Best way to make big enlargements from 6x7?

[xtolsniffer]

In the UK, I use Peak Imaging for most of my colour work (I do black and white in my own darkroom). I'm thinking of getting some big (40"x30") prints made from some of my flower slides taken on 6x7 on an RB67 to decorate my kitchen. The odd thing is that prints from digital files and colour negative for that size are similar (£32 and £33.59 respectively), but from transparency it's £50.40, somewhat more! I have no idea now how commercial labs make large colour enlargments, since my experience is from the good old days and optical enlargements onto cibachrome, but I assumed the neg/transparency is scanned and digitally printed via laser onto the paper. So why the price differential between negative and transparency? Would I be better off scanning it myself (on an Epson V700), and then paying the digital image price?
Any insights are welcome.....

 

[Anon Ymous]

I can't be sure, but the extra cost might include colour correction. You want your prints to be as close to the original (slide) as possible, so they need to spend more time to correct the output. If you give them negatives they have no way to know exactly what you want, so it becomes a whatever-comes-out situation, more or less.

 

[xtolsniffer]

Hm, I dan't considered that, but an extra £17 seems rather a lot for colour correction! On the whole, Peak does a fantastic job, but with that price differential between negative and transparency it would make sense to switch to negative for making big enlragements.

 

[2F/2F]

The extra cost is probably for a high-rez. scan (or internegative), unless they are actually doing Ilfochromes. If they are doing Ilfochromes, they are simply more expensive in all respects. 50 pound is not bad for a scan and 30x40 print, or for an Ilfochrome. I can almost assure you that if it was Ilfochrome, it would cost much more.

 

[xtolsniffer]

Some smaller enlargements from transparency came back on 'Fuji Crystal Archive' paper, so I assumed it was from a scan.

 

[2F/2F]

Yes, that is neg. paper, so they are either scanning or doing an interneg, which accounts for the higher price. (A and I doesn't even offer internegs any more, and I don't know who does. They do not do Ilfochrome either, and the only lab I have found that does do them is Lab Ciba here in L.A.) If you hand them a neg, all they have to do is put it in an enlarger and print it. If you hand them a transparency, they need to put in a lot more lab time and equipment usage.

Transparencies are very good if the eventual product is to be a litho print, but negs are better if going for a silver print. Just so you realize that that is not a bad price, research the price of getting a direct positive print made. It'll probably be about 150 pound, not 50, if you can even find anyone to do it. Then, visit an old-school print shop (if there are any left in existence) and ask how much it would be to make a litho print. It would not be pretty, I'll tell you that!

 

[Loris Medici]

If they aren't printing using an enlarger then the price difference is solely a marketing trick! Printing a transparency digitally (which is all laboratories do - unless stated otherwise) is not different than printing digitally from a color negative. Actually, printing a transparency digitally is easier, because scanning a RGB transparency (w/ correct colors) is easier. Conversion of CMY color negatives (with orange mask) to positive (w/ accurate colors) is tricky and requires special software / profiles whereas to make a good scan from a transparency you just need a calibrated scanner. It's one of the reasons why editors / clients were requesting transparencies back in the old days (the other being to be able to inspect the images on a light table w/o the need of printing = time + cost = cost). Now they request digital files which they can inspect on their calibrated screens...

Regards,
Loris.

Yes, that is neg. paper, so they are either scanning or doing an interneg, which accounts for the higher price. (A and I doesn't even offer internegs any more, and I don't know who does. They do not do Ilfochrome either, and the only lab I have found that does do them is Lab Ciba here in L.A.) If you hand them a neg, all they have to do is put it in an enlarger and print it. If you hand them a transparency, they need to put in a lot more lab time and equipment usage.

 

[xtolsniffer]

That was my feeling, if they scan a negative then print digitally, why would it cost more to scan a transparency then print it digitally? I would have thought the transparency would require less fiddling with, but then I don't know much about their machines or processes. The fact that they like digital images to be saved at the final size at 254ppi does point to a certain type of comemrcial scanner-processor. I was just curious. I don't want to do them down as the quality and service they give is great, it's just the price differential is a bit odd.

 

[Anon Ymous]

They don't do internegs, nor ilfochromes. Have a look here. I'd just call and ask them what the difference is.

 

[xtolsniffer]

Doh! I never found that link on their website, how stupid am I? Still I guess that confirms it. Even more of a mystery why prints from negs and transparencies are different in price...

 

[2F/2F]

Doh! I never found that link on their website, how stupid am I? Still I guess that confirms it. Even more of a mystery why prints from negs and transparencies are different in price...

As someone above mentioned, it is a mystery if they scan everything to print it, but not if they stick negs in an enlarger to print them.

Why not just call them and ask? two minutes and you will have your definite answer. Better than spending a day hearing "maybes" on the Internet.