Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/10/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Hi Matt, I get my T400CN and XP2 (as well as other C-41) developed and scanned at Costco one-hour on their Noritsu digital machine. The scans are never quite right initially, but they're usually ok for web posting after I've done some photoshop work with levels and curves. Getting a CD done at Costco is the only way I can hope to keep up with my PAW. Almost everything I post is done this way. For making a print, I don't use the Costco scan...I rescan the neg on my Microtek scanner (using the Microtek software) as B&W at 4000DPI (the max) and go from there. My scans are always better...but they take me much more time...so I reserve them for only the stuff that matters most. For me, I rarely see a difference between scanning as B&W/scanning as color/scanning as positive, so I just keep it simple. I find the key is to be very careful how I set the little histogram thingies to be sure that no tones are clipped in the original scanning...the auto settings do not work well at all. Hope this helps. -Aaron >Apologies if this is one of those regular questions, but I have shot a few >rolls of Kodak BW400CN, and put the first roll into a local (not-pro) lab >to process neg and scan onto CD. I'm not used to this process, I normally >take T-Max/Tri-X to the pro lab. > >The images on the CD have a 'look' that's not quite right. Quite low >contrast, no real blacks. I tried to scan a couple on my new scanner, that >I'm not a master of yet, Minolta Dimage Elite 5400, and the scans are very >contrasty, and lots of densely dark areas, not like the scans I'm getting >from true B&W negs. > >So, my question is, should I be scanning this film as a B&W neg or a >colour neg, and changing to B&W later? > >I probably won't bother with the CD next time, but like the idea of >quickly getting my negs processed, and have seen some good examples of >C-41 processed B&W shots on this forum, so just wondering how people are >getting optimum results? > >Thanks, Matt.