Color print film for B/W conversion?
Doug Robbins
considering using a color print film instead. I actually want a little
grain in my shots for BW conversion. I use a Nikon Coolscan film scanner
and Photoshop so I can use the color information and channels to achieve
some control beyond the Ilford film when converting to black and white.
Anyone doing this, color negative to black and white?
Doug
Matt Clara
news:DOncf.5322$4C5.8...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
Color negative film doesn't really have grain, at least not the same as b&w
film, it has dye packets, and they just don't look the same. If you want
b&w grain, you'll need to shoot real b&w film.
--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com
Scott W
I have to agree with Matt on this one, if I were shooting film for a BW
print I would shoot BW film. You can get the control you want by using
color filters when shooting the film.
Besides the processing is relatively easy for BW film, no so much for
color.
Scott
Rob Novak
>Besides the processing is relatively easy for BW film, no so much for
>color.
Depends on whether or not you've got temperature control. If you're
rotary-processing in a water jacket with a thermostat, C-41's not hard
- no harder than B&W.
That being said - shooting color neg film for the purpose of
generating B&W images seems at cross purposes. I shoot all my B&W
photos on film and scan into a digital workflow. Less fussy, less
work, and all the glory of B&W's grain, texture, and tonal response is
inherent in the process - no hours of PS necessary.
--
Central Maryland Photographer's Guild - http://cmpg.org
Strange, Geometrical Hinges - http://rob.rnovak.net
Doug Robbins
those people using the C41 ---> B/W via scanning/software technique. Are
there any folks using this method?
Doug
"Doug Robbins" <crob...@triad.rr.com> wrote in message
news:DOncf.5322$4C5.8...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
Matt Clara
I have: http://www.mattclara.com/vinepost.html
That was shot on Fuji Superia Reala, which I shoot when I want fine
resolution, very little grain, the exposure latitude of C41, or color
accuracy under mixed or artificial lighting.
That image had promise that was only delivered when I converted it to black
and white (via red channel, which made the blue of the sky look like the
darkest part of the clouds).
If I wanted grain, though, that's not what I'd have used.
Matt Clara
Here's another: http://www.mattclara.com/dublinhouse.html
Again, the only reason I did this is because the color image had more impact
as a black and white. This one was likely shot on Fuji Velvia.
Norm Dresner
news:1131565261....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Assuming the OP is going to use something like Photoshop to convert from
color to B/W, he can get any color filter effect he wants -- it's easy in
the newer versions and not all that difficult in the older ones. Besides,
the original (the real world) is color too.
There's always the TMax option which can be processed by the 1-hour minilabs
which IIRC is actually a C-41 film without the dyes.
Norm
Norm Dresner
> With respect to the opinions offered, what I am inquiring is feedback from
> those people using the C41 ---> B/W via scanning/software technique. Are
> there any folks using this method?
>
> Doug
I've scanned color negative, color slide, and color print and used Photoshop
to do all sorts of conversions to pseudo-B/W. You can add filters too in
the computer.
Norm
no_name
The XP2 the OP is currently using is a C-41 film. TMax is not.
Rob Novak
<crob...@triad.rr.com> wrote:
>With respect to the opinions offered, what I am inquiring is feedback from
>those people using the C41 ---> B/W via scanning/software technique. Are
>there any folks using this method?
Sure - it's pretty simple.
To get response curves that that reflect the way B&W film reacts to
light, you need to use the RGB channel mixer in Photoshop (or the
Channel Mixer filter in the GIMP). Start with about 36% red, 46%
green, and 18% blue in monochrome mode for a basic B&W conversion that
preserves tonal relationships. It ends up looking similar to HP5 -
good tonal qualities, but not to contrasty.
Simply turning the saturation down to zero gives all RGB channels
equal input into the final image (basically equivalent to setting the
channel mixer to 33%/33%/33%), which is not the way B&W panchromatic
films react.
Want to sorta emulate ortho film? Use blue as the primary channel set
at 100%, and then add just enough green to give you the brightness you
want.
There are also tricks for doing psuedo-infrared out there.
You're not ever going to get the grain structures that true B&W film
offers. There are filters out there that provide various levels of
luminance noise to simulate "grain" with varying amounts of success.
If you really want B&W's look, shoot B&W film, dunk it yourself (way
cheaper and immediately gratifying than getting it done at a shop) and
scan it. 'S what I do, and the combination of film choices,
developer/process control, and digital workflow provide a "best of
both worlds" solution that can't be beat.
Of course, if your goal is to have the option of using any image as
color or monochrome, this won't work for you. However, I find color
and B&W work to be two completely different mindsets, personally.
When I want B&W, I shoot B&W film. When I want color, I shoot chromes
or digital. Rarely will I convert a color source to monochrome, and
then usually I shoot the subject knowing in advance I'm going to do
so, and shoot the photo using B&W exposure and compositional
techniques.
Father Kodak
wrote:
>On 9 Nov 2005 11:41:01 -0800, "Scott W" <bip...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Besides the processing is relatively easy for BW film, no so much for
>>color.
>
>Depends on whether or not you've got temperature control. If you're
>rotary-processing in a water jacket with a thermostat, C-41's not hard
>- no harder than B&W.
Except the part about maintaining your chemicals, etc. if you don't do
a lot of processing.
>
>That being said - shooting color neg film for the purpose of
>generating B&W images seems at cross purposes. I shoot all my B&W
>photos on film and scan into a digital workflow. Less fussy, less
>work, and all the glory of B&W's grain, texture, and tonal response is
>inherent in the process - no hours of PS necessary.
Which scanner? How do you remove dust and dirt before the scan? I've
heard that the Nikon scanners, for example, can't really remove dust
and dirt from b&w because the silver on the negative interferes with
the way that the scanner detects dirt and dust.
Father Kodak
PunishS...@nospam.com
crob...@triad.rr.com says...
using "Konika VX 200 Super" that I get at the Dollar Store, (Adorama
sells if for $1.47) to test cameras and lenses I buy used. It is crap
color but it has some good properties that when scanned to B&W look
amazingly good. I was quite surprised. I scan the negs as B&W, if your
software will do that, not as Color film. I bump up the exposure bias
about 6 percent before scanning and the scans look like stuff I did years
ago with Kodak film. I dont' remember now if I used a lot of Tri X or
Plus X back then. I would have to pull some old stuff out to check but
anyway it may be worth a try.
Doug Robbins
Doug
<PunishS...@NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1de42d286...@news.east.earthlink.net...
PunishS...@nospam.com
crob...@triad.rr.com says...
> Thanks for the info. I'll try a couple of rolls.
>
> Doug
>