Frontier prints from transparencies as good as from Negatives?

[uberkiwi]

I was wondering whether transparecy scanned and printed on a fuji frontier is as good as that from negatives.

The reason I ask is because the labs always guess wrong when determining whether to print for highlights or shadow, or somewhere in between, remove intentional colour casts etc.

I thought may be if I shot transparency instead, the machine would print the slide as it is without 'correction'.

Is there anyone that does this?

Thanks
Kirk

 

[Dave Parker]

As far as the printing, it is up to you to tell them what you expect in a print, and if they don't do it, then reject the print....when going from slide to paper, it is often times required to do corrections to ensure getting a print that looks like the slide...I normally have them do a small test print for me straight up to check colors, shadows and such, then move to the bigger size..

Dave

 

[jd callow]

Kirk,
This probably not the forum to ask. If you wish to know about traditional R printing, or how to get a good traditionl c-print you've come to the right place.

Asking which film format is better for digital output is not what APUG is about.

 

[df cardwell]

The process has the potential. The problem is the operator.

I have had wonderful results from A&I in california. But you have to pay more than Costco because A&I has to pay a skilled printer.

.

 

[Samuel B]

For what it's worth, the scanners on digital labs seem to be optimised for scanning negatives, and the quality of the scan from transperancies are generally not as good.

At least that's been my experience on Noritsu digital labs.