Re: Chromogenic BW (Was:: OT: Almost ready to by a scanner)

2004-03-20 Thread Butch Black
Butch Black wrote: The problem with the Ilford film is that it is nearly impossible to get a neutral BW printing on color paper and any exposure change brings a major shift in color. I believe Ilfords philosophy behind that was that you proof in color but your final print should be printed

Re: Chromogenic BW (Was:: OT: Almost ready to by a scanner)

2004-03-19 Thread William Robb
- Original Message - From: graywolf Subject: Re: Chromogenic BW (Was:: OT: Almost ready to by a scanner) Well, actually, if you want a good BW image from color film you need to use a panchromatic enlarging paper like Panalure. Traditional BW papers do not give proper response

Re: Chromogenic BW (Was:: OT: Almost ready to by a scanner)

2004-03-19 Thread Butch Black
Graywolf wrote: Now, Bill Robb's statement that chromogenic BW does not worked well with variable contrast papers does not match my experiences. However, I have not used the current generation chromogenic BW's. My own experience is limited to the old XP1 film, usually developed in XP1 developer,

Re: Chromogenic BW (Was:: OT: Almost ready to by a scanner)

2004-03-19 Thread Steve Jolly
Butch Black wrote: The problem with the Ilford film is that it is nearly impossible to get a neutral BW printing on color paper and any exposure change brings a major shift in color. I believe Ilfords philosophy behind that was that you proof in color but your final print should be printed with

Re: Chromogenic BW (Was:: OT: Almost ready to by a scanner)

2004-03-18 Thread Tiger Moses
C-41 Minilab 1hr capable! At 10:45 PM 3/18/2004 +0300, you wrote: this has probably been discussed to death before, but what's the reason to use chromogenic bw? if you take a color negative film, and print on bw paper, wouldn't it give you the same result? am i missing something very basic here?

Re: Chromogenic BW (Was:: OT: Almost ready to by a scanner)

2004-03-18 Thread Steve Jolly
Stupidly wide exposure latitude. Tiger Moses wrote: C-41 Minilab 1hr capable! At 10:45 PM 3/18/2004 +0300, you wrote: this has probably been discussed to death before, but what's the reason to use chromogenic bw? if you take a color negative film, and print on bw paper, wouldn't it give you

RE: Chromogenic BW (Was:: OT: Almost ready to by a scanner)

2004-03-18 Thread Paul Ewins
The opposite seems true too. When you print chromogenic negs on colour paper the contrast is completely different to BW papers. I tried using chromogenics because I could get it developed and proofed (6x4s) in any minilab in an afternoon, but the contrast problem made the proof useless and I ended

Re: Chromogenic BW (Was:: OT: Almost ready to by a scanner)

2004-03-18 Thread Butch Black
At 10:45 PM 3/18/2004 +0300, you wrote: this has probably been discussed to death before, but what's the reason to use chromogenic bw? if you take a color negative film, and print on bw paper, wouldn't it give you the same result? am i missing something very basic here? best, mishka The masking

Re: Chromogenic BW (Was:: OT: Almost ready to by a scanner)

2004-03-18 Thread ernreed2
Someone (sorry, I lost track of who) asked: this has probably been discussed to death before, but what's the reason to use chromogenic bw? if you take a color negative film, and print on bw paper, wouldn't it give you the same result? am i missing something very basic here? Yes --