Want to start developing at home

Xmas · 06-07-2015, 12:29 AM

Originally posted by MD Optofonik

I respectfully but strongly disagree. If one is producing fine art, for real, the only appropriate scanner would be a Hassy. No need for a Hassy if making inkjet prints for friends and family or even craft fairs and local businesses as far as I'm concerned. However, If one is going to take the time to process film at home and allow oneself the ability to evaluate the results with an eye to improving and developing one's skills then a certain level of detailed resolution is needed. Flatbeds aren't up to task when it comes to 35mm. Anyone who has exhaustively researched 35mm film processing with an eye to scanning the results discovers this.

---------- Post added 06-01-15 at 11:02 AM ----------

To set up a B&W darkroom for printing, buying used equipment, would cost about the same as an XA; $400-500US. Used gear is the way to go to save money or maximize value.

When I was in middle school a friend of the family owned a commercial lab and was discontinuing B&W processing. I saved all summer and was able to get his entire B&W darkroom setup for $500 (a little over $2000.00 in todays money); 23C Beseler enlarger, 3 lenses, Gralab timer with footswitch, safe-light, tongs, bottles, trays, and all the extras including bags of unopened chemistry. To my mother's consternation I set it all up in the laundry room. It was my response to the adults around me asking, "What do you think you want to be when you grow up?" then telling me, "You know, musicians don't make a very good living."

There is little that matches the satisfaction of processing and printing you own negatives and no inkjet print can match the beauty of a properly printed B&W silver gelatin print from a well exposed and processed negative. They are things of beauty made more so today because we rarely see them and have forgotten their allure.

My enlarger, lenses, trays, we're all free there are still people dumping them, and spending money on scanners... Look no further than this thread.

There is no comparison between a silver halide print and a gilee print. You need to learn the equivalent of photoshop...
A good negative will go unto to grade 2 without any effort.
A poor negative will take real effort.

LesDMess · 06-07-2015, 06:03 AM

BTW, it is giclee prints which today is more commonly referred to as inkjet prints.

Just to be clear, scanning doesn't preclude traditional printing, rather it is yet another tool to expand your output on various types of papers and materials.

You can also get traditional RA prints from minilabs from scans.

Xmas · 06-08-2015, 05:34 AM

Originally posted by LesDMess

You can also get traditional RA prints from minilabs from scans.

Yes bubble jet, ink jet or gilee are the same.

But scan and silver print were hardly traditional.

Fine art prints were a way to get around the limited dynamic range on a silver halide print.
If a scanner Dmax does not get in to a negatives highlights it is not a fine art print in some people's minds.

YMMV

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Developing C41 at home	Painter	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	4	12-23-2014 09:12 AM
Doing C-41 at home If you understand B&W developing	Jamey777	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	16	08-06-2014 08:42 AM
Want to start playing with video, but...	eccs19	Video Recording and Processing	38	07-23-2014 02:20 PM
Want to start digitizing old pics, are flatbeds up to the job?	Glen_S	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	11	10-26-2011 05:53 AM
Want to start residential/commercial/land photorgaphy business	acarpov	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	14	01-30-2011 11:49 AM

06-07-2015, 12:29 AM	#46
Xmas Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 617	Originally posted by MD Optofonik I respectfully but strongly disagree. If one is producing fine art, for real, the only appropriate scanner would be a Hassy. No need for a Hassy if making inkjet prints for friends and family or even craft fairs and local businesses as far as I'm concerned. However, If one is going to take the time to process film at home and allow oneself the ability to evaluate the results with an eye to improving and developing one's skills then a certain level of detailed resolution is needed. Flatbeds aren't up to task when it comes to 35mm. Anyone who has exhaustively researched 35mm film processing with an eye to scanning the results discovers this. ---------- Post added 06-01-15 at 11:02 AM ---------- To set up a B&W darkroom for printing, buying used equipment, would cost about the same as an XA; $400-500US. Used gear is the way to go to save money or maximize value. When I was in middle school a friend of the family owned a commercial lab and was discontinuing B&W processing. I saved all summer and was able to get his entire B&W darkroom setup for $500 (a little over $2000.00 in todays money); 23C Beseler enlarger, 3 lenses, Gralab timer with footswitch, safe-light, tongs, bottles, trays, and all the extras including bags of unopened chemistry. To my mother's consternation I set it all up in the laundry room. It was my response to the adults around me asking, "What do you think you want to be when you grow up?" then telling me, "You know, musicians don't make a very good living." There is little that matches the satisfaction of processing and printing you own negatives and no inkjet print can match the beauty of a properly printed B&W silver gelatin print from a well exposed and processed negative. They are things of beauty made more so today because we rarely see them and have forgotten their allure. My enlarger, lenses, trays, we're all free there are still people dumping them, and spending money on scanners... Look no further than this thread. There is no comparison between a silver halide print and a gilee print. You need to learn the equivalent of photoshop... A good negative will go unto to grade 2 without any effort. A poor negative will take real effort.

06-07-2015, 06:03 AM	#47
LesDMess Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,235	BTW, it is giclee prints which today is more commonly referred to as inkjet prints. Just to be clear, scanning doesn't preclude traditional printing, rather it is yet another tool to expand your output on various types of papers and materials. You can also get traditional RA prints from minilabs from scans.

06-08-2015, 05:34 AM	#48
Xmas Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 617	Originally posted by LesDMess You can also get traditional RA prints from minilabs from scans. Yes bubble jet, ink jet or gilee are the same. But scan and silver print were hardly traditional. Fine art prints were a way to get around the limited dynamic range on a silver halide print. If a scanner Dmax does not get in to a negatives highlights it is not a fine art print in some people's minds. YMMV