Message 5431 of 5437 

From:  "Michael J. Kravit" <mkravit@kravit.net>
Date:  Wed Nov 14, 2001  9:02 am
Subject:  [Digital BW] Better Scans, was Re: Print Exchange



Todd,

Thanks for the kind words.

Well with respect to digital/inkjet print quality there is really 
only one concept to remember. The better the qualty of each element 
along the way, the better the final product. Let's not even talk 
about image composition, because that is personal and based largely 
on the individuals experience, talent, and insight.

So with that in mind I will give you my workflow.

1. Use the best film and the best lenses you can afford. Use fine 
grain film if that is the look you want. Tri-X has a special look and 
is a great film, but rememnber that as with traditional processes you 
will pay the price with respect to grain as you get larger. But, that 
look that Tri-X gives is quite unique.

I shoot T-Max 100 and Ilford Deltal 100 most of the time. The image 
in the exchange I believe was shot on Ilford Delta 100 on a 
Hasselblad 203FE with a 110mm f/2.0 Zeiss Planar lens.

2. The exchange image was processes in PMK Pyro with a N+1 
developement. It was shot at 6pm on an overcast day. 

3. The negative was scanned on a Howtek D4000 drum scanner in Raw 16 
bit Grayscale at 364dpi at a image size of 24x24.  I do this because 
for some reason I find that images scanned at even multiples of 
100dpi tend to have banding. I scan twice, once for the highlights 
and again for the shadows. I then export the 16bit Raw image into 
Silverfast HDR and make most basic tonal adjustments.

4. When working in Photoshop do all tonal adjustments in 16 bit. I do 
not deviate from this mantra. Even if I have to copy the image make a 
selection layer and then copy it into the original file. Tonal 
adjustments in 8 bit will result is a fingered histogram and bugger 
up tonal output.

5. I print on only the finest papers. Epson Archival Matte in my 
opinion is a great proofing paper, but that is it! You may disagree 
and that is fine. Hahnemuhle in my opinion has excellent papers. I 
get the finest results with rich deep blacks on Hahnemuhle papers.

As for scanners, nothing compares to a drum scanner. The truth is we 
have a Fextight at the Photo Centre locally. Scans from that scanner 
are nice, bit in enlargements they are soft compared to the Howtek or 
the better drum scanners. My Howtek is not a new scanner, but it is 
about the least quality I would accept. I paid $6,500 for it with 2 
drums, a mounting station, and a good number of supplies and spare 
parts, when a photographer's lease on it was up. New the scanner is 
$39,000.

Do not sharpen your images. Yes, I know some sharpening may be 
required. The exchange image I submitted was NOT sharpened. If you 
must sharpen, zoom in very clost to a detail of hair or skin or grass 
and only sharpen the least amount to see a subtle visual difference. 
Use the preview button to go back and forth to see the change. At the 
very most I may sharpen 25-50% if that.

As you can see, money is not the issue, you can get great results by 
buying used equip. or having a drum scan done locally. Shop around, 
we have a local shop that does high res drum scans for $50-80 each. 
You can get a lot of scans before you reach the price of a good 
scanner.

That is my 2 cents worth. Hope this helps. This is my way of doing 
things, but please remember that the only truth in digital these days 
is that in 15 minutes everything changes.

Mike