[Leica] Film Lab

Sun Jun 4 13:56:58 PDT 2017

Hi Lluis. Are you comparing a wet print from BW negative with an inkjet
print made from a scan of the negative?
If this is the case then the scanner is the weakest part
On Mon, 5 Jun 2017 at 5:39 am, Tina Manley <tmanley at gmail.com> wrote:

> I had a show at the Winthrop University gallery of 3' x 2' prints of Syrian
> children's faces.  Half were from film, half were digital.  I much, much
> preferred the prints from the digital files.  The grain of the film,
> enlarged that much, seems to affect the sharpness.  The digital prints
> could probably have been twice as large and still looked much sharper with
> more details in the shadows and highlights than the prints from film.
>
> I will never go back to film.
>
> But that's just me.
>
> Tina
>
> On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 3:23 PM, lluisripollphotography <
> lluisripollphotography at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Gerry, Jayanand and other friends
> >
> > What I can say is obvious, film and digital technologies are different,
> > they work in different ways and maybe it is a mistake compare them. What
> I
> > can say and afirm is that if you have a negative from film, you print it
> > and you also you enlarge it in the darkroom the results are much better
> > from the darkroom procedure, for example, one of the prints I’ve do on my
> > EPSON SC-P600 on Canson Platine Fiber Rag size A3 and the same enlarged
> on
> > Ilford Baryta Multigrade, same size, the resukts are much, much, much
> > better from the chemical process, the digital printing offers an
> > approximate view with less gradation, les definition and deepness on the
> > blacks and on the highlights, on this picture there is sand and very
> shiny
> > sea waves, in the inkjet print the sand appears as many small pints and
> the
> > highlights without information, on the wet copy you see a rich extended
> > zones of grey on the sand and information on the highlights. If you take
> > the focusing magnifier used n the darkroom and lou look at the  picture
> > information from digital, you see big drops of ink, if you look at the
> wet
> > copy you see fine points of grain. The printers still “don’t know print
> in
> > a fine gradation, they know only input points (drops if ink)”. If we ONLY
> > look at the picture on the monitor the differences are less evident, the
> > monitirs are retroíluminated and they give us a better suggestion of the
> > image, if you consider as I do, that the final picture is the picture,
> I’m
> > sorry to be so “brave” as Gerry says but the wet copy is the winner.
> >
> > A different think is if you have shot something on digital, in my opinion
> > on this case you are already to work with the digital values, they can
> > differ from film values. In my recent experience in the darkroom with a
> > friend who know very well the B&W negative values, he has demonstrate me
> > measuring the negatives zones with a densitomer that separation and
> > information between the different zones, particularly on the extreme
> zones
> > 0, 1 and 9 and 10 is more rich with film. I’ve do Digital Negatives, an
> > interesting technique to get chemical prints from digital files, not
> easy,
> > and at least in my experience the final quality is not as good as a copy
> > from a real negative, I think because the original amount of information
> is
> > not the same, when you make a Digtal Negative you print it, and I have
> > already said which are the inconvenients of a printer procedure compared
> > with a chemical one.
> >
> > Beside this there are many possible interpretations as well as compromise
> > and in many cases digital could be enough, but what I’ve realized is that
> > if I have a nice picture to print, I prefer have it from film and do it
> on
> > the darkroom than in inkjet printing.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Lluis
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > El 4 juny 2017, a les 9:30, Jayanand Govindaraj <jayanand at gmail.com>
> va
> > escriure:
> > >
> > > Dan,
> > > Oh, I am sure of that!
> > >
> > > I feel that digital output is still better than darkroom output,
> though,
> > > even for B&W. IMHO, there is simply no comparison, in the complete
> > > workflow, from capture to print. As I said, others may have different
> > > opinions and I respect that - I know Lluis does, and we have discussed
> > this
> > > many, many times privately, and in the end we just amicably agree to
> > > disagree, and go on with what suits us individually! However, I find
> the
> > > exchange of views very useful, leading to invaluable insights.
> > >
> > > Cameras are tools for me, and digital cameras, Fuji & Nikon, one for
> > street
> > > and one for wildlife, are my tools of choice at this point of time. The
> > > Fuji GFX50S is tempting, and exerting a siren's song,  but I cannot see
> > how
> > > I have any use for it that makes it superior to my existing gear, for
> my
