Digital BW, The Print

Hi everyone:

Have you scanned B&W negs with an Imacon (I have the 646) and can offer any 
experience/tips? Many thanks in advance....

Dave

So am I the only one who owns one of these beasts? :)

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "davelongviews"
<dave@l...> wrote:
> So am I the only one who owns one of these beasts? :)

I have a 343 that I use to scan 120 B&W film.  I get the best results
scanning as standard RGB positive then inverting in PS.  Slightly thin
negs seem to works best for me.  There is an addon called NegPOS that
does a great job of the inverting if you don't mind investing some
time learning how to use it.

http://www.c-f-systems.com/PhotoMathDocs.html

I've gotten good results from Neopan 400, TriX, Fomapan100, but the
best looking B&W film I've scanned was Efke 25.  It scans very, very
well if you deal with the contrast in the exposure and development
stages.  It's very curly so it probably sucks in a flatbed but in a
Flextight, it rawks.

Example:  http://www.crowmountain.net/NP_Subs/stones-big.jpg

This started out as a 1200dpi scan.  In the 12x12" print I made on a
2200, it's very easy to read the big print in the bit of newspaper trash.

Fomapan100 is my second favorite, it comes out witha very oldschool,
dark chocolate look after I hit it with a basic curve.  Another example:

http://www.crowmountain.net/salon/archive/2005/06/leave_it_like_i.html#000062

Awesome scanner, have fun.  I'm very jealous of the 4x5" scanning
ability.  I couldn't quite swing the bucks for one of the big ones.

Thomas

Thanks Thomas, very helpful.

dave

> Have you scanned B&W negs with an Imacon (I have the 646) and can offer any 
> experience/tips?


Dave,

I have used the Precision III and 848 with no problems as far as dynamic range goes.
Focus and curl are another story. I think for curly negs - or curly ends of 35mm strips -
you can't beat a good drum scan. Generally these scanners do their best for medium
and large format. I have no complaints from 35mm bw, but (a) you can't scan all the
way to the edge as you would in a drum and (b) supporting end-frames is a hassle.
In the non-autofocus models (P III etc), focus is also an issue. 
That said, I find that the vast majority of bw negs will do well on the imacons
with no need for the expense and wear and tear of going through oil mounting
for a drum scan. 

I prefer to scan in grayscale, high bit (if needed for the specific image) and reverse
in the imacon software (i.e. get a positive preview and scan). I recommend you be careful
not to clip either end of the scale, which means you will waste a few bits for safety
and fix later in PS. Also, I wouldn't apply too steep a contrast curve, allowing room
for work later. At the same time, you want to come as close to your final print 
as you can, overall. That is, get a preview that looks as if you printed it at the
right contrast and exposure - just not with dodge and burns yet. If you do that
well, you can scan in 8bit and save time and space. If not, 16bit scans will
help you down the line.
 
Beware of USM issues, especially with bw high speed negs. Start from -120 and 
keep increasing until it just compensates for the CCD softness. Do the rest in
Photoshop (or whatever editing s/w you use).

I assume you are aware of the imacon forum (on yahoo). If you need the link let me know.

Antonis

Thanks Antonis that is generally what I have been doing, and although I have scanned 
MUCH color film with this machine, not as much B&W. I have yet to have problems with 
curling. Keep in mind I used to use a Nikon Coolscan. Not there's a curling problem for ya!

Dave

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Antonis" 
<antonisphoto@y...> wrote:
> > Have you scanned B&W negs with an Imacon (I have the 646) and can 
offer any 
> > experience/tips?
> 
> 
> Dave,
> 
> I have used the Precision III and 848 with no problems as far as 
dynamic range goes.
> Focus and curl are another story. I think for curly negs - or curly 
ends of 35mm strips -
> you can't beat a good drum scan. Generally these scanners do their 
best for medium
> and large format. I have no complaints from 35mm bw, but (a) you 
can't scan all the
> way to the edge as you would in a drum and (b) supporting end-
frames is a hassle.
> In the non-autofocus models (P III etc), focus is also an issue. 
> That said, I find that the vast majority of bw negs will do well on 
the imacons
> with no need for the expense and wear and tear of going through oil 
mounting
> for a drum scan. 
> 
> I prefer to scan in grayscale, high bit (if needed for the specific 
image) and reverse
> in the imacon software (i.e. get a positive preview and scan). I 
recommend you be careful
> not to clip either end of the scale, which means you will waste a 
few bits for safety
> and fix later in PS. Also, I wouldn't apply too steep a contrast 
curve, allowing room
> for work later. At the same time, you want to come as close to your 
final print 
> as you can, overall. That is, get a preview that looks as if you 
printed it at the
> right contrast and exposure - just not with dodge and burns yet. If 
you do that
> well, you can scan in 8bit and save time and space. If not, 16bit 
scans will
> help you down the line.
>  
> Beware of USM issues, especially with bw high speed negs. Start 
from -120 and 
> keep increasing until it just compensates for the CCD softness. Do 
the rest in
> Photoshop (or whatever editing s/w you use).
> 
> I assume you are aware of the imacon forum (on yahoo). If you need 
the link let me know.
> 
> Antonis

Hello Antonis:

I would like to know the link for the Imacon forum.

-Nathan Jones