New article by Scott Rosenberg: Scanning B&W on the Microtek 1800F

**Kirk Gittings** · 23-Jan-2006, 11:42

"It has become quite common to scan B&W negs as a color positive and then select the channel with the best resolution and sharpness. "

This very point Michael has made many times in this forum and in his writings, but I don't think that is what he is asking you. He is asking why shoot chromes when the final product is b&W, I think.

**David Luttmann** · 23-Jan-2006, 12:29

Yes, my bad. I did misread. I understand where you're coming from, Michael.

**Scott Schroeder** · 23-Jan-2006, 19:29

I don't think I saw it mentioned but what film and developer did you use for your tests?
Would a stained negative such as Pyro yield different results?

**Joe_6286** · 23-Jan-2006, 20:22

Has anyone here tried shooting B&W film and having it developed as a postitive (and then scanning the 'chrome') ? I haven't tried this myself but I'm thinking about it.

The processing is done here http://www.dr5.com/main.html, and has been written up in Photo Techniques in 2002, and in a recent issue of Shutterbug.

**Steve J Murray** · 24-Jan-2006, 08:12

Just a note: I just checked the channels on a scan of a 4x5 chrome from my Epson 2450. The blue channel is definitely the sharpest one. I haven't tried scanning a black and white neg as a color positive yet.

**steve marino** · 26-Jan-2006, 00:29

Thanks for taking the time to do this properly. It confirms what I first found when I started scanning in b&w negs on my Nikon Coolscan. However, I found the results (mine) misleading. Yes, there is more information in the image if it is scanned in as color , but this is not necessarily a good thing. My scans that were scanned in this way looked and printed like a desaturated color neg. Not at all what I was after. Why shoot in true b&w if I end up w/ that look? In order for the image to look like a proper b&w shot, I now scan in the neg as a mono neg. This still gives me the use of the color channels in Photoshop (since it is RGB and not greyscale), and the image now looks nice and contrasty like a proper b&w shot. To me, scanning b&w negs in as color gives me a C41 b&w image, and by scanning in as mono, even though there is less information in the file, I get an image that duplicates my 4x6 wet proofs of HP5 or Tri-X. It's like printing in Black Only on my Epson printer compared to printing the same b&w image on my HP printer using all the color inks. The HP print has more tonal range, but the Epson print blows it away. It just makes for a more powerful image.

**roresteen** · 7-Jan-2009, 10:12

I would believe that in principle.

Comming from the world of digital - I shoot everything in RAW then convert using Gradient Map (Kevin Kubota's settings) for Black & White in Photoshop.

As I venture into LF with my 5x7 Korona, I might be inclined to shoot with the "best" film, color neg/pos or B&W, then convert in Photoshop.