I suspect that your technical skills will be very helpful in this area, plus you're familiar with B&W work. I'd like to see your results when you get everythng dialed in.
One of the labs here does quite good B&W work from digital files. However, the people there are real pros, are familiar with what B&W should look like, and have developed specific profiles which they share with those who want them. Even so, while the tonal range is pretty good, there's a certain "depth" that is lacking from their prints, which is to be expected considering the limitations of the process. Another lab nearby (we have quite a number of good ones here) has done some exemplary work with digi B&W, but they use some proprietary systems for their work. If you evr get into these parts I'll take you there for a visit ;-)) Shel > [Original Message] > From: Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 12/21/2004 3:02:52 PM > Subject: RE: OT: tonality of different B&W workflows? > > On 21 Dec 2004 at 14:33, Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > > When shooting "real" B&W, one is concentrating on tonality, and > > would often be using the light in a scene differently than when shooting > > color. So, converting color to B&W is often not the ideal way to get the > > best B&W result. > > Now that I have found quite acceptable (to me) methods of producing quality B&W > prints from my *ist D I'll be shooting more often with a view to producing an > image that will finally be printed in gray-scale. I'm finding that I'm less > inclined to expect to need film as the days roll by. > > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
