Best Practices, Making Silver Prints from Digital Files

[PViapiano]

Linda Butler used 4x5 LVT negs and enlarged them on Forte PWT and Ilford WT. Some of the most beautiful prints you've ever seen...

I've never done it myself, but take a look at her Italy book, just amazing.

[sanking]

What PPI does an LVT image at?

Bob

"The Chicago Albumen Works offers institutions and photographers the ability to convert high resolution digital files to traditional, archivally processed, silver halide films, using LVT film recorders.

LVT film recorders, manufactured first by Kodak, and later by Durst/Dice, are the pinnacle of large format film recorder technology. CAW has three such film recorders. They can produce film outputs up to 8x10" at 3048 ppi and up to 16x20" at 1524 ppi. "

Definitely good enough to enlarge with.

Sandy

[bob carnie]

I think I have to agree that those negs could work well in an enlarger.

I know the contacts I make are pretty good but thinking of putting the lambda film in a enlarger just IMO would not cut it.

"The Chicago Albumen Works offers institutions and photographers the ability to convert high resolution digital files to traditional, archivally processed, silver halide films, using LVT film recorders.

LVT film recorders, manufactured first by Kodak, and later by Durst/Dice, are the pinnacle of large format film recorder technology. CAW has three such film recorders. They can produce film outputs up to 8x10" at 3048 ppi and up to 16x20" at 1524 ppi. "

Definitely good enough to enlarge with.

Sandy

[rdenney]

Just for context for those following this thread but who are unaware of LVT recorders...

These guys have a couple of Kodak LVT recorders in the sub-$10K range. One has the original micro-VAX for those interesting in maintaining their own computer museum, but the other one ($5700) has been modified to run on an XP PC.

http://www.footprintsequipment.com/Results.asp?Cat=182

Rick "curiosity satisfied" Denney

[Larry Gebhardt]

I think Larry G on this site owns a LVT recorder and maybe could describe the outputs capability's in an enlarger.

I own a Lightjet 2080. It will output on 5x7, 8x10 or 11x14 film at res 80 (80px/mm or 2032 ppi) in continuous tone. In a 16x20 print made from an output 4x5 negative I can't tell the difference from the original as far as detail goes, assuming you started with a well scanned 4x5 negative.

Lately the device has been clogging up a corner of my office because it started banding on color output in the blue channel. Then I moved it and haven't tried to fix the issue, which I am hoping is just dust. I'm not sure it's really practical to have it, since service and parts are way too expensive for me to justify.

[IanMazursky]

I also own one of the few running LVTs (a Rhino) left in the world. It’s a great machine, if not a little exasperating at times.
Thanks to the Durst v. Durst fight many years ago, there is only one tech left in the US.
Hes a great guy and close by. Kodak/Durst made an amazing machine. 20+ years later, they’re still going.

The install base is pretty small compared to its hay day as a press proofer. Yes that’s what it was designed for.
Before that, you had to either do an on press proof or run a matchprint. Both took a lot longer then a chrome from an LVT.
After a while, photographers, galleries and archivists caught on.

The original LVTs used a special matched set of lamps and a light valve. Later on they moved away from the lamps (which drove the techs nuts!) to LED lasers. According to my tech, he has only had to replace one in all these years!

They made the 1620 which can image 16x20 film, the Saturn 1012, the Rhino 8x10 which was a 1010 smooshed into a tabletop unit.
For one customer they even made a 30x40, but as i understand it they were scraped a few years ago. They were used to make movie backlit posters on E6 Kodak film. I want one so bad but what would i realistically do with it!

Anywhoo, the 1620 and 1010 Rhino can do up to RES 80. Although im going to try to push my Rhino to RES 120…well see how that goes.
The Saturn can do RES 120 natively but it’s almost as big as the 1620. Both 1620 and 1012 weight nearly 500lbs. The Rhino about 200lbs.

A few words of caution for anyone considering buying one. First off, don’t buy from Footprints. I have had nothing but problems with them.
Most of what one their site is outdated and things change from when you agree to buy it to when you get it.
Everyone i know who has dealt with them has had the same or worse problems. There is a bad story behind this if anyone wants to know.

