PDA

View Full Version : Need something that's about 50% of Beyond the Zone System



sully75
25-May-2011, 13:03
Hello All,

So I got a used copy of Beyond the Zone System and WOW! I didn't get very far. Just seemed to get over the top for my needs pretty quickly.

I don't want to say that I'm lazy, but I probably am.

I don't think I'm going to get crazy with graphs and plotting curves and things like that. Probably my loss.

So...is there something that's like 50% of Beyond the Zone System? Some relatively simple guide that would get me in the ballpark? I don't think my negatives are terrible, but I'd like a bit more control. I'd be happy with consistently very good negatives, I don't need absolutely perfect.

Any suggestions? Pamphlets, web pages, other easy to understand things?

Lazily yours...

jeroldharter
25-May-2011, 13:27
I assume you are using sheet film.

Contact Fred at the View Camera Store. He will set you up with a Stouffer step wedge and tell you how to use it to expose 5 sheets of your film. Then you process the sheets at 4, 5.5. 8, 11, and 16 minutes. Send the film back to him and he will do the densitometer readings, run it through the plotter software, and then send you the graphs.

From the graphs, you can generate your "50% BTZS," which is what I have done.

I found the film speeds for SBR 5,6,7,8,9.
I made a chart which shows the proper exposure times for each EV for each SBR.
At home, you use one of the graphs to find the development time for each SBR.

For example, if I meter a normal scene and find a SBR of 7, I look on my graph for EV's corresponding to SBR 7 (corresponding film speed of 320). If middle of the highlight shadow EV reading was EV 10, then I find the desired exposure settings, say 1/2 at f32. In the darkroom, I know that the development time for SBR 7 is 8 minutes. I round off my SBR's to whole numbers so that I use only 5 development times. I mark the holder with stickers to indicate the SBR of the exposure, or I could use a note pad.

It sounds more complicated than it is. Basically, use the BTZS film testing service and then use those graphs to simplify your work. If there is modest spread in the film speed between SBR 5-9, then you might standardize to a single film speed (or err toward over exposure) which would make it easier in the field.

AF-ULF
25-May-2011, 13:34
Let's see. Something a bit easier than BTZS to understand. A simple guide to get you in the ball park? A bit more control on your negatives, producing very good negatives, but you don't need absolutely perfect?

I think it's called The Zone System. :)

Robert Hughes
25-May-2011, 13:35
IMO, you can make perfectly good photos using Sunny 16 as your guide, or if you want a little assistance, get an incident light meter. Just go out and shoot. Once you're comfortable with your process, and are interested in getting tricky, then move up to Zone System.

Peter York
25-May-2011, 13:36
Ansel Adam's The Negative

Ben Calwell
25-May-2011, 13:45
Sully75,
I'm not much of tester/technician either, but I did read Adams' "The Negative" and performed the film speed test he describes in it.
It's not too hard, so I would recommend you give that a try, and that should put you in the ballpark.
If I, as a man who doesn't yet understand my TV remote can do it, so can you.

Jay DeFehr
25-May-2011, 13:53
Shoot at box speed (sunny 16 rule is more than adequate), develop according to manufacturer's instructions, and print on VC paper. I'm not being sarcastic. This system was developed by experts over a long period of time, to assure the best results, most consistently, among the greatest number of users.

Lachlan 717
25-May-2011, 13:57
Have a look at Ken Lee's testing page (http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/tech/testing.php).

paulr
25-May-2011, 14:25
Just one point of view ... it's great to understand the zone system for what it is: a conceptual framework for thinking about and controlling exposure and development.

But there's no compelling need to use it a system every time you photograph. And much less reason to go beyond it.

In most cases, you can get great, very consistent results with an abbreviated version. Like, put your important shadows on zone 3, then meter on your highlights and see where they fall. You'll probably find normal development works for you most of the time.

Sometimes you'll have to do + or - development. But it doesn't have to be rocket science. I kept it this simple for years and printed everything on grade 3 paper, making minor contrast adjustments through 2 tray print development.

It just takes some trial and error to get dialed in. If you did it the high-precision, calibrated way, it would take less trial and error, but you'd have to wrap your head around all that stuff. Depends on which approach appeals more to you.

mdm
25-May-2011, 15:18
BTZS is very simple. Rate at 2x box speed and meter for the shadows with an incident meter. If you want you can calculate the SBR by taking a reading in bright sun too, then you can increase or decrease development to get the contrast you want.

It is an excelent book to get your head around. You dont have to go the whole hog.

ic-racer
25-May-2011, 15:27
Hello All,

So I got a used copy of Beyond the Zone System and WOW! I didn't get very far. Just seemed to get over the top for my needs pretty quickly.

I don't want to say that I'm lazy, but I probably am.

I don't think I'm going to get crazy with graphs and plotting curves and things like that. Probably my loss.

So...is there something that's like 50% of Beyond the Zone System? Some relatively simple guide that would get me in the ballpark? I don't think my negatives are terrible, but I'd like a bit more control. I'd be happy with consistently very good negatives, I don't need absolutely perfect.

Any suggestions? Pamphlets, web pages, other easy to understand things?

Lazily yours...

Have you tried printing with multigrade paper instead? The MG papers on the market these days are pretty good.

sully75
25-May-2011, 15:28
Should have mentioned that I only scan! But I still would like my negatives to have as much info in them as possible. Current results can be seen on my flickr page if you like.

sully75
25-May-2011, 15:29
BTZS is very simple. Rate at 2x box speed and meter for the shadows with an incident meter. If you want you can calculate the SBR by taking a reading in bright sun too, then you can increase or decrease development to get the contrast you want.

It is an excelent book to get your head around. You dont have to go the whole hog.

David,

I get that, basically, from the book. But there is so much crazy information in the book. I could really use the 10 page version of the book. I don't need to reinvent the wheel.

Brian Ellis
25-May-2011, 15:30
Well there's always the plain old vanilla zone system, which is really all BTZS is if you use a spot meter but with more precision thrown in. Which isn't a criticism of BTZS, I used it for many years. But you can certainly get along just fine without that degree of precision.

Jay DeFehr
25-May-2011, 16:15
scanning is analogous to printing on VC paper, but more so. Give enough exposure to get detail in your shadows, as desired, and don't over develop. I think you might be expecting more from materials calibration than it can deliver. In other words, if your not completely satisfied with your photos, it's probably not because you haven't calibrated your system. I really hope I'm not coming off as snide, or presumptuous here, because I'm being very sincere. I speak as someone who did the work, ad nauseum, and came to my opinions honestly. In my opinion, there is a place for sensitometry, as in testing and comparing materials and processing chemistry, or when using inflexible materials and processes, in which the negative must be scaled to the process, and not the other way around. Your process (scanning and digital printing) is the opposite of one that requires strict sensitometric practice, and there's no shame in that; embrace it, celebrate it! A lot of very smart and talented people worked very hard to make it so. Don't fall into the trap of thinking your not a real photographer unless you can do the math, and produce negatives within log .03 of your target density range. It's a distraction, at best.

sully75
25-May-2011, 17:25
Jay,

Ok!

Paul

(but sometimes my negatives are inconsistent and some seem to scan a lot better than others...)

Bill Burk
25-May-2011, 17:46
Hi Paul,

I agree with Jay's every point. You are free of many constraints.

Nothing wrong with wanting consistency, to answer questions like "was the temperature right, developer good, agitating enough/too much".

You could make a sensitometer like they show in the BTZS book (step wedge + box with a light source). Expose and develop a test strip along with your regular film run. Scan the test strip and look at the steps with an eyedropper tool.

