Found: A source of optical prints in UK

[Mark Antony]

Hi I hope no one minds me posting this, its not spam.
I've just dropped off my 120 film to a chemist near my home, and to my surprise they are still printing on an old Noritsu QSS 1501 machine from the 1990's
I asked them to print my film optically and they said they could at the price of 30p per print (5"x5") and processing.
I saw some prints from a Portra 120 film on 5x5 glossy and they looked really nice not over-sharpened like Frontier prints.
hey are called Hurn Chemist on Unthank Rd in Norwich 01603 767888
I'm not connected in any way to the firm and if this post is deemed spam moderators please delete.

My reasons for posting are there can't be many old minilabs still printing optically, some members may like to know who offers the service
Mark

 

[paul_c5x4]

Didn't know Hurn were geared up for colour - Wasn't impressed with the quality when they did a roll of B&W a couple of years ago. One of these days, I'm going to give Photo & Studio Processing on Hall Rd a try. Will save on trekking out to Horning or East Dereham for the odd roll or two of C41/E6.


P.S. If you want any RA-4 paper, PM me. I've got miles of the stuff sitting in the fridge.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Hi I hope no one minds me posting this, its not spam.
I've just dropped off my 120 film to a chemist near my home, and to my surprise they are still printing on an old Noritsu QSS 1501 machine from the 1990's
I asked them to print my film optically and they said they could at the price of 30p per print (5"x5") and processing.
I saw some prints from a Portra 120 film on 5x5 glossy and they looked really nice not over-sharpened like Frontier prints.
hey are called Hurn Chemist on Unthank Rd in Norwich 01603 767888
I'm not connected in any way to the firm and if this post is deemed spam moderators please delete.

My reasons for posting are there can't be many old minilabs still printing optically, some members may like to know who offers the service
Mark

You dropped off colour negative film?

Tom

 

[Mark Antony]

Yes Tom today I dropped of a Portra 800, and saw some rather good results from a Portra 160VC on 5x5 glossy Fuji paper. The thing is these are cheap 30p per print plus film process. If I get time later I'll pick them up and post images of the results.
I know the Noritsu 1501 quite well if I remember rightly it can do 8x10s and has a Nikon zoom lens.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

I recall some of the interviewees on the 'Inside Analog Photo' programme talking about processing film and prints on their personal mini-lab machines. A surprising choice I thought, as Jobo processing is more often considered for an individual photographer's usage, IIRC Bob Carnie uses Jobo machines at Elevator in Toronto.

Tom

 

[Mark Antony]

Well I picked them up just a hour ago. They are bigger than I thought 6"x6" glossy and pretty good for 30p well usable for proofs.
here is a quick scan of one of the images:

The film was Portra 800 shot on a Rollei T in dark wooded conditions
they are a little light for my taste, but the overall result is well worth it for the £6.59 I paid and optical prints lokk different from Frontier type machines thats for sure.
Mark

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Are the dust spots visible in the image or the negative, scan, print?

Tom

 

[Mark Antony]

they are from my quick scan, the prints look fine.
Here is one scanned with an attempt to match the colours:

Optical prints look different, not better smoother but still sharp, the digital has an edgy sharpness with more grain.
Analogue warm and cuddly digital print hard and clinical.
Mark

 

[nickandre]

I find that for some reason analogue color printing produces a very pleasing grain structure while scanning the same negatives gives me lots more dust and particularly ugly grain. Kodak 400 looks good when pushed to 11x14. Good as in moderate grain, but which isn't too noticeable and has a pleasing quality. Sometimes I don't mind a little dust because it says "this came from film, the film way..."

 

[clayne]

I find that for some reason analogue color printing produces a very pleasing grain structure while scanning the same negatives gives me lots more dust and particularly ugly grain. Kodak 400 looks good when pushed to 11x14. Good as in moderate grain, but which isn't too noticeable and has a pleasing quality. Sometimes I don't mind a little dust because it says "this came from film, the film way..."

Usually has to do with the condenser-like (almost point) light source used in typical film scanners. They exaggerate grain and acutance (which can be both good and bad).

 

[Prest_400]

That's nice. I would love that there was a lab around here that still printed optically. And of course, at those prices...
"Normal labs" here (aka, consumer labs), make prints from film with a bit of cheap compact digital look added. Gotta see the wonderful leaves and grass, all smeared.

 

[Matt5791]

Interesting - Palm lab in Birmingham have a Durst optical printer - I have no idea what model - and a Noritsu digital printer. I guess they would fire up the Durst if someone wanted optical prints.