Best films for scanning-2008

[StevieRose]

Hello-
I am new to this site, and have searched without finding this information. After five years of shooting digital, I have decided (for several reasons) to dig out my 35 mm gear and adopt a hybrid approach again for awhile. I would like to shoot 35mm C41 color film, have it developed locally, and then do my own high rez scans on the "keepers". I have a Minolta Dimage 5400 II film scanner as well as both Silverfast and Vuescan software on a Mac based computer system.

As I haven't shot film in 5 years I would like your opinion as to which C41 films in ISO 100, 400, and 800 would fit this workflow the best?

Thanks!

Steve

[jd callow]

I have used the new Fuji films 160s and 160c and they scan very well. I have not used any of the new 400 or 800 colour films, nor have I used the new 160 portras so I can't help you there.

[Walt Calahan]

Any film that works with your photographic vision is the best film to use.

Scanning anything takes practice. You can't learn anything overnight. Take your time testing to find the correct settings on the scanner for the film you use.

[jd callow]

Sadly, I have found some films don't scan well or not as well as others.

[Daniel Balfour]

What makes one film more "scanable" then another? And what (negative) density range is optimal for scanning?

[Don Bryant]

What makes one film more "scanable" then another? And what (negative) density range is optimal for scanning?

That depends somewhat on the scanner, but if we are talking about B&W negatives, film developed for silver printing should scan just fine on most decent scanners. B&W films developed to a higher CI can also be scanned fairly easily as well.

Color transparencies are a differnt story. Fuji Astia is a 'good' scanable transparency film.

Don Bryant

[lenny]

The film to use for scanning is as tight a grain as you can get - the higher ISO films don't do as well. Unless you like that effect...

The negative density range for b&w is twice what is used for standard darkroom prints. From normal base numbers all the way to 2.0, for instance. It doesn't have to be, one can make scans of all your old negs, but nice and rich and thick works great.

I would generally stay away from things that contain Phenidone, as in Rodinal, as this accentuates the edges of the grain. When I scan, I zoom in to the grain level and make adjustments based on what I see. Most people prefer a very tight grain...

I have had great results with PMK negs as well as D-23. Efke and Ilford films...

Lenny
EigerStudios

[sanking]

I have had great results with PMK negs as well as D-23. Efke and Ilford films...

Lenny
EigerStudios

Pyro staining developers are highly recommended for negatives that are to be scanned. PMK is very good for this type of work. I also recommend Pyrocat-HD and Pyrocat-MC, two formulas which I developed and continue to support.

With developing in pyro staining developers the silver grain density in the highlights is masked by the pyro stain, which is similar to a dye stain in C-41 processing. The result is less grain in the highlight than if one were to develop with non-staining developer.

Sandy King

[Ted Harris]

I'll echo the sentiment that films processed i staining developers scan very well. I can add that I have not yet scanned a film that gave me a bad scan ... some require more work than others and the grainer films will, well of course, show grain when scanned at a high resolution. Having aid that I have scanned some older high ISO grainy B&W films and they printed quite nicely.

[Robin P]

Kodak Portra 160 & 400 (recently improved) is very good for scans and I get good results from it with 6x6 & 6x4.5 but for 35mm seem to get more manageable colour from Fuji Superia 200.
Modern C41 neg stock should all be good for scanning as it is scanned during the normal minilab process these days.
For B&W I prefer Kodak CN400 over Ilford XP2.

Cheers, Robin