Dynamic range of a scanned negative...

[jasonjoo]

I had a nagging question that has been bothering me for quite some time now. I've been shooting primarily digital, but to my understanding, a film negative has better dynamic range (please forgive me if this is not true!).

So my question is, when you scan a negative, will you be able to recover the same amount of highlights or shadow details in Photoshop as you would in the dark room?

This might be a silly question, but I've been interested in starting to develop my own negatives, though I am more proficient in Photoshop than I am in an actual dark room. It is easy for me to recover highlights/shadows in Photoshop with a few clicks of the mouse, but I imagine it to be a lot more work in the dark room.

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks,

Jason

 

[Thanasis]

Round these parts we call it d****** and P*******.

To answer your question, though, no. You will lose detail and range when you scan a negative. All else being equal, and provided you use adequate chemicals and processes, you will get better detail from a negative than you would from any widgets you use in Photoshop on a scanned neg.

It may be more work in the dark room but I reckon it will be more rewarding for you. In the end it is up to you. I recommend you try it out.

 

[Helen B]

You should be able to get detail over the whole density range (and hence dynamic range) of the negative by correct scanning. Maybe this subject would be better discussed over on the hybrid forum.

Best,
Helen

 

[Sparky]

i should add... except if you're near the limit of your scanner's ability to collect from the highlights... in which case - you'll see a real dropoff in detail and highlight contrast (in the positive image). I scanned a whole bunch of negs awhile back - and had to mess with them an awful lot in photoshop (mostly curves) to get what I wanted. I was really shocked when I hit the darkroom - only to find out that the result was superior. And EASIER, too!

 

[mcgrattan]

I've generally had better and quicker results from actual wet darkroom prints, but (whisper it) I do tend to print hybrid slightly more than wet darkroom because I don't have the space to regularly set up my enlarger (or a dark place to do so right at the moment).

I've found a big difference from scanner to scanner in how they capture the dynamic range of negs. Also, I've found that wet prints made from very thin negs, in particular, have been much better than similar prints made from scans of the same negs.

 

[Ryuji]

You can get much of the dynamic range from negative films, both color and b&w, by scanning with a decent scanner. Slide films are tougher to get the whole range, as they go up higher in density scale (tho it's easier to get correct color out of slide films).

Many problems with losing highlights and shadows are related to glitches in the scan software, its settings, or the user operation.

 

[Sparky]

I have to limit my comments to being about B&W stuff only, however. I get superior results scanning color materials - Ryuji - I actually find color negs really easy to balance... not really harder than chromes. But yes - I'd agree in general with the comments that this is true using only good hardware and software.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Maybe this subject would be better discussed over on the hybrid forum.

Best,
Helen

Indeed it should be.

Seriously, you'll get a more detailed answer over there--APUG's sister site, hybridphoto.com