Digital BW, The Print

I always scanned my b&w negatives as b&w in Vuescan. When I tried scanning 
them as color I noticed no difference except the much larger file. OTOH, if 
you go to www.butzi.net and click on the "Articles" section you'll see the 
results of a test done by Paul Butzi. He maintains that it's better to scan 
in RGB, then use Channel Mixer to look at the red, blue, and green channels 
to find the one that looks best and discard the other two. I don't know, the 
differences he sees between the three looked pretty tiny to me even at his 
magnifications. But you can easily try it both ways and see for yourself.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "howg2211" <hgrill1@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2007 11:28 AM
Subject: [Digital BW] Scanning Black and White With Vuescan


I am just starting to try my hand at black and white digital imaging
and am actually starting with a Holga and a pinhole camera using Kodak
Tri-X.  I recently purchased an Epson V700 scanner and Vuescan
software.  Looking around the internet, the general advice seemed to
be to scan black and white negatives as if they were color images and
then convert to grayscale afterwards.  I do notice that Vuescan has a
scan black and white negative as an option.  Since this is Vuescan and
not some prepackaged scanning software I was wondering how folks here
recommend doing this with Vuescan (I realize this isn't a Vuescan
forum but figure there are lots of people here using it with a lot of
experience)....is it best to scan as a color slide or a color negative
and convert to grayscale or will the Vuescan scan as black and white
negative give the best results (ie, has Vuescan taken all this into
account and will setting the source as black and white negative give
me the best results)?

Thanks.

Howard



Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as 
they are often being updated.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to 
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same 
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep 
them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. 
Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the 
membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W 
printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from 
the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and 
Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND 
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU 
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY 
DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, 
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND 
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE 
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY 
TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR 
ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY 
THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER 
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.

Yahoo! Groups Links

I am just starting to try my hand at black and white digital imaging
and am actually starting with a Holga and a pinhole camera using Kodak
Tri-X.  I recently purchased an Epson V700 scanner and Vuescan
software.  Looking around the internet, the general advice seemed to
be to scan black and white negatives as if they were color images and
then convert to grayscale afterwards.  I do notice that Vuescan has a
scan black and white negative as an option.  Since this is Vuescan and
not some prepackaged scanning software I was wondering how folks here
recommend doing this with Vuescan (I realize this isn't a Vuescan
forum but figure there are lots of people here using it with a lot of
experience)....is it best to scan as a color slide or a color negative
and convert to grayscale or will the Vuescan scan as black and white
negative give the best results (ie, has Vuescan taken all this into
account and will setting the source as black and white negative give
me the best results)?

Thanks.

Howard

howg2211 wrote:
> I am just starting to try my hand at black and white digital imaging
> and am actually starting with a Holga and a pinhole camera using Kodak
> Tri-X.  I recently purchased an Epson V700 scanner and Vuescan
> software.  Looking around the internet, the general advice seemed to
> be to scan black and white negatives as if they were color images and
> then convert to grayscale afterwards.  I do notice that Vuescan has a
> scan black and white negative as an option.  Since this is Vuescan and
> not some prepackaged scanning software I was wondering how folks here
> recommend doing this with Vuescan (I realize this isn't a Vuescan
> forum but figure there are lots of people here using it with a lot of
> experience)....is it best to scan as a color slide or a color negative
> and convert to grayscale or will the Vuescan scan as black and white
> negative give the best results (ie, has Vuescan taken all this into
> account and will setting the source as black and white negative give
> me the best results)?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Howard
>   

Why guess when you can know? Scan the same negative in different ways 
and compare. What works for someone else won't necessarily work for you. 
And scanning isn't automatic. The only way to get good at it is to scan, 
and scan, and scan. So you can kill two birds with one stone as it were. 
Scan and scan and scan. It's the only way to learn what the different 
settings mean, and what they do, for your film. I'm serious.
--
Bruce Watson






