It's possible someone here could interpret your scan and tell you what CI you have developed to. If you are happy with it you can make it your benchmark. Then you can make a test strip occasionally and compare it against your benchmark to see how consistent you are.

A home-made sensitometer is likely to shift the curve left-and-right along the exposure axis, but the steepness of the curve is what matters when you are controlling development time.

For film speed, trust the already well-tested references. They can tell you the speed you can expect for your film-developer combination.

As Jay and many people recommend, give the shadows plenty of exposure. The advice comes in many forms but gets the same point across; set EI to half box speed, place shadows on Zone IV, etc.

Jay DeFehr
25-May-2011, 17:59
Paul,

I'd bet the ones that don't scan as well are the ones that are more developed. A soft working developer compliments a scanning workflow, because it is less likely to build up excessive density. I looked at your photos on flickr, and they look very good. No, better than that; they look excellent. In short, I don't think you have a problem. I'd say keep doing what you're already doing so well, and maybe be careful not to over develop. Very nice work- I especially like the 5x7 stuff.

Ken Lee
25-May-2011, 18:17
"So...is there something that's like 50% of Beyond the Zone System? Some relatively simple guide that would get me in the ballpark? I don't think my negatives are terrible, but I'd like a bit more control. I'd be happy with consistently very good negatives, I don't need absolutely perfect."

How do you control your images now ?

Daniel Stone
25-May-2011, 18:39
if you're ONLY scanning, then you can do contrast adjustments in PS or you editing software, or preferably, IN the scanning software(as much as possible, so its lossless).

use a soft-working developer(such as D-23 or similar,heck, even D-76), and find a general time that works for the "bulk" of your negative shooting.

then get better at perfecting your scans :)

-Dan

Herb Cunningham
25-May-2011, 18:42
depending on which scanning software you use, some have densitometers in the software so you can adapt that to the BTZS or the Zone System, personally, St Ansel did not use BTZS and I don't find it very interesting.

sully75
26-May-2011, 08:42
I've been thinking about trying the two stage d-23. Currently have been using D-76.

I'm using an Epson 4870 with the Epson software. I tried the vuescan demo and didn't really get it. The epson software is very frustrating to use and I think a big part of the problem.

Thanks for the compliments Jay!

And thanks for all the advice.

Paul

Ken Lee
26-May-2011, 09:00
"I've been thinking about trying the two stage d-23."

How do you determine exposure and development ? That's more important than choice of developer: It's around 90% of that 50% you're looking for :)

"The epson software is very frustrating to use and I think a big part of the problem."

You might find this brief article helpful. See Scanning Tips (with EPSON Scan Software) (http://www.kenleegallery.com/html/tech/scanning.php)

Jay DeFehr
26-May-2011, 11:19
Ken,

Having looked at Paul's images, I don't think he has a problem with exposure or development. He's using mostly D-76 1+1, and getting very good results. Where there are problems (that I can see), I attribute them to flare, and/or challenging lighting conditions. I think the use of a good lens shade might eliminate a good part of his "problem". I think a soft working developer, like D23, is a reasonable choice for his working methods, but given he's getting excellent results from his current methods, I'm not sure it's worth the transition issues.

jp
26-May-2011, 12:58
I think your flickr stuff looks good, especially for someone not likeing their scanning software. I like the epson software that came with my v700. I put it in pro mode, move the light and dark limit sliders to their extreme, move the histogram bottom sliders to contain the image data and I then scan as 24bit color. In gimp, I then apply a slight curve to it to make it look normal, desaturate it, and sometimes put a gentle warm tone on it. You might have perfect negatives but aren't getting the scan perfect too. I do both scanning negatives and printing on vc paper; whatever the end goal dictates.

I'm not into the sensitometry work. I think consistency is more important than testing.

