mfogiel
Veteran
I think, that outside of looking for a better lab, you should really reflect on the following statement:
DO I REALLY WANT TO SHOOT B&W FILM ?
If the answer is an unequivocal YES !, then you should do the following asap:
1) Start using silver film, and develop yourself
2) Consider if you can wet print, if not go to option 3
3)Buy the best scanner you can afford, I mean, it should cost more than your most expensive camera
4) Get Vuescan
5) Learn scanning yourself
6) Buy an Epson K3 printer, and print in advanced B&W mode on paper like Ilford Baryta Silk
If the answer is - I AM NOT SURE, then I suggest you look for a decent digi toy and hung up your film activity.
DO I REALLY WANT TO SHOOT B&W FILM ?
If the answer is an unequivocal YES !, then you should do the following asap:
1) Start using silver film, and develop yourself
2) Consider if you can wet print, if not go to option 3
3)Buy the best scanner you can afford, I mean, it should cost more than your most expensive camera
4) Get Vuescan
5) Learn scanning yourself
6) Buy an Epson K3 printer, and print in advanced B&W mode on paper like Ilford Baryta Silk
If the answer is - I AM NOT SURE, then I suggest you look for a decent digi toy and hung up your film activity.
willie_901
Veteran
Do you think it's productive to describe digital cameras as toys?
froyd
Veteran
Sorry for the delay.
Here is an example from a recent roll. XP2 shot at box speed.
Below is a (roughly 550px x 550px) 100% crop:
Note the pronounced "grain" pattern, which I'm assuming comes from excessive sharpening? Also, the detail on the yellow flowers is almost completely gone, but on my lightbox I see some light come through the petal portions of the negative, it's not completely blocked up, as you would guess from the scan.
I'm sure in a wet print the detail would come out.
Here is an example from a recent roll. XP2 shot at box speed.
Below is a (roughly 550px x 550px) 100% crop:
Note the pronounced "grain" pattern, which I'm assuming comes from excessive sharpening? Also, the detail on the yellow flowers is almost completely gone, but on my lightbox I see some light come through the petal portions of the negative, it's not completely blocked up, as you would guess from the scan.
I'm sure in a wet print the detail would come out.
furbs
Well-known
You could definitely recover that detail in a homemade scan. That scan doesn't look much different than more expensive photolab scans I've gotten; I've learned not to expect much from them.
froyd
Veteran
I am looking forward to owning a digital toy, but not now. I'm having too much fun with my film bodies... Now that the option of great processing at $4.99 is gone, I'll try my hand at scanning, and, as you suggest, i'll be free to go back to silver halide films, but I like color, and I love XP2, so c-41 will continue to be part of my life.
Vuescan seems to be a favorite around here, and I'll propably spring for it, but a $1000 scanner is out of the question for now.
For all I know, I might learn that scanning requires more time than I'm willing to give it or that the results I get are not worth the effort, and I'll be looking for alternatives. However, my wet darkroom is permanently closed, and I'm in the process of getting rid of my equipment, the days of locking myself in the dark for a whole weekend are no longer a good fit for my life
Check on point 6. Despite 20 years in the darkroom, I've never managed to turn out prints as competent as those that I can get from the R3000 in a matter of minutes. I'm sold. I'm sure master printers getter better results from traditional fiber prints, but not me.