//

> I am just starting to try my hand at black and white digital imaging
> and am actually starting with a Holga and a pinhole camera using Kodak
> Tri-X. I recently purchased an Epson V700 scanner and Vuescan
> software. Looking around the internet, the general advice seemed to
> be to scan black and white negatives as if they were color images and
> then convert to grayscale afterwards. I do notice that Vuescan has a
> scan black and white negative as an option. Since this is Vuescan and
> not some prepackaged scanning software I was wondering how folks here
> recommend doing this with Vuescan (I realize this isn't a Vuescan
> forum but figure there are lots of people here using it with a lot of
> experience).
>
> ...is it best to scan as a color slide or a color negative
> and convert to grayscale or will the Vuescan scan as black and white
> negative give the best results (ie, has Vuescan taken all this into
> account and will setting the source as black and white negative give
> me the best results)?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Howard
>
Howard,

Really the only way to know is to try each way and compare results.  I 
scan with "make gray from green channel" because it gives the best 
results with my scanner.  You don't want to use a "color negative" 
setting, as this changes things to get rid of the orange mask of a color 
film, which regular bw films don't have.  I usually set the "color" 
settings to manual, and set the black and white clipping settings at 
"0".  Basically, you want a low contrast scan that includes as much info 
as possible.  Make sure that you set up viewscan show that clipped 
shadows and highlights get represented by colors (usually blue and 
green)  on the scan screen.

-Peter

Silver B&W scans perfectly with the B&W setting but maybe C41 B&W is
different? 

Importantly C41 B&W allows use of Infared...maybe that wants RGB?
Don't know about that. 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Brian Ellis
<bellis60@...> wrote:
> Paul Butzi. He maintains that it's better to scan 
> in RGB, then use Channel Mixer to look at the red, blue, and green
channels to find the one that looks best and discard the other two. 

Butzi's advocating an outright silly workflow IMO. He's paying
attention to the "look" of the scan on his monitor rather than his
post-processed file (or soft proof) in Photoshop, his print, or
Internet image. Bassakward.

There is no advantage to scanning a b&w neg in RGB as the three
channels (and hence the three times larger file) will be identical.
However, my printer tells me that i should supply him with RGB files
of my b&w work as they contain more information. I have never quite
understood this but I do it.
 If you convert to monochrome in the channel mixer the three different
channels WILL look different. Very different in some cases. Yes it's
true that you can select the one that you like but there is an optimum
percentage mix that I have seen recommended. I don't know if you used
to shoot with different b&w films years ago but if you compared the
same shot of a colourful subjecttaken with Tri-X and say Plus X they
were very different as the films reacted to different colours differently.
I personally don't use the Mixer method to convert to B&W but use the
Lab method and prefer those results. The method is explained on the
web if you do a search. Try it and see what you think. It is good and
much better than Desaturate.
Jules

 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Watson
<bwyg@...> wrote:
>
> howg2211 wrote:
> > I am just starting to try my hand at black and white digital imaging
> > and am actually starting with a Holga and a pinhole camera using Kodak
> > Tri-X.  I recently purchased an Epson V700 scanner and Vuescan
> > software.  Looking around the internet, the general advice seemed to
> > be to scan black and white negatives as if they were color images and
> > then convert to grayscale afterwards.  I do notice that Vuescan has a
> > scan black and white negative as an option.  Since this is Vuescan and
> > not some prepackaged scanning software I was wondering how folks here
> > recommend doing this with Vuescan (I realize this isn't a Vuescan
> > forum but figure there are lots of people here using it with a lot of
> > experience)....is it best to scan as a color slide or a color negative
> > and convert to grayscale or will the Vuescan scan as black and white
> > negative give the best results (ie, has Vuescan taken all this into
> > account and will setting the source as black and white negative give
> > me the best results)?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Howard
> >   
> 
> Why guess when you can know? Scan the same negative in different ways 
> and compare. What works for someone else won't necessarily work for
you. 
> And scanning isn't automatic. The only way to get good at it is to
scan, 
> and scan, and scan. So you can kill two birds with one stone as it
were. 

> Scan and scan and scan. It's the only way to learn what the different 
> settings mean, and what they do, for your film. I'm serious.
> --
> Bruce Watson
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> //
>

djon43 wrote:
> 
> 
> Silver B&W scans perfectly with the B&W setting but maybe C41 B&W is
> different?
> 
> Importantly C41 B&W allows use of Infared...maybe that wants RGB?
> Don't know about that.

I haven't been using Vuescan - I use the Nikon scanning S/W
with my LS-9000.  I scan B&W negs as 16-bit monochrome.

