Digital BW, The Print

Err unless I am mistaken the point of the earlier post was to describe a
fast and efficient means of sorting through a massive pile of negs in order
to determine which should be worked on.....


> From: Peter Nelson <pnweb@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:37:33 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: How Best to Scan older BW Negatives
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Rowed"
>  
>> The fastest way I found was just to lay the negs on a light table
>> and photograph them with a digital camera. In Photoshop I set up a
>> batch that inverted the files and applied auto levels. The results
>> were surprisingly good. Sure I wouldn't print off them, but for the
>> initial sorting they were more than adequate.
>> 
>> You could also use a fast scanner for this purpose, but I think the
>> camera saved a lot of time.
> 
> A 6MP camera will give you roughly 3000x2000 pixels.  And since the
> the color CCD's in a camera use a bayer-pattern, the actual
> luminosity resolution is even lower than that.
> 
> On the other hand, a 4000 DPI scan of even a SMALL MF negative, e.g.,
> 6 x 4.5 cm, will yield 9600 x 7200 pixels.  And obviously it's even
> worse for 6x6cm, 6x7cm or 4x5in.   So you are throwing away a TON of
> detail, assuming the original negs were reasonably sharp.  You are
> probably also thowing away a ton of dynamic range compared to a film
> scanner.
> 
> MF holds LOTS of detail and lots of tonal-range subtlety.   That's
> the whole reason for using MF in the first place!  What you're doing
> is taking all your Hasselblads or Mamiya RB67's or whatever and
> replacing the film backs on them with a little APS camera.
>