How do most of you get to print?

C

Conner999

Member
Local time
9:09 AM
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
40
Question - how do the majority of you go from negative/slide to print? Taking a stape back from strictly DSLRs to an R8 and soon an M7 (tired to the short life cycle times and tendecy to treat a DSLR like a very costly P&S).

Love the R8+motordrive (ergos and that VF....) and the R glass. As I consider an M, I picked up a used Nikon 5000 and am finding that scans, when done larger than 5x7 quiet frankly suck in the acuity department vs direct-from-digital. I guess my expectations were too high for a 2nd generation image capture on a 'home' unit.

I know may soup their own B&W's (last time I did that was in high school on a Canonet), but what of those who don't develop their own?

Am thinking of just going the capture & local shop contact print routine and have their lcoal scanning guru work his magic on his Frontier unit for those I really want to go to print or digitally archive.

Am thinking color print/slides or XP2 and working my own B&W conversion in P&S on any resulting scans.

As an aside I also have a 30D I use with adapters and a Katzeye split screen/micro prims VF with the R glass for lens testing, experimentation and as an electronic 1.6x for my 180/2 Apo + Apo 1.4x

Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
I have a darkroom for b&w and color printing. 4x5 and medium-format color enlargers and a Jobo CPP-2 processor.
 
I print in a very makeshift (laundry room) darkroom. Fiber based papers. I only shoot black & white, 35 and 6x6.
Vic
 
Joe - how do you find the sharpness of your scans? Also what film do you normally scan and with what scanner/software?

I'm scanning some velvia 500 & 100 and while expect the colors to be wonky being Velvia, the sharpness is yuk above 5x7 output.
 
I will have prints made then i scan them. I do not have a dedicated film scanner, only a flat bed one which will handle prints quite well but not slides or negatives. If I especially like a picture I will have the negative scanned professionally. I then process using Photoshop Elements and print using a Canon Pixma photo printer. Mainly I will print at A4 size on gloss photo paper and the results are just fine. I have a high opinion of the Pixma which produces quality prints. The only glitch is that in black and white like most such printers it always print with a slight blue cast. This can be allowed for by giving my final image for printing a slight yellow / sepia cast first.
 
Negatives at Sams Fuji Minilab, then Epson 350V, then Sams! I have never gone bigger than 8X10, and then, it's only on my office wall! This quality blows away anything else that I have compared it too hanging in our entire building.

Its way cheap too!
 
For B&W prints I have a darkroom...I can print from a 35mm up to 6x7 neg...
For any color work, I have just been going to a CD with the film...have yet to print any in the last 5 or 6 years...
 
Peter - thanks. I use a an older HP 7960 printer for B&W. Being a dye -based system, it does a great job, with no color cast with B&W. With color, it's fine - as long as you print sRGB. Have had some issues getting good Adobe RGB from it. Can probably get one for next to nothing 2nd hand.

My Nikon 5000 has been a real disapointment. I think my expectations were simply too high. So much of the acuity of nice slide film is simply lost in the process.
 
I do film exclusively, almost all color.

For most stuff I have them developed and scanned at the mini-lab, mostly Walgreens, but I am looking for a more consistent low-cost one. For important stuff I use a local independent photo shop, again, develop and scan to CD.

I actually print only a fraction of what I shoot. I've had a very nice HP 9180 for about a year now and love it. I think it produces nicer prints than the mass-produced wet prints. "Giclee", to use the buzzword-compliant term. I won't repeat the analogy from another thread on the subject. :)

For those I want a very nice presentation quality print, I'll re-scan the negative myself at 16 bits, max res, and tweak myself in Photoshop, then print. The 9180 can produce absolutely stunning 13x19 "Super B" size prints!

Now I know there's a bias here on this board toward wet printing. I can appreciate that, and I do insist on film for making the exposure. However, given my equipment, skill, experience, etc., I can make a much nicer print using Photoshop and a nice "Giclee" printer than I could with a wet darkroom.
 
Conner999 said:
My Nikon 5000 has been a real disapointment. I think my expectations were simply too high. So much of the acuity of nice slide film is simply lost in the process.
Click to expand...

Which software are you using? I used to have a Nikon IV and was quite happy with how it scanned slides for up to 8x10 prints but the software was always horrible. Lots of people use Silverfast or VueScan for better results.
My current workflow is B&W or slide film processed by the lab and scanned at home with a Minolta Scan Multi II. My slides are also viewed in a Kodak projector. Sometimes I have the lab make 4x6 proofs but usually I just have the negs developed.
I have an Epson PictureMate for quick 4x6 prints at home. The photo quality is fantastic but I find with all Epson inkject printers, the nozzles clog to easily and I waste a lot of time and paper and ink cleaning them. Canon is much better in this department.
For the amount of printing I do it's not cost efficient to have a home printer so all enlargements are done at the lab.
 
I get the 35 film developed and scanned (no prints) at a local mini lab. If I get a frame that I want printed I will scan at home on a Minolta 5400 and print an 8x10 on an HP 7960. The HP 7960 does well with both colour and B&W printing and there are no issues with heads clogging. For larger prints than 8x10 I out scource to a commercial place. For the number of times I want larger than 8x10 it is not worth it to me to get a costly larger printer.

Bob
 
I get C41 film, both color and B&W, developed at a minilab at Wal-Mart. I formerly had them scan to a CD, but these were not high quality scans. I now use a Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II to scan 35mm negatives and load them into Elements 5.0, where I edit those that are worthwhile. When I need a print, I use my Epson Stylus Photo R800 which prints up to 8.5x11. My old darkroom equipment has been in the attic for over 40 years, and I don't intend to go back to it.

Jim N.
 
Usually C41 or E6 x-pro, minilab and hires scan to CD, then day to day prints by printer, or special prints from the neg at the shop, with a guide proof from me for crop and color.

The scans do need to be hires, and some minilabs don't understand unless you make it really clear to them that this is your requirement. Generally the scanner scans at the resolution it needs to make a small print - you need to persuade or bribe or threaten to get them to scan at the resolution they need for the biggest print their machine could ever make.

These hires scans take time. Be prepared to be relaxed about the return time so they can put your film through the machine when they're not busy.
 
Right now I'm using Nikon Scan. I need to download the silverfast demo. I'm scanning Velvia 50 & 100. The slides I'm testing are sharp under the loupe and I;m scanning at the highest res, but they just come out soft mush when output at over 8x10.
 
I'm wondering if the slides are being held flat by the mounts. Is it standard practice you scan mounted (two piece plastic mounts, glassless) or as a strip, unmounted?
 
Conner999 said:
I'm wondering if the slides are being held flat by the mounts. Is it standard practice you scan mounted (two piece plastic mounts, glassless) or as a strip, unmounted?
Click to expand...
I scan both ways without any problems. I wonder if you're scanning at the correct resolution?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom