Developing negatives for scanning

[Jordan]

I thought I might get this forum off to a start with a discussion about developing negs for scanning. I've been scanning B&W negs for several years now and customizing the process for the needs of film scanners is something I think about quite a bit. I use a Minolta Scan Dual II for 35mm and an Epson 4180 for 120.

There are tons of discussions about this on PN and other forums, but overall the consensus seems to be that aiming for fine grain (rather than acutance) and taking care not to overdevelop are the best ways to ensure nicely scan-able negatives. I also think that the scanner used can make a big difference.

These days, I try to use relatively fine-grained film-developer combinations. I can get away with a lot for slow films (Efke 25 in Rodinal scans nicely) while faster films like HP5 Plus require a bit more care (the most scan-able HP5 negs I have were developed in Perceptol).

Any thoughts?

[Jeremy]

Also, for the most part, a thinner negative is preferred to a thicker negative as the majority of the scanners are over-rated by the manufacturers on the max dMax they can scan.

[Kerik]

I find Ilford's XP2 super is great for scanning. I shoot this film alot for MF when I plan to make digital negs. Super fine grain, very little reciprocity effect, easy to scan since it's a dye-based C41 film.

[juanito]

I shoot HP5 and develop in tmax. I scan 35mm film in a polaroid sprintscan 400.
These images are the all negative an then a crop from a 18 X 12 inches print. I think the grain is very acceptable.

[Greg_E]

If you read the DR5 website, they suggest that developing film to be a positive is the best way to go.

[Jordan]

Thanks for your input, everyone. Kerik, I agree that Ilford XP2 scans wonderfully... if I wasn't so addicted to playing with chemicals, I'd use it all the time. The "grain" is nice and smooth and renders well on scanning.

Aside from Ilford XP2, the best-scanning negs I have were made with the Efke 25 / Rodinal and Delta 100 / HC-110 combinations. (Efke 25 is virtually grainless, even in Rodinal). The worst-scanning negs I have are basically anything (except Efke 25) in Rodinal and HP5 Plus / Diafine.

The scans I have seen from DR5-processed positives are very nice but I think it isn't feasible (for $ reasons) for most amateurs to switch their B&W work to DR5. My own home-processed B&W positives scan quite nicely, though I can get the same quality from a negative process as well.

[Greg_E]

You can get chemical kits for the B/W reversal process, but I haven't tried any yet.

[jd callow]

I find Ilford's XP2 super is great for scanning. I shoot this film alot for MF when I plan to make digital negs. Super fine grain, very little reciprocity effect, easy to scan since it's a dye-based C41 film.

This is very true in my experience. Less apparent grain, long tonal range and a lower Dmax make the chromogenic c41 films excelent for scanning.

[sanking]

I find Ilford's XP2 super is great for scanning. I shoot this film alot for MF when I plan to make digital negs. Super fine grain, very little reciprocity effect, easy to scan since it's a dye-based C41 film.

How does one control contrast with a C41 film, say with conditions that normally require very severe contraction development? I assume you do not develop in C41 yourself? I shoot a lot of color negative film with the intention of scanning but have not found a way to control high contrast scenes. Is it possible/feasible to requested reduced development from labs that process C41 film.

Sandy King

[Kerik]

Sandy,

I don't process it myself, just take it to the local lab for standard C41. I haven't had trouble with excessive contrast, so I've not pursued how to reduce it. I've not had highlights that are so dense they can't be scanned. OTOH, I generally don't shoot under extreme contrast conditions.