Paul's advice works well if your scanner is only capable of scanning grayscale at 8 bits. Also it helps if the DMAX of your scanner is below 4. However, with a 16-bit grayscale image, you'd have 65536 shades of gray to play around with. And again, downconverting to a TIFF is gonna strip out 65280 of those shades, however you will get the widest gamut on your remaining 256 shades. Don't underestimate the power of your high-end equipment to produce a better looking grayscale than a $100 flatbed scanner.
And you can always add sepia or selenium by using making a Pantone Duotone of your grayscale image. Jeff. -----Original Message----- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 2:46 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Scanning Question I scan BW negs in RGB. That way I can control the look of the gray or tone them a bit toward a sepia or a selenium look if I wish. Plus, I think I get better gradations of grayscale in RGB. When I want small files I convert the scans to grayscale in PhotoShop after they've been scanned, cleaned and adjusted. Paul Shel Belinkoff wrote: > Hi gang ... > > Over the next few weeks I'm going to attempt scanning a lot of > conventional B&W negs. I have heard a number of conflicting opinions > on the best way to do this. Most comments center around whether to > scan in RGB or greyscale. Greyscale would be nice as I could save some > space, but if RBG will give higher quality results, I'll bite the > bullet. > > I have scanned using both methods before, although with the help of a > friend who did most of the work and setup, so I'm still pretty much > uneducated and inexperienced wrt the subtleties. > > Scanners used will be an Imacon Flextight 626 (I believe that's the > number) and the Nikon Coolscan IV 4000dpi unit, if that makes any > difference. > > Thanks for any help, > > shel
