Scanning vs. Printing BW negs/BW basics
I'm finding that if I expose/develop a BW neg just right for optical printing, that it SCANS (Epson 2450) a little to dark (scanner likes a little more density ). Is this typical or a fault with my scanner/driver?? I'm using silverfast driver... Second question (may be a little too basic but what the hell). Are under exposed BW negs sharper BUT grainier than correctly exposed/developed? And viceversa, are overexposed BW negs softer(less sharp) but less grainier than correctly exposed/developed? JCO
RE: Scanning vs. Printing BW negs/BW basics
> -Original Message- > From: J. C. O'Connell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > I'm finding that if I expose/develop a > BW neg just right for optical printing, that it > SCANS (Epson 2450) a little to dark (scanner > likes a little more density ). Is this > typical or a fault with my scanner/driver?? > I'm using silverfast driver... I'm not exactly sure, though I know the contract I like for printing is not the same my lab likes for scanning. > > Second question (may be a little too basic > but what the hell). > > Are under exposed BW negs sharper BUT grainier than > correctly exposed/developed? > > And viceversa, are overexposed > BW negs softer(less sharp) but less grainier > than correctly exposed/developed? Generally bad exposure will increase grain either way. With underexposure only the big sensitive grains get exposed. With overexposure the grains clump up. Sharpness varies, but both generally look unsharp to me...I guess underexposure looks less sharp than over. Just expose correctly! tv
Re: Scanning vs. Printing BW negs/BW basics
On 24 Sep 2002 at 20:58, William Robb wrote: > This, in part, is the siren song of larger negatives. You can > get the shadow detail you want, and still have the sharpness > needed to make a great print, simply because you are enlarging > the negative less. Mr Robb, do you have to make so much sense? :-) Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Re: Scanning vs. Printing BW negs/BW basics
- Original Message - From: Rob Studdert Subject: Re: Scanning vs. Printing BW negs/BW basics > On 24 Sep 2002 at 20:58, William Robb wrote: > > > This, in part, is the siren song of larger negatives. You can > > get the shadow detail you want, and still have the sharpness > > needed to make a great print, simply because you are enlarging > > the negative less. > > Mr Robb, do you have to make so much sense? :-) > It lends me credibility in other threads. William Robb
Re: Scanning vs. Printing BW negs/BW basics
I read about a technique for scanning BW negs recently (I forget where) that seems to work pretty well, or at least better that the way I had been doing things. The author recommended scanning the negs as color *positives*, using the scanner's highest bit-depth and resolution. Get the levels approximately correct before scanning, then scan and save. Open the image in photoshop, invert the image and make final levels adjustments there. A bit convoluted, but it does seem to produce good results. I'm still far form satisfied with scanning traditional BW negatives (I don't use chromogenic BW film) but I'm making progress. Slowly. -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com Photography and writing