I've found what provides good results is to be very consistent in the darkroom; always using the same temperatures, dilutions, agitation. Stick to no more than 1-2 B&W films and no more than 1-2 developers. Maybe just use one combination for a while to get really nailed down the way you like. For 35mm, 120, 4x5, & 8x10 I use TMY2 and for 4x5 & 8x10 I also use fomapan100 because it's a lot different than tmy2. The fomapan had some qc issues in 120 format last year and I like finer t-grain for 35mm. For the past year, I've used nothing but PMK and Xtol. (d76 is good, but xtol is similar and tiny bit better. I used d76 for about 15 years) So I'm using 2 films and 2 developers; my self imposed limit. I'd love to play with more, but I'd be playing with film rather than making consistent photos.

I use xtol for low-mid contrast scenes and PMK for mid-high contrast scenes. The nature of pyro developers gets you a big dynamic range that makes scanning/printing easy for high contrast scenes without needing spot meters and zone systems. Essentially without any math, your highlights are safe with PMK if you expose for the shadows or expose otherwise normally.

sanking
26-May-2011, 13:29
I'm using an Epson 4870 with the Epson software. I tried the vuescan demo and didn't really get it. The epson software is very frustrating to use and I think a big part of the problem.

Paul

Paul,

I owned an Epson 4870 at one time and used it with the Epson software. It worked perfectly fine with B&W negatives IMO, and I still use the software with an Epson V700. You probably just need to invest the time and learn to use the software.

Sandy King

Bill Burk
26-May-2011, 17:25
Paul,

There is the "other" 50% of the Zone system. Were you wondering about that at all?

You know the part where you use the spotmeter at the scene to determine the important shadow, important highlight, value you want to place, where the other values fall, determine N number, literal and stylized representations, etc.?

My favorite "pamphlet" for that... Zone System Manual How To Previsualize Your Pictures by Minor White. My copy from 1963 is only 111 pages.

If you've already made up your mind about the back-end processes... Then you can skip over all the practical but arguably distracting testing. The booklet now is 71 pages - much of it devoted to encouraging you to depart from normal.

Ed Richards
26-May-2011, 18:36
Are you printing or scanning the negatives?

Bob McCarthy
27-May-2011, 04:27
I have found, when your scanning in B&W on a capable scanner, the system is very easy.

Expose so shadows are lit as you envision,

Develop in a good standard developer (I use D23) with a standard time, let the highlights fall where they will.

My scanner can easily cover the differences unless the light is EXTREME, and then 2 bath D23 works like a champ.

Don't need no stinkin' + or -

Though I should add, JB Harlin has convinced me to test Pyrocat hd. His negs are always frikin beautifully exposed, but he is not scanning.

Bob

atlcruiser
27-May-2011, 06:07
"The Negative" should give you most all the info you want/need. I looked into BTZS for a while but it is not for me....I see it as complicated and i have not wanted to spend the amount of time/resources needed to get it set up. I agree that it is a great system once it is set up.

I am new to LF but i have been usng some variant of the zone system for a while.. It really does not need to be that complicated. At times I think folks dedicate more time to the theory than to the practice of photography. That is not directed at any one person here!

I spend a bit of time setting my ASA when using a new film; test shots etc... then I scour the web for info and develop in rodinal 1:50 and determine what ASA/times give me what I like. Most of the info I need for a neg I get off of the light table.

I spot meter the darkest area with detail then the brightest area and figure out how many stops are between them. That determines dev time...more often than not I just guess :) I close down two steps from my initial reading and I am good to go.

Of course this is not perfect but neither am i. The above works for about 90% of the situations I get involved with.

My goal is to have fun and learn. I take detailed notes then review each negative and try to wring out of it a bit more knowledge for the next time.

sanking
27-May-2011, 06:19
Some times, especially when on trips of several weeks or more where equipment and materials have to be packed carefully, I use a simple method where I just take an incident meter in the shadow areas where I expect to see texture and detail and follow that up with two-bath development.

