Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Microtek 1800f...how is it with 120 film?

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    159

    Microtek 1800f...how is it with 120 film?

    I am trying to decide whether to go for the 1800f or a 4x5 enlarger. I like the versatility of scanning and editing in Photoshop, but these damned 8x10 contact prints have persuaded me that LF is the way to shoot and print...
    I still love making images with my Hasselblads however, and am not so familiar with the traditional darkroom. I have made prints I am very happy with, but I find that often I have a problem with contrast that is SOOOOO easy to fix in photoshop. Problem is, I will not tolerate metamerism! Don't like it, never did, never will.

    Stupid question perhaps, in any event, the secret of my ignorance will now be exposed to the light of day:

    Can one control contrast as well in the traditional darkroom as one can in the digital darkroom? I am a fast learner, but I need to know this before I give up my MF film scanner for a 4x5 enlarger. I have seen traditional black and white enlargements from 4x5; sublime. I am not willing to settle for less...maybe piezography and digital will approximate silver....?

    Hope this makes sense...

  2. #2
    Kirk Gittings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Albuquerque, Nuevo Mexico
    Posts
    9,864

    Microtek 1800f...how is it with 120 film?

    "I have seen traditional black and white enlargements from 4x5; sublime. I am not willing to settle for less...maybe piezography and digital will approximate silver....?"

    If you want silver looking prints you should stay with printing traditional silver. Ink is a different medium and should be treated so with its own inherent beauty and is not at its best when the artist is limited by an attempt to simulate silver prints.
    Thanks,
    Kirk

    at age 73:
    "The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
    But I have promises to keep,
    And miles to go before I sleep,
    And miles to go before I sleep"

  3. #3
    lazy retired bum
    Join Date
    Sep 1998
    Location
    Lake Oswego, Oregon
    Posts
    264

    Microtek 1800f...how is it with 120 film?

    I agree with Kirk. You are comparing apples and oranges. Assuming you're in it for your own enjoyment as opposed to trying to make a living from your prints, the real issue is which PROCESS you prefer, which "journey to the print" is most satisfying to YOU.

    You can do both! There is no rule that says you must work only in the digital realm or only in the traditional realm. If you have never done or been taught the fine points of darkroom printing, it's hard to describe, perhaps like trying to explain sex to an celibate person? I have spent many years and lots of dollars putting together a large format system. I too enjoy the control that photoshop offers, but it can be argued that one can have too much control, endlessly manipulating. If you look at the work of really excellent darkroom printers, they seem to get just about everything anyone would want from a negative.

    There is no question digital has efficiencies. Once you "get it right," you can have as many prints as you want just by pushing a button, whereas at least in my darkroom, EVERY print is a bit different. If you are willing to get familiar with the traditional darkroom, you may find it more satisfying... or less.

    Godd luck on your quest, you seek the grail, and it will not be easy.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    953

    Microtek 1800f...how is it with 120 film?

    you don't need an enlarger for 8x10 contact prints. problem solved...

  5. #5

    Microtek 1800f...how is it with 120 film?

    Can one control contrast as well in the traditional darkroom as one can in the digital darkroom? I am a fast learner, but I need to know this before I give up my MF film scanner for a 4x5 enlarger.

    Sure, you can have the same control of contrast in the traditional darkroom that you can in the digital darkroom. It just involves making masks, probably multiple masks, and registration of the masks to the negative, and a lot of time and effort.

    I have seen traditional black and white enlargements from 4x5; sublime. I am not willing to settle for less...maybe piezography and digital will approximate silver....?


    If you don't want to settle for less, then don't. If what you want is the look of gelatin silver, then print with the gelatin silver process.

    If you want the best prints you're capable of making, then you're going to have to try several different processes, learn them thoroughly, and then choose the process to suit the prints you want to make.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Massachusetts USA
    Posts
    8,476

    Microtek 1800f...how is it with 120 film?

    "Microtek 1800f...how is it with 120 film?"



    "...I need to know this before I give up my MF film scanner for a 4x5 enlarger.
    "



    If you have a good dedicated film scanner, then the 1800f will be a disappointment. Even if you get all 1800 pixels per inch out of the Microtek, this will only allow you a 5x enlargement, to print at 360dpi. If all you want is 11x11 prints with no cropping, you will probably be happy with the level of detail. (That's why I got a Microtek 2500f, so that I could squeeze a little more out of my 6x6 and 6x9 MF images, and print them at good size, with occasional cropping).



    On the other hand, a good dedicated film scanner will give you twice as much resolution or more - giving you quite a bit of flexibility. Keep it if you can. I wish I had kept mine.



    The enlarger will allow you to make nice prints with anything from 4x5 down., at any size you like. Much more flexible than contact printing. If you keep the dedicated MF scanner, you can still make digital prints in color and b&w. Enlargers are more affordable than many large format lenses...and most scanners - and they don't wear out.



    I would keep the film scanner, get a 4x5 enlarger, and fiddle with silver-based printing for a while. If you really like the analog look, you can try contact printing, and get something larger. Maybe go to Platinum or other "alternative" processes.



    Your experience will be your guide.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 1997
    Location
    Baraboo, Wisconsin
    Posts
    7,697

    Microtek 1800f...how is it with 120 film?

    "Problem is, I will not tolerate metamerism!"

    It sounds like you've perhaps been trying to make b&w prints with color inks and no RIP. If you add QTR (free download at www.harrington .com, pay $50 if you like it and keep it) you won't have any metamerism even with color inks on matte paper (assuming you own a printer that QTR supports, of which there are quite a few). Or you could use MIS quadtone inks and Paul Roark's curves downloadable for free at the MIS web site (again, assuming your printer is one for which MIS sells inks and for which Paul has created curves. Or you could use the Piezo system. I've never used that system but a friend has. His prints are excellent but it's expensive to buy in cartridges and the continuous flow system he uses is a pain to keep unclogged he says. So those are three ways to avoid metamerism.

    As to your basic question, I'd suggest just going with what you like best if you have experience with both as it sounds like you do. If you have no strong preference for either, and are willing to commit to the very long learning curve of digital, I'd say go with it, photography today is digital and will be even more so in the future, you might as well learn to print that way even if you continue using film.
    Brian Ellis
    Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you do criticize them you'll be
    a mile away and you'll have their shoes.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    159

    Microtek 1800f...how is it with 120 film?

    This might be tantamount to heresy on this forum, but...
    I don't care for prints on matte paper so much. I m not a fan of fiber based papers, either. I much prefer Ilford satin RC paper to the fiber based papers I have used. So using ink seems impractical.
    I have quite a bit of experience with the digital darkroom; that's how I started, with a dslr, Photoshop 4 and a 2200 printer. But chemical prints....ooooo....ahhh....guess I've answered my own question. It's just that I will miss the convenience of scanning those sware 'blad negatives, adjusting contrast, spotting digtally, and getting EVERYTHING just right. Seems all in vain when prints on Ilford Galerie Smooth Pearl paper (which I am quite fond of) have that strange color cast when viewed at an angle...

    Thanks for the replies.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    832

    Microtek 1800f...how is it with 120 film?

    Can one control contrast as well in the traditional darkroom as one can in the digital darkroom?

    Depends on who one and it's safe to say No One for, for now, can adjust contrast in the wet process as one can with Photoshop. See Curves, Layers, Masks, Channels for starters.

    Of course, if you use Photoshop, your forehead will be branded with a #FF0000 #44.

    Branding was so much simpler before HEX.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    159

    Microtek 1800f...how is it with 120 film?

    ???????

Similar Threads

  1. Best 8x10 Carrier Set-Up for Microtek 1800f
    By Frank Petronio in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 11-Feb-2006, 13:50
  2. Microtek 1800f
    By Kirk Gittings in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 30-Dec-2005, 19:08
  3. microtek 1800f
    By Percy in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-Oct-2005, 14:34
  4. Microtek 1800f Sample Scan? Oh Where Art Thou?
    By Joe Bossuyt in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 15-Sep-2005, 16:10
  5. Vuescan software problem with Microtek 1800f
    By Mike Derr in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 23-Aug-2004, 10:04

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •