the only reason I shoot B&W film is when I want to engage in the mental discipline of seeng in B&W. It really is a different trip - looking for patterns and texture etc. But if I'm shooting color and see a shot that will look best in B&W, I take it and convert the image digitally.
Having developed my own traditional B&W, I have to say no lab I've used has done it properly. I can also say that traditional B&W can be difficult to scan. In regards to chromogenic B&W - it takes out the iffiness regarding processing and you can have it properly processed even at minilabs. I think it also scans better than traditional B&W, but you have to be aware of differences between brands. Ilford XP-2 Super, for example, makes a negative that is a lot like a tradtional B&W neg. Scanned on the B&W setting you get good results. On the other hand, Kodak's most recent chromogenic C-41 (BW+) produces a negative with an orange cast like color print film. For this film you have to scan with the scanner set the color negative. - MCC At 12:52 PM 4/16/2002 +0000, you wrote: >what do you guys think about it? is it better/different than shooting >color and then just turning to BW in photoshop? i never tried it and >really curious how is it different (if at all) from regular BW film - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Kalamazoo, MI [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - - - - - - - - - Photos: http://www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
