Hi, Bart, thanks for the answers. Couple of questions buried below:
Bart van der Wolf wrote: SNIP
Since the B&W negative is (I assume) a single monochrome
source, do the separate RGB scan channels have identical
tone response once the exposure gain is equalized?
The B&W film (assuming proper processing) is quite neutral in its
absorption across the visible spectrum. However, the scanner lamp has
a certain color that needs to be eliminated as good as possible to
obtain similar channel response.
Whatever the cause, I was seeing a slight cast on my original
B&W-as-color scans and wasn't sure how to interpret it.
Might also have come from trying out ICE on some of them.
If the film processing was sub-standard, there may be residual
anti-halo dye left, or there may be a (photo)chemical reaction when
fixation and washing was too short. In addition there is the lamp
color to deal with.
If the per-channel hardware gain in B&W-posi mode was
adjusting *away* from a good balance for a B&W negative,
would the image even remotely resemble a proper scan?
Yes, but the channel differences would produce a color cast and thus
would be less accurate and more noisy.
SNIP
Could you elaborate a bit on this sentence? I'm not sure what
such a linearizing curve would look like in the workflow, let alone
how to match it to the characteristic curve.
Film has a rather non-linear response to light. It compresses the
shadow and highlight information with lower contrast than midtones,
which allows to chapture a larger range of luminances with more
apparent sharpness in the mid-tones.
If that non-linear response can be quantified, e.g. by measuring the
response to a stepwedge target with known step increments, then that
non-linearity can be taken out of the film response (by increasing the
shadow and highlight contrast and/or lowering mid-tone contrast). The
result would be that the equal stepwedge steps would result in similar
equal increases in RGB numbers.
In fact the step increments are multipliers (each step is the same
factor lighter or darker than its neighbor), but when represented on a
Log/Log scale (logarithmic exposure time vs Optical Density) there
will be a straight line (which makes it easier to check for
irregularities).
<
http://www.xs4all.nl/~bvdwolf/main/downloads/SE5400+GD.jpg> shows the
response of my DSE5400 to a transparent stepwedge, which produces a
reasonably straight response (except for the highest densities).
The response of film itself would exhibit a somewhat more S-shaped
curve, slowly increasing its response, followed by a more rapid
increase in the midtones, and then a gradually decreasing response,
AKA the Characteristic Curve.
In Photoshop or similar photo-editors you can use a Curves control to
boost the contrast in shadows and highlights until the response
resembles the response shown above, and apply an inversion from
negative to positive. A given profile on the other hand would require
the exact same exposure level on each film frame (which is impossible
with outdoor scenes) to be valid.
The film gamma and CC stuff is still going over my head, sorry to
say. Right now I get decent B&W output in PSCS2 by assigning
a gamma 1.0 profile, then stacking a Levels black-as-whitepoint
adjustment, a single inverted gamma curve
(somewhat arbitrary value), and a subjective s-curve for contrast.
Which is fine if it produces pleasing results, afterall the final
result is more art than science in most cases.
Do you have an example of a proper characteristic curve correction
lying around?
No I don't, but it could (depending on lots of of factors) look
something like this:
<
http://www.xs4all.nl/~bvdwolf/main/downloads/FilmCalibrInversionCurve.gif>
Don't take the exact curve shape too seriously, I just drew up
something approximate that inverts from negative to positive, applies
a given (probably wrong) gamma correction, and adjusts for shadow and
highlight contrast.
Bart