Convert color to B&W vs shooting B&W?
I have to make a decision: shoot 4x5 color film (positive or negative), send it out for processing, scan and convert to B&W -OR- shoot B&W film, develop myself and scan. I'm presently doing the former. I do like the adjustments I can make to the scans with Lightroom.
Is there a clear quality advantage to the latter? The only advantage I can see is that B&W film is cheaper than color.
Re: Convert color to B&W vs shooting B&W?
There is no particular advantage to shooting b&w for scanning. One may prefer the "look" of scanned b&w over converted color film. B&W requires more discipline in some ways because you must make appropriate filter choices in the field and the tonal relationships are basically locked in. I believe there is something valuable to be learned from mastering filtering for b&w, which allows one to previsualize final prints better even if you return to color conversion.
Re: Convert color to B&W vs shooting B&W?
You can distort the color of the shot before converting to black and white to emulate the effect of filtering, or with more delicate adjustments, different kinds of Black and white film. Maybe not as good as shooting monochrome from the outset but it does give you options to play with.
Re: Convert color to B&W vs shooting B&W?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dyuhas
I have to make a decision: shoot 4x5 color film (positive or negative), send it out for processing, scan and convert to B&W -OR- shoot B&W film, develop myself and scan. I'm presently doing the former. I do like the adjustments I can make to the scans with Lightroom.
Is there a clear quality advantage to the latter? The only advantage I can see is that B&W film is cheaper than color.
One definite advantage is that B&W film is generally sharper (higher resolution) than color film of the same ASA.
Sandy King
Re: Convert color to B&W vs shooting B&W?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
sanking
One definite advantage is that B&W film is sharper than color film of the same ASA.
What Sandy said. The better sharpness is due in part to the far fewer layers in B&W film.
In my experience, B&W film also exhibits less graininess than color negative film of the same ISO rating. In the past I've been using 5x4 Tri-X processed in XTOL 1:3. I found it has about the same graininess as 160PortaVC, which is a stop slower. I'm currently (finally!) making the transition to TMY-2 which I expect will have even less graininess than Tri-X. Initial testing looks very promising.
Re: Convert color to B&W vs shooting B&W?
I just had ~ 70 sheets of Ilford Delta 100-Pro processed in Dave Woods' reversal chemistry in order to furnish a B&W transparency (http://www.dr5.com/). The silver is removed in this process making it ideal for scanning. Compared to RVP-50 (my standard E6 film), I find this gives me almost an additional 1.3 stops in shadow detail, and on the lightbox, the Delta-100 is sharper than RVP-50.
Re: Convert color to B&W vs shooting B&W?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dyuhas
I have to make a decision: shoot 4x5 color film (positive or negative), send it out for processing, scan and convert to B&W -OR- shoot B&W film, develop myself and scan. I'm presently doing the former. I do like the adjustments I can make to the scans with Lightroom.
Is there a clear quality advantage to the latter? The only advantage I can see is that B&W film is cheaper than color.
The limited captured stops of colour transparency film rules it out as a viable source for quality B&W. Also, Lightroom isn't an adequate tool to make the best of your images for print.
Re: Convert color to B&W vs shooting B&W?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dyuhas
I have to make a decision: shoot 4x5 color film (positive or negative), send it out for processing, scan and convert to B&W -OR- shoot B&W film, develop myself and scan. I'm presently doing the former. I do like the adjustments I can make to the scans with Lightroom.
Is there a clear quality advantage to the latter? The only advantage I can see is that B&W film is cheaper than color.
B&W film has a much higher range than color. Sharper also, as others have mentioned. However, you must be making tiny scans to be using Lightroom. You could also try a better scan....
Lenny
EigerStudios.com
Re: Convert color to B&W vs shooting B&W?
I have come to regret shooting on B&W film in the past. I **love** the control that Lightroom gives me in mixing color channlels from my scanned color images.
It gives me much more control than I ever had in the field over relative brightness values of different components of an image, such as bringing up - or pushing down - a darker green on a sign, versus a lighter, more yellowish green of foilage.
I used mostly color negative film for the past 10 years and am happy that I made the switch from B&W film. Also, after shooting and being happy with 6x7 for many years, I don't find grain an issue with 4x5. It is a bit more of a challange to manage and control a color negative scan, but worth the effort in my mind.
I shot B&W film exclusively for 20 years, until 1998. I loved that at the time. There is a classic Tri-X look and feel, and a classic feel to TMX/TMY. I guess it depends on how much of a purist you are, and whether you want to take advantage of new tools available, like Lightroom.
I am physically challanged, so making images is a very difficult process for me. I like to be able to "interpret" images on the computer, by working with Lightroom to create an image that expresses my intentended interpretation of a scene.
Re: Convert color to B&W vs shooting B&W?
The great yellow father no longer makes photo paper,and i don't know of anybody makeing anything like panalure,that never was that good because it was rc.