> > > type of photography, and the sizes I print at present. A printer that
> > > accepts 24" wide paper, instead of 17" that my Epson 3885 uses might
> be a
> > > better choice right now!
> > >
> > > I have a fair amount of film camera equipment gathering dust on my
> > shelves
> > > and in the bank locker, more, I am sure, than most of the most
> committed
> > > film shooters around - Leica IIIF and IIIG, Nikon F Apollo. F2AS,
> > > F3Titanium, F4, F100, Canon and Nikon Rangefinders, Rollei TLRs, Mamiya
> > > 645E - except for the Leicas, all of them were originally bought by my
> > > family - uncles, aunts, father, myself - and finally found their way to
> > me.
> > > Most of these are with me because I did not have the wit (or the heart)
> > to
> > > sell them in time. This after selling most of my Leica film equipment
> in
> > > London a few years ago (M3, M2, R6.2 and 10 lenses)!
> > >
> > > Pens and watches, on the other hand, are hobbies, passions which make
> > them
> > > an emotional issue, while cameras are just a utilitarian one! I am
> > > particularly fond of JLR and IWC in watches, and Pelikan as well as the
> > > Japanese trio, Namiki/Pilot, Sailor and Platinum as far as pens are
> > > concerned, and primarily these are what I use.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Jayanand
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Dan Khong <dankhong at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Jayanand
> > >>
> > >> You might be more analog oriented than you think.
> > >>
> > >> I actually like collecting and using old fully mechanical watches and
> > apart
> > >> from the antique look, almost all that I have are accurate and they
> run
> > >> like clockwork. I also write with fountain pens in my work and cheap
> > ones
> > >> perform really well. So it looks that we have much in common.
> > >>
> > >> Dan K.
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Jayanand Govindaraj <
> > jayanand at gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I disagree, I think film is nowhere as good as digital, but to each
> his
> > >>> own.....:-) (Hey - I use mechanical watches and fountain pens!!!)
> > >>>
> > >>> Cheers
> > >>> Jayanand
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Sun, Jun 4, 2017 at 3:18 AM, lluisripollphotography <
> > >>> lluisripollphotography at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Gerry, Dan
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I’m agree of course, but film is not only nostalgia, it is better
> > >> quality
> > >>>> than pixels technologies…
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Cheers
> > >>>> Lluis
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> El 3 juny 2017, a les 23:23, Dan Khong <dankhong at gmail.com> va
> > >>> escriure:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Lluis
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Film and darkroom is far from dead. Ilford is revived as
> > >> Harman-Ilford.
> > >>>>> Kodak still makes films both for still photography and
> > >> cinematographic
> > >>>>> industry. Seems Star Wars and latest Bond movie were shot on film.
> > >> Once
> > >>>> in
> > >>>>> a while, I set up my darkroom (bedroom for the dry part and
> > >> connecting
> > >>>>> bathroom for the wet part) and enlarge a dozen prints. Nothing
> beats
> > >>> the
> > >>>>> smell of fixer for nostalgia.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Bests
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Dan K.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 6:34 PM, lluisripollphotography <
> > >>>>> lluisripollphotography at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Jayanand,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> The best B&W is from the darkroom, now I’ve been back I regret to
> > >> have
> > >>>>>> spent so much time and money on digital….
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Cheers
> > >>>>>> Lluis
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> El 16 maig 2017, a les 5:05, Jayanand Govindaraj <
> > >> jayanand at gmail.com
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>> va escriure:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> If it catches anybody's fancy!
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/175814937/filmlab-an-
> > >>>>>> app-for-viewing-and-digitizing-analog-f
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Cheers
> > >>>>>>> Jayanand
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>>>>> 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
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>>> 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
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > >>> 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
> > >>
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Tina Manley
> www.tinamanley.com
> tina-manley.artistwebsites.com
>
> http://www.alamy.com/stock-photography/3B49552F-90A0-4D0A-A11D-2175C937AA91/Tina+Manley.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information