Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/10/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]One aspect might be to compare the longevity of C41 negs vs. TriX. I have had much better results converting in-camera digital files to b&w, compared to film. Plus, the scanning seems to take an eternity now. Ken p.s. If you haven't tried it, you might try Convert to B&W Pro. It is a PS plug-in that lets you select the film stock, the "paper grade" and so forth. It's pretty painless. > -----Original Message----- > From: lug-bounces+kcarney1=cox.net@leica-users.org [mailto:lug- > bounces+kcarney1=cox.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Walt Johnson > Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 3:31 PM > To: Leica Users Group > Subject: Re: [Leica] No more b&w > > Harvey > > I think my point (if I had one) was a bit muddled. Didn't mean to > compare the Athena image as being best in color. It was, but with PS one > can make the conversion to b&w . I don't see the need for processing > Tri-X when I can make my Fujicolor color or Tri-X. There is one element > in all this which comes to mind. When the 1 Hour Labs all fold I'd > better have a supply of Tri-X and D-76. :-) > > Walt > > H. Ball Arche wrote: > > Having shot with that building as a backdrop several times, I know it > has a weird problem for B&W. In color, the gravel in the concrete looks > like gravelly concrete- in B&W it looks like the grain from hell. > > > > Walt Johnson <walt@waltjohnson.com> wrote: I'm wondering if there is > any real reason left to shoot b&w? > > > > > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Walt+Johnson/athena2_ed.jpg.html > > > > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/Walt+Johnson/athena_bw.jpg.html