enlarge from photograph not negative

Discussion in 'Large Format' started by holly_landry, Sep 8, 2003.

  1. I have a photograph (the negative has been lost) that I want to
    enlarge to 4x6, it had been done before at an in-house lab and was
    good quality using an interneg process- not very grainy and the
    colors were magnificant. It was destroyed in an unfortunate moving
    accident and I need to replace it. I brought it to Robyn color and
    the test strip using a digital enlargement was horrible and they
    told me the interneg would be worse.
    So I am willing to spend however much money it costs to have a good
    one made but Robyn came as the highest recommended place in the Bay
    Area. But I don't know much about any of this and don't know if what
    they say is true, can someone recommend a process and place anywhere
    in the US that I can use, preferably in the Bay area- but am willing
    to go elsewhere for higher quality.

    Thanks !!
     
  2. Although your post is probably in the wrong forum, Holly, it sounds like you need to take your original print, which I assume is something like wallet-sized, to a shop that specializes in photo restoration. That way, they will be prepared to not only do the scanning or inter-neg, but also the retouching that may be needed to produce a reasonable print. The 4x6 print you are looking for isn't terribly large, so it should be feasible unless the original is very small. Your best bet is probably to check the ads in your local phone book, looking for the restoration angle.
     
  3. Holly,
    Check out Marin Photoworks in San Rafael 415-256-8200 or Ag Photo in Oakland
    510-652-6433.

    good luck

    mark
     
  4. Hi, I've had pics done several years ago at Montclair Photo in Oakland and they turned out well. Don't think it was digital, though.
     
  5. Holly,
    <p>
    I would think that ANY professional lab should be able to scan the photograph into a
    program like Photoshop. From there, they should be able to correct any defects in the
    image and provide you with a CD, which you can then produce additional 4x6 prints.
    <p>
    Hope this helps.
    <p>
    Cheers
    <p>
    Henry
     
  6. Holly

    Just for reference this forum deals with Large Format photography, i.e. using view cameras and (usually) 5"x4" sheet film or larger. I'm not sure that you have posted in the right place.

    No matter though - it's good to see that you have some useful tips.

    I'll delete the thread in a couple of weeks to give you a chance to see the reples - that way it will keep the LF forum archives nice and tidy.
     
  7. I guess while I am asking, I might as well go ahead and ask why the interneg process would be worse than digital. It seems the best process is using a negative, so in the case where a negative is created (internegative) from the picture, why wouldn't that be better than just a straight digital blow-up? It doesn't make sense to me ???

    ALso, I thought I had already posted this (earlier as an addtion) but I meant 4x6 FEET, not inches. Sorry for the confusion, I assumed because it was large format forum that it would be implied.
     
  8. The "Large Format" part of the forum title refers to the size of the film negative, not the size of the resultant print (although the size of the negative does allow very large print sizes with good quality); hence, there was no way anyone could have assumed that you meant feet rather than inches (or metres rather than millimetres, or furlongs rather than chains, or...).

    The reason a digital scan will give better results is that the file can then be extensively manipulated to get the best final result in the print. I am guessing that your original interneg was produced at a time when digital printing was not at the standard it is now. Many of the professional photographers here scan their LF negatives and then print digitally at similar sizes to that you require. These people rely on the quality of their prints for their livelihood. Take their advice - they know whereof they speak... Obviously, scanning a print will not give the same quality as scanning an original 4x5 inch negative, but digital is the way to go.
     
  9. This may bring us back to large format. In a similar vein, has anyone scanned the
    newest Fuji instant films (pack or 4x5). The Fuji ads seem to imply that these latest
    generation instant films would be up to reproduction standards-being used as the
    original for scanning and then on to magazines, brochures and so on. THA
     
  10. Holly,
    The scanning of a print is superior to making an internegative for two reasons.

    1. The detail resolved by a scanner far exceeds that of a large format camera.
    2. The scanner is designed to accurately reproduce the colors and tonalities of the
    print whereas film is optimized to represent the colors and tonalities of an average
    scene in a pleasing, if not entirely accurate, way. Even a highly qualified lab tech
    cannot match the quality of a scanner in capable hands. As a previous poster noted,
    once the image is digitally captured, the image can be further adjusted and retouched
    as necessary to yield the highest posible quality.

    As to making a quality 4foot by 6foot print from your print original, only a few labs
    are still doing that job optically and only because the equipment is paid for. I would
    just take a tour through the East Bay city yellow pages and I would think you could
    find at least 10-20 labs that could do an excellent job.

    good luck,
    mark

    p.s. Full Disclosure- I do run a lab that makes large format digital prints. I am not in
    your area and I
    am not looking for your work. Despite your disappointment with Robyn I know there a
    ton of other labs that could make you happy.
     

Share This Page