Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/02/11

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re: Kodak BW400CN film
From: lrzeitlin at optonline.net (Lawrence Zeitlin)
Date: Sun Feb 11 13:58:02 2007
References: <200702112006.l1BK6PI4041522@server1.waverley.reid.org>

Question:

I have never used a BW chromogenic film. I've done all my B&W  
photography with silver based films developed in the traditional way.  
But in the last couple of years I've abandoned my wet darkroom  
because of skin allergies to chemicals. I have been scanning all my  
color negatives to create a data base, using a Minolta Dimage 5400  
scanner. Apart from taking a long time, the ICE facility is marvelous  
for eliminating all those nuisance dust spots.

My specific question is - if I standardize on a readily available  
color negative film, say ASA 100 or 200 Kodak Royal Gold, scan the  
negative, then turn it into a grayscale in PS, will the results be  
comparable to a B&W chromogenic film. The Kodak web site seems to  
indicate that if you want prints, then silver based B&W films are  
preferable. Their reasoning seems to be that the dyes and base color  
of BW400CN makes printing difficult. But if I want to use an ink jet  
or laser printer, does it matter?

Larry Z

Replies: Reply from leicachris at worldnet.att.net (Christopher Williams) ([Leica] Re:Kodak BW400CN film)
Reply from don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory) ([Leica] Re: Kodak BW400CN film)
Reply from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Re: Kodak BW400CN film)
Reply from philippe.orlent at pandora.be (Philippe Orlent) ([Leica] Re: Kodak BW400CN film)