C41 B&W, I usually scan as monochrome, but I haven't scanned much of
it in a while.  The Nikon S/W lets me enable Digital ICE even when
scanning as monochrome, though I haven't really experimented with it
much because, as I mention above, I haven't scanned much C41 B&W.

Dana

> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>, Brian Ellis
> <bellis60@...> wrote:
>  > Paul Butzi. He maintains that it's better to scan
>  > in RGB, then use Channel Mixer to look at the red, blue, and green
> channels to find the one that looks best and discard the other two.
> 
> Butzi's advocating an outright silly workflow IMO. He's paying
> attention to the "look" of the scan on his monitor rather than his
> post-processed file (or soft proof) in Photoshop, his print, or
> Internet image. Bassakward.

Jules wrote:
>  There is no advantage to scanning a b&w neg in RGB as the three
> channels (and hence the three times larger file) will be identical.
>   
No actually, they won't be identical. Even B&W negatives have some level 
of color, usually depending on developer. HC-110 leaves Tri-X somewhat 
purple, while XTOL leaves Tri-X somewhat brown, for example.

The question is, is capturing this slight color cast worth anything? I 
personally don't think so, but clearly this going to vary depending on 
what the individual wants.

Now if you are working with one of the staining developers like 
Procat-HD, the stain contains image data and you should really think 
about scanning in RGB to capture this data. But I'm assuming a "normal" 
developer here.
> However, my printer tells me that i should supply him with RGB files
> of my b&w work as they contain more information. I have never quite
> understood this but I do it.
Theoretically this is true. A single scanner channel has less dynamic 
range than the three channels taken together. There is a similar effect 
with thermal noise in that more channels helps dampen scanner induced 
noise. But from a practical standpoint, especially with B&W negatives, I 
doubt the need for this. IOW, I believe that the three channels together 
contain more data, but not necessarily more information which is a 
different concept.
--
Bruce Watson

>  If you convert to monochrome in the channel mixer the three different
> channels WILL look different. 

If you scan B&W as B&W channel mixer is irrelevant.



I don't know if you used
> to shoot with different b&w films years ago but if you compared the
> same shot of a colourful subjecttaken with Tri-X and say Plus X they
> were very different as the films reacted to different colours
differently.

Not in my experience or for practical purposes, but it'd be
interesting to confirm. I shoot silver film now, as I have since 1951
(I was 8). All but Verichrome Pan and Kodalith are "panchromatic." 

> I personally don't use the Mixer method to convert to B&W but use
the Lab method and prefer those results. The method is explained on
theweb if you do a search. Try it and see what you think. It is good
and much better than Desaturate.
> Jules

Channel mixer and Desaturate are both irrelevant as Bruce Watson is
scanning Tri X. 


> 
>  
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Watson
> <bwyg@> wrote:
> >
> > howg2211 wrote:
> > > I am just starting to try my hand at black and white digital imaging
> > > and am actually starting with a Holga and a pinhole camera using
Kodak
> > > Tri-X.  I

this is exactly the point of doing some b&w negs scan tests in RGB- to investigate the 
possibility of a superior channel, or channel combination as you describe. Once 
determined, if you have the channel option for mono as you describe (Silverfast also has it, 
I've seen it elsewhere as well) there is no reason to make the larger RGB scans from B&W in 
the future.
If you have a clearly desirable channel, and no such option in the software, there is no 
choice but to scan in RGB then toss out the other channels once in Photoshop.
It is quite possible some scanners perform well in all channels, and a more typical RGB to 
Gray conversion in the scanner software or elsewhere will be fine, or desaturate, or LAB, or 
whatever your prefer.
Another reason to investigate individual channels to optimize workflow is for staining 
developer users.

