Film vs. Digital or..... DIGITAL V. DIGITAL PRINTING

My solution

 

www.kodakgallery.com let's see you spent +$1000 on a printer that goes to 13X19, the online places do up 20X30 (yes others go bigger) about $25 a piece thats 40 20X30's before you have even turned your printer on, if you don't use the printer every week it's toast (clogged heads), I can print a 4X6 for $0.19 (much cheaper than your printer), so I wait 3 days who cares (if I need it tomorrow upload to CVS or your favorite brick and motar shop), I forgot to mention they also do pretty good B&W not as good as my HP9750.

 

alternately printroom.com / snapfish.com / etc. If you need something better try lab at national geographic or a local custom house.

 

Gerry

"He NEVER has any useful information on Leica technique or equipment."

 

Give it a rest, Al, 'cause your useful information stops about 1969. You've never used an

M body with a meter in it, or - God forbid - TTL flash; never used any of the new

aspherical glass, etc., etc.. In fact, considering the amount of time you spend waxing

nostalgic for your old Nikon 50mm f1.4 and 85mm f2.0 in LTM mount, not to mention

your current fascination with the 15mm VC lens, you've got no right to play the 'purist'

card on anybody.

 

Not that I care about that, anyway. The forum tolerates "leica style" photography, which

seems to pitch a tent broad enough to admit any topic the moderator will allow.

"What's genuinely irritating is when you jump in and try to derail discussions about things

that I don't know already. "

 

Hear hear. Thanks for saying this, Mike.

There's another "touch of Leica" in a question about digital printing.

 

I like b/w photography, but I'm not inclined to do it with a digital camera. At this time I do not have a working darkroom except for film processing. I think that many b/w film photographers combine the two by using film and scanning the negs or having CD's made, and then print digitally from those.

 

I've been doing that for a few years and find it to be a good compromise. There are many nice tricks in PS and other processing software that gives good control over b/w tonality and such.

 

Doing that has kept me in Leica and MF film photography and learn digital printing skills as well. Using levels and turning off RGB and printing with black ink only are just a few simple ways to make a good looking b/w digital image.

 

I print the b/w images on Epson matte digital paper with results that I really like. They are different from silver wet prints, for sure, but I would not say one was better or worse than the other...just different.

 

A nicely framed, well made digital b/w print is very beautiful

The only common factor in the digi vs film wars of recent times is Brad. First it was Brad

baiting Dennis C (remember him) and now it is Brad vs Al. If Tony had done something about

Brad's behaviour earlier, these threads wouldn't get hijacked as often as they do.

<i>"The forum tolerates "leica style" photography, which seems to pitch a tent broad enough to admit any topic the moderator will allow."</i><p>

yeah, really... I really ought to do a better job of weeding out all those OT posts, like what kind of paint one should use on their Volkswagon, who is a good plumber and pipefitter in Little Rock, and why somebody's Ford won't start after being plugged in at -50F in Fairbanks. Would that narrow the scope of the forum enough for you, Kevin?

Tony, I'm not complaining. I like the broad scope of the forum and I think the effort to

ensure some sort of Leica "purity" would make this a duller place.

<I>The only common factor in the digi vs film wars of recent times is Brad.</I><P>

 

Too funny Stuart - are you in some sort of reality distortion field or something? I mean

right now. <P>

 

I only respond to posted information about digital (capture, processing, and archiving)

that's not factual. Usually from people who have never used the medium. I've never said

film sux, leica sux, digital is king, etc. <P>

 

I'm not part of any so-called digi-film war - I'm not promoting one technology over the

other. I havea lot of friends who shoot film.<P>

 

Trying to make this into something else is pretty disingenuous on your part, Stuart. Please

stop trying to stir up the pot. Take some responsibility and rechannel some of that dark

energy you exhibit from time to time into your photography.

Have you travelled this path before? Come up with a solution? What did you do?

 

Trail and error, Tony. Folk can give you a hundred different solutions, but at best they are just pointing you in the right direction.

