Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/02/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]1. Really: do not ever just grayscale a color image to get B&W: it's very ugly. Much better stuff around to get what you look for in inexpensive plug-ins and so (BW Pro, Alien Skin, the B.D. Colen method, ...) 2. If you talk analog prints, this might be the case. If you talk digital prints: no difficulties at all. Philippe Op 11-feb-07, om 22:58 heeft Lawrence Zeitlin het volgende geschreven: > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >