Any people that aims to get a end result on the slide?

fretlessdavis · Feb 10, 2014

StoneNYC said:
I use Dwayne's Photo for printing my scanned slides because they use light-jet style printing on RA-4 paper essentially a digital projector and chemical print, the results are generally excellent. I've had one mess up and they went above and beyond to fix it (re-did an 11x14 print 6 times for me).

I prefer slides on metallic paper, but the normal paper they use, whatever it is, is also good. It's all kodak for sure.

+1 on Dwayne's. It's where I send my slides and occasional C-41. They do very well when asked to match color to my slides. I've never been disappointed. Sadly, they don't do metallic, just Kodak Supra Endura Ultra Glossy or whatever.

They're printing is much more reasonably priced, too.

Metallic looks fantastic for Velvia and cityscapes and landscapes... or any shot with water in it. Not a huge fan of it for people or animal shots, though. Adorama's print shop does metallic at reasonable prices.

6x7 up to 11x14 when pulled from a flatbed should be OK, but I'd definitely send off slides if you're doing 16x20's.

StoneNYC · Feb 10, 2014

fretlessdavis said:
+1 on Dwayne's. It's where I send my slides and occasional C-41. They do very well when asked to match color to my slides. I've never been disappointed. Sadly, they don't do metallic, just Kodak Supra Endura Ultra Glossy or whatever.

They're printing is much more reasonably priced, too.

Metallic looks fantastic for Velvia and cityscapes and landscapes... or any shot with water in it. Not a huge fan of it for people or animal shots, though. Adorama's print shop does metallic at reasonable prices.

6x7 up to 11x14 when pulled from a flatbed should be OK, but I'd definitely send off slides if you're doing 16x20's.

I agree that metallic is best for Velvia and Kodachrome

But they certainly DO print metallic... All of my color images by them are metallic.

Poisson Du Jour · Feb 10, 2014

Alan Klein said:
I shoot Velvia 50 in 120 mf 6x7mm landscapes. I scan and print at home with a flat bed and print small size 8 1/2" x11". What print process, paper, etc would you recommend for large prints let's say 16x20" and larger? Thanks. Alan.
Edit: in outside lab.

That's a pretty big size to be aiming for; not one I routinely gun for because of cost, chiefly on metallic paper (which includes the drum scan and post work).
It is of course well within the ability of a 6x7 slide for printing. Landscapes come up beautifully printed on metallic media but really, you should ask for samples of each of the media that are of interest to you from the lab, including pearl, semi-gloss, cotton rag etc. My favourite besides metallic is Museo cotton rag. A lot of others can actually flatten the punchy nature of Velvia so you do need to ask for samples rather than gasp and faint when very dull, flat looking prints come back on media that you just know you should have tested before finals.

Mainecoonmaniac · Feb 10, 2014

One option for digitized transparencies is you can print on different substrates. This includes something that simulates the old Duratrans material. http://www.apimaging.com/services_lightbox.html You can use light boxes to light them from behind. It looks quite different since the image is transmitted light, not light reflected off of a photograph. A lot of retail stores use this for displays.

fretlessdavis · Feb 10, 2014

StoneNYC said:
I agree that metallic is best for Velvia and Kodachrome

But they certainly DO print metallic... All of my color images by them are metallic.

I actually didn't know that. Last time I ordered, their options were matte, glossy, and super glossy (not even sure what that menas... maybe I'm just going crazy), so the few shots I really wanted printed on metallic paper I mailed somewhere else to be scanned, then printed through Adorama...

No reason to go anywhere besides Dwayne's then. As long as you do orders with lots of items, they're a really good deal for E-6 processing, too.

StoneNYC · Feb 10, 2014

fretlessdavis said:
I actually didn't know that. Last time I ordered, their options were matte, glossy, and super glossy (not even sure what that menas... maybe I'm just going crazy), so the few shots I really wanted printed on metallic paper I mailed somewhere else to be scanned, then printed through Adorama...

No reason to go anywhere besides Dwayne's then. As long as you do orders with lots of items, they're a really good deal for E-6 processing, too.

Wait do you SEND them the film? Or do you use their ROES online ordering system and send them the file of the scanned image?

I wouldn't use Dwayne's for scanning EVER only for printing

fretlessdavis · Feb 10, 2014

StoneNYC said:
Wait do you SEND them the film? Or do you use their ROES online ordering system and send them the file of the scanned image?

I wouldn't use Dwayne's for scanning EVER only for printing

I send them film, correct. They're scanning isn't the best, but when they're scanning with an output in mind, they do well, and match slides quite well. Never had proper drum scans, as I'm not selling any of my color work so it isn't worth the money. They do a better job than I have found with nearby places that use higher end film scanners. I also don't go over 8x10 for 35mm, 11x14 for 645. Haven't had issues yet, and I'm very happy with the results.

My usual order is to send them some slides for printing, usually a couple pages with a dozen marked for printing, along with a couple rolls of undeveloped E-6.

Maybe I just don't do enough color, but my Dwayne's prints from sending in slides come back with better colors than my digital images have ever had. I know they're not the greatest for scanning, which is why I don't push the size from them. Honestly, though, I doubt anyone could really tell a difference from my Dwayne's prints to ones where I had the frame scanned on a higher end Nikon, uploaded, and printed digitally. I'll have to ask what method they use to scan.

Alan Klein · Feb 10, 2014

I'm close to NYC. Does anyone know who prints from the Velvia or do they scan and then print? Who do you recommend? That would be best probably because then I could stop in and see them and establish a relationship so I can get good, consistent results.

StoneNYC · Feb 10, 2014

Alan Klein said:
I'm close to NYC. Does anyone know who prints from the Velvia or do they scan and then print? Who do you recommend? That would be best probably because then I could stop in and see them and establish a relationship so I can get good, consistent results.

All E-6 film is scanned ... because that cibichrome/ilfochrome process doesn't exist anymore...

You can send it to AUSTRALIA and have it done by a few people who still have stock paper/chemistry stored... But it VERY expensive.

So scanning and printing with a light-jet (acts like an enlarger from a digital file) on RA-4 paper is the closest you can get to a print from E-6

Poisson Du Jour · Feb 11, 2014

AUSTRALIA, has Ilfochrome printing?? :confused:
At the size quoted you'd be looking at a $350 print with masking set up.
ChromaColour Adelaide (my lab) has been gone since July 2010. Their back inventory of Ilfochrome materials were sold off during liquidation, goodness knows to who and where. Possibly Ken Duncan.

StoneNYC · Feb 11, 2014

Poisson Du Jour said:
AUSTRALIA, has Ilfochrome printing?? :confused:
At the size quoted you'd be looking at a $350 print with masking set up.
ChromaColour Adelaide (my lab) has been gone since July 2010. Their back inventory of Ilfochrome materials were sold off during liquidation, goodness knows to who and where. Possibly Ken Duncan.

Yeah the guy who supposedly was able to do hand processed Kodachrome at his lab also still has stock of ilfochrome paper/chems, he stocked up, but has warned that it's almost depleted...

Poisson Du Jour · Feb 11, 2014

StoneNYC said:
Yeah the guy who supposedly was able to do hand processed Kodachrome at his lab also still has stock of ilfochrome paper/chems, he stocked up, but has warned that it's almost depleted...

That would be Stephen Frizza in Sydney. His process does not use masking (auto-chromes?).
Interesting about the mention of Kodachrome processing. Way forward of all that ambitious talk in another thread, not a single person came forth with the gumption to kick start it with cash lots of it.

Alan Klein · Feb 11, 2014

Years ago, the lab use to take 4x5 internegatives of my 120 chromes and print C prints from that. Anyone do that anymore or is the light print the way to go for better quality?

