Please forgive the longer post. Being new to large format photography, I have been busy reading many of the threads on this excellent forum in an attempt to learn as much as possible, but one question/issue I have remains unanswered/resolved. In my reading about commercial flatbed scanners (like the Epson V700) most user's claim that print sizes of over 11x14 begin to seriously compromise quality level, and are really just beyond the capabilities of most scanners in such a price range.
For print sizes of 16x20 and up, most recommend getting an imacon or drum scan. This presents something of a problem for someone like me who is on a student budget. A 100mb scan at the pro lab in my city (Toronto Image Works) is about 55$ on the imacon 848 and 65$ using a drum scanner. Considering that the print also costs between 65-80 (for 16x20) depending on the quality level, we are talking about some hefty money being forked out.
The main reason -- though not the only one -- I moved into large format was to be able to start making larger prints than I can with my Nikon D50. I found that with little cropping, I could get pretty good quality out of 11x14's using it, but certainly nothing more. I'm finding it hard to swallow that now, with what feels like a huge negative at 4x5, I will have to double or even triple my costs to get a print that is essentially one size larger than what the D50 can handle.
I know print quality is a difficult term to define and agree upon, and that some are more discerning than others, but I would appreciate it greatly if some of the experts could weigh in on what some of my options are for printing at 16x20 and 20x24. Am I just facing a sad cost-of-materials reality that I had unforeseen, or not up to speed on other options? I suppose I could skip the scan and just enlarge the negative traditionally at another pro lab, but I have become accustomed to (or perhaps even reliant on) using Photoshop to process my images.
Thanks for taking the time to read and respond.
Bookmarks