Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/10/29

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

Subject: Re: Chrome for prints
From: Miguel Fabie III <mvf3@evoserve.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 09:08:17 -0800

At 08:52 AM 10/27/97 +0000, you wrote:
>Eric Welch wrote:
>>Why do you choose chrome film if the final goal is a print? The only
>>printer I know who does Ilfochrome in a way that doesn't lose shadow detail
>>and give blown out highlights (i.e. match the film's potential beauty) is
>>Portland Photographics, and last time I looked their 8x10 with a contrast
>>mask just under $100. Do you print your own?
>>
>>I know chromes are a lot more fun to edit (and easier to judge). But if the
>>final goal is prints, I'd be using slow neg film. What are your reasons?
>>Just curious.
>
>John Lowther answered:
>>........printer to match the color and density of the original, she does it.
>>God only knows how a printer will interpret a negative... and I am red-green
>>color blind which makes communicating about color print expectations a
>>much greater challenge, since when I get a print which is unsatisfactory,
>>I often can't really explain why...
>
>For me another reason is the direct possibility of creating a black&white
>negative or a color separation from a slide, so there is no need (or better:
>there is not always a need) for using two different films .
>
>Henk
>
>
>-- 
>  Henk    Thijs                 tel: +31-(0)43-3661249  
>  Eurocontrol Maastricht UAC    fax: +31-(0)43-3661300 
>  Horsterweg 11       email: henk.thijs@eurocontrol.be                       
>  NL-6191 RX  Beek(l)     T h e  N e t h e r l a n d s  
>
>
hello- was just wondering if a cibachrome would be more "archival" then any
prints from a color neg?  thanks... miguel fabie of the philippines
>