Durst 138S vs. Epson V750 flatbed scanner

[sashandaisy]

Hello everyone,

This is my first post on the LF forum. I have been reading this site for a couple of years as I was deciding how, when and with what to get in to large format photopraphy. I really appreciated all of your constructive comments on questions that I had myself but other people had already asked.

For the last year and a half I have been using a marvelous KB Canham 5x7 (field) for B&W work. I use a Jobo 3006 drum for developing on an old motor base. Eventually I would like to get a CPP2.
I have been contact printing, but I am not getting the results I wanted (mainly because of exposure problems as I am slowly learning the Zone system). I am set up to take a class with John Sexton (The Fine B&W print) and I am afraid that I will be bitten by the enlargment bug.

Here is the question for the collective wisdom: I have the opportunity to get a Durst 138S at a reasonable price. For just a little bit less, I could get an Epson 750 and scan my film. What is it that I want in the end? An excellent print, of course. For those of you, with experience in both mediums, what would you advise a novice like me?

Thank you

Eliot

[Steve Sherman]

I don't have a bunch of experience with digital but can offer some expertise when it comes to analog and the wet process.

I have a good sized wet darkroom equipped with a Beseler 5x7 cold light enlarger and a Durst 138s with an Ilford 500 head. Both capable enlarging sources and useable for what I intend them to do. That said, have owned the Beseler for 25 years and can tell you that one has to constantly check lens and negative stage alignment. Not so with the Durst, the Durst is a rugged quality machine which performs consistently as any piece of equipment I own.

As an aside, I purchased my Durst from a high end University here in the Northeast, Y*** University (liquidating the analog process) and have a bill of lading for over $11,000.00, price to me 6 years ago $1000.00. Most likely you can find them much less expensive than that now, you won't regret the wet process.

Cheers!

[photobymike]

Yea i agree with steve... i would love to go back to making my prints in the darkroom again.... But its the cost factor for me... the scanner is cheaper ... would be nice to go back tho. I have a v750 scanner that i love to work with. It is almost like an enlarger in that it takes the negative and makes an image. I just got my new Epson r3000 today and tested ... its a really good printer.... color and B&W comes out great. There is not much of an environmental impact in this hybrid type of photography (for those who might be concerned). I live in a house that has a small septic tank. I learned long ago that can be problematic with the amount of water that flows thru a darkroom.

[Gerry Meekins]

Hello Eliot,

Welcome to the forum!

I don’t see economy in either process unless you limit yourself to contact printing. Limit may be a poor choice of words since 5X7 contact prints can be beautiful.
After a 20 year hiatus from darkroom work I attended John’s Fine Print Workshop. He taught about everything you need to know about making a straight, wet print.
If you decide to purchase the Durst and make wet prints with John’s workshop under your belt, you should be good to go. I make both wet prints and digital prints from scans. Each process has its own inherent expense. You will need to purchase the enlarger and all the ancillary equipment,trays, paper, focus magnifier, easel, print washer and such. Depending on how large of a print you want to make these items can get expensive. To do scanning you will need the scanner, a computer with enough memory, software, and a printer. Depending on print size again, all of these items can get expensive quickly too. Each process has its own learning curve as well.

I wish you all the best whatever process you choose.

-Gerry

[Drew Wiley]

You have to choose your own workflow; they are not mutually exclusive, and you could try both. But in terms of equipment acquisition per se, once you tune up the 138 Durst you will have a piece of equipment which will last a lifetime. The scanner will need to be replaced soon enough, with periodic software upgrades or outright dead-ends.

[sashandaisy]

Thank you so very much for your replies. I took a look at the Durst 138 today and it was not
the shape I was hoping it to be. For now, I think I will continue to improve my contact printing ability and
wait until I become better at it and (more importantly) when a good Durst deal comes along.

Eliot

[neil poulsen]

For me, it's an enlarger for B&W and scanning negatives for color.

[cosmicexplosion]

For me, it's an enlarger for B&W and scanning negatives for color.

i have been told the same thing from one of sydney's master b+w printers....must be true enough to be true!

does the scanned colour print last longer than traditional.

the other master printer, reckons its about the same cost to print a large print in digi or dark room...which i found interesting.

my response would be why not do both. that way you can have the best of both worlds, and extra storage back up.

i am sure you can learn alot from manipulating in digi to see how they look etc

[dasBlute]

I use a scanner to evaluate nagatives, so some basic curves manipulation,
but the b&w print is what I'm after. I have scanned 4x5s and had them digitally
printed and they look great, but I don't have the same feeling of having 'made'
them. Just bought a 138s yesterday, hopefully I'll have prints in a couple weeks.