 

Bottom line you've got to suss it out for yourself. Hey, you get more satisfaction when you get it right (sort of an inner glow like when you eat porridge), and learn more.<div></div>

Let's please keep these threads on topic from now on. I don't

want to hear anything about VC lenses or see any pics posted

from them. Leica equipment, and nothing else- should be used

exclusively for photography by anyone who posts here. No

Beselers or Omegas in the darkroom either. I'm sick of these

people who use phony and cheap substitutes for the genuine

article, and bring it to this forum.

<I>"I really ought to do a better job..."</I>

<P>

Tony you saw how this started, why didn't you just delete the second of Al's comments? You knew where it was going to end up, why did you allow it to drag out? Does Al truly get a free stick to poke at anyone he wants?

<P>

Put an end to this crap.

errr... Sorry again for interrupting and getting back on topic - I'll even throw in some Leica content: the "Selphy"ish solution (the 28 cent per print one, on a 85$ printer) will give great 4x6s in no time - ideal for proofing, give-away prints, etc. As pointed out above, with an optional battery attached you could even print on the go, directly from a digital camera without any computer in between...! So, that would mean zilch time spent on tweaking - on the other hand, if you use it to print scans from your LEICA negs or slides, the "standard" settings are quite satisfactory out of the box if your monitor was more or less calibrated. Since printing takes less than a minute, you can tweak the settings and find the one most corresponding to your monitor in no time and for less than, say, two dollars in "calibration cost". From there on it's just plain fun... even b&w comes out nicely, rich in tones and with or without color cast, according to your preferences/tweaking efforts. On Christmas I re-printed several sets of recent b&w family pics for all of the family members in no time. Consumabables are best bought in 108-print packs. The whole workflow is just completely effortless. Cheers.

Ha, I like the "consumabables"! :-)

For Leicas, it's "consumabaubles."

Here on the Leica Forum, so many of us are proud to call ourselves "consumabables."

 

Exceptions are rare.

 

Thanks, Lutz.

And you unwittingly answered what was going to be my follow-up question:

 

Can the Selphy print acceptably in b & w ?

Tony, I'm deleting your thread: it stirs up unwelcome controversy and brings out the worst in. . .

That sounds easy enough. There's an economics lesson by 'selphy'ing B&H.

If Selphy ink is on a ribbon, then it must not clog like the usual cartridges do for the infrequent user?

It's on a ribbon - 4 passes per print: yellow, magenta, cyan and protective coating. It's fun to watch it come together, layer by layer.

Rene:

 

Only use HP cartridges in your printer. I have had 4 HP Photosmart printers (still use 3 of them and gave one to a friend when I upgraded). They do beautiful work with no fuss. Let your prints dry for a day and then spray with a fixative. Then dry for another day although both times they are dry to the touch before framing.

 

Conni

What type of fixative do you recommend?

Rene:

 

I'm not at home so I can't get a name for you but there are several that work equally well. I usually use Krylon but I use others with equal success. Michael's carries a couple of good ones. There are some sold at photo stores now specifically for inkjet use. Once sprayed, HP prints don(t fade. I have some on my walls that are 5 years old. I reprintedﾁ@one of them with a lot of red in it since I'm suspicious of red fading and found no appreciable difference between the old and new prints.

 

I have found that I really enjoy digital printing.

 

Conni

Whew! This is a long thread, full of all sorts of dynamics. Anyway, regarding the Epson 2200: for a long time (years), I couldn't get a neutral black & white print, no matter what I did (never bought a RIP though). I eventually settled for toning my pics to offset some of the colour - a poor compromise. I never quite liked the look of Black-Only printing.

 

So, a few weeks ago, I bought a new computer. When installing the printer, I went to the Epson site to pick up the latest profiles and drivers. Bingo - the next B&W print I made (in colour mode) was perfectly neutral. Epson must have changed the profiles and now they work fine.

Why on earth would you be less afraid to post something completely non-Leica related on the Leica forum, then you would be to post it in the digital darkroom forum where it belongs? Leica forum equals Leica discussion, period. Also, some of you need to stop posting pictures that were not taken with a leica. Digitally captured images do not belong here unless you are using the DMR or the Digisucks. A few of you need to stop polluting this forum with pro digital and anti Leica rhetoric. Go troll somewhere else. This whole thread should be deleted.