New to photography. Recommendations on editing (light table, loupe, scanner, printers)?

[nammyboy]

Hi,

 

I've been taking photos all my life, but I'm fairly new

to "photography," and this is my first post on Photo.net .

 

I think a good way to start is to edit my own film (negatives and

chromes) on a light table and not waste money ($15/roll) on prints.

Even though I have a Frontier Minilab nearby, I've been pretty

disappointed with the results (super upped contrast, obvious

sharpening, very grainy digital-looking results, even from 100

speed). So I figure after I get a good collection of

slides/negatives I can invest in a film scanner (FS4000US, Coolscan

V, Dimage 5400) and a printer (Epson 1280, 2200, Canon i960) and do

my own enhancing and printing. Would this be a good course of action?

 

Can anyone recommend a good light table? Good 1X loupe for general

work? Also, what's a good loupe for critical evaluation (what

magnification should it be--4X, 8X, 10X)? I live in the San Diego

and Los Angeles area in case anyone has store recommendations.

 

Also, once I want to print, will I be able to possibly attain

prefessional quality prints from a scanner, Photoshop, printer

route? At least better than the Frontier Minilab?

 

Thanks in advance. I'm constantly impressed with how helpful people

are on this forum :)

 

~Nam

[nammyboy]

BTW, where in the San Diego area can I go to develop slide film for fast results? What is the most cost-efficient way (I suspect "mailers" but I have no idea what that means)?

 

~Nam

[danny_liao]

-Cabin makes good light tables that are 5000K in color temp. You could buy less

expensive light tables for half the cost but not 5000K in color temp.

-Schneider makes good loupes. But you could get good loupes for a lot cheaper in

prices...such as a Horizon.

-For starters, Epson makes really good table top scanners. You might want to start

with that first before you move on to a film scanner. A good Epson scanner will run

you about 400 bucks. A film scanner will run you in the thousands.

-Epson 2200 is a great printer.

-Pantone Spyder is neccessary to calibrate you monitor to achieve good prints.

-Buy a load of Epson paper to do test prints. Luster is closest to photo paper quality.

-Buy Epson supplies at www.Atlex.com. One of the cheapest around.

 

Try searching ebay for used light tables, printers, and loupes. I would buy the

scanner and Pantone Spyder new.

 

If you would like to buy everything new, try www.bhphoto.com. You'll save on tax but

would have to pay for shipping. Sometimes shipping is cheaper than tax.

[matt katz]

Chromacolor on India does nice slide processing; I think it's like $7 a roll mounted. Not the cheapest but they have a 2 hour turnaround which is nice if you're in a rush.

[nammyboy]

I don't mind spending extra for quality. If it costs too much, then I will just have to budget and save up for it. But I don't need anything too fancy. As for light tables and loupes, how are these?

 

Just Normlicht Smart Light 5000 - $180 at B&H

Schneider 4X Wide Angle Loupe - $110 at B&H

Are these good prices?

 

I would also like something like a 10X for critical evaluation, but the Schneider is so expensive ($300)! Is there anything cheaper out there without sacrificing quality?

 

Also, why buy a flatbed Epson for $400 when you can get a FS4000US for $100 more?

 

Thanks for all your help!

 

~Nam

[vincetylor]

I find the 4x loupe much more helpful than the 10x. I will occasionally use the 10x or even 15x when comparing two similar images for sharpness. However for general editing the 10x is just too close. The 4x gives you a better over-all look at composition, color etc.

 

The Minolta 5400 is a very good scanner. After editing, scanning and then Photoshop, take your digital file back to the Fuji Frontier for printing. Simply the best!

[goemon]

My cheap 4x loupe drove me bats until I replaced it with a good Mamiya (which cost a

pretty penny, but they tend to); spacial and chromatic distortion in the edges. My 10x is

not really particularly good and displays chromatic distortion near the edges of its field,

but since I use it for concentrating on one specific area I don't feel this is a big deal. I

have a Porta-Trace, and it works fine.

 

I have good eyes for detail if it's close enough, so I usually don't bother to use a loupe,

and when I do I only use my 4x. The 4x is good for getting a feel for the whole of the

frame, whereas the 10x is better if you want to examine one specific area in detail.

 

As for pro quality results, there are a number of pros who print off Epson 2200s (or far

more commonly, its bigger brothers the 7600 and 9600). They tend to use specialized

scanners, but you can get pretty good results off an Epson flatbed. The problem with the

Frontier sounds like your lab is being stupid; the Frontier itself is pretty good.