Some software has problematic LUTs for B&W negs, that never give you access to all the 
info on some or all negs. This would be another reason to use an alternative procedure- 
scan as a transperency to open up the capture range, and invert in PS later. Or, with 
Vuescan use the raw file, or Silverfast's HDR.
Tyler


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter De Smidt <pdesmidt@...> 
wrote:

>
> >  There is no advantage to scanning a b&w neg in RGB as the three
> > channels (and hence the three times larger file) will be identical.
> Vuescan allows you to make a greyscale file from any of the color 
> channels.  I tried the default way, and then each of the various color 
> channels.  The green channel with my Canon 9950F gave the most detail 
> with the least noise for scanning BW silver negatives.  As such, I set 
> Vuescan to make the grey 16 bit image from the green channel. This does 
> not require having an RGB image, with the resultant huge file size. It's 
> easy to test these things. Try each way. Make sure to label the file 
> with an appropriate name.  Open them in Photoshop and compare.
>

I agree with Jules, different B&W films have different responses to 
colour, despite all being labelled as "panchromatic".  If you try a 
search you should be able to find someone who has shot a colour test 
chart with different films and published the results - its surprising 
how much variation there is in the mid tones!

David

>  If you convert to monochrome in the channel mixer the three different
> channels WILL look different. 



channel mixer isn't involved if one is scanning silver B&W...



I don't know if you used
> to shoot with different b&w films years ago but if you compared the
> same shot of a colourful subjecttaken with Tri-X and say Plus X they
> were very different as the films reacted to different colours
differently.

Not in my experience or for practical purposes (that's what B&W
filters are for), but it'd be interesting to confirm. It's technically
true that different panchromatic B&W films have different spectral
responses but I don't think it's relevant for practical purposes.

I shoot silver film now, have since 1951 (I was 8). All readily
available films but Verichrome Pan and Kodalith, and perhaps some
technical films, have been fully "panchromatic." 

> I personally don't use the Mixer method to convert to B&W but use
the Lab method and prefer those results. The method is explained on
theweb if you do a search. Try it and see what you think. It is good
and much better than Desaturate.
> Jules

Neither Channel mixer nor Desaturate are relevant as Bruce Watson is
scanning Tri X. They would be relevant if he was shooting color film
for B&W. 


> 
>  
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Watson
> <bwyg@> wrote:
> >
> > howg2211 wrote:
> > > I am just starting to try my hand at black and white digital imaging
> > > and am actually starting with a Holga and a pinhole camera using
Kodak
> > > Tri-X.  I

Howard,

Try both and see what works best for you.

For me, scanning in 16-bit grayscale works the best

Scott

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "howg2211" 
<hgrill1@...> wrote:
>
> I am just starting to try my hand at black and white digital imaging
> and am actually starting with a Holga and a pinhole camera using 
Kodak
> Tri-X.  I recently purchased an Epson V700 scanner and Vuescan
> software.  Looking around the internet, the general advice seemed to
> be to scan black and white negatives as if they were color images 
and
> then convert to grayscale afterwards.  I do notice that Vuescan has 
a
> scan black and white negative as an option.  Since this is Vuescan 
and
> not some prepackaged scanning software I was wondering how folks 
here
> recommend doing this with Vuescan (I realize this isn't a Vuescan
> forum but figure there are lots of people here using it with a lot 
of
> experience)....is it best to scan as a color slide or a color 
negative

> and convert to grayscale or will the Vuescan scan as black and white
> negative give the best results (ie, has Vuescan taken all this into
> account and will setting the source as black and white negative give
> me the best results)?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Howard
>

>  There is no advantage to scanning a b&w neg in RGB as the three
> channels (and hence the three times larger file) will be identical.
Vuescan allows you to make a greyscale file from any of the color 
channels.  I tried the default way, and then each of the various color 
channels.  The green channel with my Canon 9950F gave the most detail 
with the least noise for scanning BW silver negatives.  As such, I set 
Vuescan to make the grey 16 bit image from the green channel. This does 
not require having an RGB image, with the resultant huge file size. It's 
easy to test these things. Try each way. Make sure to label the file 
with an appropriate name.  Open them in Photoshop and compare.

Thanks for the thoughtful and many responses.  I was hoping not to try
to reinvent the wheel, but it looks like I may have some testing to
do.  Right now I am learning the developing in the basement
routine....and having fun at it.  A nice diversion from pure digital. 

Anyway, once I get past that stage and have an assortment of negs to
work with I will start scanning in earnest.  Once I see what the
options are I will probably come back with a few more questions.  In
the meantime, I will be reading the great advice you guys are putting
forth in the forum here.

Thanks.

Howard

"There is no advantage to scanning a b&w neg in RGB as the three
channels (and hence the three times larger file) will be identical."

The test done by Paul Butzi that I mentioned in my earlier post shows that 
the three are different, at least with the film and scanner he was using.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jules" <jules50uk@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2007 3:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Scanning Black and White With Vuescan


There is no advantage to scanning a b&w neg in RGB as the three
channels (and hence the three times larger file) will be identical.
However, my printer tells me that i should supply him with RGB files
of my b&w work as they contain more information. I have never quite
understood this but I do it.
 If you convert to monochrome in the channel mixer the three different
channels WILL look different. Very different in some cases. Yes it's
true that you can select the one that you like but there is an optimum
percentage mix that I have seen recommended. I don't know if you used
to shoot with different b&w films years ago but if you compared the
same shot of a colourful subjecttaken with Tri-X and say Plus X they
were very different as the films reacted to different colours differently.
I personally don't use the Mixer method to convert to B&W but use the
Lab method and prefer those results. The method is explained on the
web if you do a search. Try it and see what you think. It is good and
much better than Desaturate.
Jules



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Watson
<bwyg@...> wrote:
>
> howg2211 wrote:
> > I am just starting to try my hand at black and white digital imaging
> > and am actually starting with a Holga and a pinhole camera using Kodak
> > Tri-X.  I recently purchased an Epson V700 scanner and Vuescan
> > software.  Looking around the internet, the general advice seemed to
> > be to scan black and white negatives as if they were color images and
> > then convert to grayscale afterwards.  I do notice that Vuescan has a
> > scan black and white negative as an option.  Since this is Vuescan and
> > not some prepackaged scanning software I was wondering how folks here
> > recommend doing this with Vuescan (I realize this isn't a Vuescan
> > forum but figure there are lots of people here using it with a lot of
> > experience)....is it best to scan as a color slide or a color negative
> > and convert to grayscale or will the Vuescan scan as black and white
> > negative give the best results (ie, has Vuescan taken all this into
> > account and will setting the source as black and white negative give
> > me the best results)?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Howard
> >
>
> Why guess when you can know? Scan the same negative in different ways
> and compare. What works for someone else won't necessarily work for
you.
> And scanning isn't automatic. The only way to get good at it is to
scan,
> and scan, and scan. So you can kill two birds with one stone as it
were.
> Scan and scan and scan. It's the only way to learn what the different
> settings mean, and what they do, for your film. I'm serious.
> --
> Bruce Watson
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> //
>




Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as 
they are often being updated.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to 
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same 
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep 
them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. 
Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the 
membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W 
printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from 
the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and 
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and 
Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND 
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU 
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY 
DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, 
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND 
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE 
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY 
TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR 
ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY 
THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER 
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.

Yahoo! Groups Links

> Another reason to investigate individual channels to optimize workflow 
> is for staining
> developer users.
Tyler,

That's a very good point. I used Xtol for years, but recently I switched 
to Pyrocat-HD, a staining developer.  Looks like it's time to run 
another test. Sigh. I hate tests.

-Peter

First,  even stains in negatives usually prove inadequately removed
antihalation dye...insufficient fix/wash. It's equivalent to fog when
printing or scanning..it reduces contrast evenly but may suggest the
negative wasn't adequately fixed/washed.

Second, very few people use staining developers, probably nobody with
 TriX/Holga. Staining developer ideas simply confuse things here. 

COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC>>>It happens that I've inquired of folks who DO
use staining developers and scan...they've told me scanners treat the
stain identically to silver..it's considered colorless density by the
scanner when in B&W mode, just as it is when using an
enlarger...that's the whole point of a staining developer! (some say
the stain color is faintly noticed by polycontrast paper but not
significantly.

Just to make the point about file size, a B&W neg that I just scanned
as as if it was a chrome is 120.3MB...(can be inverted in Photoshop to
look like a positive...not necessary with Vuescan, best practice with
Nikonscan). The same neg scanned as a B&W neg produces 40.1MB and
won't have to be inverted. 

