# black and white prints from color negatives



## flyingPhoto (May 30, 2021)

Other then the risky proposition of developing color film in black and white chemicals.   IS there a way to make a black and white print from a COLOR negative?

Kodak Panalure paper is only available online in extremely old stock packages that normally are extremely damaged. 

Using photo positive paper seems the only option, but how would that impact contrast filters?


----------



## Ysarex (May 30, 2021)

flyingPhoto said:


> Other then the risky proposition of developing color film in black and white chemicals.   IS there a way to make a black and white print from a COLOR negative?


Yep, scan the negative.


flyingPhoto said:


> Kodak Panalure paper is only available online in extremely old stock packages that normally are extremely damaged.
> 
> Using photo positive paper seems the only option, but how would that impact contrast filters?


----------



## flyingPhoto (May 30, 2021)

Well i am not in th emarket for a new scanner, and thats that... 

so would the positive photo paper work well since its actually printing paper and black and white film in one


----------



## Ysarex (May 30, 2021)

flyingPhoto said:


> Well i am not in th emarket for a new scanner, and thats that...
> 
> so would the positive photo paper work well since its actually printing paper and black and white film in one



There was never a good option to print color negs directly to B&W. The mask on the color negs creates too much contrast loss and you're not going to beat that including with positive photo paper. In the past if we had to do it we winced and got some Panalure and tried to convince ourselves it only looked a little awful. That option is now gone. Excellent results can be obtained however with a good scan. Send the scan out to a decent lab. In the future if you want good B&W prints don't start with color neg film.


----------



## flyingPhoto (May 30, 2021)

would it work if say 

1. simply using white light, no filters of any kind, to put the color negative image onto the positive paper  - on basis thats what happens when you use it in a camera?

2. switch to xp2 for that enjoyable C41 processing ease and be happy?


----------



## ac12 (May 31, 2021)

Just shoot B&W film, and avoid the problem.


----------



## Rickbb (May 31, 2021)

flyingPhoto said:


> would it work if say
> 
> 1. simply using white light, no filters of any kind, to put the color negative image onto the positive paper  - on basis thats what happens when you use it in a camera?
> 
> 2. switch to xp2 for that enjoyable C41 processing ease and be happy?


You will get a result, you won’t like it, but it will ”work”. Color negs have colors in them that BnW paper won’t see, or see well. Even panalure paper was crappy, there is a reason everyone gave up on this even back in the day.


----------



## 480sparky (May 31, 2021)

B&W paper is usually sensitive only to blue and green.  That's why safe lights are red.  So any green in the original scene will be recorded in the color film as red, which the paper isn't going to 'see'.  So even deep, dark green in the scene will end up being show white in the print.


----------



## Silversnapper (Jun 7, 2021)

Rickbb said:


> You will get a result, you won’t like it, but it will ”work”. Color negs have colors in them that BnW paper won’t see, or see well. Even panalure paper was crappy, there is a reason everyone gave up on this even back in the day.


I'm surprised at peoples response to Panalure paper. As a wedding photographer in the mid 1960's to the mid 1980's I used it extensively to  generate extra income from wedding shoots simply by having a select few prints lying around when the newly wed couple collected their 'official' prints, albums etc.  I think I inadverently tapped into a sort of 'nostalgia ethos' going around at the time and I had many requests for 'old fashion' prints - i.e. faded around the edge etc and of course all these 'extras' commanded a premium price.  

It took me a while to master Panalure but the considerable extra income it generated more than made up for the effort.


----------



## flyingPhoto (Jun 7, 2021)

Silversnapper said:


> I'm surprised at peoples response to Panalure paper. As a wedding photographer in the mid 1960's to the mid 1980's I used it extensively to  generate extra income from wedding shoots simply by having a select few prints lying around when the newly wed couple collected their 'official' prints, albums etc.  I think I inadverently tapped into a sort of 'nostalgia ethos' going around at the time and I had many requests for 'old fashion' prints - i.e. faded around the edge etc and of course all these 'extras' commanded a premium price.
> 
> It took me a while to master Panalure but the considerable extra income it generated more than made up for the effort.


Well ive always heard setting  up a darkroom was really easy, and cheap on ebay... 

then life proved it otherwise. SO perhaps not all information online is useful based upon expereinces of those people.


----------



## 480sparky (Jun 7, 2021)

flyingPhoto said:


> Well ive always heard setting  up a darkroom was really easy, and cheap on ebay...
> 
> then life proved it otherwise. SO perhaps not all information online is useful based upon expereinces of those people.



B&W is cheap. _ Color_ ain't.


----------



## TmRm (Jun 10, 2021)

You can do this, but you have to experiment and be flexible.  Basically, print at the highest contrast your enlarger will allow.  If the photo does not have any readily identifiable densities (definitely no skin tones) you may like the results.  Attached is a shot of Tower Bridge in Sacramento from an Ektar medium format negative.  The girders are actually gold colored.


----------

