First digital print from pro lab -- advise appreciated!

[Jon Warwick]

I am planning on getting a pro lab in the UK to drum scan (Fuji Celsis scanner) and print an image to 50"x40", or possibly bigger at a 60"x48", using their Lambda printer off a full-frame 5x4 B&W negative (Acros 100 film).

As a pure side comment, they allegedly use "true" black and white paper (both resin coated and fiber, the latter called Harman Galerie FB Digital) that they developed with Ilford / Harman for use on digital printers.

This will be the first digital print I've ever had made -- in the past, wet-prints to 24"x20" (from both large and medium format negatives) has been my limit.

I am trying to figure out what I should expect in terms of image quality? ...... as a reference, I am very happy with the resolution & grain-structure that I get from my medium format (6x7) film enlarged traditionally to 20"x24".

** Does the above 9x enlargment factor suggest that I would be likely equally content with a digital 50"x40" done off a sharp 5x4 negative? Also, under a 12x loup, the negative on a light-box seems pin-sharp.

** Would I likely see a material drop-off in resolution and increase in grain if I try and push this digital enlargement to 60"x48"? ie, where does 5x4 film likely start to "blow apart" (very subjective, i know, but i was wondering if there is a consensus in what people see as a maximum enlargement factor?).

I know that it's really a case of me biting the bullet and seeing if the image at a given size is really in line with my satisfaction, but any feedback is greatly appreciated (drum scans & big enlargements are not exactly the cheapest things to get done!)

Many thanks.

[Jim Michael]

My wife does this type of work and said the quality she was seeing with the B&W material was quite good. She works with several artists to produce their gallery prints. I think the key is to find someone at the lab that you can work with to achieve the vision you have for the print and have them print a resolution test and final proof. The scan can be manipulated in post if required. If they can't make you happy with the res test then you can cut your losses and stop with that.

[Joanna Carter]

I am planning on getting a pro lab in the UK to drum scan (Fuji Celsis scanner) and print an image to 50"x40", or possibly bigger at a 60"x48", using their Lambda printer off a full-frame 5x4 B&W negative (Acros 100 film).

Jon, if you are in the UK, how about joining us on the UKLFPG forums www.lf-photo.org.uk/forum ? You are more likely to find advice on UK based labs there.

As a pure side comment, they allegedly use "true" black and white paper (both resin coated and fiber, the latter called Harman Galerie FB Digital) that they developed with Ilford / Harman for use on digital printers.

I would be very interested in knowing which lab you are planning on using, as I have a few B&W that I want printing big, but on "proper" paper.

I am trying to figure out what I should expect in terms of image quality? ...... as a reference, I am very happy with the resolution & grain-structure that I get from my medium format (6x7) film enlarged traditionally to 20"x24".

I had a 40"x32" print doen from a 4x5 that I scanned myself on an Epson 4870; the result was simply stunning!!! And that is the opinion of everyone who has seen it as well

** Does the above 9x enlargment factor suggest that I would be likely equally content with a digital 50"x40" done off a sharp 5x4 negative? Also, under a 12x loup, the negative on a light-box seems pin-sharp.

Viewed from anb appropriate distance for the size,a 50"x40" should look just as, if not more, impressive.

** Would I likely see a material drop-off in resolution and increase in grain if I try and push this digital enlargement to 60"x48"? ie, where does 5x4 film likely start to "blow apart" (very subjective, i know, but i was wondering if there is a consensus in what people see as a maximum enlargement factor?).

This kind of thing only matters if you plan on standing next to the print with a magnifying glass; from the correct viewing distance for the magnification, it should still be impressive.

[bob carnie]

The Lab is probably Metro in London. The fibre paper is Gallerie 4 with extended red sensitivity.
If every thing works well you should expect to see a print that looks every bit like a wet enlarger print from your negative to that magnification.
Picto in Paris does this as well.
Dalmation in NCarolina, Duggal,Lamont in New York and Elevator in Toronto which is my Lab. These are the labs I am aware of doing this , there probably is more if you contact Harmon they could supply a full list
It is advisable to be prepping your files to their exact specs, if you can work with the printer even better.
I would suggest a magnification strip test to see the final resolution if you can get one.

good luck

Bob

[Jon Warwick]

Exactly right on the lab being Metro in London. http://www.metroimaging.co.uk/printi...mbdaprints.asp

[Bruce Watson]

In general, sharpness and graininess in the print are directly related to level of enlargement. Optical or scanned. That is, the more you enlarge, the softer and more grainy the print. Your question of when does it "blow apart" is entirely subjective -- much depends on the image, your film, exposure, and processing, scanning and printing, and of course the major component is your own personal sense of aesthetics. No one can answer that question for you, and you'll certainly never reach any consensus.

If you've never made a print this large before, you might want to have the lab make a smaller section out of the full sized print (say, a 20 x 16 inch section out of your 50 x 40 print) so you can see for yourself and determine if the final print will be sharp enough and whether or not the graininess level is acceptable to you.

A 5x4 film has an image area of roughly 4.75 x 3.75 inches. That makes a borderless 50 x 40 inch print a 10.7x enlargement. In my experience this is well within an acceptable enlargement range for 5x4 Acros. Acros and 100Tmax can usually take 12x enlargement fairly easily. Others of course will disagree.

That's about all I can tell you on the subject of "can you do it" but you may want to think about the practical aspects of "should you do it." The question comes up when you think about what you are going to do with a 50 x 40 inch print once you have it. Conventional mounting/framing in this size is difficult at best, and very expensive. The frame / glazing is heavy in these sizes which makes hanging a chore also. But... it's doable. When you get to 60 x 48 inches it may not even be doable where you live. And it brings up the problem of transport. How will you move such a big framed print from the framer to it's final destination?

Being able to answer the mounting/framing/transport questions will go a long way toward answering the "should you do it" question IMHO. Whichever way you go, good luck with it. I love a big print on the wall!

[Joanna Carter]

Acros and 100Tmax can usually take 12x enlargement fairly easily. Others of course will disagree.

But not me. I use Acros for LF and Delta 400 for MF B&W work and would find no problem in getting a 12x enlargement out of either of them.

Being able to answer the mounting/framing/transport questions will go a long way toward answering the "should you do it" question IMHO. Whichever way you go, good luck with it. I love a big print on the wall!

I had two 40"x32" prints done for an exhibition; they were mounted on 3mm Foamex board and laminated. They are light and easy to transport at that size (they still just fit in the back of a Volvo V70). But, as for larger sizes, as tempting as it is, they would have to be for a very special purpose and delivered directly to the client, ready framed

[Jim Michael]

You might also need to budget for retouching of your drum scan if you don't do it yourself. There are 2 types of issues, those in the original and those produced as a result of the scan. I would expect the latter to be included in the scan price.

[percepts]

print your neg in the traditional manner to your own taste and provide that to Metro as a guide as to what you want the output to look like. Metro being one of the top labs in the country, have expertise in doing what you are asking.
You can also phone Durst UK who won't make a recommendation of one lab over another, but they will tell you which labs have a lambda in your part of the country which may give you some alternatives. But if you are in London then Metro is the one.
Always best if you can go in there and talk through it with the printer with your sample print in hand.
And yes Metro did get involved with the development of the Ilford paper. Other labs may also have been involved but either way, the paper is specifcally developed for use on laser output devices.

[Jon Warwick]

Thanks for all your comments. I have now had two 24"x20" traditional darkroom prints made from just a small segment of the 5x4 negative ....... it represented a 12x enlargement factor (ie, if the full-frame negative had been used, the print size would have been a bit under 60"x48").

I am pleased with the overall sharpness, and was particularly surprised at how grainfree the image remained.

If I was to get a drum-scan and digital 60"x48" print made, should I expect the sharpness and grain to be the same as the segment that I had done as a test? ........ ie, do you typically see any differences in resolution / grain between traditional wet printing and digital darkroom prints?

Many thanks