John

I for one can tell you that it does make a difference in Staining developers
to scan in RGB mode. There is a visiable difference and it can be easily
seen when printing in the darkroom.  That is the point of using a staining
developer.  Separately it is my understanding the the majority of scanners
all scan in RGB and the scanner software whether it is Vuesan,Epson or
Silverfast just convert the RGB image to greyscale in software.   Frankly I
would rather take charge of that conversion myself and do it in Photoshop
with whatever method I chose.

 

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of djon43
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2007 7:31 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Scanning Black and White With Vuescan

 

First, even stains in negatives usually prove inadequately removed
antihalation dye...insufficient fix/wash. It's equivalent to fog when
printing or scanning..it reduces contrast evenly but may suggest the
negative wasn't adequately fixed/washed.

Second, very few people use staining developers, probably nobody with
TriX/Holga. Staining developer ideas simply confuse things here. 

COMPLETELY OFF TOPIC>>>It happens that I've inquired of folks who DO
use staining developers and scan...they've told me scanners treat the
stain identically to silver..it's considered colorless density by the
scanner when in B&W mode, just as it is when using an
enlarger...that's the whole point of a staining developer! (some say
the stain color is faintly noticed by polycontrast paper but not
significantly.

Just to make the point about file size, a B&W neg that I just scanned
as as if it was a chrome is 120.3MB...(can be inverted in Photoshop to
look like a positive...not necessary with Vuescan, best practice with
Nikonscan). The same neg scanned as a B&W neg produces 40.1MB and
won't have to be inverted. 

John



 



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

Paul Grant wrote:
> I for one can tell you that it does make a difference in Staining developers
> to scan in RGB mode. There is a visiable difference and it can be easily
> seen when printing in the darkroom.  That is the point of using a staining
> developer.  Separately it is my understanding the the majority of scanners
> all scan in RGB and the scanner software whether it is Vuesan,Epson or
> Silverfast just convert the RGB image to greyscale in software.   Frankly I
> would rather take charge of that conversion myself and do it in Photoshop
> with whatever method I chose.

Two scanners I have the Nikon LS8000 and the Epson V700 can 
only scan in RGB hardware wise whether the software is set 
on greyscale or color.  Vuescan will emphasise the green 
channel but still pick up part of the other channels in the 
conversion to greyscale if I recall some messages by Ed.

My old Agfa  Horizon Plus A3 has a monochrome sensor that 
needs 3 passes for color and isn't very good for that work 
anymore but it has a one pass Greyscale setting where the 
color filter is replaced by a ND filter that works very 
good, 1200 PPI only but up to A3 if needed. I use it mainly 
for old graphic films.

Related to that, we see all kinds of B&W conversions of 
color devices: printers that are changed to quad inksets, 
cameras that are stripped of their Bayer filters, but no 
scanners that have their sensor filters removed for B&W 
scanning. Could be impossible if the filter is within the 
glass of the linear sensor strips. But if possible one could 
even partition the 3 sensors with 2 grades of ND filters and 
one without to increase the dynamic range. RGB filters have 
different density levels but not as ideal as it could be.


-- 
Met vriendelijke groeten,  Ernst


|  Dinkla Grafische Techniek  |
|     www.pigment-print.com    |
|             ( unvollendet )            |

Howard's original question had nothing to do with staining developers.

**I've sent a note to Sandy King, asking his thoughts. 

Howard, Want to make your own developers? I'd thought your question
was more photographically oriented than boy-chemist oriented :-)  

http://unblinkingeye.com/Articles/PCat/pcat.html

http://www.freestylephoto.biz/sc_prod.php?cat_id=&pid=1000000387

"I am just starting to try my hand at black and white digital imaging
and am actually starting with a Holga and a pinhole camera using Kodak
Tri-X. I recently purchased an Epson V700 scanner and Vuescan
software. Looking around the internet, the general advice seemed to
be to scan black and white negatives as if they were color images and
then convert to grayscale afterwards. I do notice that Vuescan has a
scan black and white negative as an option. Since this is Vuescan and
not some prepackaged scanning software I was wondering how folks here
recommend doing this with Vuescan (I realize this isn't a Vuescan
forum but figure there are lots of people here using it with a lot of
experience)....is it best to scan as a color slide or a color negative
and convert to grayscale or will the Vuescan scan as black and white
negative give the best results (ie, has Vuescan taken all this into
account and will setting the source as black and white negative give
me the best results)? "




