Digital BW, The Print

I'm an old zone system guy that has used the "proper proof" to dial
in my negative ISO and 
development times to work well on my printing paper. Now the old wet
lab is gone and 
replaced with a scanner, computer, and printer. When I scan one of my
negatives on my 
Epson 3200 - the histgram shows data (tones?) from about 80 - 240.
I'm assuming the 
more of the input histgram I use, the fewer the gaps when I set my
black and white points 
to output to 0 - 255. I hope thats right thinking.

If it is, I would assume from the histgram that my ISO is a bit too
high and development a 
bit too short

Would it make sense to calibrate ISO and development times to use
more of the scanner 
histogram? If so - is there a better way than shooting test frames
and scanning them?

Any help would be appreciated!

Thanks

Phil C.

Hi Phil,

I haven't done any zone system dev. for a long time
so it's difficult now for me to think about what is
involved here. It does appear your histogram is a bit
compressed, this means your ISO maybe too high (with
longer development time) for the scene (or maybe I'm
wrong  :(  ).

Anyway, the idea is you want to have the widest
exposure lattitude possible for your film and scene
using your favorite zone system development recipe,
and if the scanner is not able to capture all the
details in one pass, do it twice at different
exposure and merge them in your software.

Ah...perhaps someone else who is currently doing the
same thing as Phil can chime in.

Best,
--nick

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pdcorlis"
<pdcorlis@a...> wrote:

> I'm an old zone system guy that has used the "proper
> proof" to dial in my negative ISO and development
> times to work well on my printing paper. Now the old
> wet lab is gone and replaced with a scanner,
> computer, and printer. When I scan one of my
> negatives on my Epson 3200 - the histgram shows data
> (tones?) from about 80 - 240. I'm assuming the more
> of the input histgram I use, the fewer the gaps when
> I set my black and white points to output to 0 - 255.
> I hope thats right thinking.
> 
> If it is, I would assume from the histgram that my
> ISO is a bit too high and development a bit too short
> 
> Would it make sense to calibrate ISO and development
> times to use more of the scanner histogram? If so -
> is there a better way than shooting test frames and
> scanning them?
> 
> Any help would be appreciated!
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Phil C.

Almost there: Reduce ISO (more shadow detail - expand
lower portion of historgram) and increase development
time (push highs -- increase the upper portion of
historgram).

Guy

--- "Nick H. Nugent" <nghin@...> wrote:

> Hi Phil,
> 
> I haven't done any zone system dev. for a long time
> so it's difficult now for me to think about what is
> involved here. It does appear your histogram is a
> bit
> compressed, this means your ISO maybe too high (with
> longer development time) for the scene (or maybe I'm
> wrong  :(  ).
> 
> Anyway, the idea is you want to have the widest
> exposure lattitude possible for your film and scene
> using your favorite zone system development recipe,
> and if the scanner is not able to capture all the
> details in one pass, do it twice at different
> exposure and merge them in your software.
> 
> Ah...perhaps someone else who is currently doing the
> same thing as Phil can chime in.
> 
> Best,
> --nick
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com,
> "pdcorlis"
> <pdcorlis@a...> wrote:
> > I'm an old zone system guy that has used the
> "proper
> > proof" to dial in my negative ISO and development
> > times to work well on my printing paper. Now the
> old
> > wet lab is gone and replaced with a scanner,
> > computer, and printer. When I scan one of my
> > negatives on my Epson 3200 - the histgram shows
> data
> > (tones?) from about 80 - 240. I'm assuming the
> more
> > of the input histgram I use, the fewer the gaps
> when
> > I set my black and white points to output to 0 -
> 255.
> > I hope thats right thinking.
> > 
> > If it is, I would assume from the histgram that my
> > ISO is a bit too high and development a bit too
> short
> > 
> > Would it make sense to calibrate ISO and
> development
> > times to use more of the scanner histogram? If so
> -
> > is there a better way than shooting test frames
> and
> > scanning them?
> > 
> > Any help would be appreciated!
> > 
> > Thanks
> > 
> > Phil C.
> 
> 
> 



		
__________________________________ 
Discover Yahoo! 
Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news and more. Check it out! 
http://discover.yahoo.com/mobile.html

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pdcorlis" <pdcorlis@a...> 
wrote:
> I'm an old zone system guy that has used the "proper proof" to dial
> in my negative ISO and 
> development times to work well on my printing paper. Now the old wet
> lab is gone and 
> replaced with a scanner, computer, and printer. When I scan one of my
> negatives on my 
> Epson 3200 - the histgram shows data (tones?) from about 80 - 240.
> I'm assuming the 
> more of the input histgram I use, the fewer the gaps when I set my
> black and white points 
> to output to 0 - 255. I hope thats right thinking.
> 
> If it is, I would assume from the histgram that my ISO is a bit too
> high and development a 
> bit too short
> 
> Would it make sense to calibrate ISO and development times to use
> more of the scanner 
> histogram? If so - is there a better way than shooting test frames
> and scanning them?
> 
> Any help would be appreciated!
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Phil C.

The scanner is much more forgiving with negatives than the darkroom.
I wouldn't worry about your ISO and dev times they should be just fine.

I use the Epson 3200 all the time with just the Epson Twain software.
The important things are:  always scan 16 bit grayscale, the auto is pretty
good but going into the histogram page is worthwhile. At the top is the
"raw" histogram and If you click on "Output" you'll see the result histogram.
Occasionally I'll adjust for a better output, but as long it's reasonable with
no losses at the end points, you'll have plenty of data for Photoshop.

Roy

Nick H. Nugent wrote:

>
>Anyway, the idea is you want to have the widest
>exposure lattitude possible for your film and scene
>using your favorite zone system development recipe,
>and if the scanner is not able to capture all the
>details in one pass, do it twice at different
>exposure and merge them in your software.
>  
>
Vuescan will do that with "long exposure".  Two passes, one slow and a 
normal one. Merging what is important. 16 bit for greyscale.

Ernst

In a message dated 6/10/05 12:41:28 PM, Roy Harrington writes:


> I use the Epson 3200 all the time with just the Epson Twain software.
> The important things are:  always scan 16 bit grayscale, the auto is pretty
> good but going into the histogram page is worthwhile.
> 

Funny -- I go about scanning on the 3200/4990 in an entirely different way.   
I am scanning 4x5 and 5x7 B+W negatives.   I too use the Epson driver -- it's 
a really good piece of software, once you figure out where everything is.   
But I never leave the scanner on automatic.   

Instead, I use the software in "professional mode."   I never scan in 16-bit 
mode -- if you can get your tonal balance 90+ right in the scanner, you don't 
need to scan in 16-bit.   I adjust tones using the "Tone Correction" curve.   
I find that manipulating the curve gets me really close to what I want the 
final image to look like.   (For some reason, I always seem to end up increasing 
contrast by five percent once in PS, but that's not enough to justify the time 
and memory needed to scan in 16-bit mode.)

I agree that if your negative is anywhere close to the ballpark, you will be 
fine once you learn how to control the scanner.   

Sanders McNew
www.mcnew.net


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]