B&W Negative Scanner

Discussion in 'Scanners' started by Edward Holt, Jan 29, 2006.

  1. Edward Holt

    Edward Holt Guest

    Can anyone recommend a scanner that will get black and white negative images
    onto a PC?

    I'm not after anything fancy and will only need to use it to convert some
    old negatives.
     
    Edward Holt, Jan 29, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Edward Holt

    Pat Guest

    read the threads here and at rec.photo.digital re negative. Most are
    re color, but the same thing applies for b&w, except you don't have to
    worry about color cast.
     
    Pat, Jan 29, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Edward Holt

    tomm42 Guest

    If they are 35mm, the Minolta 5400, if multi formats the Epson 4990.

    Tom
     
    tomm42, Jan 30, 2006
    #3
  4. Edward Holt

    Alan Browne Guest


    The very first consideration is how large you intend to print.

    The usual dpi "rule" for printing is 300 (although 150 dpi is often
    sufficient).

    So, to print an 8x12 from a 24mm x 36mm frame requires:

    8 x 300 = 2400 (points required on the print in the narrow dimension))

    2400 / 24mm = 100 d/mm

    100 d X 25.4 mm/in = 2540 d/i (dpi) scanner minimum.

    (Repeat the math for the long dimension should give the same end result)

    Next, dynamic range. Most "good" film scanners should do fine if they
    have 10 or more bits/channed (30 or more bits overall).

    The current Minolta 5400 II, Nikon Coolscan V or 5000 will be more than
    sufficient. A used Minolta Scan Dual II or better will do the job fine.

    Cheers,
    Alan.
     
    Alan Browne, Feb 4, 2006
    #4
  5. On 04-Feb-06 23:08:26, Alan Browne said
    Guys,

    On the black and white thing, I used to use B&W film to take studio shots
    of bits of equipment for instruction manuals. Some of the kit was very
    dark but included shiny metallic areas, producing a high contrast range.

    I gathered that most(?) digital cameras only produce 256 shades of grey,
    is that right?

    And presumably using a digital camera in B&W mode does not suddenly
    improve its contrast range in the way that B&W film does over Colour film?

    So in B&W mode on a digital camera the contrast is the same as the Colour
    mode but you just lose all that colour information?

    Can somebody unconfuse me? :)



    All the best,
    Angus Manwaring. (for e-mail remove ANTISPEM)

    I need your memories for the Amiga Games Database: A collection of Amiga
    Game reviews by Amiga players http://www.angusm.demon.co.uk/AGDB/AGDB.html
     
    Angus Manwaring, Feb 17, 2006
    #5
  6. Edward Holt

    JPS Guest

    In message <[email protected]_ANTISPEM_.demon.co.uk>,
    That depends on how the camera creates the B&W. If it makes it from an
    already-processed color image, it will have that color to B&W look. If
    it got the B&W directly from the RAW data without converting to color,
    it can have that B&W-type contrast.
    --
     
    JPS, Feb 18, 2006
    #6
  7. Edward Holt

    JPS Guest

    In message <[email protected]_ANTISPEM_.demon.co.uk>,
    If it only outputs JPEG and TIFF, yes. If it outputs RAW, then it is a
    bit more complicated. RAW has a lot more luminance precision,
    especially in the highlights. It's hard to say how many levels there
    are, because you usually have 1/2 the pixels sensitive mainly to green,
    1/4 to red, and 1/4 to blue. So, how you scale them determines the
    number of levels. There are at least 3967, in any case, with my Canon
    20D. I sometimes make 2.05MP greyscale images from the RAW data of an
    8.2MP camera by binning 2x2 tiles of pixels (2 greens and a red and
    blue) into a single 14-bit pixel (16,768 - 513 = 16,255 usable levels'
    black is about 128.25 with this camera). This potentially halves the
    noise, and adds about 2 stops of dynamic range. There isn't much
    aliasing from this "box filter", because the anti-aliasing filter in the
    camera is still effective at this resolution for luminance, and spatial
    color shifts are not particularly visible in greyscale.
    --
     
    JPS, Feb 18, 2006
    #7
  8. On 18-Feb-06 03:53:46, JPS said
    John, thanks a lot for the answer. I got a bit lost with the RAW option,
    though, but that's not youe fault. :)

    It seems like an aspect of photography that is largely overlooked,
    considering its importance.


    All the best,
    Angus Manwaring. (for e-mail remove ANTISPEM)

    I need your memories for the Amiga Games Database: A collection of Amiga
    Game reviews by Amiga players http://www.angusm.demon.co.uk/AGDB/AGDB.html
     
    Angus Manwaring, Feb 20, 2006
    #8
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.