Scan Color Negative

[RobAnderson]

The conventional wisdom seems to be that images made on color negative film cannot yield the quality of black & white print that comes from negatives made on black & white film.

Have any of our members done practical testing, scanning color negatives or C-41 black & white negatives & producing salon quality prints digitally?  I'm interested in all formats, including 35mm, medium format & large format.

Do you have tips for achieving the best tonal range, contrast & depth of blacks?

Rob Anderson, New York City

[smthopr]

The conventional wisdom seems to be that images made on color negative film cannot yield the quality of black & white print that comes from negatives made on black & white film.

Have any of our members done practical testing, scanning color negatives or C-41 black & white negatives & producing salon quality prints digitally?  I'm interested in all formats, including 35mm, medium format & large format.

Do you have tips for achieving the best tonal range, contrast & depth of blacks?

Rob Anderson, New York City
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Rob,

I have quite a few examples on the fuji rangefinder site at:  [a href=\"http://fujirangefinder.com/folder.php?id=118]color neg / b&w[/url]

some are B&W silver film, some c-41 b&w film and most, color neg film.

I have been very happy with the quality of the prints and like the flexibility of using the colors for conversion to B&W in lieu of color filters on the lens. That said, there is a different look to true b&w film, but it's more difficult to scan.

Let me know what you think if you have the time.

-bruce

[Rob C]

For what it´s worth, my best scans (people) have been from Kodachrome 64 Pro. However, that does imply high quality original transparencies, otherwise the medium is very unforgiving.

But, if you have a background of negatives, that is what you have to deal with. I never did like colour negatives, personally, but I did have to use them on rare occasions and each time I realised why I disliked them so much.

Rob C

[RobAnderson]

Rob,

I have quite a few examples on the fuji rangefinder site at:  color neg / b&w

some are B&W silver film, some c-41 b&w film and most, color neg film.

I have been very happy with the quality of the prints and like the flexibility of using the colors for conversion to B&W in lieu of color filters on the lens. That said, there is a different look to true b&w film, but it's more difficult to scan.

Let me know what you think if you have the time.

-bruce
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=168713\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[Kirk Gittings]

Shooting color negatives for b&w conversion has become an accepted process. I do it all the time as a substitute for filtering b&w film in the field, when color values are difficult to separate with traditional filters and film. A good scanning program like Silverfast's Negafix helps get a good scan. Conversion is easily and creatively done in CS3 b&w converter. A saturated scan gives the most conversion flexibility in CS3.

[RobAnderson]

Wonderful images, Bruce Greene.  I can see that the skills you have acquired as a cinematographer squeezing the last bit of image quality from color negative motion picture film is serving you well in your night scenic work in stills.

The black & white versions of your Portra 400 shots hold up really well.  I have to look at the captions to find out which are the Tri-X shots.  But the color of the 6th St. Bridge shot is really haunting!  The uncorrected security lighting & the diffused glow of the urban night sky really add to the mood.

--Rob Anderson, NYC

[pfigen]

Accepted practice by who? Certainly not serious black and white shooters who what all their lenses can deliver. I've scanned thousand of image from all kinds of film. Color negs are great for what they are if that's the look you want, but they are not nearly in the same league as a great T-Max 100 neg or even Tri-X for that matter. Not tonally, grain wise and especially not in fine detail. You have to set the scanning aperture to about 16 microns for Portra (sometimes even 19 microns!) while T-Max 100 easily suports 3-4 microns and Tri-X six. The corresponding effective resolutions that the film supports vary from 8000 for TMX and 1600-2000 for Portra. You can see the difference in the scan and in prints. If you like your grain mushy, then shoot the chromogenic black and white. Never like it but have had to scan it for others. Not sharp and mushy ass grain.

In my experience, the best black and white comes from shooting real black and white to begin with, although I've have recently pulled one killer black and while image from an old Velvia 35mm. The grain on that actually feels like b&w film and has fooled several people who have seen it.

As mentioned earlier, very few films can equal the punch you get from K64. Thank goodness you can still buy that...

[Rob C]

pfigen

The punch from Kodachrome 64 Pro scanned and printed B/W is truly lovely, assuming a good transparency.

However, it is not always that easy to figure out which shot will work well with conversion to B/W and which not. I have a shot of a girl in the sea, just up to the start of boob level, and with the head facing up to the sun, eyes closed, one side of her head in deep shadow. In colour, I notice I should have used fill; converted to B/W it shouts with glee - drama, and really fantastic  beads of water on the skin.

On the other hand, a shot of another girl sitting on the steps of an old Spanish doorway in similar contrasty light works well in colour but sucks in B/W. Other than putting it down to subject, I find it hard to figure out quite why it works in one case but not in the other. Trouble is, I have to scan both to find out!

Rob C

[Kirk Gittings]

Accepted practice by who? Certainly not serious black and white shooters who what all their lenses can deliver.

Accepted by many of the finest photographers I know. And yes I am a "serious black and white" large format photographer for 30 years now, who sometimes intentionally shoots color negative film to solve certain problems. I have no problem making exhibition quality b&w prints from color negatives, have exhibited them around the country and have a few in museum collections.

[smthopr]

Wonderful images, Bruce Greene.  I can see that the skills you have acquired as a cinematographer squeezing the last bit of image quality from color negative motion picture film is serving you well in your night scenic work in stills.

The black & white versions of your Portra 400 shots hold up really well.  I have to look at the captions to find out which are the Tri-X shots.  But the color of the 6th St. Bridge shot is really haunting!  The uncorrected security lighting & the diffused glow of the urban night sky really add to the mood.

--Rob Anderson, NYC
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=168906\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks for the kind words Rob!

It's ironic that you've chosen to comment on a photograph that I kept the color in  

Happy shooting and give the color to b&w a try.

-bruce

[Neil Hunt]

Rob,

The only things I've found are that colour neg is nearly always too soft at 35mm, but the people recommending Kodachrome 64 are dead right, though you can get quite a similar balance with a lot less grain by using Provia.

Neil.

[RobAnderson]

Thanks for all your comments.  I can now appreciate more than ever what the possibilities are of shooting film in medium format for scanning.

Does anyone think there are any digital backs for Hasselblad V which are especially advantageous for capturing BLACK & WHITE  images.  I think I have to disregard MegaVision, because, even though they offered a black & white model, I believe its sensor is 24mm x 36mm, the size of a 35mm film frame for still photography.

Rob Anderson, NYC