greyscale conversion of slides vs scanned B&W film

[mark_smith64]

<p>did a search on this subject but thread was '04, a lot has progressed since then. what is your take on shooting B&W film then having a high res scan (i shoot Delta various iso's) vs a high res scan of velvia then grey scale conversion after the fact @ the lab? <br>

yes, it's subjective but interested in your take. i no longer have a darkroom, but may consider setting myself up to dev. B&W film then off to the lab for either wet printing or scan/print. I shoot 67 format. thanks in advance</p>

[russ_kerlin]

<p>There are a lot of variables, but there are likely notable differences between the end products in terms of tonality, shadow detail, etc. However, you could probably get them to be very close with post processing (e.g., editing in Photoshop).</p>

<p>I think it really comes down to personal preferences as well as cost & time. If you primarily want to create B&W images, then I'd say shoot B&W. Don't waste time and money with the extra step of shooting slides and having then converted. B&W film is optimized to produce greyscale images and in general would be the best choice for doing so. However, this would mean developing your own film -- which may or may not appeal to you -- or sending the B&W film out for development, which depending on the lab may not produce the results you want. </p>

<p>On the other hand, if you want to simultaneously produce color and B&W images (and don't have interchangeable backs), then sticking with slides might be the best option. And, if you have a lab that produces consistently good results with your slides, this might be strong reason to stick with slides as well, despite the cost and extra step.</p>

<p>I'm sure others will be able to weigh in on this topic.</p>

[john_shriver]

<p>You're going to capture a lot more scene brightness range with B&W film than with any slide film. The double-developing of reversal processing results in high contrast and low SBR.</p>

[mark_smith64]

<p>hey thanks on this info! i do NOT intend this to be a dig vs film war in any way as i intend to continue w/film. just feedback on different processes & this sort of info helps tremendously. thanks again ms</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>I personally shoot B&W, chromogenic B&W (C41 process), and color negative film. I shot most of my work before digital on Kodachrome and other slide films however, which I have scanned (finally getting there).</p>

<p>The combination of color of one sort or another and digital processing means that whatever else is true, you can get a huge range of different B&W images from the same color image, using many different paths in Photoshop to get there, ranging from manipulation of color channels, the simple process of desaturation, and perhaps best, the frankly wonderful to me Image>Adjustments>Black & White combined manipulation panel. This allows you to vary the B&W from a pseudo infrared on down.</p>

<p>I understand the concept of limiting yourself to a particular medium like B&W film as an aesthetic choice, but for me, I like the B&W results from C/N film for its flexibility. It's like carrying around a whole kit of filters, etc.</p>

[steve_johnston4]

<p>I shoot a lot of b&w, then scan and print digital. I have also converted both color neg and transparency. B&w has a longer tonal range, is less contrasty and renders nicer than converted color.</p>