Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/07/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Scott McLoughlin wrote: > What typical enlargements do folks *typically* make from their 135 > format negatives exposed with their Leica gear. > > I hear alot about Walmart and Costco processing, but I imagine that > many folks make much larger prints as well. Some comments make > me think that for some folks the image lives on a slide on a light table. > > I guess I'm also curious about lab wet printing vs. home/darkroom > self wet printing vs. scan + digital printing. > > Does the type of pic influence the enlargement size? Landscape vs. > potraiture vs. street shooting and so on? What about hand held vs. > tripod mounted camera shots? Film choice? > > Thanks in advance for any shared experiences. > > I'm trying to "dial in" my own expectations, particularly self-scanned/ > digi-printed B&W prints vs. lab/wet printed prints (I don't have my own > darkroom). > > Scott > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > Scott, I get mine processed by a local camera dev+print shop so I guess that it is like Costco etc. I get them to dev as standard C-41 then scan the negs as .Tiffs and this gives me all the info that I need. Apart from issues of scan density, this gives me pretty much all that I would get from a digital (RAW) image at that scan density. The output you can see on my PAW pages etc; http://gallery.leica-users.org/album164 it does vary, but seems to be getting better even on 400ASA. Peter Dzwig