With this method you just forgot about all the mumbo-jumbo about how to determine film speed and rate the film at 1/2 the speed recommended by the film maker. The most important issue in determining film speed, as Ken Lee mentioned, is not the way you develop it, but how you use your meter. If you take an incident metering in the shadows, and your meter is calibrated. you will always have sufficient shadow detail. And two-bath development will always limit contrast in the highlights so for scanning this method is pretty much fool proof .

On the other hand, I learned both ZS and BTZS and I still use in many cases the full precision of BTZS in film testing, exposure and SBR determination in the field, and development. I don't however, use any kind of PDA or computer in the field as I find this distracting and the calculations for exposure and SBR are relatively easys to make.

It is obviously not necessary to understand and use ZS or BTZS, or any system for that matter, to make good photographs. But understanding theses systems will enhance your knowledge of the creative controls possible with photographic materials. And once learned, even if you don't use ZS or BTZS in practical work the knowledge will still be in your head and it may be useful in the future.I found this always to be true of the use of LF cameras. The care in composition required by the use of these cameras has come in very handy in my composing skills with MF equipment.

IS BTZS difficult to learn? No, really not at all. The book may be difficult to wade through on your own but anyone with a good understanding of the system could teach you practical BTZS in an afternoon.

Sandy

Frank Petronio
27-May-2011, 07:54
Fred Picker's old book on the Zone System was simple and straight-forward. Once you determine your film speed for your standard development, then it is simply a matter of using your spot meter to put whatever is the most important aspect of the picture onto the Zone you desire. From there you can plus or minus the development so that you get more of the tones within the capability of the film -- or simply let the other tones fall where they may, even plug up or burn out as the case may be.

For example, used correctly you can set a backlit Euro face to Zone VI and let the background burnout, or perhaps set it to Zone V and pull the development to hold the background tones. That's the creative part.

Even with careful control, I don't think anyone is tighter than half-a-stop in real life, unless they photograph the same things in the same light time after time... I have to laugh at some people carrying measurements out several decimal places more than necessary. That is a big problem with practical math and engineering education right there - it is almost a personality trait.

Actually you can tell if you're roughly in the ballpark by watching the edges of your film. See a good negative and bunch of bad ones and you can tell most of the time just by sight.

All said, you can usually be a bit underexposed compared to a good darkroom negative if you're scanning, usually the highlight information is in the film and scannable - whilst many darkroom workers trash it and favor shadow detail. That's just style and peer pressure from all the overly-dramatic Ansel Adams influence.

And finally, while you want to apply Zone System principals to color, few color film photographers give a hoot about the Zone System and they don't seem to be suffering too poorly for it, they just rate their film a little lower than box speed. I never knew of any mainstream commercial photographers who used it, and I know of one well-respected professor at one of the largest MFA programs, the guy has taught at all the big workshops and dozens of college courses... and he just wings it in real life.

There are only so many possible exposures in normal everyday scenery - 1/125 @ f/8 plus or minus five stops - that after awhile you just know pretty darn close what you should shoot it at.

Kirk Gittings
27-May-2011, 07:56
Ditto Frank.


Fred Picker's old book on the Zone System was simple and straight-forward. Once you determine your film speed for your standard development, then it is simply a matter of using your spot meter to put whatever is the most important aspect of the picture onto the Zone you desire. From there you can plus or minus the development so that you get more of the tones within the capability of the film -- or simply let the other tones fall where they may, even plug up or burn out as the case may be.

And as Sandy and Ken point out there are many ways to adequately or precisely to skin this cat these days. The days of the "party line" approach to the ZS are more diverse.

Bill Burk
27-May-2011, 09:43
I crave more treatises that emphasize visualization, any recommendations?

I like the way Minor White stresses using Zone System depart from normal. His pamphlet is full of tagline-quality blurbs like:

"If the Normal Print is always thought of as a point of departure ... technique always remains at the service of purpose and interpretation..."

frednewman
28-May-2011, 07:35
Hi Scully75

You don't have to understand the BTZS book 4th edition to do BTZS. If you want a good introduction the BTZS Video (about 2 hours) is a good introduction and I always recommend watching the video before reading the book - it familiarizes you with all the technical terms.

