Re: [Leica] Fuji Frontier 4R prints lose detail that is in the negatives?

[tripspud <tripspud@transbay.net>]

Hi Sonny,

      Ok.  I've never made a digital print and I guess the Fuji Frontier
is some kind of digital printer in a drugstore or photoshop?  Are these
high quality?

Cheers,

Rich Lahrson
Berkeley, California
tripspud@transbay.net

"(SonC) Sonny Carter" wrote:

> Rich Lahrson sez:        I guess an image like this would become total mush
> when scanned,
> > and attempting to read the writing.
> >
> Gee Rich,
>
> Not trying to be contentious, but I don't know how you could "guess" the
> results of an experiment like that.  Actually scanning it, or taking it to a
> Fuji Frontier printer  might give an inexpensive answer to the question.
>
> SonC
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "tripspud" <tripspud@transbay.net>
> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
> Sent: Friday, July 04, 2003 9:32 AM
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Fuji Frontier 4R prints lose detail that is in the
> negatives?
>
> > Hi Martin,
> >
> >        I'll comment here, since all my prints in the darkroom so far have
> > been 4x6 prints from 35mm black and white negatives in the wet
> > darkroom.
> >
> >        One image is of an historic building and in front is a plaque
> explaining
> > about the building.  The writing on the plaque is unreadable in the 4x
> > enlargement without a magnifying glass. With a 4x or 7x lupe, it's
> > possible to just barely read the plaque, so the limits of practical
> > resolution has been reached (Agfapan 100, 35mm lens handheld
> > in bright light, careful focus on the sign at f/8.
> >
> >        I guess an image like this would become total mush when scanned,
> > and attempting to read the writing.
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Rich Lahrson
> > Berkeley, California
> > tripspud@transbay.net
> >
> > Martin Krieger wrote:
> >
> > > I would expect that a 4x print in a reasonable enlarger would retain all
> the
> > > detail visible in the negative with a 10x magnifier and make that detail
> > > easier to see. Yet when I examine 4x prints made in a Fuji Frontier
> digital
> > > system, I seem to be losing detail. I gather that the Frontier digitizes
> the
> > > negative and then prints with a laser onto ordinary photographic paper.
> I
> > > imagine that the scan is insufficiently fine to pick up all the detail
> in
> > > the negative, just enough so that when the print is examined with the
> bare
> > > eye it appears as sharp as one might hope. (Perhaps also, electronic
> > > manipulation, say sharpening, loses some detail?) Hence the 4R print,
> > > examined with a loupe, is inadequate.
> > >
> > > If I understand all of this correctly, optical enlargement with a decent
> > > enlarger, is "inefficient." Lots more detail is retained in the print
> than
> > > can be seen with the naked eye. Digital scanning and enlargement can be
> more
> > > "efficient," putting down just enough detail so that the image feels
> sharp
> > > and complete with the naked eye. This is not necessary, in that a
> digital
> > > system could have all the detail available in the negative, and print it
> out
> > > (at say a real 1000dpi).
> > >
> > > Am I right in my understanding?
> > >
> > > MK
> > >
> > > --
> > > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html