[marshall]

Generally speaking, a dedicated film scanner will beat a flatbed scanner used to scan film. There are several good models under $1000. When you spend thousands, you're looking at high-end models and drum scanners, but you can get "pro" results for less.

 

If you're going to do your own digital editing, whether for printing at home or a lab, you'll need a decent monitor and you'll need to calibrate it. The newly-updated Monaco stuff is supposed to be excellent. I use and feel good recommending the EyeOne. The Colorvision stuff has produced some inconsistent results, but I believe it's also been recently upgraded.

 

I wouldn't write off the Frontier, or other mini-lab solutions, just yet. We used to know that looking for a "good printer" meant finding a *person* who prints well. It still means that, even with digital hardware.

 

Good luck.

[Matthew Currie]

I think Danny Liao is a little pessimistic on a couple of things. I have no doubt that for best results you would need to calibrate all your equipment but you can get acceptable prints without calibrating your monitor, if you're willing to experiment with printer and monitor settings. It's taken a fair amount of wasted paper and ink for a few months, but these days I don't find it all that hard to get prints of slides whose colors are substantially the same as what I see on a light table, even with a rather poor quality LCD monitor and a "garden variety" HP printer. Of course I'd do better, or at least get there faster, with better equipment and calibration, but I wouldn't put off starting the enterprise and the learning process for lack of it.

 

And these days, in the US at least, a good slide scanner is no longer thousands of dollars. You can get a Nikon Coolscan IV or V, for example, for well under a grand, and get very good scans.

[moccia]

Why don't you try another lab? In a big metropolitan area like LA it should be easy to find a good one. Also accounting the extra-time spent to drive to a distant lab it should be far less than scanning, PS retouching, color calibrating and printing at home. And way less expensive. Unless YOU LIKE digital darkroom processes. Than this observation doesn't hold. But I agree with you, slide film give more control on the process and you'll see...slides shining on the light table, projected on a wall...they are a real pleasure for the eye. The Shneider 4x is a good one, I'm happy with it. But if I should buy a loupe again I'll take the Pentax 5.5x. Cheaper and the extra magnification is useful.

[Robert_Lai]

I highly recommend the Schneider 10X loupe. Look at B&H or Adorama. I bought mine for about $175 from B&H in early winter of last year. The prices have really come down. They give you a web price - you have to go to the item, then a box comes up asking for your email address. They will email you with the true price, not the "list" price.

[bruce_kapla]

As far as light boards, I made my own. I followed John Shaw's advice and went to an electrical supply and got two daylight-balanced 5000K bulbs and used a piece of frosted lucite glass for the screen. Still works great after about 10 years. Made a wood box and mounted the light fixtures 3 inches below the glass. Just plug it in and good to go.

[nammyboy]

Seems everyone likes the Schnieder or the Mamiya. I will go to a store sometime and check out their loupes.

 

Also, for the light table, I'm a little hesitant to build my own--I'd rather just buy one. I've seen some used Just Normlicht light tables for under $100. I'm curious if anyone has experience with their 5000 series.

 

Would I also be able to edit negatives using the light table and loupes as well? Aside from the obvious inverted/shifted colors.

 

I actually like the digital darkroom process. I want to have as much control as I can as I learn photography. I have several years of experience using Photoshop and I love it. My monitor is a Dell Ultrasharp 1900FP (rebadged Samsung), but do realize that higher end CRTs have better color than flat panels. My video card supports two monitors, so should I also get a nice CRT that I can color correct? Or is the 1900FP good enough?

 

Anyway, I'd like to take this one step at a time. First, a loupe and light table and a lot of film :) . Then I'll consider scanners/printers/monitors/papers/calibration etc. I just wanted to know if I do invest in these things down the line, if I would see better results than my local Minilab (who can only print up to 10x14").

 

Thanks for all the helpful responses!

 

~Nam

[goemon]

I can just barely edit B&W negatives for composition on a light table; tonality remains beyond my grasp. Those are easy compared to the orange mask on color negatives; it's been very difficult for me to evaluate colors in any meaningful way by staring at negatives. I have my lab make 8x10 contact sheets, which works way better for evaluating and is filed alongside the negatives easily. I pay a good amount of money for such things, unfortunately.