Poisson Du Jour · Feb 12, 2014

Not so much an argument of or for "better quality" (the judgement is up to you), but one of visible change in techniques and methods — then versus now. Lightjet/hybrid print exposure and variations is now considerably more established than the traditional wet darkroom colour print. How you judge the quality of the two methods is very subjective, but the best printers are there to please, not see you walk out teary-eyed. Yes, 4x5 internegs of 120 chromes were the usual way for Ilfochrome Classic printers here in Australia too; this of course isn't done for machine auto-chromes that do not use masking (and is thus not a good choice for critical printing).

StoneNYC · Feb 12, 2014

Poisson Du Jour said:
That would be Stephen Frizza in Sydney. His process does not use masking (auto-chromes?).
Interesting about the mention of Kodachrome processing. Way forward of all that ambitious talk in another thread, not a single person came forth with the gumption to kick start it with cash lots of it.

I think the consensus was, Stephen did it to know if he could, then asked how much people would pay, but was not actually offering to do it, just curious what others would theoretically pay.

When some actually approached him about it, he said no, it's too much work and time and people got mad as they assumed his question of price meant he was offering, but he wasn't.

lxdude · Feb 12, 2014

Poisson Du Jour said:
/QUOTE] Yes, 4x5 internegs of 120 chromes were the usual way for Ilfochrome Classic printers here in Australia too

Internegs?

Peltigera · Feb 12, 2014

Internegs - a negative produced from an original - not an original negative. In this case (Poisson Du Jour's) a colour positive in 120 format producing a negative in 4x5 format to produce a larger positive (larger than the 120 positive).

lxdude · Feb 12, 2014

Peltigera said:
Internegs - a negative produced from an original - not an original negative. In this case (Poisson Du Jour's) a colour positive in 120 format producing a negative in 4x5 format to produce a larger positive (larger than the 120 positive).

Yes, but for use with Ilfochrome Classic?

Sirius Glass · Feb 12, 2014

When I did take slides every photograph was taken with the final result in mind. There were no digi-snappers back then. If I took slides now I would not change my methods.

Poisson Du Jour · Feb 12, 2014

lxdude said:
Yes, but for use with Ilfochrome Classic?

Yes. The media for masks was B&W (contrast control) and something of Kodak's ... can't remember now, something ortho (?)
Maskingn was never done for mural or panoramic-sized Ilfochrome Classic prints, thus exposure and contrast had to be bang-on — no breathing space. This wasn't my line of work but a few other lensmen here in Australia hogged the production line with pano prints costing upward of $3,220 a pop.

BradleyK · Feb 12, 2014

Sirius Glass said:
When I did take slides every photograph was taken with the final result in mind. There were no digi-snappers back then. If I took slides now I would not change my methods.

+1. The slide as my "finished product" (excepting those instances when I would opt to print) was, and still is, my assumption when I trip the shutter. Part of the reason that I bracket to the extent that I do is with that underlying assumption in mind. As well, there are those instances of tricky or difficult light, and those cases where I just want to see the effects of a little more or a little less exposure on a particular subject.

Poisson Du Jour · Feb 12, 2014

Sirius Glass said:
When I did take slides every photograph was taken with the final result in mind. There were no digi-snappers back then. If I took slides now I would not change my methods.

+1 again.

lxdude · Feb 12, 2014

Poisson Du Jour said:
Yes. The media for masks was B&W (contrast control) and something of Kodak's ... can't remember now, something ortho (?)
Maskingn was never done for mural or panoramic-sized Ilfochrome Classic prints, thus exposure and contrast had to be bang-on — no breathing space.

OK, now I get it- those were masking negatives.

benjiboy · Feb 13, 2014

If you need the optimum quality on a print shoot negative film, and if you need to get the best results from slides project them, end of story.

Alan Klein · Feb 13, 2014

Ben: If you scan for printing, why is one better than the other?

Any people that aims to get a end result on the slide?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency