ckp

<p>Thanks Charles, sorry so vague. I shoot a large variety of subjects including wedding, portrait and some product as well as personal art images. Obviously large print orders are better left to my commercial lab. But I would like the ability to print high quality enlargements, display prints, etc. And possibly canvases if I can swing the minimum expense to do it right. And sometimes not having to count on a lab seems likt it would be a beautiful thing.<br>

Of course with photography there's never-ending equipment needs and I have a limited budget (never heard that before). So I'm curious to hear how on-site printing has fit into people's mix and if it's made "dollars and sense" or just been a luxury. Do you do you're own printing for increased profit, control, quality or a mix? Bye the way, your work and the subjects of it are absolutely stunning. And I appreciate your response.</p>

<p>Casey</p>

<p>My apologies if this has been covered, couldn't find it. I'm wondering how many of you do your own printing (inkjet,etc). If so, how much of your printing and for what purpose? I've been apprehensive in the past due to the difficulty achieving at least work comparable to my lab. Specifically learning curve, achieving consistent results and bottom line cost/profitability. And I realize a lot of you doing P.O.P. printing do your own printing out of necessity. And with todays demand for instant gratification it seems something that all photographers should be able to offer and do well. Any thoughts and experiences are greatly appreciated as always.</p>

<p>Everyone is mentioning some great print films but if the end result is going to be a scan you are better of with transparency film (provided processing isn't more trouble than it's worth). It scans much better than print film because of reduced image density and there are some sharp and beautiful films.</p>

<p>I'm curious how everyone is presenting their discs to clients. I need to dress mine up since I'm often providing nothing but a disc to them. I know that printed stick-on labels on the actual disc can cause short and long term problems. So at the very least I need to package the disc in a more attractive manner. Any help is greatly appreciated.</p>

<p>OK, I thought that by going with an 850nm I would catch everything under that but I'm apparently cutting all IR under 850nm. I'm such a noob. So I'll get an R72 or suitable filter at 720nm. Thanks for the help. So with good light, what shutter speed are you guys getting with a given aperture (roughly of course)?</p>

<p>Thanks Vlad, I'll try another filter. Michael, I should have been more specific. I shot some images with a Cokin 003 deep red as a control. I stated that I thought my development should have been less based on those exposures. The factory exposed film edges looked fine but there was no discernable image on the areas where I used the IR filter. </p>

<p>I'm hoping someone can help me with exposing Efke IR820. I realize there are plenty of posts on this film but i can't find what I need. I exposed a roll yesterday on a partly cloudy day. Not all cloudy. The sun was breaking out pretty well. I would not have hesitated to shoot handheld with a normal film and red filter. I was metering for 3 asa with an average exposure of about 3 seconds @ F8. This includes the 4-5 stops I gave for the filter. The filter I am using is an IR 850 (imported from the 'bay. Don't scold me I'm poor). I bracketed out to 9 seconds on most images. Developed in ID-11 undiluted, 68 degrees for 8 minutes. Based on the images shot with a red filter 8 minutes lookes a little long for this dilution of ID-11. But I could work on times and developers if I could only GET AN IMAGE TO APPEAR ON MY FILM!<br>

So, did I err in using an 850nm filter with an 820nm film, something else incorrect with the filter? Looking at other people's images and data I should have at least some image formed on the film. And I'm not sure a red filter justifies using a film this slow for so little effect. Any help you can give me is greatly appreciated. Some people are making beautiful images with this film. It must be worth the learning curve. </p>

Thanks Mikael, I'll check them out.

Shoot a lot of everything now. A lot! Don't worry about specializing until you get a really good feel for all types of work and more specifically the business of that particular focus. Making a living as a photographer regardless of the type of photography almost always requires some sacrifice and compromise. But you can always have your "personal work" which remains your own. Hit up the students in the graphic design, fashion and marketing departments if your school has them. It's really good practice and excellent for your portfolio. And some of the assignments can be a lot more fun than in the real world.

It's mostly 35mm so the biggest I would ever print at is 11x14. A good 300 dpi should be fine. I would rather not have to work them much so a scan with a good cleanup (grain reduction, dust etc) would be optimal.

Alright, I think the time has come to thin out my customers negatives I have on file. It has finally become just

too difficult to get good printing for them. I'm trying to find the most trustworthy and potentially profitable

out-service. Who have you used? And before you say it, I would rather sit and poke myself with a fork than feed

hundreds of strips of five into a Coolscan. Any help is greatly appreciated.

God bless rich patrons.

Great simple concept. It would be fun to leave them around dramatically different locals. It would be interesting to see which demographics tried to be creative with the cameras.

Warm tone papers are especially good with toners like sepia and brown toners. You can get some really nice chocolate browns. Just depends on what you are looking for in tone.

I agree with everybody on a non hardening fixer for films but I like to use a hardener for paper. preferably an A B so I can hold out hardening till after toning on fb papers (staining). It really does make a more durable print even after drying and flattening. Although I have a passionate dislike for spotting hardened prints.

Few years out of date? Old or heat damaged film will take on a heavier base fog. But don't compensate. Don't shoot anything of importance with it though, you really don't know what condition it's in. The value is not great enough for the risk. Could do a snip test.

I think it does. In some instances the C-41 might have more latitude. Possibly in highlights but they wont be as crisp. I don't like working with scanned film (especially 35mm)because it really accentuates the grain, but some people like it and it beats horrible black and white lab prints. But overall I think Trevor could have improved the noise problem and probably even gotten some more tone in the sky without having to use red, yellow filters etc. Another thing I should have mentioned is that you can control contrast with C-41 with over developing and underprocessing if you have a lab with a dip and dunk but if they use roller transport processors the push-pull processing is done with changes in temperature generally which is not good.

C-41 process films were specifically created to increase profitability for minilabs and for the convenience of the casual photographer. They have serious limitations vs the real black and white films. What has always frustrated me about them is their heavy base fog. Looking at the daylight image you took, I'll bet you really nailed the exposure. But the required exposure in addition to the dense base makes for a really bulletproof neg. And even though current printers have pretty serious light sources (multiple lamps, etc.) They still have some trouble with thick negs and some degree of reciprocity difficulties. If you had shot the outside image on say TX, you could have given the shot even more overexposure and then underdeveloped it by an equal amount. This would have given you a negative with an average density and a much more printable tonal range. So do yourself a favor and try some true black and white films and developing your own. If you come back and tell me I'm wrong, I'll never pick on C-41 black and white again!

Digital world? You sound like a Kodak commercial. A fine art silver print has it's own distinct aesthetic separate from digital outputs. Personally I think much more beautiful than any digital product, but to each his own.And darkroom work is far from simple. A knowledgeable photographer uses different combinations of film,chemistry and papers to achieve a desired result. Different developers can be used in any combination of dilutions and times. It takes a long time to obtain any degree of mastery of the process but when you do you'll have a product that you're more proud of than anything you've done before. So tell these people to stuff their digital world up their digital backside sideways. Do use safety with the chemicals though. Gloves when possible or be sure to rinse your hands after contact and have good ventilation. Then you don't have to be concerned. Can't go wrong with any of the old favorites: Pentax K-1000, any Nikon F series, I like the electronic Canon EOS series such as A2's and Elans. Just beware of the infrared film advance on electronic cameras if you're thinking about shooting infrared. And you might want to post in the black and white sections in the future to deal with fewer "digital tools". Good luck, have fun!

This is a very important point. A great work comes from the photographer. And provided that they have enough technical skill and adequate equipment to get an image from their head to final resolution, the final image is the only thing of importance. Do you question the parents of an exceptional child what position they used during intercourse to produce said child. No, that would be tacky at best. Every month I receive about four magazines which are stuffed with equipment ads disguised as how-to's. They are a waste of good pulp. And they perpetuate the experience of some one looking at one of my images I'm proud of and giving me the, "you must have a really nice camera". So I don't think people are trying to deprive you of knowledge but trying to put the emphasis where it should be. That being said, I'm learning that patrons of this forum are very giving and will always answer specific questions about areas you are having trouble with.

First I would take a matted and framed print (with signature) to the owner of the restaurant, exchange it for the p.o.s. and then inquire about the guilty party. I would ream them to a degree that would hopefully prevent them snagging images in the future. It's the right thing to do.

Great first Eng. session! You're really working each pose and now you're evaluating what you did. Some poses look a little forced but that will get better every time you shoot. Amy hit on a good point, the light is killing you. Sadly you can't always schedule morning and evening shoots, but if you will use a faster shutter speed and have enough lighting you can kill shadows and lighten the subject relative to the background.

 

Shoot the wedding. You've been cautious and up front with them about your abilities. It's the perfect situation for you at this point. Get a good shotlist as a starting point. Go to the rehearsal and find out how the ceremony will be structured. This will make you and the client feel a lot more comfortable on the wedding day. Don't use any equipment you're not used to. Decide ahead of time how you can most efficiently manage the group images. Beware of the transition from the group shots at the wedding location to the wedding party being announced at the reception. And internships are sometimes overrated. Don't be afraid to find your own way. If you can find a unique way to work you've done the profession a great service.

I designed a multi-purpose envelope with my logo on it. It has places for contact info,print orders and billing info. I'll even use them to pack orders 8x10 or smaller. Not cheap but considering the flexibility and how nice they look it's worth it. I'll bet you can make a rough and have a printer near you do the design at n/c with a minimum print order.

Decent image Yann. I would offer that it's still too much about the artwork on the sign. The title is great and opens up the image a little but you need to find a way to make it yours. Looks like it's in a busy area. Possible to back out a little and look for a more interesting contrast within the crowd?

I noticed you do some wedding photography too. I've done some of my personal work on canvas through my wedding vendors. It makes a nice presentation. They look great hanging without a frame (depending on the image)and they are really durable. And you can go big for a decent price.