<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: Digitizing photos?</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
Cool. In my experience, b&w negatives scan as black and white. True black and white. I can't remember now if we needed to select a black and white channel on the computer to scan b&w negs. I'm pretty sure we didn't. Either way, scanning b&w negs was always easier to get a satisfactory result from than printing. It's usually when you come to printing that there's an issue because the print machines are colour printers. And even when you select the appropriate channel and use b&w paper, you still get tone issues. From negatives, you get the best results from hand printing. <BR>
<BR>
So, I believe scanning your negatives is definitely the optimal option if you want true black and white pictures. From there, I think your computer's printer would be able to print it as black and white without tone issues; your normal printer can (I think) bypass the colour inks when it wants b&w but the photo print machine only minimises the colour filters' effects but can't bypass them completely.<BR>
<BR>
I hope that makes sense and that I explained it properly. If I didn't and it's just plain wrong, I'd love to know about it.<BR>
<BR>
Or, just have a go. Take a negative strip into a shop (or mate in visual/fine arts dept), get it scanned and see if you're happy with it - price is usually in proportion to quality of work and willingness to fit in with customers' needs. <BR>
<BR>
Eleonora<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
on 21/2/05 11:23 AM, Michael Walsh at micwalsh@arts.usyd.edu.au wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE>I should have pointed out that my particular inquiry has to do with B&W negs. Although the prints I have are 'in colour' which gives them a sepia look. <BR>
Michael<BR>
<BR>
wmlinguist@kisser.net.au wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE>----------<BR>
From: wmlinguist@kisser.net.au<BR>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 08:35:57 +0800<BR>
To: Doug Marmion <dem@coombs.anu.edu.au> <mailto:dem@coombs.anu.edu.au> <BR>
Subject: Re: Digitizing photos?<BR>
<BR>
In the neg scanning program, there's should be a thing you (or the customer<BR>
assistant) can go into to select the right film channel (so different<BR>
channels have the densities set to suit the needs of different film brands'<BR>
idiocyncracies - just like on the print machine - except most places don't<BR>
bother because it gets a bit fiddly. Ask about it and maybe offer to pay a<BR>
bit extra.<BR>
<BR>
Eleonora<BR>
<BR>
on 20/2/05 2:10 PM, Doug Marmion at dem@coombs.anu.edu.au wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE><BLOCKQUOTE>There are some photos I want to digitize. I have ready access to<BR>
good quality prints but I can also get access to the negs.<BR>
<BR>
Is it better to digitize off negs or off prints?<BR>
<BR>
Michael Walsh<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
Hi Michael,<BR>
<BR>
As a general rule, it's always better to scan from the originals (the<BR>
negatives) than from a copy (the prints). However (presuming you're<BR>
talking about colour negatives as opposed to B&W) I've read that<BR>
there can be real problems in getting the colours right due to<BR>
differences between film brands (and even between different film<BR>
types from the same manufacturer). So while scanning from prints<BR>
won't produce results of the same quality it might be more practical,<BR>
depending on what you want the scanned images for.<BR>
<BR>
cheers,<BR>
doug<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
</BODY>
</HTML>