markus_albertz Posted September 11, 2003 Share Posted September 11, 2003 Good evening, I know there is an abundance of answers and comments on digitally and optically enlarged negatives. However, I thought before I try out both approaches myself, perhaps someone who switched from the traditional method (optically enlarged negative with an interpositive) to the modern approach (digitally enlarged and ink- jet printed negative) has compared the two results. Despite the greater flexibility of the digitally enlarged negative regarding size, adjustment for a range of papers, and removal of dust speckles, how does the final print actually compare to one made by the interpositive method? Is there a big difference? Do people accept a loss in print quality for the gain in flexibility? Is there any difference at all? Thanks in advance, Markus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe_lipka3 Posted September 12, 2003 Share Posted September 12, 2003 If done correctly there is no difference to the naked eye between an original silver print and a silver print made from a digital negative. For silver printing the negative should be created by an image setter to achieve the optimal result. The LensWork special edition prints are made this way. I like to think of the difference betweeen interpositive and digital methods of making enlarged negatives is the difference between hand tools and power tools. In the hands of a skilled worker hand tools can build something beautiful. Power tools can do it quicker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nze_christian Posted September 12, 2003 Share Posted September 12, 2003 Hello Markus, I will talk of the 2 way to get digital negative. The image setter wil give you great and tough negative . if you have acces to an image setter of 300lpi, they give terrific result. But Inkjet give also terrific result. Now I just can't see the difference between an optically and digital inkjet negative. But I find them a little bit harder to do, compare to digital neg for image setter. You need to take care on sharpening on the sky to avoid graining, work the max. in 16 bit. But well made, you will not see any differences. The inkjet negative are more fragile and you should avoid to touch the inked part. if you need advice just contact me. here is an example of what can be obtained of a 35 mm enlarge 6 times<body> <center><img SRC="http://perso.club-internet.fr/cnze/images/buda1.jpg" height=600 width=351></center> </body>platinum print Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christian_harkness Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 "Do people accept a loss in print quality for the gain in flexibility? Is there any difference at all?"<P> I think as you can see from the above statements, there is no loss in print quality. I just wanted to emphasize that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now