A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » General Photography » In The Darkroom
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Advice sought on scanning b/w negatives



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old February 27th 06, 03:01 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Advice sought on scanning b/w negatives

While burning and dodging will always be necessary tools in a wet
darkroom, a couple of tips from a 35-year vet may be helpful:

Make sure your film speed and development times are accurate for your
equipment to give you both shadow and highlight detail on your neg.

When you print, the use of VC paper combined with a split-filter
technique will often save you a lot of burning and dodging. If you're
using multicontrast filters, give one exposure with the highest contrast
filter and one with the lowest. Arrive at the times through running
test strips of each. If using a colorhead, give one at full magenta and
one at full yellow. When doing your test strips, you'll want the yellow
(lowest contrast) exposure that will give you the desired amount of
detail in the brightest highlights (excluding specular highlights, of
course) and with the magenta (high contrast) exposure, the desired
amount of detail in the most important shadow areas. Example, 12
seconds magenta and 6 seconds yellow at f/11 or whatever f stop you
prefer. You'll be amazed at how quickly you'll arrive at a really good
work print, and how little final manipulation of burning and dodging
you'll have to do. You can burn or dodge to increase or decrease
density increasing or decreasing both exposures. You can burn or dodge
to increase or decrease contrast by increasing or decreasing only one of
the exposures. Takes a little practice to get your head into it at
first, but will save you a lot of pain and time and paper when you do.
And, it will give you visible improvement in the local contrast, i.e.
the contrast within a given tone in the print. This will give your
prints that luminous glow--- make them "sing."



Rod Smith wrote:

In article ,
Craig Schroeder writes:


It might be a
reflection of my darkroom skills, but I've actually gotten some
hard-to-print negatives to deliver better via the scans and deliver
good tonality on the printer that I wasn't quite getting in the
darkroom... It takes a bit of courage to admit that publicly!



What I've found is that a scanner (or my Minolta DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400 as
driven by VueScan, anyhow) is very good at extracting the full scale of
densities from a negative, compared to printing. This is most commonly
noticeable in scenes with cloudy skies; a scan produces noticeable, and
even dramatic, detail in the clouds along with a good range of tones
outside of the sky. A print of the same negative produces little or no
detail in the clouds and/or lost detail in the shadows. The only way I've
found to recover detail in both areas in the darkroom is to burn the sky
in. (I've less than a year's experience in the wet darkroom, though;
perhaps there's a technique I don't know about that'd do the job.)

That said, scans of B&W negatives just don't cut it when it comes to
recording subtle tonal changes, particularly in dark areas (of the final
images; light areas of the negative); they tend to break up into harsh
pixel patterns, and printing on an injet printer just makes it worse.
Thus, with a little burning, I find it's usually possible to get superior
results in a conventional darkroom. I've a couple of negatives I have yet
to print satisfactorily in the darkroom but for which I have good scans,
though. Still, I do expect to eventually learn enough to get them done.



  #12  
Old February 27th 06, 04:43 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Advice sought on scanning b/w negatives

I would like to scan the negatives and invert the image for a contact
sheet proof before printing the negatives. This is the only use that I
have for the scanner and software.


I spent a long time trying to find a way to scan negs on a regular flat
bed scanner and it is so easy I didn't believe it when I read that you
can just place the negs on the glass and if the backing cover is black
place a sheet of white paper over them to reflect the light. Of course
it is not needed if the cover is white already.
Then most image software can invert the image from negative to
positive. I recommend Irfanview which has the advantage of being free.
http://www.irfanview.com/

  #13  
Old February 27th 06, 06:17 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Advice sought on scanning b/w negatives

wrote in message
ups.com...
I have a black and white darkroom. I use 4x5, 6x12, 35mm negatives and
have two enlargers.
I would like to scan the negatives and invert the image for a contact
sheet proof before printing the negatives.


On the Day Job I do exactly that with an Epson 1640XL with the transparency
option. You can gang-scan up to eight 4x5 transparencies/negatives at a
time. Doing so many at once means that you make the same compromises you
might with ordinary contact printing of so many at once, but it works for
proofing quite well. If you choose this approach, and want to use the whole
scanning bed, then you will have to buy two sets of negative holders. No big
deal, really.