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Ernst Dinkla
<E.Dinkla@...> wrote:
>
> Paul Grant wrote:
> > I for one can tell you that it does make a difference in Staining
developers
> > to scan in RGB mode. There is a visiable difference and it can be
easily
> > seen when printing in the darkroom.  That is the point of using a
staining
> > developer.  Separately it is my understanding the the majority of
scanners
> > all scan in RGB and the scanner software whether it is Vuesan,Epson or
> > Silverfast just convert the RGB image to greyscale in software.  
Frankly I
> > would rather take charge of that conversion myself and do it in
Photoshop

> > with whatever method I chose.
> 
> Two scanners I have the Nikon LS8000 and the Epson V700 can 
> only scan in RGB hardware wise whether the software is set 
> on greyscale or color.  Vuescan will emphasise the green 
> channel but still pick up part of the other channels in the 
> conversion to greyscale if I recall some messages by Ed.
> 
> My old Agfa  Horizon Plus A3 has a monochrome sensor that 
> needs 3 passes for color and isn't very good for that work 
> anymore but it has a one pass Greyscale setting where the 
> color filter is replaced by a ND filter that works very 
> good, 1200 PPI only but up to A3 if needed. I use it mainly 
> for old graphic films.
> 
> Related to that, we see all kinds of B&W conversions of 
> color devices: printers that are changed to quad inksets, 
> cameras that are stripped of their Bayer filters, but no 
> scanners that have their sensor filters removed for B&W 
> scanning. Could be impossible if the filter is within the 
> glass of the linear sensor strips. But if possible one could 
> even partition the 3 sensors with 2 grades of ND filters and 
> one without to increase the dynamic range. RGB filters have 
> different density levels but not as ideal as it could be.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Met vriendelijke groeten,  Ernst
> 
> 
> |  Dinkla Grafische Techniek  |
> |     www.pigment-print.com    |
> |             ( unvollendet )            |
>

Thanks for clarifying my post Djon. I thought I was clear that the
channels were relevent to scanning, or importing colour. Using
different b&w fims did hive different results as the different
processes in manufacturing them reacted differently to different colours.
Jules


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "djon43"
<djon43@...> wrote:
>
>  
> >  If you convert to monochrome in the channel mixer the three different
> > channels WILL look different. 
> 
> If you scan B&W as B&W channel mixer is irrelevant.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if you used
> > to shoot with different b&w films years ago but if you compared the
> > same shot of a colourful subjecttaken with Tri-X and say Plus X they
> > were very different as the films reacted to different colours
> differently.
> 
> Not in my experience or for practical purposes, but it'd be
> interesting to confirm. I shoot silver film now, as I have since 1951
> (I was 8). All but Verichrome Pan and Kodalith are "panchromatic." 
> 
> > I personally don't use the Mixer method to convert to B&W but use
> the Lab method and prefer those results. The method is explained on
> theweb if you do a search. Try it and see what you think. It is good
> and much better than Desaturate.
> > Jules
> 
> Channel mixer and Desaturate are both irrelevant as Bruce Watson is
> scanning Tri X. 
> 
> 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Watson
> > <bwyg@> wrote:
> > >
> > > howg2211 wrote:
> > > > I am just starting to try my hand at black and white digital
imaging

> > > > and am actually starting with a Holga and a pinhole camera using
> Kodak
> > > > Tri-X.  I
>

What is the meaning of the word 'staining' used here and previously.
I have no idea of it's meaning unless it is some reference to 'toning'
as used to be done to B&W prints. Please explain.
Jules


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley"
<tyler@...> wrote:
>
> this is exactly the point of doing some b&w negs scan tests in RGB-
to investigate the 
> possibility of a superior channel, or channel combination as you
describe. Once 
> determined, if you have the channel option for mono as you describe
(Silverfast also has it, 
> I've seen it elsewhere as well) there is no reason to make the
larger RGB scans from B&W in 
> the future.
> If you have a clearly desirable channel, and no such option in the
software, there is no 
> choice but to scan in RGB then toss out the other channels once in
Photoshop.
> It is quite possible some scanners perform well in all channels, and
a more typical RGB to 
> Gray conversion in the scanner software or elsewhere will be fine,
or desaturate, or LAB, or 
> whatever your prefer.
> Another reason to investigate individual channels to optimize
workflow is for staining 
> developer users.
> 
> Some software has problematic LUTs for B&W negs, that never give you
access to all the 
> info on some or all negs. This would be another reason to use an
alternative procedure- 
> scan as a transperency to open up the capture range, and invert in
PS later. Or, with 
> Vuescan use the raw file, or Silverfast's HDR.
> Tyler
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter De Smidt
<pdesmidt@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > >  There is no advantage to scanning a b&w neg in RGB as the three
> > > channels (and hence the three times larger file) will be identical.
> > Vuescan allows you to make a greyscale file from any of the color 
> > channels.  I tried the default way, and then each of the various
color 
> > channels.  The green channel with my Canon 9950F gave the most detail 
> > with the least noise for scanning BW silver negatives.  As such, I
set 
> > Vuescan to make the grey 16 bit image from the green channel. This
does 
> > not require having an RGB image, with the resultant huge file
size. It's 

> > easy to test these things. Try each way. Make sure to label the file 
> > with an appropriate name.  Open them in Photoshop and compare.
> >
>

Jules, Some developers stain emulsion selectively, which does with
certain images sometimes increase shadow detail. As well, stain tends
to conceal grain without dissolving it. Almost exclusively  relevant
to "scenic" photography (not commonly of interest to people who use
fast film), it has less to do with "image" and more to do with
"print." Practitioners commonly develop sheet film, one at a time in
trays, though it can certainly be done with 35mm in tanks.


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jules"
<jules50uk@...> wrote:

>
>  What is the meaning of the word 'staining' used here and previously.
> I have no idea of it's meaning

Sandy King's response to my query: 

I am suggesting scanning B&W negatives in RGB, but only if they were 
developed in a pyro staining developer. Negatives developed in 
non-staining developers should be scanned in grayscale as there is no 
advantage to scanning in RGB.

And yes, if memory and file size is not an issue I would recommend 
scanning stained negatives in RGB and then looking at the channels to 
see which one (s) give the best tonal range. In most cases there is 
no advantage over scanning grayscale, but sometimes there is.

Sandy

At 7:43 AM -0700 7/16/07, john kelly wrote:

>Sandy, thanks..
>
>I may be missing something here...
>
>Are you suggesting scan of stained B&W negs as color
>neg or transparency, then reviewing channels?
>
>Do you think this is better than scanning as B&W?
>
>I understand the file size issue, but if memory wasn't
>an issue, would you scan B&W stained negs as B&W or as
>color?
>
>Is there any argument for scanning non-stained B&W
>negs as color?

Well, I'm 57 and started my photography and developing my own in
about1965 and then studied photography full time for three years in
the seventies and I never heard of satining before. I guess we learn
something new every day.
Jules

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "djon43"
<djon43@...> wrote:

>
> Jules, Some developers stain emulsion selectively, which does with
> certain images sometimes increase shadow detail. As well, stain tends
> to conceal grain without dissolving it. Almost exclusively  relevant
> to "scenic" photography (not commonly of interest to people who use
> fast film), it has less to do with "image" and more to do with
> "print." Practitioners commonly develop sheet film, one at a time in
> trays, though it can certainly be done with 35mm in tanks.
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jules"
> <jules50uk@> wrote:
> >
> >  What is the meaning of the word 'staining' used here and previously.
> > I have no idea of it's meaning
>

Howard,



With my scanner, the Canon 4000, there is a huge difference between the RGB 
Color Negative 42 bit setting and any of the monochrome settings. Each 
monochrome setting gives me a single channel to work with, take it or leave 
it. The Color Negative setting gives me three very different channels with 
the option of working with any one, two or all three of them. On my 
particular scanner the red channel is always the lightest, the blue channel 
is always the darkest and the green channel is always in between. I usually 
work from the green but when I have a problem with nearly blown out 
highlights and weak shadow detail in the same photograph I will sometimes 
use two channels, painting from one to the other.



Maybe there should be no difference between channels but with my scanner 
there is and I find the difference very useful.



My suggestion: Listen to all of your friends on this forum and then try 
everything with your particular scanner and see what works best for you.



Olaf