[rollei_list] Re: Neil on Nikon Coolscan 9000 Information Quest
- From: "dnygr" <dnygr@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 15:10:00 -0500
Neil,
Your comments on inkjet B&W printing rings a bell for me. I have felt that
inkjet printing makes fine posters, but that the posters lack the glow of the
traditional darkroom silver print. I don't know the lightjet process, but what
you makes sense because the paper (silver embedded?) remains the same as that
used in the darkroom.
You seem to confirm my feeling that Photoshop offers a lot of control. It makes
some tweaking easier. The printer is the problem.
Doug
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Neil Gould" <neil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 14:33:56 -0600
>Hi Frederic,
>
>> From: <fre@xxxxxxx>
>> Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 17:15:15 +0200
>>
>> Hi,
>> I am considering buying a Nikon Coolscan 9000 ED, to scan my 120-film
>> I produce with my rolleiflex SL66E.
>> I have some questions on this piece of equipment :
>>
>> - Does someone have any experience and tips?
>> - What is the difference between a scanned black/white , and the
>> print you get in the dark room? Is there a big difference?
>> - Other info would be nice too...
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Frederic
>
>I have little direct experience with the Nikon 9000 ED, but know it is a
>good piece of equipment. I have been scanning since about 1985, so I do
>have a response to your inquiry that may differ from some of the others.
>
>There are at least 3 printing methods to compare:
>* Optical on photo print material (darkroom)
>* Digital on photo print material (e.g. Lightjet, Frontier, etc.)
>* Digital printed on paper (typically inkjet)
>
>They all have a distinctly different look, with strengths and limitations
>that take a while to learn. My preference for printing digital images is
>to use a Lightjet or Frontier to image onto photo print material. These
>use a laser to write the image onto the same paper that one might use in a
>darkroom, that is then chemically processed, so the end result is more
>visually similar to a darkroom print, especially for black/white work.
>However, it requires a good deal of experience working with digital media
>to control this process, and it can be expensive. ;-)
>
>Inkjet prints are OK, but to my eye, they look "flat" in comparison to the
>other two methods. For black/white, the best results are obtained by using
>special multi-tonal black inks, which usually means that the printer will
>be pretty much dedicated to printing black/white.
>
>All things considered, I don't think that scanning, editing, and printing
>black/white offers much in the way of time savings over the traditional
>darkroom for some prints. The trade-off is that the options for tweaking
>an image are far greater, with some things that just can't be done with
>optical printing.
>
>Best,
>
>Neil
>
>
>
>
>---
>Rollei List
>
>- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
>in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
>- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
>'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
>- Online, searchable archives are available at
>//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>
>
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