  #14  
Old February 27th 06, 09:14 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Advice sought on scanning b/w negatives

Dick spake thus:

I would like to scan the negatives and invert the image for a
contact sheet proof before printing the negatives. This is the only
use that I have for the scanner and software.


I spent a long time trying to find a way to scan negs on a regular
flat bed scanner and it is so easy I didn't believe it when I read
that you can just place the negs on the glass and if the backing
cover is black place a sheet of white paper over them to reflect the
light. Of course it is not needed if the cover is white already.


The problem with this method is that you end up "seeing" twice the
density in the negative. Think about it: the light has to travel through
the film twice, once towards the cover, the next time reflected towards
the scanner. So you effectively double (quadruple?) the contrast.


--
To the arrogant putzes at NBC:

Do we call the country Italia? Is its capital Roma?
Were previous Olympics held in Moskva, Muenchen or Athine?
Do we call it the "Shroud of Torino"?

No!

So learn to speak English already and call it Turin.

- from someone's blog
  #15  
Old February 28th 06, 12:07 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Advice sought on scanning b/w negatives

Dick wrote:

I would like to scan the negatives and invert the image for a contact
sheet proof before printing the negatives. This is the only use that I
have for the scanner and software.


I spent a long time trying to find a way to scan negs on a regular flat
bed scanner and it is so easy I didn't believe it ...
Then most image software can invert the image from negative to
positive. I recommend Irfanview which has the advantage of being free.
http://www.irfanview.com/


I wondered about that. That idea popped into my mind; a white
back-up sheet might do the job. I'm going to do some shopping
for a better quality 3 in 1 machine. Any suggestions? Dan

  #16  
Old February 28th 06, 12:08 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Advice sought on scanning b/w negatives

Get a used 4870 on Ebay. It will do all you want and more. Furthermore
it will be reliable, simple to operate, and you will be happy. I use
one at home and a 4990 at work, in terms of product there's not a
dime's worth of difference between them.

  #17  
Old February 28th 06, 12:29 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Advice sought on scanning b/w negatives

David Nebenzahl wrote:

Dick spake thus:

I spent a long time trying to find a way to scan negs on a regular
flat bed scanner and it is so easy I didn't believe it ...


The problem with this method is that you end up "seeing" twice the
density in the negative.


I've a few where twice the density would be a big improvement.
Any scanner with a D-Max capability of 3 or better should handle
just about any negative. I think Dick may have some experience
with the method. Dan

  #18  
Old February 28th 06, 02:49 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Advice sought on scanning b/w negatives

On 27 Feb 2006 07:43:08 -0800, "Dick" wrote:


I spent a long time trying to find a way to scan negs on a regular flat
bed scanner and it is so easy I didn't believe it when I read that you
can just place the negs on the glass and if the backing cover is black
place a sheet of white paper over them to reflect the light. Of course
it is not needed if the cover is white already.



Tried this on a 4990 and results were awful.

Here are two strips of BW 35 mm scanned as reflective material:
http://www.terrapinphoto.com/bw/trix_flatb.jpg

Here are the same two strips scanned as transparencies:
http://www.terrapinphoto.com/bw/trix_transp.jpg

These are both straight off the scanner with
no manipulations in Photoshop other than
scaling and conversion to JPG.

Bottom line: not enough light reflecting off
the white background.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com
  #19  
Old February 28th 06, 02:50 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.equipment.large-format
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Advice sought on scanning b/w negatives


LR Kalajainen wrote:
While burning and dodging will always be necessary tools in a wet
darkroom, a couple of tips from a 35-year vet may be helpful:


Very rarely is it necessary to burn and dodge. Usually this is caused
by overdeveloping the film, resulting in excessivly contrasty
negatives.

Make sure your film speed and development times are accurate for your
equipment to give you both shadow and highlight detail on your neg.


It would be nice if you told him HOW.


When you print, the use of VC paper combined with a split-filter
technique will often save you a lot of burning and dodging.


Completely false. It makes no difference whatsoever. The silver grains
don't care in which order they are exposed. Most prints look just
gorgeous when printed at the normal grade (grade 3 for 35mm).

If you're
using multicontrast filters, give one exposure with the highest contrast
filter and one with the lowest. Arrive at the times through running
test strips of each. If using a colorhead, give one at full magenta and
one at full yellow. When doing your test strips, you'll want the yellow
(lowest contrast) exposure that will give you the desired amount of
detail in the brightest highlights (excluding specular highlights, of
course) and with the magenta (high contrast) exposure, the desired
amount of detail in the most important shadow areas. Example, 12
seconds magenta and 6 seconds yellow at f/11 or whatever f stop you
prefer. You'll be amazed at how quickly you'll arrive at a really good
work print, and how little final manipulation of burning and dodging
you'll have to do. You can burn or dodge to increase or decrease
density increasing or decreasing both exposures. You can burn or dodge
to increase or decrease contrast by increasing or decreasing only one of
the exposures. Takes a little practice to get your head into it at
first, but will save you a lot of pain and time and paper when you do.
And, it will give you visible improvement in the local contrast, i.e.
the contrast within a given tone in the print. This will give your
prints that luminous glow--- make them "sing."


Complete bull****.



Rod Smith wrote:

In article ,
Craig Schroeder writes:


It might be a
reflection of my darkroom skills, but I've actually gotten some
hard-to-print negatives to deliver better via the scans and deliver
good tonality on the printer that I wasn't quite getting in the
darkroom... It takes a bit of courage to admit that publicly!



What I've found is that a scanner (or my Minolta DiMAGE Scan Elite 5400 as
driven by VueScan, anyhow) is very good at extracting the full scale of
densities from a negative, compared to printing. This is most commonly
noticeable in scenes with cloudy skies; a scan produces noticeable, and
even dramatic, detail in the clouds along with a good range of tones
outside of the sky. A print of the same negative produces little or no
detail in the clouds and/or lost detail in the shadows. The only way I've
found to recover detail in both areas in the darkroom is to burn the sky
in. (I've less than a year's experience in the wet darkroom, though;
perhaps there's a technique I don't know about that'd do the job.)

That said, scans of B&W negatives just don't cut it when it comes to
recording subtle tonal changes, particularly in dark areas (of the final
images; light areas of the negative); they tend to break up into harsh
pixel patterns, and printing on an injet printer just makes it worse.
Thus, with a little burning, I find it's usually possible to get superior
results in a conventional darkroom. I've a couple of negatives I have yet
to print satisfactorily in the darkroom but for which I have good scans,
though. Still, I do expect to eventually learn enough to get them done.




  #20  
Old February 28th 06, 01:47 PM posted to rec.photo.darkroom
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Advice sought on scanning b/w negatives

On 26 Feb 2006 14:31:59 -0800,
wrote:

rafe b wrote:

wrote:

I have a black and white darkroom. I use 4x5, 6x12, 35mm negatives
I would like to scan the negatives and invert the image for a contact
sheet proof before printing the negatives.



Epson 4990 is probably your best bet right now,
though it's overkill if all you want is contact sheets.


I think the 4990 is overkill in the mind of the OP
and myself. I've a scanner to buy as well. A B&W negative
and print scanning unit is needed. What of those integrated
units; scanner-copier-printer? Any of those that do a good
job of all three? The prices on those units seems
ridiculously low. Dan



February 28, 2006, from Lloyd Erlick,

Is there a combination unit that has the
ability to scan transparencies as well? What
about 8x10 transparency (to permit scanning a
roll of negs in protective filing sleeve)?

I'm suspicious of combo machines. Jack of all
trades, master of none. If my telephone was
also an electric toothbrush, my problems
would be over. Really, the health of our
nation would cease to be an issue if only we
combined stationary bicycles with electrical
generators and computers ... and TVs.

regards,
--le
________________________________
Lloyd Erlick Portraits, Toronto.
voice: 416-686-0326
email:

net:
www.heylloyd.com
________________________________
--

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
scanning negatives - resolution freightcar Digital Photography 2 November 14th 05 09:10 PM
Pricing advice sought glassofwhine General Equipment For Sale 0 June 27th 05 02:25 AM
Camera advice sought 5-7 mpx Steve Digital Photography 0 April 12th 05 10:56 PM
Are scratches on negatives normal? [email protected] Digital Photography 16 December 19th 04 09:05 AM
What densities at which zones? ~BitPump Large Format Photography Equipment 24 August 13th 04 04:15 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.