Pick an JBrunner original print for free, or a URL to view the image.

[TheFlyingCamera]

Steve- I believe you are correct. Scanners are pretty lousy with highlights. All but the best of drum scanners will block them up, and what the scanner doesn't block up, your monitor will.

 

[JBrunner]

Obviously the print is going to be better than the screen image. But, if my scans are anything to go by, the difference will be even greater than normal due to the large amount of highlight detail in this image. Something which scanners don't handle very well (or is that just mine?).


Steve.

Hehehehehehehe.

 

[timbo10ca]

Jason- I think your point has been made.

Tim

 

[Ray Heath]

Steve- I believe you are correct. Scanners are pretty lousy with highlights. All but the best of drum scanners will block them up, and what the scanner doesn't block up, your monitor will.

sure a print will be better, if printed well, presented properly and viewed under optimum conditions

just as a scan will look good if done and presented properly

you all should learn how to scan well, just as you (according to yourselves) have learnt how to do analogue well, stop bashing scanning, stop using it as an excuse for poor work or not showing work at all

the attached image was scanned from an 8x10 RC print on a $120 Canon flat bed

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Ray- I don't know that that image proves your point any more than it proves mine. You've got a white sky, and no detailed highlights. Everything else is a high midtone on down. It doesn't prove or disprove anything about the quality of scanners.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

RC prints also often scan better than fiber, because they stay flat and have less texture. Of course 8x10" prints are easier to scan than larger prints that require an expensive oversized scanner or scanning in sections, which isn't always possible either, since some flatbeds are recessed and would risk damage to an oversized print. Should everyone have to make 8x10" RC prints for the purpose of scanning?

 

[papagene]

I agree with David. There is no way I am going to waste my time and money (both of which are in short supply) just to make 8x10 RC prints just for scanning for the web.

gene

 

[Ray Heath]

Ray- I don't know that that image proves your point any more than it proves mine. You've got a white sky, and no detailed highlights. Everything else is a high midtone on down. It doesn't prove or disprove anything about the quality of scanners.

good points, and i'm not sure myself, but i do believe it shows scanned images can be much better with a little effort

scanning is not the problem, doing it badly and then pointing out that scanning is no good is the problem

i can't believe that a group of dedicated image makers can find beauty in RC, FB, PT/PD, Cyano, VDB, whatever, all of which have different characteristics and tonal ranges, and then reject digital means out of hand

 

[jd callow]

Ray,
Few if any do as an object unto itself. Most do when baited or when asked an either or as they are here. Otherwise noone would bother posting or viewing images in the gallery or on the web.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

good points, and i'm not sure myself, but i do believe it shows scanned images can be much better with a little effort

scanning is not the problem, doing it badly and then pointing out that scanning is no good is the problem

i can't believe that a group of dedicated image makers can find beauty in RC, FB, PT/PD, Cyano, VDB, whatever, all of which have different characteristics and tonal ranges, and then reject digital means out of hand

And who says that those preferring wet darkroom methods and materials are rejecting digital out of hand? I've been working with digital imaging since Photoshop 3.0 came out. It was pretty gee-whiz-bang back then, but the output technology was a big limiting factor, as was the cost and quality of input technology. Now, the cost and quality of input and output technologies have fallen/risen inversely, but I still don't like the "quality" of image produced with those methods. There is an unquantifiable that makes me choose wet darkroom methods over digital methods. I think that holds true for many of our members here - they just get tired of defending and articulating what I just said, so it comes across as an out-of-hand rejection.

 

[Ian Leake]

...you all should learn how to scan well, just as you (according to yourselves) have learnt how to do analogue well, stop bashing scanning, stop using it as an excuse for poor work or not showing work at all

Rather than spending time and effort to improve my scanning technique, I would prefer to work on improving my print making, or optimising my darkroom processes, or making new photographs.

