X pan wet printing

[atlcruiser]

After lots of talk I got my darkroom officially up and running last nigt 🙂


One of the test prints was x pan in a 6x7 holder with a pretty half assed mask to sort of get it to fit.............................

I was floored! I had not seen a wet print from that camera but have seen many decent scans. The detail in the wet print blew the scans out of the water but what i really noticed with the lens quality when compared to regular 35mm negatives from my leicas.

I printed a bit from my mamiya 7 as well and compared x pan to mamiya 7 to M6 leica/leica glass.....x pan and mamiya 7 are about equal. I had heard that the x pan was MF in a 35mm size but that now really makes sense to me.

 

[didjiman]

An Xpan width is just a tad smaller than 7cm so yes the quality should be similar to the Mamiya 7. I have done both too and can confirm.

The Leica lens are "better" (especially the newer ones) in that they are extracting all those fine details from a much smaller negative.

BTW, what enlarger do you use? Since I scan and use digital neg to wet print now, I have an unused XPan carrier for the Beseler 45MZT.

 

[atlcruiser]

I have an Omega C700 that i got from here for now, pretty happy with it.

I think I will get another Omega 6x7 carrier and mod it take the xpan negs. Alos lookign inot some roll papaer of 20 x 24 and cut it down a bit.

 

[Colin Corneau]

FWIW, I found an extra 35mm neg carrier for the Omega I use. I measured out the width of an Xpan neg carefully, marked it out, and had a friend with a plasma torch cut it out.

I then filed it smooth as can be with metal sandpaper...works beautifully and holds em flat as can be. I also get a nice custom black border effect, too (although I suppose you could get that with a glass carrier too)

 

[jan normandale]

After lots of talk I got my darkroom officially up and running last nigt 🙂


One of the test prints was x pan in a 6x7 holder with a pretty half assed mask to sort of get it to fit.............................

I was floored! I had not seen a wet print from that camera but have seen many decent scans. The detail in the wet print blew the scans out of the water but what i really noticed with the lens quality when compared to regular 35mm negatives from my leicas.

I printed a bit from my mamiya 7 as well and compared x pan to mamiya 7 to M6 leica/leica glass.....x pan and mamiya 7 are about equal. I had heard that the x pan was MF in a 35mm size but that now really makes sense to me.

I'd really like to see the prints if you can scan some and upload them here or elsewhere.

 

[Colin Corneau]

I can also back up altcruiser's experience -- the lenses on an Xpan are crazy sharp.

 

[jan normandale]

I know the lenses are sharp but I am very interested in the differences between the wet print and the scanned print, so "pix please" :- )

[/url]
"Revel in The Details" by jannx [カメラマン] breaking it up, on Flickr[/IMG]

 

[Colin Corneau]

Logically, the difference there won't come from the lens but in the scanner and workflow one uses...a sharp darkroom print and a fuzzy digital scan can come from the same neg.

 

[Darshan]

I would love to see the pics. 🙂

 

[didjiman]

Folks, I have an XPan and used to have a Mamiya 7II. I do scanning on the LS-8000/9000 and print them on inkjet paper and now also doing digital negative and darkroom contact print them. I also have a 4x5 enlarger and did Mamiya 7II and XPand enlargement on Adox MCC paper.

The verdict? They are all good and different. People who said they get sharper darkroom prints than scanning may not be having the best scanning workflow, and people who said they get better scanned output is probably due to the post processing they can do in LR or Photoshop. In other words, don't fuss over it. Use what's available and what's you feel good about.

The XPan lens are sharp, but I doubt it's better (or worse) than the Mamiya 7 lens or the Leica lens. Of course with the Leica you are working with 1/2 of the negatives.

 

[jan normandale]

Folks, I have an XPan and used to have a Mamiya 7II. I do scanning on the LS-8000/9000 and print them on inkjet paper and now also doing digital negative and darkroom contact print them. I also have a 4x5 enlarger and did Mamiya 7II and XPand enlargement on Adox MCC paper.

The verdict? They are all good and different. People who said they get sharper darkroom prints than scanning may not be having the best scanning workflow, and people who said they get better scanned output is probably due to the post processing they can do in LR or Photoshop. In other words, don't fuss over it. Use what's available and what's you feel good about.

The XPan lens are sharp, but I doubt it's better (or worse) than the Mamiya 7 lens or the Leica lens. Of course with the Leica you are working with 1/2 of the negatives.

Since I'm looking to see results of both wet and scan based prints I'm wondering if you have some of each for us to see?

 

[capitalK]

Colin, you were selling your XPAN recently. Did you have an extra or a change of heart?

 

[atlcruiser]

I am getting closer...right now I am sort of waiting on bigger paper or an excuse to buy a roll.

I agree that one big difference for me was the scannign workflow...or lack of 🙂

 

[Colin Corneau]

Colin, you were selling your XPAN recently. Did you have an extra or a change of heart?

I had a second one I picked up -- I love this camera that much. Unfortunately I couldn't afford 2 and had to sell the second one...I did keep a 90mm lens out of it, though, to accompany the 45mm.

 

[atlcruiser]

So it took me a few months....... 🙂

I had to dissasemble the darkroom then reassemble it and ony just last night got around to printing some x pan images. I really am floored!

Another post above mentioned workflow issues if the scanned images are not that great and i agree fully. I can get "good" scans all the time and I can even get "great" scans if I want to screw with it long enough but the wet prints are ou of this world. I have yet to get a real carrier and amy 1/2 ased taped carrier actually works very well.

I will print a smaller version and try to scan it later this week.

 

[Luna]

Since I'm looking to see results of both wet and scan based prints I'm wondering if you have some of each for us to see?

Is he asking to compare a scan negative photo with a scan photo of a printed photo?

 

[atlcruiser]

I think so....... I will give it a shot but generally my scans of prints are not geat on the v700

 

[jan normandale]

David one of my flickr contacts shoots "street". He uses a Leica M6 and a Hassleblad SWC. He develops and wet prints his images then he scans the prints.

I'm curious to see the results of a scanned neg and a wet print from the same neg. His prints show an immediately noticeable difference between the two for the SWC

 

[atlcruiser]

your wish is my command.....might be a day or so as all of my wet prints are 12ish inches long and wont fit on the v700 🙂

 

[jan normandale]

your wish is my command.....might be a day or so as all of my wet prints are 12ish inches long and wont fit on the v700 🙂

yer a champ! FWIW.. scan it like it's an 8x10 then that'll work fine.

BTW : what Big Ass Fuji is coming your way?