Yes, I had a brain fart, you can go to 6x9 on a 4x5 enlarger, but not a
whole lot further. It's the wider ones that need the 5x7. And really, I've
never seen an inkjet print that I thought would equal a good wet print.
From: Chris Crawford [mailto:chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 5:37 PM
To: Olympus Camera Discussion
Subject: Re: [OM] IMG: 280 megapixels
Why on Earth does he need a 5x7 enlarger to print from 6x9 film? My old
Beseler 23cII medium format enlarger handles 6x9 just fine. Scanning is no
insult to film if you do it right. Problem is, most people don't know how,
so they slam scanning as 'bad' just because they can't do it right.
Yesterday on Rangefinderforum, someone who owns two of my prints said in a
thread there that my prints were incredible and that you had to hold one in
your hand to believe it. He went on to say that I was a master at wet
printing. They weren't wet prints, they were inkjets from an Epson R2400
(and he should have remembered that since my website says so and I told him
that when he bought them, but still...quite a compliment).
--
Chris Crawford
Fine Art Photography
Fort Wayne, Indiana
260-486-2581
http://www.chriscrawfordphoto.com My portfolio
http://blog.chriscrawfordphoto.com My latest work!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Christopher-Crawford/48229272798
Become a fan on Facebook
On 1/17/11 6:06 PM, "Bill Pearce" <bs.pearce@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Good lord, man! Don't insult this fine camera with scanning the results.
Get
> an enlarger and print! Start watching for 5x7 enlargers right now!
>
>
>
> From: Nathan Wajsman [mailto:photo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 5:01 PM
> To: Leica Users Group; leica@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Olympus Camera Discussion
> Subject: [OM] IMG: 280 megapixels
>
>
>
> In a recent fit of madness, I acquired a Fuji rangefinder which produces
6x9
> images on that archaic medium known as film. I just received my test rolls
> from the lab, which proved to me that the camera functions correctly. When
I
> scan those huge negatives on my Epson 700 at its maximum resolution, the
> result is a file of about 280 megapixels. But it is not sharpness or
details
> that keeps film interesting; rather, it is the fine gradation of the
tones:
>
>
http://www.greatpix.eu/Other/Sometimes-I-use-film/7590141_XFqsu#1159932454_x
> 9hbc-O-LB
>
> More to come. I am right now shooting a roll of Ilford SFX with a red
> filter. In our sunny climate, it should give good results. Photographty is
a
> big tent, and I enjoy visiting different areas of that tent.
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan
>
>
> Nathan Wajsman
> Alicante, Spain
> http://www.frozenlight.eu
> http://www.greatpix.eu
> http://www.nathanfoto.com
> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
> Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
>
> YNWA
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
> _____
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1191 / Virus Database: 1435/3385 - Release Date: 01/16/11
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
_____
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1191 / Virus Database: 1435/3386 - Release Date: 01/17/11
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|