LVTs do not travel well, especially the 1620, 1010 and 1012. The weight of the imaging head is supported by the lead screw.
During travel it will bend the lead screw or worse break it and that cant be fixed if the head falls off and gets damaged.
The last tech sells head removal instructions. Without removing the head you are guaranteed a dead LVT.

Don’t buy one with a micro vax, to much of a headache. Most will connect to a windows PC running win2k, xp but not 7 or vista.
Some of the old ones come with a BNC style network port. I think you can get a converter to Ethernet.

Calibration for LVTs is a long process that can take 7-15 iterations. Processing needs to be super consistent, hand processing is out of the question.
Jobo ATL or D&D is the best way to go. Im using a Jobo ATL 2300 to process E6, C41 and B&W LVTs.

Interestingly the cal process is based on density (RGB) only. The LVT software was never updated to include ICC.
There is an interesting story behind that also. You will need an Xrite 811 TR densitometer, that is the only one that will work for E6.
You will also need the cal instructions from the tech. 99% of LVTs on the market don’t have manuals, even if they do they’re not very useful.

Last important thing, all of the LVTs have old boards in them (most 20+ years). Some of the chips have batteries built in and have neared or past their life span.
I ran into that with mine, makes an expensive machine into a doorstop, it was an expensive fix. Only one guy in the world can fix it, luckily hes a friend.
Other boards used to be a stock item when DEC was alive, but compaq and later HP put a stop to that.
They’re mostly no longer available. Painful when one dies on you and you have to scrounge.


File setup for LVTs is specific, no ICC profile embedded. Sized to RES 80 (2032 ppi), RES 40 (1016 ppi)….at the imaging size of the LVT.
The imaging size is a bit smaller then the actual film size due to the film grip. More on the specifics if anyone wants.

If anyone has any questions about an LVT, please PM me. Happy to help.

[IanMazursky]

I own a Lightjet 2080. It will output on 5x7, 8x10 or 11x14 film at res 80 (80px/mm or 2032 ppi) in continuous tone. In a 16x20 print made from an output 4x5 negative I can't tell the difference from the original as far as detail goes, assuming you started with a well scanned 4x5 negative.

Lately the device has been clogging up a corner of my office because it started banding on color output in the blue channel. Then I moved it and haven't tried to fix the issue, which I am hoping is just dust. I'm not sure it's really practical to have it, since service and parts are way too expensive for me to justify.

Hi Larry,
You might want to check on the Blue laser. Those are the fastest to die in a lightjet.
If its going in and out, it might be dying. Also check the cooling unit to make sure its actually keeping the unit cool.
Also check to see if any of the cables or power supplies have come loose. That could cause the laser to go on and off rapidly.

Sort of had the same problem with my LVT once. But it wasn’t an LED laser, it was one of the cables sending data to the laser that was shorting in and out causing banding in the blue channel.
I had some really interesting looking chromes that didn’t please my client

I totally understand the service and parts problem. Before i bought my LVT i investigated a 2080.
With a lot of effort i was able to contact the last company servicing them.
I forget the guys name but when he finally called me back, he said that they can but don’t really want to service them.
The cost was outrageous and parts are so scarce. If the system that auto loads and ejects the film goes…ouch!
The lasers are considered consumables, same goes for the big lightjets. They have a finite life span, blue goes first, then green (i think) and finally red.
They can be 2-4k to replace them, sometimes more. All depends on your service contract if you have one.

Hope that helps.

[Richard M. Coda]

Frank, try ludo@reflectiveimagestudios.com

He did a couple of negs for me a year or so ago. I used to go to Albumen Works, and they are great, too.

I find their quality to be the best available. Chip Hooper was an early adopter of this technique, and I dare anyone here to tell me his prints are not beautiful.

[bob carnie]

Ian

You have just made my mind up not to purchase this unit... I owe you a beer.

What a wonderful device when working at top condition,

Ian is this unit like the Kodak Preimier?

[SamReeves]

I remember screwing around with film recorders 10 years ago. Not impressed with the resolution or quality, and I never touched a piece of "digital film" again. The real McCoy or nada.