rolland_elliott Posted December 12, 1998 Share Posted December 12, 1998 Does anyone regularly duplicate his/her 35mm slides up to a larger format like 6x7 or 6x9 Medium format slides for submittal to image editors? IF so does the larger format slides give you a better success rate in getting your images accepted? <p> Doing this I think has two advantages. 1) You are submitting large slides that editors can view easily and 2)They are also duplicates so you aren't risking sending your originals. <p> Do you think this is a good tactic for getting your images notices more by editors? You'd of course let the editor know that the MF slides are actually dupes of 35mm slides. <p> I'd appreciate input. Thanks Rolland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_windom Posted December 13, 1998 Share Posted December 13, 1998 More and more editors are asking for dupes in the initial submission, primarily to reduce their liability in the event that something should happen to the transparencies while in their possession. If they see an image that interests them, the larger format size may or may not be more suitable depending on the intended use. However, many of those same editors that want dupes initially will ask for the original when it comes time to reproduce it. And if 35mm isn't suitable then you've lost a sale. <p> I shoot large and medium formats primarily. With the technology as it is today I think the differences between the various formats is shrinking in the eyes of many editors; at least that's what my stock agency tells me. If you shoot wildlife then 35mm is what editors expect to see. If you are shooting landscapes and submitting to Sierra Club then you may be better off investing in MF or LF equipment rather than duping 35mm to a larger size. If you have a very unique image that an editor hasn't seen before I would doubt that image size would matter much. <p> There is no clearcut answer to your question. It really depends on the editor, the image itself, and the intended use for the image. <p> Ultimately the best way to get your images noticed more by editors is to shoot high quality images that meet their needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s_p Posted December 13, 1998 Share Posted December 13, 1998 I would vote not to do so.<p>If you dupe up from 35mm to 6x7, they will be bigger and easier to see to the naked eye than 35mm, but, compared to 6x7 dupes from 6x7 originals, they will look weak. You may send along cover letters, notes on the matte, etc., but those will all seem like after the fact excuses and there is no guarantee that anyone will read your explanantion.<p>I would second the previous poster's advice that the best way to get the attention of the editor is to research his/her publication/needs and provide that if you can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s_p Posted January 7, 1999 Share Posted January 7, 1999 Rolland;<p> New info on your old question. I'm afraid I was only about 1/2 right on my previous posting. Recently I had a chance to talk to a photographer who has been making his living shooting stock and assignment photography for magazines for 20 years. He said he almost always uses 35mm; he uses 90% slide film and the rest is BW. He said his preference is to send original 35mm chromes; if he can't or does not trust the magazine not to lose the original, he sends a 70mm duplicate. Since he often sends the same film out multiple times to different clients, he makes multiple "originals" in the camera at the time that he takes the originals if possible. They are supposedly better than any copy and I figured out if I buy my film in bulk at have it processed at the local lab it runs less than 0.40 cents per frame --- cheaper than any duplicates.<p> This guy was careful to say that I should not confuse "display" dupes with high quality dupes. Display dupes cost about a buck each and are just to show someone to give them an idea of what you have. The high quality dupes cost $25.00 or more and can be used by the printer to produce the printed piece. The photographer told me that he uses the high quality dupes you mentioned when he has a one of a kind piece of film. He said that he has a few clients that he deals with on a regular basis that he trusts not to lose his pictures and he usually send them the originals. In 20 years and hundreds of submissions a year he said he had only had his film lost or damaged a handful of times.<p> 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