gerardo
Posts: 3372
Joined: Sun May 21, 2000 6:22 pm

What's Better For Enlargments?

Sun Feb 25, 2001 7:18 pm

Two questions:

1) What's better if I want to make an enlargement - let's say to 36x26cm - of a picture: slide or negative?

2) I made for the first time slides. I used Kodak Elitechrome 100. With the loupe, the slides look awesome, above all the colors. I made a paper print of some of the slides - 10x15cm - in a shop and those prints do look somehow grainy, even more than pictures made with a 200 negative film. When I scan them, I see fine parallel lines all over the picture. Why is that? What's wrong?

Any advice?

Regards
Gerardo
dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
 
Jan Mogren
Posts: 2014
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2000 2:47 am

RE: What's Better For Enlargments?

Sun Feb 25, 2001 8:18 pm

Sounds like some weird digital print.
I would suggest you scan the slide and get an Epson printer. I have the Epson stylus Photo 870. It's just awesome! The 1270 can do A3 format.
/JM
AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition
 
gerardo
Posts: 3372
Joined: Sun May 21, 2000 6:22 pm

RE: What's Better For Enlargments?

Sun Feb 25, 2001 11:44 pm

Actually, I gave it to a professional photo store, not an 1hr service. The prints were of lower quality than previous copies I made from negatives in the same shop.

Regards
Gerardo
dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
 
Jan Mogren
Posts: 2014
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2000 2:47 am

RE: What's Better For Enlargments?

Mon Feb 26, 2001 12:13 am

Go back and complain.
/JM
AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition
 
Guest

RE: What's Better For Enlargments?

Mon Feb 26, 2001 12:32 am

Hello,

It seems to be your photoshop dealer made a fault
so he should fix it for free.

If he don't, you know what to do find a better place for better print results.

Maybe but just maybe the parallel lines you named will be solved if you take a higher sharpness.

And if you scan negatives / slides I allways use 300 or 400 DPI/PPI.

And somethimes cropping the image will work but not allways Smile.

I wish you good luck and let me know if it solved your problem.

And what scanner do you use (flatbed,Film,Negative)

Regards,

Jeffrey van Beek
The Netherlands


 
kellmark
Posts: 542
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2000 12:05 pm

RE: What's Better For Enlargments?

Mon Feb 26, 2001 12:33 am

It would depend on the process that they used. Ask them.
In the traditional chemical based process, they would have to make an internegative of the slide with negative film, then make the print from the negative. This loses definition and increases contrast significantly. Some labs will make a 6 x 6 negative of the 35 slide in order to get better detail. Of course this costs more.
Others use a scanning process.
I believe using a high quality slide scanner and then printing on a high quality printer such as the Epson would give you a good result. That is what I do and am very happy with it. But you need to make sure that the paper and ink is something that will last and not fade quickly.
 
gerardo
Posts: 3372
Joined: Sun May 21, 2000 6:22 pm

RE: What's Better For Enlargments?

Mon Feb 26, 2001 1:29 am

I think, for a real comparison, I would have to scan the slides with a film-scanner. What I did was, to scan the paper prints, which were made at the already mentioned photo shop, with a flatbed (UMAX 1220S), which normally isn't that bad.

The prints already have a bad quality. I think, I'll go back and ask what happened. Perhaps I could try another shop.

Thanks so far.

Regards
Gerardo
http://fly.to/zrh
dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests