Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/08/21

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] M8 v M9--better printers needed
From: robertmeier at usjet.net (Robert Meier)
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 08:58:13 -0500 (CDT)
References: <9fd6dd7e4a3542ea7207465e6e62988c@cshore.com> <646061.57419.qm@web86710.mail.ird.yahoo.com>

That's what White House Color, and many others, do.  They laser print  
the digital file on to color negative paper and develop it in RA-4  
chemicals, so you get a Type C print from a digital file.   I'm not  
sure if anyone prints digitally onto fiber base B&W paper.


On Aug 21, 2009, at 8:53 AM, FRANK DERNIE wrote:

> You used to be able to send files to be "laserprinted" onto  
> photographic paper. I don't know if this is still done or the  
> quality but those I saw a few years ago impressed me.
> Frank
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Douglas Nygren <dnygr at cshore.com>
> To: lug at leica-users.org
> Sent: Friday, 21 August, 2009 2:18:20 PM
> Subject: [Leica] M8 v M9--better printers needed
>
> I'm pretty happy with my M8. It supplements my film camera nicely.  
> The crop doesn't bother me. Of course, without the crop it would be  
> even better, but 5.$$$$$$$$$$ better?
>
> Perhaps the images of the M9 will be sharper, clearer.Great. But  
> I'm the type who likes not only the sharpness and contrast of the  
> new lenses, but the look of the 50-year-old ones as well. The  
> different aesthetics of different periods are like diverse tastes.  
> If the M0 gives us another taste, great. We'll have one more to  
> chose from. Nothing wrong with that. But it doesn't mean I have to  
> have one--at least right away.
>
> For now, an M6 for film and an M8/8.2 for digital meet my needs.
>
> Where I would like to see some more progress is in the printing  
> technology.
>
> My feeling about digital printing is that it makes fine posters.  
> The darkroom stuff still looks better. They have the glow that  
> paintings have. The magic is embedded in the paper. Ink on paper  
> doesn't get the same effect. That's probably why the painters use  
> paint and not ink by and large.
>
> That said I confess I work both in the darkroom and with Photoshop.  
> I love the control Photoshop provides. If I only had that in the  
> darkroom. But I also love the look of silver prints. If only my  
> printer could do that as well. That's why I hope for big progress  
> in printing. I might also add that negatives always hold more info  
> than you can get on the print. The paper remains a problem common  
> to both.
>
> Doug
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



Replies: Reply from topoxforddoc at btinternet.com (Charlie Chan) ([Leica] M8 v M9--better printers needed)
Reply from lug at steveunsworth.co.uk (Steve Unsworth) ([Leica] M8 v M9--better printers needed)
In reply to: Message from dnygr at cshore.com (Douglas Nygren) ([Leica] M8 v M9--better printers needed)
Message from frank.dernie at btinternet.com (FRANK DERNIE) ([Leica] M8 v M9--better printers needed)