By concentrating on what matters (making good prints), I have significantly improved my printing over the last 12 months. If I'd diverted time and effort into learning better scanning techniques then I'd undoubtedly be able to make better scans, but what's the point in a good scan of a bad print?

 

[gr82bart]

i can't believe that a group of dedicated image makers can find beauty in RC, FB, PT/PD, Cyano, VDB, whatever, all of which have different characteristics and tonal ranges, and then reject digital means out of hand

Ray, Ray, Ray, .... you know McDonald's serves more Big Macs per day than all the finest restaurants in NYC serve meals in a year. Yet we all know the 'Happy Meal' is junk food.

Not withstanding the fact I love a Big Mac meal every now and then and I also love my D2X. But, I think you're smarter than your posts and are just posting to argue because you can. Never try to steal from a thief Ray.

Regards, Art.

 

[JBrunner]

FWIW I spent about an hour yesterday trying to make a better scan, even compositing two different scans in an attempt to get the detail where it needs to be to try and communicate the white on white of this image. The scanner is a 4990, and I scan all the time for commercial out put to some pretty big agencies, so I'm not quite an idiot. This is a very, very, difficult image for digital display.

Yes, the deck is stacked (on purpose) by my choices, - but it's fitting to have the street run the other direction for a change.

 

[Harrigan]

Limitations of digital equipment poses a major part of the equation in the scan here. I assume JB is getting the best that unit can do. The 4990 is not nearly in the same quality level in comparison to high end scanners as the 8x10 is in comparison to other format film. Excuse my frank nature but the 4990 is a consumer grade scanner where 8x10 is about as good as it gets for film quality.

I would be happy to scan this print for you on my lino-hell topaz, which is older but it will handle those highlights much better than any scanner epson has ever made. Happy to do it just send me a email if you want to get a good scan.

 

[Ray Heath]

Ray, Ray, Ray, .... you know McDonald's serves more Big Macs per day than all the finest restaurants in NYC serve meals in a year. Yet we all know the 'Happy Meal' is junk food.

Not withstanding the fact I love a Big Mac meal every now and then and I also love my D2X. But, I think you're smarter than your posts and are just posting to argue because you can. Never try to steal from a thief Ray.

Regards, Art.

thank you Art, i like your Big Mac analogy

i prefer to believe that i provoke lateral thinking because i can

all the points raised on this thread i actually agree with, i consider myself to be a fine art black and white photographer/traditional printer, i don't need to be convinced that a fine monochrome print is the pinnacle of photographic imaging, it just is

Ray

 

[JBrunner]

Limitations of digital equipment poses a major part of the equation in the scan here. I assume JB is getting the best that unit can do. The 4990 is not nearly in the same quality level in comparison to high end scanners as the 8x10 is in comparison to other format film. Excuse my frank nature but the 4990 is a consumer grade scanner where 8x10 is about as good as it gets for film quality.

I would be happy to scan this print for you on my lino-hell topaz, which is older but it will handle those highlights much better than any scanner epson has ever made. Happy to do it just send me a email if you want to get a good scan.

Admittedly I am at both the limits of this scanner, and my own abilities as well. I usually use this scanner to for 4x5 chromes, and for the money, it does a fair job. I don't think they had anything like this in mind when they designed it. I appreciate the offer, (it's very kind, and in the best spirit of this forum) but I have a number of sources locally that owe me the favor, if I decide to use it.

 

[copake_ham]

Admittedly I am at both the limits of this scanner, and my own abilities as well. I usually use this scanner to for 4x5 chromes, and for the money, it does a fair job. I don't think they had anything like this in mind when they designed it. I appreciate the offer, (it's very kind, and in the best spirit of this forum) but I have a number of sources locally that owe me the favor, if I decide to use it.

Ayup. Never surrender a negative from your control!

Good reply JB.

 

[JBrunner]

Just a note- The Christmas thing cramped me up, but the prints will be leaving Jan 2. Thanks for your patience.

J