Prev: Do you want to start as a professional photographer in Ireland ?
Next: Do you want to start as a professional photographer in Ireland?
From: Richard on 7 Feb 2010 10:55
My negatives are AGFA RAPID, which is basically 35mm film, but with a
1:1 aspect ratio, so the negatives are 24mm x 24mm about.

Mostly the negatives are black & white. By and by, I'm wanting to end up
with several 12" x 12" enprints from the negatives.

I don't know whether any amateur has the capability to do this. The
equipment used needs to be high quality.

The negatives need cleaning first.

How do I achieve my objective with costs in mind? Thanks.

From: Richard on 8 Feb 2010 06:22

"Richard" <useless(a)dot.com> wrote in message
news:7t864uF5c6U1(a)mid.individual.net...
> My negatives are AGFA RAPID, which is basically 35mm film, but with a
> 1:1 aspect ratio, so the negatives are 24mm x 24mm about.
>
> Mostly the negatives are black & white. By and by, I'm wanting to end
> up with several 12" x 12" enprints from the negatives.
>
> I don't know whether any amateur has the capability to do this. The
> equipment used needs to be high quality.
>
> The negatives need cleaning first.
>
> How do I achieve my objective with costs in mind? Thanks.


What is the best techical process that results in getting enprints
today?

Using a digital film scanner? Or what? Rich

From: "Trev" trev_uk on 8 Feb 2010 06:53

"Richard" <useless(a)dot.com> wrote in message
news:7taafmF208U1(a)mid.individual.net...
>
> "Richard" <useless(a)dot.com> wrote in message
> news:7t864uF5c6U1(a)mid.individual.net...
>> My negatives are AGFA RAPID, which is basically 35mm film, but with a 1:1
>> aspect ratio, so the negatives are 24mm x 24mm about.
>>
>> Mostly the negatives are black & white. By and by, I'm wanting to end up
>> with several 12" x 12" enprints from the negatives.
>>
>> I don't know whether any amateur has the capability to do this. The
>> equipment used needs to be high quality.
>>
>> The negatives need cleaning first.
>>
>> How do I achieve my objective with costs in mind? Thanks.
>
>
> What is the best techical process that results in getting enprints today?
>
> Using a digital film scanner? Or what? Rich

Enprints was a term invented for small enlargement's. 12 x 12 would be an
Enlargement.
Scanning and printing Is the norm today and is what the process labs do just
as a user would do at home but with more expensive equipment. They could do
it by enlarging on to Photo Paper but that would be time consuming and
costly. Clean your Negs and take them to Boots or such like

From: Willy Eckerslyke on 8 Feb 2010 07:00
Richard wrote:
>
> "Richard" <useless(a)dot.com> wrote in message
> news:7t864uF5c6U1(a)mid.individual.net...
>> My negatives are AGFA RAPID, which is basically 35mm film, but with a
>> 1:1 aspect ratio, so the negatives are 24mm x 24mm about.
>>
>> Mostly the negatives are black & white. By and by, I'm wanting to end
>> up with several 12" x 12" enprints from the negatives.
>>
>> I don't know whether any amateur has the capability to do this. The
>> equipment used needs to be high quality.
>>
>> The negatives need cleaning first.
>>
>> How do I achieve my objective with costs in mind? Thanks.
>
>
> What is the best techical process that results in getting enprints today?
>
> Using a digital film scanner? Or what? Rich

What do you mean by the word 'enprint'? It usually refers to 6x4 prints
that most people consider the standard size they get back from Boots, etc.

Presumably you just want prints.

If I was doing them, I'd scan them on my flatbed scanner (Epson 1680
with a transparency adaptor) as they're too big for my 35mm film
scanner. Then I'd print them onto decent quality paper with my Epson
R2400. I wouldn't expect the results to be any worse than conventional
printing in the darkroom.

Cleaning - anti static brush to get rid of loose dust before scanning.
Photoshop to get rid of remaining dust.
If they're really filthy, I'd scan them first, then consider soaking in
distilled water with a drop of wetting agent, and redrying, but would
avoid this unless absolutely necessary.
From: Michael McGrath, Portraitist . on 8 Feb 2010 08:20
On 8 Feb, 12:42, Willy Eckerslyke <oss108no_s...(a)bangor.ac.uk> wrote:
> Rob Morley wrote:
> > On Mon, 08 Feb 2010 12:00:49 +0000
> > Willy Eckerslyke <oss108no_s...(a)bangor.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> >> If I was doing them, I'd scan them on my flatbed scanner (Epson 1680
> >> with a transparency adaptor) as they're too big for my 35mm film
> >> scanner.
>
> > Eh?  Agfa Rapid /is/ regular 35mm film (in full frame, half frame or
> > square format) just with a different cartridge system than the Kodak
> > one that everyone uses today.
>
> Doh! For some reason I was picturing it as 35mm without sprocket holes
> so the image went full width. Put it down to Monday morning.

Maybe it's me, but I haven't yet got 'true' B&W out of any DSLR in
digital darkroom , as I have out of my Bronica SQA , Mamiya 645 or
Nikon F90X /N90S with B&W film under the enlarger in my traditional
wet darkroom . Of course I use the best Nikon enlarger lenses, whereas
in digital darkroom I use the best Canon printers . I have even tried
scanning my B&W negs on a newly acquired Canon CanoScan flatbed 8800F
scanner, but still the traditional B&W film & traditional wet darkroom
prints work out far better, so much better that digital B&W simply
does not compare.

I have checked Dublin studios who do all their B&W studio work these
days on DSLR plus digital darkroom - and they don't compare either !
And I'm talking about top fellow pro's ( who shall, of course, remain
nameless , if I want them to ever talk to me again - I do ) .

I am happy enough with DSLR colour, though I see that they are still
not quite up to my Bronica or Mamiya film camera work on the job .

Digital, great for press work, great as fun cameras for the multitude,
great especially for the Internet - but I think ( maybe it's me ? )
comparing my own results on the best of DSLR Canon, Nikon and Fuji S2
Pro, as well as the Panasonic Lumix/Leica range, that there is more
of a ; Bang ' from film , especially as regards B&W work , though the
'old' Fuji Finepix S2 Pro comes darned near .

I haven't used a digital full frame yet, anybody who has care to
compare that for B&W work ?

I did so much want to get rid of my traditional wet darkroom, I had
so much looked forward to that, but if I am to maintain quality, esp
in B&W, it looks as if I am stuck with it for the near future .

A fellow local studio pro tells me the same, and says he doesn't think
that even the Hasselblad with Digi back can do it for B&W as his film
Hassie does, so he's remaining wet , to such an extent that he does
not do any professional work at all, colour or B&W , in digital .

My friends in the local Press tell me that they use only digital for
everything, including weddings and private portraiture jobs that they
get , but they also admit that they know little or nothing about film
to the extent that they've never even been in a traditional wet
darkroom ( a couple of them admit to not even using photoshop or any
post-processing , they just send in their work straight out of the
camera, they're strictly point-and-shoot men with Canon DSLRs ! ) ,
they say that it's the NEWS value that counts, not quality, and
editors have told me the same....

So I wonder how on Earth they produce acceptable portraiture in the
weddings they get , I haven't dared ask them that personally,
especially as they look up to me and I enjoy their admiration, don't
want to spoil it by asking awkward questions ( GRIN ) .

Cheers,
Michael .


 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Prev: Do you want to start as a professional photographer in Ireland ?
Next: Do you want to start as a professional photographer in Ireland?