phil_garey1

<p>If it were me, I would contact a frame shop in Ireland and send them the print in a tube. Use media Mail and it would be cheap to send. The framing done in Ireland then posted to your friend would almost certainly be cheaper than sending a 16x20 framed print from the USA. If you find a frame shop near him, he could even pick it up from them and save the post charges. Just my thoughts</p>

<p>15- 20 seconds with an F-stop of 8-11 using a 50 or 80 mm enlarger lens. Sorry forgot that info in my previous post. Additionally this film replaced 4112, which for my money I was glad to see the back of. 4112 had a tendency to cross-over easily. 4114 was a lot more forgiving.</p>

<p>From my recollection as Dept head of the film dept at Custom Color Services in Glendale, ( no longer there) 4114 film has an ISO of about 15. ISO ratings were never an issue for us as each emulsion had to be balanced and calibrated to get an accurate internegative from slide and transparency film. The exposure time would fluctuate depending on the filtration needed to acheive top quality results. We also used this film for copy negatives. It was a perfect film for copy negs from photographic prints for other art work like paintings and drawings, we used Vericolor Type L. Exposure times for internegatives was around 15 -20 seconds using a standard Chromega color enlarger with a halogen light source.</p>

<p>Make sure your scanner is set to Grayscale when scanning. Scanning BW film on the RGB settings can do this. Changing them in your editing program is easy but can be time consuming if you have a lot. Let the scanner make them grayscale so you dont have to do extra work.</p>

<p>Phil<br>

<p>I run the drum scanner at Richard Photo Lab in Hollywood and do this type of scanning all the time. If I was to Archive my work, I would scan my film at the highest possible without interpolation. For my scanner a 35mm can be scanned at approx 245 Mb without interpolation. (100% @ 8000 dpi) Save as tiff with no LZW compression. Also for really important images. I would also scan at 16 bits per channel. Might be overkill for you but you need to determine what the end product would be and scan for that. Its no good scanning at 20 Mb then deciding you want a 30x40. Just my thoughts<br>

phil@richardphotolab.com</p>

<p>At our lab we were strictly Machine mounting unless it was in glass. All the slides mounted in glass were hand done due to the dust factor. They had to be spotless. The Pakon mounters were the best for the heat sealed mounts. We also had a Byers 3500 Plastic mounter that flattened 8 pins to hold the mount together, kind of like a rivet. The advantage with the plastic mounts was that were easy to take apart to make negatives, duplicates, or in the digital age- scans. The byers mounter would even handle the self stick cardboard mounts if you were careful. But for the large quantity of slides we used to process, the Pakon heat mounter was the way to go. We no longer have the demand for a mounter like this so we sold it not long ago. Most people these days request "Process and Sleeve" so they can either mount them themselves or send them straight to scanning.<br>

Phil Garey<br>

www.richardphotolab.com</p>

<p>We have a Sapphire film recorder here at Richard Photo lab We are in Hollywood. We take digital images to Slides, Black and white and Colour negative 35mm film. We have FTP to get your files to us and you would just have to be concerned over shipping back to you. We can use Fed-ex if you like; Give our customer service a call and they can tell you turnaround times.<br>

www.richardphotolab.com</p>

<p>Give our customer service a call. We can do inkjet, Lightjet, Metallic, supergloss, regular gloss and matte, trans if you want a lightbox. I will print it exactly how you want. We have FTP to upload you image also. Just give image size and trim size. I will even add the border for you.<br>

Richard Photo Lab Hollywood, Calif. 323-939-8893. www.richardphotolab.com.</p>

<p>I will be more than happy to print this for you at Richard Photo Lab in Hollywood, Calif. I do the lightJet printing there. I dont know what your location is to us, but our customer service would be more than happy to assist you. 323-939-8893<br>

Phil Garey<br>

Lightjet/Giclee tech<br>

Richardphotolab.com</p>

<p>Thanks for the recommendation Mr. Luttmann. I am an employee of Richard Photo Lab. I do the Lightjet prints as well as Drum scans and inkjet Fine art printing. Our other services include C-41, Black and White processing as well as Proofing services and Custom hand enlargements. ( both colour and Black and white fibre prints) Full Film and digital Services.We have FTP for those of you who cannot get to us. Come and see our new Facility, 979 N. LaBrea, Hollywood. Having worked in the industry for 30 years, I find this group of technicians to be some of the finest I have come across. We pride ourselves on Quality and Customer Service. Mr Soddard, We hope you will give us a try. Thank You</p>

<p>We, here at Richard Photo Lab in Hollywood, will print your Super Gloss up to 50" wide on our Lightjet 430. We use exclusivly Fuji Crystal Archive and do the Fujitrans as well as Matte, Glossy, Flex/ Supergloss, and the new Metallic pearl. We have an FTP to get your files to us if you cannot drive here and you can go to richardphotolab.com to get in contact with customer service. Hope we can do business for you. phone is 323-939-8893</p>

<p>I run a LightJet 430 and the RIP the sofware it uses is very good. Some say better than Photoshop's interpolation. If you can scan it at size and at least 150, have it printed on a LightJet and you will most likely be happy with the results. I just printed a scan from a 35mm Kodachrome, up to 40x60 and my client was very happy. I think when you deal with 35mm, most people expect it to be a bit grainy when enlarged a lot and they are more willing to accept it. I agree with previous posts that once you get to a certain point, scanning a 35 larger is a waste of time. You will not see any more detail and a larger neg as a starting point is better. I really have seen some amazing enlargements from 35mm and the lightjet. I print my 35s to 24x36 all the time. While a scan at size and 300ppi is best, as long as your scan is between 150 and 300 then you should not have a problem as long as what you see on your screen is acceptable to you. Just my thoughts.</p>

<p>Lightjet prints are available at competitive prices from Richard Photo Lab on Melrose Ave in Los Angeles. I am their LightJet technician and have been printing Lightjets since the machines first came out, (lightjet 5000). I have also used the Lambda but find the lightjet 430 to be far superior. They are superior for a couple of reasons. Yes, we use Fuji Crystal Archive paper including the new "Pearl Metallic". We are setting up a Direct to Print service even as I write this. Phil@richardphotolab for more info.</p>