[ChrisPlatt]

I have always enjoyed developing and printing my own black and white at home.
Unfortunately I lost all my processing equipment when we were flooded in Sandy.

I would consider setting up a darkroom here in our new place, but there are many more pressing needs.
In the meantime I might consider a scanner. I know silver halide films are a real challenge for them.
Any suggestions for something not too expensive, capable of handling 35mm black and white negatives?

TIA,
Chris

[jeztastic]

I have always enjoyed developing and printing my own black and white at home.
Unfortunately I lost all my processing equipment when we were flooded in Sandy.

I would consider setting up a darkroom here in our new place, but there are many more pressing needs.
In the meantime I might consider a scanner. I know silver halide films are a real challenge for them.
Any suggestions for something not too expensive, capable of handling 35mm black and white negatives?

TIA,
Chris

I'm in the same boat as you. I've just bought an Epson V500. After a bit of research it seems that it's effectively the same as the V600 hardware specs wise, and is a good deal cheaper than both the V600 and V700.

I have been pleased with it, although I have discovered that the digital ICE and dust removal are useless or worse. Perhaps it's user error, I don't know. I have been quite happy scanning and then sharpening and adding contrast in Lightroom. Resolution wise, I cannot imagine needing more for 35mm film. If I wanted more resolution I would not be shooting B&W 35mm in the first place. Have a look at my flickr for examples.

What problems to scanners have with black and white film?

Edit: Interesting discussion about b&w scanning techniques, pros and cons, workflow etc.

Shooting/scanning MF Film

[wombat2go]

I have the Epson V600. I find the Pentax Bellows M /Slide Copier with enlarger lenses gives better results.
I put a thread in DIY for C41 color but the BW shot below is just took one shot manually focussed and no pp except inversion and de-gamma.

https://www.box.com/s/p5nia83gee7efw0havw3

With the scanner artifacts I was never confident I could really see the original image.
In this shot I can go down to the HP5 grain, for example the Morgan label, and also see the focus is a bit off on the right side tire.

[LesDMess]

I have been pleased with it, although I have discovered that the digital ICE and dust removal are useless or worse. Perhaps it's user error, I don't know. I have been quite happy scanning and then sharpening and adding contrast in Lightroom. Resolution wise, I cannot imagine needing more for 35mm film. If I wanted more resolution I would not be shooting B&W 35mm in the first place. Have a look at my flickr for examples.

What problems to scanners have with black and white film?

There is nno ICE that works with true b&w film regadles of scanner make or model due to the silver. ICE does work with chromogenic film - b&w intended for c41 processing.

Regarding resolution, b&w film is the highest resolving film type that no scanner can fully resolve and no digital can match.

---

Last edited by LesDMess; 04-22-2013 at 10:15 AM.

[tuco]

Looking at the MTF curve of Velvia 50 and Ektar 100 they go above 100 cycles/mm and that is about the same as most BW films ( and don't bring up non-existent Tech Pan )

EDIT: And I doubt their is a camera that can hold film flat enough to realize that 100 cycles/mm resolution without some vacuum system or something.

[LesDMess]

tuco, It is interesting that all the MTF curves published for Fuji Velvia (50) and Kodaks TMAX 100, Ektar 100 and even the non-existent Techpan all max out about the same.

Chris, I doubt that any of today's scanners have an advantage over any other when it comes to scanning b&w film. I believe it is still the same lineup as it is for color except that ICE won't be a factor to consider. So really it all comes down to the cost, feature set and resolution.

[stevebrot]

I know silver halide films are a real challenge for them.

...Except for the lack of IR scratch/dust reduction, I have not encountered any particular problem scanning traditional silver emulsions. Having said that, I know that a traditional optical enlargement can and will provide better results than the best my Nikon 5000 ED is capable of.


Steve



Steve

[artobest]

The Plustek Opticfilm 8100 is a dedicated 35mm film scanner with no ICE, so cheaper, while providing the same decent results for b&w.

[ChrisPlatt]

Do scans of properly exposed black and white negatives typically require much tweaking using photo editing software?
Is there any preferred photo editing software for black and white?

Chris

[redrockcoulee]

Looking at the MTF curve of Velvia 50 and Ektar 100 they go above 100 cycles/mm and that is about the same as most BW films ( and don't bring up non-existent Tech Pan )

EDIT: And I doubt their is a camera that can hold film flat enough to realize that 100 cycles/mm resolution without some vacuum system or something.

How does the non existent Tech Pan take up room in my freezer ?

But I know what you mean but have 8 or 9 rolls of 135 and a full box of 100 4X5 plus more than enough Technodol to process it all.

I do not have experience scanning with the Epson scanners but I thought that the Nikon dedicated film scanners were supposed to be both higher true resolution and able to obtain sharper images.

[tuco]

Do scans of properly exposed black and white negatives typically require much tweaking using photo editing software?
Is there any preferred photo editing software for black and white?

Chris

I all depends on the shot and how much you want to work the image. You can either go with the editing controls in the scanning software, scan and be done. Or scan to collect as much "data" off the negative as you can and finish adjusting the contrast curve and other edits in an image editor.

I would recommend getting an air source to blow the dust off the negatives. You can minimize post processing clean up of dust specs with the healing tool in image editor as follows. Get a jewelers headset magnifying glass, white cotton gloves to handle the film, hold the film up to a strong light and blow off all the little dust specs you can see. Those cans of air will work if you avoid aiming them down (they are risky). Your scanner will pick up the smallest dust spec you can barely see.

[stevebrot]

Do scans of properly exposed black and white negatives typically require much tweaking using photo editing software?
Is there any preferred photo editing software for black and white?

Chris

I use Lightroom for all my scanned images. PP is pretty much the same as for an image from a digital camera and is analogous to what you might do in a wet darkroom except that you have fine control over the curves. As you might imagine, a poorly exposed/scanned negative gives less to work with and is more difficult to handle.


Steve

[ChrisPlatt]

Photo editing looks pretty tedious and frankly I'd prefer not tamper too much with the original image.

Is it possible to do straight prints from a scanner? If so does anyone here ever do this?
Or does one any particular photo editing program have an"auto" mode that yields decent results?

Chris

[tuco]

Photo editing looks pretty tedious and frankly I'd prefer not tamper too much with the original image.

Chris

You either "tamper" with the image in the scanning software or an image editor. You *have* to adjust the contrast cure at a minium. If you think you are somehow perserving the essence of film when you convert it to a digital image by not doing any adjustments, you can expect flat, and dull images, I feel. And, yes, scanning is a lot of work. More so with BW film.

[stevebrot]

And, yes, scanning is a lot of work. More so with BW film.

Though much, much less so than with a wet darkroom. I cannot overstate the huge advantage of the hybrid (figital) workflow. A good scanner coupled with good image processing software provides the access to the full gamut of information contained on the negative and does so in a very time-effective (and also cost-effective) manner. To be honest, the only thing I miss about the wet darkroom is the ability to quickly and easily make a proof sheet to file with the negatives.

We tend to forget that all prints (digital as well as film) require manipulation of the originally captured image. With drugstore film prints or in-camera jpegs output direct to printer this is done using an automated process. If you like, you can set the scanner driver to auto adjust the levels/curves/color for you with output to jpeg and then use the printer's software to access the file to print using its auto-render features. The results will be generally be acceptable and close to what you would get from Costco or Walgreens.


Steve