minilab still apug conform ?

[Dietmar Wolf]

HI.

I want to ask, if my color prints from a fuji minilab nearby, made with a frontier printer are still considered as 100% apug traditional. Could I send them in a exchange?

I ask because every frontier minilab scans the image before printing it.
Although, the whole process after is wet again.

(I am not asking about crap inkjet prints.)

Thank you for clarification, regards, Dietmar

 

[gr82bart]

Oh boy, are you opening a can of worms ... personally, I and every colour photographer stilll here and those that have been chased away by my fellow APUGers say yes. In fact, I have sent some as Postcards in the Postcard Exchange. No one complained. And one of my Lambda prints is in the Traveling Portfoloio. Again, no complaints, but I was sneaky and didn't bring it up. Better to be burned at the stake as a heretic than to ask permission, I always say.

I'm certain the rest of the APUG community would say no. They'll even direct you to that digital site trying so hard to be different, but having a hard time at it. Especially the hoardes of B&W types here with pitch forks and torches ...

Regards, Art.

 

[Markok765]

My local lab scans and prints like that too.

 

[kraker]

I want to ask, if my color prints from a fuji minilab nearby, made with a frontier printer are still considered as 100% apug traditional.

I would be tempted to answer that one with a "yes"...

Could I send them in a exchange?

... and this one with a "no".

Yes, in my opinion, it's analog.

But I feel that sending them in, let's say, the APUG Postcard Exchange is a no. Not because it could be perceived as not being 100% analog, but because it's not 100% processed by yourself. Maybe that's just me, but for the Postcard Exchange, I want to send a photo for which I did 100% of the processing. Taking it, developing the film, printing the photo 20, 30, 40 times, handwriting (yeah, I'm pretty sure that's just me and a few die-hards...), putting on the stamp. Not having a minilab print your 20, 30, 40 copies.

Then again, I really have to remember what Art just mentioned:

Better to be burned at the stake as a heretic than to ask permission, I always say.

Art, I simply love that one! That's the quote of the month for me, and it's only the 2nd of April...

So, just don't mention it. It's not as if I would enjoy the end result any less.

 

[eddym]

Better to be burned at the stake as a heretic than to ask permission, I always say.

At least that way you won't make the same mistake twice...

 

[PHOTOTONE]

If your print was from an analog negative, then it should still be considered analog photography, regardless of the print media. Photos reproduced in magazines are not "analog" prints. There are many methods of making prints, and yes some go thru a scanning stage.

 

[eddym]

Art, have you loaded the popcorn machine yet? :munch:

 

[MattKing]

But I feel that sending them in, let's say, the APUG Postcard Exchange is a no. Not because it could be perceived as not being 100% analog, but because it's not 100% processed by yourself. Maybe that's just me, but for the Postcard Exchange, I want to send a photo for which I did 100% of the processing. Taking it, developing the film, printing the photo 20, 30, 40 times, handwriting (yeah, I'm pretty sure that's just me and a few die-hards...), putting on the stamp. Not having a minilab print your 20, 30, 40 copies

Just a reminder folks that the rules for the Postcard Exchange are quite different then all the other exchanges:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Note in particular from the first paragraph:

The postcards sent are predominantly B&W prints, but there have been alternative processes (some stunning examples), inkjets and colour machine prints - anything is welcome as long as it originated on film.

Now you may prefer to send something you print yourself, but that is a preference, rather than the rule.

Matt

P.S. I would posit as well that something like a photogram might be acceptable even though "film" wasn't used, but that question would be for another thread.

 

[Samuel B]

A print from a Fuji Frontier is a digital print, no different to an inkjet print made from a neg scan.
IMO doesn't matter if the process is wet or dry, still a digital print.

 

[Dietmar Wolf]

Thank you.

@Art ) Now I am curious as I participate at the travelling project myself.

The argument, not 100% self processed is a good & valid one.

Samuel, strictly speaking you are right of course.

Thank you all.

 

[Removed Account]

While I do agree that a Frontier print is technically a "digital print," I would also note that in my town, and certainly in many (if not most) others, if you don't do you're own optical colour printing then you are SOL in terms of purely analogue colour printing. There is the option of mailing the film to a lab which does optical, but if there is not one in a nearby town or city this can be a fairly large expense or investment of time as well as presenting a risk of losing or damaging your negatives depending on the postal carrier and if the lab normally receives film in the mail. With colour positive film especially the chances of anywhere but a select few custom pro labs printing optically are precisely nil.

I don't see a problem with such a print in the APUG environment. It's sort of like a sick relative who can't make it in for a birthday. Their heart's in the right place, but unfortunate circumstances prevent it.

- Justin

 

[copake_ham]

I think Matt nicely clarified the situation as regards the post card exchange part of you query. I've never taken part in that activity - but he appears to be quite familiar with the rules.

I think it's also okay if you get a JPEG disk of your Monthly Shooting Assignment entries for uploading - so long as the photo was originally shot on film. It's no different than a DIY scan.

I don't know about other exchanges here.

 

[bdial]

I agree with Justin and art. While they are digital prints, technically speaking, there is still a big difference between prints made by RA-4 machines and inkjets. And if we were to consider Ciba from places like Elevator, there is no comparison to be made for archival permanence to inkjet prints. I think a "waver" in this case is reasonable, asuming that, like the gallery, the only PS'ing is for color correction, contrast, and perhaps spotting.
Our goal is to promote analog photography, and traditional materials. If we exclude machine printed color, then we'll turn this into a B&W only forum except for those who can do their own color aside from scanning. And in some respects, by excluding color, we'll hasten the demise of silver-based color printing.

 

[Nicole]

It's a fine line, but I believe that as long as the image was photographed using film the rest is unimportant. Aren't we here to support film and the analogue industry? Plenty of worms there Art, plenty of worms.