Hi Sid ...
For openers at least, I'd suggest making the best enlargement
you can and see what the results are like. It may be that the
negs are sharp enough to make a good, large enlargement. Also,
if you have more than one enlarging lens, try 'em all - some are
better than others. Finally, make sure your enlarger is
properly aligned. Once you know the results from these steps,
you'll know what, if anything else, you may need to do.
Oh, one other thing, if you're able to make these prints
without running the enlarger head to the top of the column, you
mat see better results. With the head up high, even the
slightest movement - sometimes even a breeze - can cause
movement and blur. If you must use the head up high, try
fabricating a brace from the ceiling to the head. In all
honesty, I've never tried that, but I read it somewhere and it
made sense to me.
How large can you go on your baseboard? Can you do floor
projection?
--
Shel Belinkoff
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The difference between a good photograph
and a great photograph is subtleties."
Sid Barras wrote:
>
> Hi All:
>
> I've got a local interior architect interested in some of my black and
> white photography, and she wants me to produce a catalog of contact
> sheets or small prints for her to present to clients on a continuing
> basis. (No problem there...)
>
> But immediately, she's already sold a series of swamp scenes I did a
> couple of years ago, based on some 8 x 10 examples I gave her to use.
>
> These photographs are all in 35mm format. About half are TMY (400 ISO
> Tmax), about one fourth are TMX (100 ISO Tmax) and the rest are either
> Plus x, or FP4 +.
>
> She wants them in sizes ranging from approximately 18 x 24 inches to 30
> x 40 inches. I don't need to do the math to figure out that this is
> really pushing the limits of these negatives to retain any kind of
> crispness.
>
> I therefore ask my learned brethren for advice: what am I gonna do for
> this? This could represent a real breakthrough into the world of "income
> (money!) producing photography", so I'm really, really interested in
> having this project turn out well.
>
> Should I have the negative drum scanned?
>
> Then what? I think I should produce something that's archivally sound
> here too. (Like no ink jet or Dye-sub prints.)
>
> I talked to the guy at the service bureau where I used to have my
> Running club's newsletter printed about drum scanning, and he seemed to
> think this route my not be very cost efficient, since I'd only be
> wanting a few copies (at best) of each print, and the kind of equipment
> he uses are geared to producing many many copies before it starts
> becoming cost effective.
>
> I've heard of having a large format negative made from a 35mm neg or
> print, but don't have any idea or experience in this area.
>
> Surely someone in this group has been down this road before. Some idea
> as to what kind of cost to me a lab would charge would be helpful too.
>
> Thanks, not only for your help on this, but to all the fine advice this
> group has given me before now, too.
>
> regards,
>
> Sid
>
> -
> This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
> go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
> visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org.
