• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

the beauty of scanning black and white in color

you seem to have an axe to grind.
its got nothing to do with happy talk v results
as i said, whatever floats your boat ..
 
Last edited:
jnanian said:
you seem to have an axe to grind.
its got nothing to do with happy talk v results
as i said, whatever floats your boat ..
Click to expand...



While it's OK to worry about alleged performance, most will evaluate technical matters in prints.

If someone is limited by a small (e.g. letter size) printer or can't imagine enlarging beyond small size, for critical evaluation they should use non-absorbent paper in order to evaluate a scanner or scanning technique. A big monitor might suffice. That's obvious.

If they're not into defined grain or images with fine detail (some here are not), that "whatever floats your boat" philosophy speaks for itself...

Me, I prefer "results" to "happy talk" in technical matters.
 
Last edited:
  • jtk
  • Deleted
  • Reason: Empty posts
Alan Edward Klein said:
How does Epson change the scan to BW? Does it use one particular color channel? Or all three? Or something else?
Click to expand...

Alan, perhaps someone here knows how an Epson scanner sees BW,

MAYBE instead of seeing BLACK, it interpolates, taking typical printers into consideration. Maybe that's why alleged blue channel works better for some folks.

Recognize that "black" inks and pigments are not pure black...they're faintly RED on close evaluation..

Non-OEM pigments and inks (like MIS) sometimes claim to be "pure carbon"...however pure carbon isn't perfectly black...it's faintly red. That's why a bit of CYAN makes sense ...it balances out the red in the "black". MAYBE that's why printers do use cyan pigments , even when trying to print "black only."
 
Especially if the film has pyro staining.
 
If they're not into defined grain or images with fine detail (some here are not), that "whatever floats your boat" philosophy speaks for itself...
Click to expand...

current scanner technology is not able to resolve film grain, so most everyone will have to have that philosophy.
as said,
whatever floats one's boat
 
  • jtk
  • Deleted
  • Reason: Empty posts
  • jtk
  • Deleted
  • Reason: Empty posts
  • jtk
  • Deleted
  • Reason: redundant
Alex Burke has significant hands-on, up-to-date experience scanning. On this blog he compares top-tier current Epson with his drum scanner..

http://www.alexburkephoto.com/blog/2017/12/15/drum-vs-flatbed-scanner-side-by-side-comparison

http://betterscanning.com/ Better Scanning makes precision holders and provides valid advice. In ancient times, while my Epson 3200 was still relatively new, I bought and extensively tested the Better Scanning's most basic holder, the ANR holder, and the "variable height" holder for my old Epson 3200 ( scanning 6X6 and 6X7 and 6X9).

In careful tests found the "variable height" holder distinctly better than the others. Repeated formal testing was necessary to achieve best possible height (best possible focus).

With my 3200, focus adjustment (height from glass) was important. While layers of tape could undoubtedly achieve the same focus, with enough testing, as the adjustment screws in the "variable" holder. However, the precision and fit of all Better Scanning holders was distinctly better than OEM.

The ANR holder was distinctly better than the basic holder but not as good as the "variable height" holder.

Comparing 3200 ANR scanned 80 Planar 6X6 negatives with Inkjet AND with silver prints via Componon at 16" square, I found sharpness to be visually identical.

Popular online reviewers/"experts" simply regurgitate scanner info somebody else has written, quoting numerical data that they have not personally produced and clearly don't understand. I don't know Burke, but he seems better-informed. See especially what he says about grain sharpness.
 

i agree wholeheartedly there is a lot of regurgitation of a lot of nonsense on the internet, but that's what the internet is
like 90% "stuff" and 10 % "reality" . i'm not really regurgitating so called internet experts but someone who IS and expert
not one that is paid for his or her testimonial / perspective for reviews &c ( i don't know who burke is, never heard of him
so i have no idea if he is hired by people to do comparison tests for them to show their flatbeds are as good as
imageon or drum or whatever high end scanner is ruling the roost these days )
..., have you done the tests yourself? with a magnified film loupe to examine grain vs scanned interpolated grain ?
i've seen comparisons myself and it is pretty interesting and eye opening )

its ok, you don't need to believe me it, as i've said IDK 3 times in this thread >> whatever floats your boat...

and i'm ok with the fact that my 91 year old scanner ( i figure its like dog years ) doesn't resolve grain and it doesn'tmatter to me one way or another. i find don't find sharpness to be all that appealing most of the time anyways, unless i am doing
a habs job or something similar ... so i don't have an axe to grind either way ...
 
Last edited:
  • jtk
  • Deleted
  • jtk
  • Deleted
  • Reason: Off topic
  • jtk
  • Deleted
  • Reason: OT
  • jtk
  • Deleted
  • Reason: OT


Thanks for rethinking and removing that previous post.

I don't think anybody's claimed the best Epsons resolve film grain or dye clouds.

Seems like nobody's aware of dye clouds: the difference is usually missed in talk about "grainy film" and "grainy prints."

The difference between film grain and film dye clouds is obvious in my Nikon V scans.

 
Just a waste of memory space unless it is a stained pyro negative.
 
Sirius Glass said:
Just a waste of memory space unless it is a stained pyro negative.
Click to expand...

LOL

p-cat, pmk, rolo or 510 ? i'd hate to scan something offensive cause i already don't use stop bath. and i am completely unsure about the color magenta
 
jnanian said:
LOL

p-cat, pmk, rolo or 510 ? i'd hate to scan something offensive cause i already don't use stop bath. and i am completely unsure about the color magenta
Click to expand...


The two letter troll insisted that magenta is not a color.
 
Sirius Glass said:
Just a waste of memory space unless it is a stained pyro negative.
Click to expand...

Perhaps some photographers shoot color film intending to make B&W prints: They're scanning the dye clouds...which are colorful (easy to see with Nikon scan).

And of course, some photographers scan their color film with the daring intent to make color prints.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register