• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

iPhone enlarger

Status
Not open for further replies.
Didn't I see something like this a few years ago? Or was that to print onto polaroids or something?

Still, a) you're going to get pretty crap IQ by enlarging screen pixels onto paper, but b) I don't mind it as a gateway drug or even as a miniature / portable 'real' enlarger (ie, use the phone screen on full brightness as a diffusion light source, with a neg on the phone screen and enlarge that).
 
Brilliant idea to merge two styles of photography into the analog process. I think it's a great way for people to get a taste for analog photography in a quick and easy fashion.

As stated above, it will help the iPhone lovers see that there is life after the LED screen - instant gratification the analog way!
 
Interesting, clever and a bit pricey. Surprised the thread hasn't been shut down.
 
Odessey Sales sold a version of digital enlarger - this goes back to 2001 - one lab in the states was using it.. I bought a Lambda instead - basically biggie sized the concept.

Not sure why this thread will be closed, I think its a great idea for beginners to photography to experience the paper emerging in the tray.. that is what hooked me into a 35 year career.
Never forget the first time I saw the image appear.. it was magic.
 
I find humor in that this is exactly the mirror image or opposite of what I do: I shoot B&W film in analog cameras, then scan with Nikon 4000/9000 scanners and print with an Epson 3880.

For me to discuss anything past the word "cameras" in the above sentence is pretty much forbidden on APUG.

So people are thinking this is ok to discuss here because the LAST part is analog darkroom printing and we can ignore the iPhone or digital aspect?
 
DWThomas said:
It will never work out, I can't snap my fingers worth a darn.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure their iPhone program can be set to do the snap for you if needed, there's an app for that.

But then wouldn't that be a digital version of an analog-created snap? But then if you do it you're using your digits (fingers) which makes it digital, no?

See? This thread should be shut down. The fact that you snap your digits in the process means it's way too digital a process for APUG. ;-)
 
I understand you can enlarge real negatives too.

I seem to remember something about decreasing resolution in the enlarging lens or something so the pixels in the iPhone don't show up. Can anyone confirm that?

Anyway though I think it is very cool.
 
gr82bart said:
Why? Because of the iPhone factor? Not sure the mods are that jihadist.


Regards, Art
Click to expand...


LOL
they might not be but a lot of others are !
i'd duck and cover art
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jnanian said:
LOL
they might not be but a lot of others are !
i'd duclk and cover art
Click to expand...

Cool! So we can discuss digitally-created iPhone images as long as they are printed with an analog process, then we can discuss scanning and Epson printing as long as the images are from analog-cameras created on film?

Of course I'm kidding, the latter has been shown to be an absolute NO. How is this iPhone process ok then? I guess if we keep the discussion to the analog printing part ONLY just like I keep most of the discussion of my process to the use of film and the analog cameras, yes? I'm not trying to argue here as frankly I'm fine with it either way just curious where everyone sees this fall.

Hmmm, maybe because I scan and print digitally I'm actually scoffed here but do not know it......
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Might be fun and the price is right assuming you already own every thing but the enlarger itself.
 

it's fine by me
as long as we do it really fast like thr guy in the olde fedex ads
I think it is great fun, great technology and wil be a
great gateway drug for people to say, if I can do this with my handheld device,
it will be even cooler when I reek of chemicals and have greenish yellow fingernails
 
gr82bart said:
Why? Because of the iPhone factor? Not sure the mods are that jihadist.
Click to expand...

Not about iPhones really. Everybody (almost) has one. Or its equivalent. So no one is against them.

And not really about you, Art. You've been around here off-and-on since like a couple of hours after Genesis. I've enjoyed your posts for years. At least the years you've been active.

What it's about is a small number of members who know exactly what the charter, and by extension its originator, says about the focus of this site. And knowing this, they then try to play Whack-A-Mole with the membership and the moderators by seeing just how far they can push the digital technology envelope. Just how close they can come without actually getting punished. It has nothing to do with photography itself, regardless of the backend technology behind it.

Injecting unwanted digital discussions into APUG is just a big game to them, at everyone else's expense. They intentionally work to irritate, then when called on it they back off claiming that all of the upset members are treating them meanly and aren't allowing them to just have fun. It's a poking-sticks-in-eyes problem. Not an iPhone problem.

Ken
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@ darkosaric... You could probably use it for 35mm, make a negative carrier to mount to the phone and set the screen to white light. Not sure how even the backlight is on an iPhone, but it'd be fun to try and wouldn't take up much space at all... There I've turned this into a film accessory!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

I don't much care either, but the inconsistency is confusing. I thought the party line is: move this to DPUG since it is undeniably hybrid when used to print cell phone captures. Anyone here actually going to use one of these to print film?
 
I like the idea of everyone carrying around I-phones. That way if you can't find any rocks around, you can use a bunch of phones in a mesh bag, hung below your tripod to add extra weight in windy conditions - your tripod for a real camera, that is. Then when you're done with
the phones, they're always fun to skip across a pond.
 

I tend to find a blender and an iPhone more entertaining

[video=youtube;qg1ckCkm8YI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qg1ckCkm8YI[/video]

(the original from 2007 and still the best)
 
My nieces, little miss 9 years old and her little miss 6 year old sister watched that clip. Miss 9 year old hasn’t stopped talking about having one of those little enlargers and making cool prints that she can stick on her half of their bedroom walls.

Having been in my darkroom for an enlarging and printing experience, she pretty much knows just what happens. She has mooted that it would be cool to have her own darkroom, but it probably wouldn’t happen. Space, a sister and mum, being the problems, not necessarily in that order. This concept has fired her up no end, actually took me by surprise.

What is interesting to me is that quite a lot of people shoot film, scan their negative then show it around, including in the gallery here. If they do print any of these scanned images, invariably they do it electronically.

This concept is quite the opposite, one shoots electronically, then prints an analogue print conventionally. Before you can object to my statement, the image is projected to the paper, whether that be through a negative (which is apparently doable) or a mobile telephone, it is an identical process with a slight format difference, much like an Otto cycle engine can run on either petroleum or dieseloleum.

Neat enlarger.

Mick.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register