Print Size

[semrich]

I've just started posting photos here and I'm not sure if this is the correct thread to ask this, but question is about enlarging.

I'm new to printing in the darkroom and posting here, I've been posting photos in the gallery, some scans from my early prints and some scans from negatives.

Being new to printing I decided that I would like to print my MF 6X6 negatives and chose 10X10 as a standard.

That poses the following problem for me: My Epson 750 flatbed scanner is only 9" at it's widest. I compose in the camera and a 1" crop top and sides keeping the 6X6 proportions often cuts into important elements of the image. The same also applies to larger 35mm prints I'm making.

I want to post more scanned prints here so the question is twofold: how are members digitizing their prints to post here and what size prints are usually made.

I'd prefer to not make smaller prints just so I can post them in the gallery.

I would appreciate your input and suggestions.

 

[R gould]

The size you print to is very much a personal thing, I prefer a smaller print, I think that a smaller print mounted in a large mount looks great, and I use 91/2x12 paper and tend very often to print full frame, which for 6x6 is around an actual print size of 8inx8in, as I like to have a large border around my prints when matted,
Richard

 

[markbarendt]

There are "digital handheld scanners" that many of us, or someone in our family has.

Take the print outside into some nice sun, lay it down on a mat board on the deck or patio or sidewalk and scan.

 

[ooze]

Richard,

I've experimented a lot with paper and print sizes in the past. But for years my standard starting point has been 24x30cm (9.5x12") paper and I print with a generous border. 6x6 negs usually end up at 19x19cm, whereas 35mm negs are around 16x24cm. I think that this paper and print size serve two purposes very well: 1) It is large enough for a portfolio and small enough to easily carry and show around, 2) I can scan them with an A4 flatbed scanner.

If I think that the image warrants it, then I go up to 40x50cm paper.

You would need an A3 scanner for a 10x10" size. A3 scanners are both difficult to find and expensive, whereas A4 scanners are cheap and abundant.

When we find the time to get together I could bring along a small portfolio and you can make up your own mind whether it works or not.

Mike Johnston (The Online Photographer) once wrote that he used to print everything on 11x14" paper, as a result of which he regretted not being able to scan the majority of his work now.

Cheers

 

[ChuckP]

A cheap A3 scanner: http://www.mustek.com/onlinestore/product_info.php/cPath/23/products_id/32
Or use a digital camera. I have the same problem as most of my finished off prints are 11x14. I've used the digital camera but maybe one day I'll bite on that scanner.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

My standard paper size is 11x14". I print 8x8" square, or 9x12" rectangular.

When I scan my images, I scan half at a time, and stitch them together in Photoshop. It's a pain in the ass, but it works. I don't want to make smaller prints just to be able to scan them in one pass either.

Or, as ChuckP says - get a bigger scanner or a digital camera.

 

[semrich]

Thank you everyone for your suggestions. I appreciate the link for the mustek scanner, I can get one locally for twice the price. I just scanned a print and figured out how to do photomerge, it worked well enough, and I will try a 8X8 print soon.

 

[Rick A]

I always print smaller first, to see if I like the image enough to enlarge. I'm not talking contact prints, I use 5x7 and 5x5 as my gauge. These are the prints I scan in for the gallery. I almost never scan full size enlargments any more.

 

[hpulley]

It seems silly to scan a print but we don't like to share, don't we?

A digital camera seems best for my 11x14 prints. 8x10 scans perfectly but like you I hate to make a smaller print just to scan it. My scanner is a bit bigger actually and if I don't use all of the 11x14 then my Canon CanoScan 9000F will get most of it in.

That A3 scanner for under $200 looks good though I'd have to keep my Canon for negatives. Edit: Free shipping too! Ordered one, silly me...

 

[Jim Jones]

When digitalizing old B&W negatives, I make a fairly low contrast 8x10 print and scan it in 16 bit. This lets me do extensive curve adjustment and other editing. The effort involved in making a disposable print just for scanning is a fraction of the effort involved in producing a finished digital print. Using a DSLR is more practical for anyone digitalizing many photographs.

 

[removed account4]

too bad there isn't a subscribers only - place in the lounge ( or soapbox ! )
that is a sticky that some can post and receive answers these basic questions
it is part of what some of us do here and unfortunately a lot of people
leave this nice site because they ask a simple question, get stomped on
their thread closed, throw their hands up in frustration and never come back ...
and then tell everyone and their cousin of their experience ...

=====

that said ...

hi richard,
there are a handful of ways you can do this ...
negative scans to match your print works well
or just make a small print ( you might like a 8.5x8.5 print ? )
or a camera-snappy ... or if you make contact sheets of your negatives
you can scan THAT at 600 ( tiff ) and just size it the way you want and sve
it as a small jpg ( if you "save for web" it rezes it down so it file size is tiny )

probably the hand held scanner device is the easiest / hassle free way to go

good luck !
john

 

[ic-racer]

I print these about 6"x6" on the 8x10 sheet.

 

[MattKing]

For those who don't own Photoshop, and use Windows computers, Microsoft has a neat little utility program called "Microsoft Research Image Composition Editor" (aka "Microsoft ICE") that, believe it or not, is available for free download!

It works quite well. I've used it for stitching together two scanned halves of an 11x14.

Here is the link:

http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/redmond/groups/ivm/ICE/