Another way to approach BTZS is to do a film test with us. Our film testing service make film testing simple. I expose 5 sheets/rolls to a 21 step tablet with a calibrated light source. Send you the film - you process the film for 5 different times - 4, 5.5, 8, 11 and 16 minutes. You send me the processed film to be read on the densitometer and the densities readings entered into the plotter program. The plotter program does all the work. I can email you a PDF of the film test results. It's the fasted way to calibrate your film and developer combination.

If you want to use the results of the film test with the Expo/Dev program we can even program your palm pilot for you with your film test results.

You can do it as one photographer said to me - just give me the numbers. He never read the BTZS book - jsut did the film test.

What I really like about the BTZS is that I can get a beginner to get really good negatives right in the beginning.

I have a few videos on youtube.com on testing and using the Expo/Dev software. To find the videos you just do a search with the word "viewcamerastore".

You can also email or call me with questions.
fred@viewcamerastore.com
480-767-7105

Fred Newman

D. Bryant
28-May-2011, 08:56
Even with careful control, I don't think anyone is tighter than half-a-stop in real life,


Exactly what Phil Davis used to write on internet forums.

Don Bryant

mikew
28-May-2011, 16:43
Lots of great advice on here but I wanted to offer a few thoughts...

Using the Zone System and BTZS isn't about making "better" negatives, it's about the way you approach the medium - philosophically. But I'd argue that to eclectically pick certain aspects of either system, you have to understand its fundamentals first. There's no getting around that.

Personally, I've never found the BTZS appealing after learning the Zone System. I find much of the BTZS's directive unnecessary, though I can understand the effort to keep classical photography current. Unfortunately, however, you're not going to find an easy way no matter what anyone tells you on here.

What it boils down to is the type of photographer you want to be. I think of it this way: if you want to be a boxer, you can't learn to throw different combinations until you learn the mechanics of a punch; because if you try to step into the ring without the basics you're gunna get knocked out. So, in my mind, if you're not willing to spend the time to learn and work through such a system as a part of your process, what's the point? I'm just sayin...

Best of luck...

Mikew

mdm
28-May-2011, 16:51
The zone system is conceptually unsound. When you use +/- development to alter contrast, your effective film speed changes. Use the zone system by all means, but with the benefits of BTZS testing. The BTZS book is not prescriptive about how you meter. Mostly it presents a sound scientific approach to exposure, by spot or incident metering, and film testing. It is a squillion times easier than the Minor White, Zakia book.

AF-ULF
28-May-2011, 18:09
The zone system is conceptually unsound. When you use +/- development to alter contrast, your effective film speed changes.


It sounds to me like you are saying the zone system does not consider the affect of changes in development on film speed.

“In practice it will be found that while development modification has its primary effect in the high values, it does also cause some slight density change in the shadow areas. With contraction, the decreased development time causes a slight loss of density (and contrast) in the low values, and a small additional exposure should be given to compensate. For most films and developers, a 1/3 to ½ stop increase should be sufficient, unless testing indicates otherwise. Similarly, with expanded development, it is possible to reduce the exposure slightly since the low densities are somewhat strengthened by the increase developing time.”

Ansel Adams, The Negative, p.78-9. See also note on page 79 and page 93 for more discussion of this issue by Adams.

mdm
28-May-2011, 18:20
And what tools does the zone system give you to nail this down precisely? Pick your nose Mr Adams.

AF-ULF
28-May-2011, 18:22
Apparently someone has their nose out of joint.

Jay DeFehr
28-May-2011, 18:50
This thread seems to me like a lot of solutions in search of a problem. Has it occurred to anyone else that changing his current workflow might do Paul more harm than good? He's doing really nice work within (it seems to me) the margin of error of any of the systems advocated. If it ain't broke........

If you haven't looked at his photo, Becca, I recommend it. Really beautiful work, and certainly not technically challenged.

mikew
28-May-2011, 18:54
The zone system is conceptually unsound. When you use +/- development to alter contrast, your effective film speed changes. Use the zone system by all means, but with the benefits of BTZS testing. The BTZS book is not prescriptive about how you meter. Mostly it presents a sound scientific approach to exposure, by spot or incident metering, and film testing. It is a squillion times easier than the Minor White, Zakia book.

I just have to ask: how is the zone system conceptually unsound? With my N+1 expansion, my threshold density increases by log .01 - log .02 (for a Zone I density of log .14) and my film speed stays the same.

mikew
28-May-2011, 18:56
"Has it occurred to anyone else that changing his current workflow might do Paul more harm than good? He's doing really nice work within (it seems to me) the margin of error of any of the systems advocated. If it ain't broke........"

Totally agree.

jeroldharter
28-May-2011, 21:28
This thread seems to me like a lot of solutions in search of a problem. Has it occurred to anyone else that changing his current workflow might do Paul more harm than good? He's doing really nice work within (it seems to me) the margin of error of any of the systems advocated. If it ain't broke........

If you haven't looked at his photo, Becca, I recommend it. Really beautiful work, and certainly not technically challenged.

I assume that the OP is an adequate judge of his own desires. He asked a question about a simple path to BTZS results because, for whatever reasons, he wanted to tweak his work. The solutions offered are potential solutions to his question, not solutions in search of a problem.

sully75
29-May-2011, 16:18
Thanks for the vote of confidence Jay!

I guess my frustration comes a little from the scanning software as much as anything. I HATE that you have to reset it for each photo, this is particularly annoying when scanning a bunch of 35mm negatives. I'd like to see how each one compares to the others, but since it resets you don't really have a baseline for examining each negative while it's on the scanner.

That picture that you mentioned is a good negative I guess. I do feel like I have to do more heroic measures in photoshop than I would like. Since I haven't been in a real darkroom in years, I don't really know how these negatives would stand up to being printed.

I guess that's sort of the point of my frustration: I can use photoshop to "fix" a lot of things, but I'd really be pleased just to have things come out good to being with. Perhaps since B&W negatives weren't designed to be scanned in the first place that's too much to ask?

All the suggestions have been great, btw.

Random question: I'm still interested in the Divided D-23, any particular resources for that?

sanking
29-May-2011, 17:08
Thanks for the vote of confidence Jay!

I guess my frustration comes a little from the scanning software as much as anything. I HATE that you have to reset it for each photo, this is particularly annoying when scanning a bunch of 35mm negatives. I'd like to see how each one compares to the others, but since it resets you don't really have a baseline for examining each negative while it's on the scanner.

That picture that you mentioned is a good negative I guess. I do feel like I have to do more heroic measures in photoshop than I would like. Since I haven't been in a real darkroom in years, I don't really know how these negatives would stand up to being printed.

I guess that's sort of the point of my frustration: I can use photoshop to "fix" a lot of things, but I'd really be pleased just to have things come out good to being with. Perhaps since B&W negatives weren't designed to be scanned in the first place that's too much to ask?

All the suggestions have been great, btw.

Random question: I'm still interested in the Divided D-23, any particular resources for that?


You can configure the Epson software so that every time you open the scanning application with the Import command the window opens with the settings of the last negative scanned. If you don't change the frame you won't even need to do a preview, just click scan. And nearly all scanning software works this way.

Although B&W negatives may have been designed with the idea of printing in the wet darkroom there is no question but that they will scan very well unless over-exposed or over-developed. But for sure scanning and work in Photoshop requires every bit as much investment of time and experience as printing in the darkroom. The work flow is different but if the goal is to make great prints you have to invest the time and energy to learn how to use your tools.

Sandy King