If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Recalibrating film to scan?
Hello all again,
I figured this was still apropriate to post to R.P.Darkroom as it is about processing film. I am already familiar with the calibration of film development specifically for printing using the Zone System. I currently have mapped out TMX and TMY to get a zone VIII density of 1.35 over FB+F for darkroom printing with various exposures. Now that I have started to dabble in scanning I have realized that the total density range of my negatives is quite narrow compared to the capabilities of the scanner. I was wondering if anyone had specifically dealt with this issue and possibly come out with some target densities that take advantage of the range of the scanner without coming close to the edges of the films capabilities in Dmax. I would assume right of the bat that since I am interested in the same shadow detail that my film speed would not change (currently 64 for TMX and 200 for TMY for me specifically). However I would think that to expand the overall density range I would have to significantly increase my development times. I would assume that TMX and TMY would remain quite linear to a Dmax of 3.0 or so, so would anyone think an appropriate calibration value for Zone VIII would be on the range of 2.4 - 2.6. This would give me difficult to print conventionally contrasty negatives, but would effectively separate out the values and allow for better information capture in a good film scanner. Any thoughts? (whether or not this fits in with your philosophy of "printing", please keep flames to a minimum - I decided I am going to TRY this anyway, I am not throwing out my darkroom and if I am not happy I can always go back. ) -Josh |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Wouldn't it be useful to know which scanner, and software; and then the
output intentions? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Wouldn't it be useful to know which scanner, and software; and then the
output intentions? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
In article .com,
"Josh" wrote: Hello all again, I figured this was still apropriate to post to R.P.Darkroom as it is about processing film. I am already familiar with the calibration of film development specifically for printing using the Zone System. I currently have mapped out TMX and TMY to get a zone VIII density of 1.35 over FB+F for darkroom printing with various exposures. Now that I have started to dabble in scanning I have realized that the total density range of my negatives is quite narrow compared to the capabilities of the scanner. I was wondering if anyone had specifically dealt with this issue and possibly come out with some target densities that take advantage of the range of the scanner without coming close to the edges of the films capabilities in Dmax. I would assume right of the bat that since I am interested in the same shadow detail that my film speed would not change (currently 64 for TMX and 200 for TMY for me specifically). However I would think that to expand the overall density range I would have to significantly increase my development times. I would assume that TMX and TMY would remain quite linear to a Dmax of 3.0 or so, so would anyone think an appropriate calibration value for Zone VIII would be on the range of 2.4 - 2.6. This would give me difficult to print conventionally contrasty negatives, but would effectively separate out the values and allow for better information capture in a good film scanner. Any thoughts? (whether or not this fits in with your philosophy of "printing", please keep flames to a minimum - I decided I am going to TRY this anyway, I am not throwing out my darkroom and if I am not happy I can always go back. ) -Josh IMOP nothing is going to be gained by lots of over exposure,....or over development. Once you have the information on the film (even for scanning) there really is no advantage to more density. Basically your just lengthening the time your scan takes. -- LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
In article .com,
"Josh" wrote: Hello all again, I figured this was still apropriate to post to R.P.Darkroom as it is about processing film. I am already familiar with the calibration of film development specifically for printing using the Zone System. I currently have mapped out TMX and TMY to get a zone VIII density of 1.35 over FB+F for darkroom printing with various exposures. Now that I have started to dabble in scanning I have realized that the total density range of my negatives is quite narrow compared to the capabilities of the scanner. I was wondering if anyone had specifically dealt with this issue and possibly come out with some target densities that take advantage of the range of the scanner without coming close to the edges of the films capabilities in Dmax. I would assume right of the bat that since I am interested in the same shadow detail that my film speed would not change (currently 64 for TMX and 200 for TMY for me specifically). However I would think that to expand the overall density range I would have to significantly increase my development times. I would assume that TMX and TMY would remain quite linear to a Dmax of 3.0 or so, so would anyone think an appropriate calibration value for Zone VIII would be on the range of 2.4 - 2.6. This would give me difficult to print conventionally contrasty negatives, but would effectively separate out the values and allow for better information capture in a good film scanner. Any thoughts? (whether or not this fits in with your philosophy of "printing", please keep flames to a minimum - I decided I am going to TRY this anyway, I am not throwing out my darkroom and if I am not happy I can always go back. ) -Josh IMOP nothing is going to be gained by lots of over exposure,....or over development. Once you have the information on the film (even for scanning) there really is no advantage to more density. Basically your just lengthening the time your scan takes. -- LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"winddancing" wrote: Wouldn't it be useful to know which scanner, and software; and then the output intentions? It would be for us :-) -- LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"winddancing" wrote: Wouldn't it be useful to know which scanner, and software; and then the output intentions? It would be for us :-) -- LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
This is insane.
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
This is insane.
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Why?
-Josh |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Focal plane vs. leaf shutters in MF SLRs | KM | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 724 | December 7th 04 09:58 AM |
"Digital ICE" without Digital ICE | Lorenzo J. Lucchini | Digital Photography | 24 | November 4th 04 04:07 PM |
Scanning Film Images into Digital Files | Michael | Digital Photography | 21 | September 18th 04 09:47 PM |
Is it Copal or copal? Then what is it? | Nick Zentena | Large Format Photography Equipment | 14 | July 27th 04 03:31 AM |
FA: NIKON LS-4500AF HiEnd LargeFormatFilm Scanner | bleanne | Other Photographic Equipment | 1 | November 27th 03 07:34 AM |