Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 28

Thread: At what size is the contact print a "jewel"? Or has digital scanning taken over?

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    674

    Thumbs up At what size is the contact print a "jewel"? Or has digital scanning taken over?

    Title says it all...

    Whenever the format threads start up, the term "jewel" comes up. Now with most of the LF world digitally scanning their work, and ULF shooters obviously contact printing their work, is there a "jewel" still left by doing a contact print with these natively smaller 5X7-10X12 formats? I know there's a ton of subjectivity involved here regarding the contact print vs. the digitally scanned based print. And if we want to get into ratios, one can easily use a slightly smaller ratio than 4X5 to get the desired ratio, scan it, and have very large prints. Does the person using the 5X7-10X12 camera feel the contact print is still "something to behold", a "jewel", or are the shooters of these formats (can be wide ratio such as 4X10/5X12) doing most of their work to be digitally scanned via drum/flatbed, and then digitally printed via inkjet?

    Does the jewel of the contact still live on or has digital taken its toll on it?

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Sonora, California
    Posts
    1,475

    Re: At what size is the contact print a "jewel"? Or has digital scanning taken over?

    ...has digital scanning taken over?
    It is of course, as you observe, a very subjective question. Personally, I have to say, absolutely not. Scanning and the digital work flow doesn't even come close to a contact print - at any size. I only scan stuff to put it up on line someplace and am always apologizing for the crummy scan.

    I can contact print a 5x7 negative with relatively little effort or expense and the results cannot be touched by any digital process. The digital print may look nice...maybe even acceptable but it lacks soul. It is sterile and without any human attraction.

  3. #3
    Richard M. Coda
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Scottsdale, AZ
    Posts
    973

    Re: At what size is the contact print a "jewel"? Or has digital scanning taken over?

    Contact prints rule! And as far as "jewels" go... please don't forget 4x5"... they are really special. My preference is 8x10 contacts, BUT, I just enlarged some (old and new) 8x10s the other day and have the "big" bug (for a little while, anyways). I will soon have an 11x14 back for my Arca and can't wait to see those!

    IMHO Digital serves two purposes (for me, YMMV)... saving a good image from poor processing (in my earlier days) or defects, and for going larger than I can print traditionally.
    Photographs by Richard M. Coda
    my blog
    Primordial: 2010 - Photographs of the Arizona Monsoon
    "Speak softly and carry an 8x10"
    "I shoot a HYBRID - Arca/Canham 11x14"

  4. #4

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

    Re: At what size is the contact print a "jewel"? Or has digital scanning taken over?

    Quote Originally Posted by BradS View Post
    It is of course, as you observe, a very subjective question. Personally, I have to say, absolutely not. Scanning and the digital work flow doesn't even come close to a contact print - at any size. I only scan stuff to put it up on line someplace and am always apologizing for the crummy scan.

    I can contact print a 5x7 negative with relatively little effort or expense and the results cannot be touched by any digital process. The digital print may look nice...maybe even acceptable but it lacks soul. It is sterile and without any human attraction.
    Ever considered the possibility that it's your crummy scans that are the problem and not the digital process itself?
    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.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    1,057

    Re: At what size is the contact print a "jewel"? Or has digital scanning taken over?

    I don't know about elsewhere, but for my $$ a contact print is hard to beat. I have seen some absolutely wonderful 5x7 contact prints. I own a film scanner, but the truth be told, I have never hooked it up to a computer.

    For me, an Azo contact print is still the cat's meow. YMMV

  6. #6
    Whatever David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Posts
    4,658

    Re: At what size is the contact print a "jewel"? Or has digital scanning taken over?

    Hard to beat a contact print from an original camera negative, in my opinion. They can even work at 6x6 cm, when they are presented right.

    At some point you really just need to get out to some galleries and museums (not books, not the internet) and look at excellent prints made by various means and see what appeals to you, experiment with different methods, and make the process you choose your own.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    5,506

    Re: At what size is the contact print a "jewel"? Or has digital scanning taken over?

    I have seen 14X17" contact prints from in-camera negatives that were technically perfect but for aesthetic reasons rank among the worst photographs I have ever seen.

    Then, I have seen prints of about the same size made by digital means from scans of smaller format negatives that rank among the best photographs I have ever seen.

    It ain't the equipment, but how you use it. The issue is not in-camera contact print versus digital print. It is about the artist, craft, vision and execution. This is my opinion.


    Sandy

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Victoria BC Canada
    Posts
    274

    Re: At what size is the contact print a "jewel"? Or has digital scanning taken over?

    I echo Sandy's comments. I recently started Platinum printing and I've been experimenting with prints of various sizes. Most of my negs are 5x7 and the contact prints I've made do look very nice indeed. I have also wanted larger print sizes so I'm now making digital negatives and printing anywhere up to almost 16x20. Technically, its not a straight contact print, but I find the digital neg gives me the ability to burn and dodge which now gives me a more expressive print than a pure, straight contact print. My 2 cents worth!

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    New Hampshire
    Posts
    482

    Re: At what size is the contact print a "jewel"? Or has digital scanning taken over?

    No single size is necessarily a jewel, but rather the perfect size for a given subject and treatment might merit being called a jewel. Something about the term jewel infers that a huge print might have a hard time being a jewel.

    C
    Last edited by CG; 8-Mar-2008 at 16:17. Reason: spelling

  10. #10
    Kirk Gittings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Albuquerque, Nuevo Mexico
    Posts
    9,864

    Re: At what size is the contact print a "jewel"? Or has digital scanning taken over?

    Quote Originally Posted by sanking View Post
    I have seen 14X17" contact prints from in-camera negatives that were technically perfect but for aesthetic reasons rank among the worst photographs I have ever seen.

    Then, I have seen prints of about the same size made by digital means from scans of smaller format negatives that rank among the best photographs I have ever seen.

    It ain't the equipment, but how you use it. The issue is not in-camera contact print versus digital print. It is about the artist, craft, vision and execution. This is my opinion.


    Sandy
    Very well said.
    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"

Similar Threads

  1. Film vs. Digital
    By Richard Boulware in forum Cameras & Camera Accessories
    Replies: 103
    Last Post: 13-Feb-2006, 07:44
  2. Interesting comparison between 4x5 and digital
    By Dan Wells in forum Digital Hardware
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 6-Mar-2005, 07:06
  3. Diffraction and Lens Flare
    By Paul Mongillo in forum Lenses & Lens Accessories
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 12-Mar-2000, 13:57

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
  •