Color Negative to B&W Print?

[landon_christensen]

<p>Can I take a Wal-Mart processed color negative and print a B&W Print from it? I have Polymax RC Paper, Not sure if that makes a difference though.</p>

<p>Landon</p>

[Zootman]

<p>You can, but it won't be great. I've tried that and ended up with low contrast somewhat "mushy" looking pictures. It would be better to scan and convert digitally.</p>

[john_a5]

<p>Sure, but it will not print like a b/w neg. The color in the neg will affect the contrast differently in different areas depending on the areas color--the different colors will act much like your multigrade filters do--producing low contrast in the greener areas and high contrast in the bluer areas--or how ever your filters are colored. Also, b/w paper can be used under a safelight because the paper is not sensitive to certain colors of light--again, a problem getting a color neg to print with any kind of expected results. </p>

[bob_himmelright]

<p>an easier way...go to your lab and say...i want this frame printed but b/w.</p>

[User_503771]

<p>You'll need a panchromatic black and white printing paper to do what you want to do. Regular B&W paper is orthochromatic, which is not red-sensitive, and will therefore not print quite a bit of the data in the color negative.</p>

[ann_clancy6]

<p>it can be done, i have students who do it all the time. Your contrast needs to be at least 3.5 if not more and the exposure times will be longer.</p>

<p>if you take them to a one-hour photo place be prepared for a color shift as they are using color paper and color chemsitry and you won't have neutral black and whites.</p>

[larrydressler]

<p>Too bad Kodak quit making Panalure it was a Panchromatic B&W developing paper...</p>

[James G. Dainis]

Panalure did an excellent job. With other B&W papers that I tried, reds such as lips, were very black, contrast was lower and grain seemed more pronounced. .

[joseph_wisniewski]

<p>What James describes is quite normal. Graded paper is only sensitive to blue and violet light, polycontrast extends this to green light, but has dramatically different contrast curves for green and blue). So, anything red or orange in the scene produces green and blue on the negative and drivers the paper dark. The resulting B&W images look like they were all shot through a red 25 filter. On polycontrast paper, oranges (blue on the negative) trigger the low contrast part of the paper, so you get diminished contrast in portraits. Red (green on the negative) triggers the high contrast part of the paper, so you see a lot of grain and annoying contrast. Bland face, black lips, unusally dark eyes. Dark skys with lots of grain in the clouds...</p>

[bob_himmelright]

<blockquote>

<p>if you take them to a one-hour <a href="../film-and-processing-forum/00V2uj#" target="_blank" >photo</a> place be prepared for a color shift as they are using color paper and color chemsitry and you won't have neutral black and whites.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I don't know where you're going, but you need a better lab.</p>

[StuartMoxham]

<p>I've made a few prints over the from color negs onto regular B&W paper. The exposures are longer than usual, sometimes the results are not that great and other times the prints have looked really quite normal. It really depends what colors are in the image and how the paper responds. If you have a B&W darkroom it is worth giving it a try if you have the time and don't mind wasting some paper.</p>

[Ed_Ingold]

<p>There are two proven techniques - use panchromatic paper (in total darkness) or scan the negative in RGB color and fix it up in Photoshop. A CD from Wal-Mart might work, but for best results you'll need a good scanner or have it done professionally.</p>

<p>Color negatives printed on ordinary B&W paper (or multi-contrast paper) look flat and ugly. You might use high-contrast paper and put a little lipstick on the pig, but don't count on the kind of tonality you see in real B&W.</p>

<p>Once you have the colors in the computer, you can render it in monochrome using the Channel Mixer tool, or buy one of several plugins that to that simple job for you. For starters, B&W film is nearly as sensitive to blue light as to red and green combined. Set that in Channel Mixer and see if you like the results. You can print the results yourself, or take it back to Wal-Mart.</p>

[roger_smith4]

<p>Hi Landon,<br /> You didn't make it clear if you're talking about printing from an archive of negatives or trying to figure out a future process.<br>

<br /> If you can't do your own film development but still want to print on B&W paper at home you might consider Ilford XP2 over standard color negative films. It can be processed at a Walmart as it is a C41 film. Ilford claims it can be traditionally printed onto B&W paper. <cite>www.<strong>ilford</strong> photo.com/Webfiles/200629163442455.pdf <br /> </cite> I haven't tried it myself as I scan everything, which is what I recommend for total control.</p>

 

[greg_peterson3]

<p>I'm with Edward Ingold. Scan the color negative and convert it to B&W in your editing program, where you have complete control of the contrast. With a bit of skill you can even make it look as though you used various filters.</p>

 

[gnashings]

<p>Couple of things - try with traditional paper, as has been mentioned, your mileage will vary, but you can can get pretty decent at it, however some images simply won't work due to the colours prevealant in them and the response of your B&W paper. <br>

Panalure - works great, and if you google contrast and panalure, a very smart guy named Ctein has some awesome insight. Sure, its discontinued, but paper keeps great and you can still find it in craigslist ads, ebay, etc.<br>

One more thing - this statement:<br>

"I scan everything, which is what I recommend for total control"<br>

Don't confuse your lack of ability with a medium with its inherent lack of ability. You don't have "total control", and the very fact that you suggest it is so, shows how much you know. Caveat emptor when taking advice from providers of broad sweeping statements and purveyors of snake oil coated silver bullets. I'm glad the digital epidemic was a more convenient escape route from your failed darkroom struggles. If you said "I can't do it in the darkroom, try as I might MY results sucked, I gave up and let a computer simulate it for me" I would have no problem with it - but the kind of hubris that drives people to condemn a whole medium based on their inability to get acceptable results with it, or unwilling to put the work into without the benefit of an "undo" button drives me nuts.<br>

Cheers and good luck!</p>