[thomas ciulei]

Hi Eliot,

i have just the setup you mention, 138s and v750.
i got the 750 after the 138, cause i wanted to scan the negs for internet etc.

no scan and digital print will EVER come close to a well made anologue darkroom origin print. period.
holding one of those prints in your hand is the supreme satisfaction of the whole fotographic process,
starting with choice of camera, lens, neg developing, pos developing, toning whatever.

the need to be able to operate with your images on a digital level is however really important these days.

therefore i would suggest to get the v750 (not v700- it will create newton rings on your scan due to the uncoated glass)
but also keep your eye out for a 138s in good working order for cheap money.
i got mine for 400euros, 5 componons included and have not regretted this ever. its a machine for life!

good luck to you
cheers

[perfectedmaya]

i have send some of my digital files to print in some stores at 30 cents for a 4r.. it is a bw pic.. but the whites is yellowish..

i did some wet print using my Durst enlarger and i did like it better.. but of course it is so much work and such a mess! not to mention the buld has bursted and now i can't print :(

i am contemplating to change to a LED torch instead of a 250w bulb for a greener Earth!

[Chris Usher]

I concur that an enlargement on a good machine with a good lens and traditional darkroom process is without question the highest quality one can achieve, not to mention the satisfaction derived from time in a darkroom! :-) However, I have had a V750 for the past 3 years and I can vouch for it's versatility and quality. I often shoot 8x10 paper negatives and film and use the scanner extensively with results that, for the money, rival an imacon IMHO. You can use the wet mount adapter for your 8x10 negs or I find that placing the neg emulsion-down on the flat bed with an 8x10 piece of anti-newton glass on top gives me wonderful results 98% of the time. After you have the scan and photoshop to your liking, then you can print out a digital negative on pictorico to size for contact printing which I do for POP prints--plenty sharp IMHO! Of course, you can also make damn good prints on your printer and have nice images to share online etc. this way.

[Sylvester Graham]

. There is not much of an environmental impact in this hybrid type of photography (for those who might be concerned)

Responding to old post, but, don't forget about those negative externalities. How many gallons of chemicals were dumped in a river somewhere to manufacture your scanner, printer, and computer? How much energy was used to mold the plastic? How many gallons of fuel did it take to ship your equipment from china, Taiwan, Japan. Etc?

You'de probably have to use digital equipment for decades to reach a break even point in environmental costs when compared to darkroom. But, you will never end up doing that because digital equipment doesn't last that long.

[photobymike]

Responding to old post, but, don't forget about those negative externalities. How many gallons of chemicals were dumped in a river somewhere to manufacture your scanner, printer, and computer? How much energy was used to mold the plastic? How many gallons of fuel did it take to ship your equipment from china, Taiwan, Japan. Etc?

You'de probably have to use digital equipment for decades to reach a break even point in environmental costs when compared to darkroom. But, you will never end up doing that because digital equipment doesn't last that long.

LOL LOL Yea thats true... i am also quite a greenhouse gas machine..... just ask my wife ... I fart enough methane to run my Cadillac all week long. I get a lot of enjoyment out of developing in the darkroom... but economics and space requirements ... i have 3 kids teenagers/methane producers.... and a wife and 2 cats/mini-methane .. i really am lucky to get my corner and the kitchen sink 3 times a week... I aleast my consuming is at least making jobs for someone else.

[swhiser]

If you intend to master the fine print, both will come in handy.

For contact printing, in order to gain flexibility in sizing the internegative, digital output (onto Pictorico using QTR on the Epson with Piezography inks) has become the best route.

Even if I were committing to this method, I would still want to go back from time to time and make silver prints with the enlarger.

Both.

[dasBlute]

follow up to an old post ...

Ive had the durst now for about a year, had to align it once,
had to get some better condensers, but I've been making prints
like crazy, here is some work from the last two weeks alone....

118320

bottom line, if there are problems with the prints,
I cannot blame the enlarger :)

[Luis-F-S]

The Durst is a wonderful enlarger. Just make sure you get one that's complete, ie condensers, neg carrier, masks, lens boards, and/or a color head, etc., as parts can sometimes be difficult to find. Also make sure it's one of the later ones with the single lens board, not the turret and be sure that the bellows is in good shape! Good luck.

[Drew Wiley]

Do you like tinkering with machines? Do you like darkroom work per se? This is an apples vs oranges subject. A properly refurbished Durst 138 should last a lifetime.

[Jeff Dexheimer]

I don't have a Durst or an Epson 750. I do have an Epson 4870 and a Beseler 45, and from my experience I enjoy the darkroom process much more than the digital process and I enjoy looking at my darkroom prints much more than looking at inkjet prints. Of course that is only my opinion. As for cost, neither option is cheap.

[Michael Clark]

Thank you so very much for your replies. I took a look at the Durst 138 today and it was not
the shape I was hoping it to be. For now, I think I will continue to improve my contact printing ability and
wait until I become better at it and (more importantly) when a good Durst deal comes along.

Eliot
Eliot, I do have a 138 if interested give me a PM.
Mike

[jose angel]

For me, it's an enlarger for B&W and scanning negatives for color.
For me too.
Actually, all my colour work is made using digital. And the more I shoot, the more I like b&w traditional processes. Since the advent of digital, I stopped using chromes, and since then, never colour work again.
You need both machines... the enlarger and a V750. Right now, I rarely use the V750 for other than to make an archive of contact prints.
And I also agree with Steve Sherman about the Beseler vs Durst thing... same experience here.

[Liquid Artist]

I always figured that when I had poor results it was the fault of the tool behind the camera, or enlarger these days.
Thankfully it's the cheapest and easiest tool to fix.

I rarely turn on my computer these days, and like it that way. Plus i rarely use my digital camera, and am about to throw it on a copy stand and leave it there to scan my film.

However I am in the darkroom every chance I can get. I wish work wouldn't get in the way.

Thank goodness for smart phones and pads so I can leave the computer at home.

[Larry Kellogg]

I anxiously await the arrival of my Durst 138S. I've thought about getting a scanner just to scan finished prints from the Durst, but the Epson V750 will not handle 11x14 prints, as far as I know. I can use a scanner that will handle 11x14 at the International Center of Photography in New York, so I guess I'll keep doing that. I won't go back to scanning negatives, printing in the darkroom is a lot more fun for me. I had an Imacon and I sold it. Actually, I sold all my digital gear, and don't regret it for a minute.

[William Whitaker]

Take the Sexton class/workshop first, then make your decision. The more information you have for making a purchase/investment, the better.

[Drew Wiley]

A 138 in decent condition will last a lifetime, and it is easy enough to find a colorhead for one if you decide to print color film, or use a colorhead for VC paper.
Any scanner will need periodic software updates or even complete replacement. But everything depends on what you like to do. I happen to enjoy tactile darkroom
craft and have really gotten tired of anything involving computers. For some people, it's the other way around. Either way, it takes some time and dedication to
perfect your craft.

[Larry Kellogg]

Take the Sexton class/workshop first, then make your decision. The more information you have for making a purchase/investment, the better.


Will,

Could you tell me more about this workshop? I looked through the online materials and I'm tempted to apply, very tempted. Of course, time and money, and all that.

I print every week, and intern in a black and white lab in New York, but I know there is so much more I have to learn about black and white printing. Has John gone more into digital manipulations, or is it strictly a darkroom workshop? I saw some mention of digital tools on the website. How much time do you have to shoot, process, and print your own negatives?

[mdarnton]

Wow! Zombie thread. I didn't realize, and it looks like others didn't either.

There are a lot of different opinions on this topic, digital v silver. For some years I was a custom printer, worked in darkrooms for other people, was pretty good at it, never had trouble finding a job, and I wouldn't go back to silver if you paid me. All of the things that were difficult or nearly impossible in the darkroom without a lot of fuss are a snap in Photoshop. If someone is good and has their equipment honed in, there is NO substantial difference between the two, except that the digital workflow is more direct.

Anyone who challenges the equality of the comparison needs to look at someone who's really got a handle on both, for instance, the work of Abelardo Morell. He had an exhibit of his work at the Chicago Art Institute a year ago--huge prints, beautifully executed, flawless and beautiful by any measure (I didn't like his work, but I sure loved his prints). Halfway through the show (I habitually look at the pictures all first, not the tags next to them) I glanced at the tag and saw I was looking at a silver print, then the next was digital. Going through the show I discovered that about half were silver, half digital. The ONLY difference between them was a slight tonal color difference.

I'm going to be preemptive here and say that anyone who says you can't do good work in digital doesn't have their digital process figured out, it's just as simple as that.

Anyway, silver is fun if you have the room for it, but don't let anyone tell you one is inherently better than the other. I enjoy them both, but have room for only one, now.

[Sal Santamaura]

Wow! Zombie thread...That has negative connotations. Posting to an existing thread rather than starting a new, redundant one is positive, not negative. Makes the archive cleaner and easier to search.

[Larry Kellogg]

I don't want to fight the digital vs. silver battle, but I think at the physical level, the prints are different, and will always be different. Ink sprayed on paper will never be the same as silver halides suspended in a coating of gelatin. Both can be good but the prints looks different, and they always will. I find more depth in a silver print than in a digital one because of the way light is reflected from those silver halide particles.

I liken this debate to one that compares digital pianos with sampled sounds to real pianos that have hammers hitting strings. The physics of the two instruments is different. One instrument has a vibrating string, and one does not, so they sound different, and always will, no matter how expensive a piano you use to produce the sampled sounds.

[sepstein17]

I own a 184 with a turret -- why the skepticism?

[sepstein17]

wrong # -- sorry -- trying to do 3 things at once and forgot my limitations...I have a Durst 138 with a turret -- why the skepticism?