[rollei_list] Re: Are Enlargers Obsolete?
- From: Ardeshir Mehta <ardeshir@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 19:22:08 -0400
You put it very well, Mark. The grain IS indeed the image.
Cheers.
+++++
On Friday, April 22, 2005, at 07:12 PM, Mark Rabiner wrote:
>
>> In the remote past, I have been able to use an enlarger to get some
>> really nice grainy results, that is to say photos in which the grain
>> was clearly visible and resulted in a pleasing aesthetic effect. But
>> I don't think it is possible to do that with a scanned image - or is
>> it?
>>
>> I wonder if folks have an opinion on this subject.
>>
>> Cheers.
>
> It really is getting there.
> I kind of feel like I'm starting to get it.
> The scans people are getting now are just starting to have a more
> accurate description of the grain quality that a negative has in it.
> Someone closer to the "true" way in which that grain quality is
> expressed in a blowup from an enlarger.
>
> It pretty much happened with the move from the Nikon 4000 to 5000.
> But it's not quite there yet.. Not quite.
>
> The grain of the image could be thought of as being the image.
> If one was doing larger format and or slow film then grain quality is
> less of an issue than if one was a 35mm shooter of faster films.
> And these scanning issues don't come up.
> 35mm shooting of faster films demands the opposite of what one might
> think.
> Such work demands the utmost from the darkroom worker.
> 35mm print making is very demanding from a variety of angles.
>
> The exact dilution you are using. Your agitation methods.
> The film itself of course. How great your enlarging lens is and are
> you stopped down too much or not enough. Is your grain quality falling
> off in an edge indicating your enlarger needs to be lined up better.
> Or you are popping your negs because of heat.
> All show on an 11x14 print if you look at it closely even without a
> loupe.
> From 35mm 400 or faster film. Maybe 6x6 in a 16x20 (14x14).
>
> And it is on a level of subtlety just beyond what is being gotten now
> with desktop scanning this year.
> But I'd expect it to be there in a high end drum scan but I don't know
> directly.
>
> Whatever if not this year then next year.
> Two at the most. Stay tuned. Or better yet. Stay at it.
>
>
>
> Mark Rabiner
> Photography
> Portland Oregon
> http://rabinergroup.com/
Other related posts:
