Hybrid Film and Digital - Your Approach?

[Bob Hubert]

Hi All:

I am interested in hearing about any hybrid (film + digital) workflows that are currently being used. About 2 years ago I was faced with not being able to make 16X20 prints in a traditional darkroom any longer. My solution was to go hybrid in the following way:

Shoot 8X10 (usually Tri X)

Develop in Diafine (I chose Diafine because I do not have to dispose of great quantities)

Scan on an Epson V750 at 1200 dpi (using the full bed dry scan - not wet)

Print on the Epson 4900 in 16X20 size. I love the look of the Canson papers.

Would appreciate hearing from any other hybriders and a description of your approach.

Bob

[vinny]

I drum scan my transparencies (120, 4x5, 8x10) then output via lightjet on fuji crystal archive glossy. I print my b+w stuff on kentmere glossy in the darkroom but I do have some negs that I need to have LVT's made of since they are either damaged from processing erros or have major dust issues. I could also output those via lightjet but I prefer silver prints.

[Lenny Eiger]

I shoot both 4x5 and 8x10 Delta. I soup in Xtol 1:1 on a Jobo. (Testing Pyro this summer.) I scan in using a drum scanner (Aztek Premier) and print on a Roland FJ-540 set up with StudioPrint on both Hahnemuhle and Kozo paper, depending.

I am one of those folks who really can't stand glossy, or even baryta papers, no offense to anyone who likes them, but they just aren't for me.

I print in color (for my clients only) with a dVinci setup and am moving from a 6-tone Piezotone to a K7 insket this month sometime. The Roland's have 12 slots, so I fill 6 with Carbon Sepia and 6 with Selenium. Can do splits, all kinds of things. We will also be offering enlarged negs soon, as soon as the new ink is installed...

I am impressed with the quality of the hybrid systems. I think they are exquisite.

Lenny

[Bob Hubert]

Thanks Lenny

This sounds like a really interesting workflow.

Bob

[tgtaylor]

Funny as just this afternoon I found myself questioning the honesty of printing an alternative process such as the Vandyke and scanning the original print and printing it digitally. Well I did both today. I made this [http://www.largeformatphotography.in...636#post841636 original print posted in the forum's Alternative section and made a digital print of it which is drying on my desk at the moment. The inkjet print really looks good and sure takes a lot less time to make than the original. But is it legitimate?

Thomas

[Zaitz]

Legitimate to what? A good print is a good print. To clarify, it's a scan of a Vandyke and then printed via inkjet? Or just a scan of the negative and then printed via inkjet? The inkjet print (either way) may not be a Vandyke but if it looks great to you that should be all that matters in my opinion. What it's classified as doesn't change how the end product is viewed for me. Call it whatever you want! Good is good and I don't really care how it gets there.

I've used Lenny's scanning service which is fantastic. I'd love to try a few prints through you as well! I usually send out for my prints to the various labs like WHCC, El-Co Color, Bay photo.. etc. I really like the results and couldn't imagine doing it any other way. I haven't yet tried a fine-art inkjet print but have a few images which I think would work better that way compared to Kodak Metallic or Lustre papers.

[Frank Petronio]

Most of the time I shoot Portra 400 and have Edgar Praus process it. Scan on my Epson 700 flatbed (or 35mm on an inexpensive Konica Minolta Dual Scan IV), editing extensively in Photoshop and more often than not convert it to B&W, printing on the Epson R3000 using the Epson driver for color and the Harrington Quadtone RIP for B&W. I like the glossy Harman by Hahnemuhle Baryta.

The printer limits me to 13x19 inches and my current print portfolio is based on 11x17 sheets, untrimmed, so image area is only ~10x12.5 or 10x15. So while I don't have anything very fancy, for portfolio-sized images they look great. I get a lot of compliments and sell work, get assignments from them.

Occasionally I will use Edgar's Imacon and BookSmart's larger inkjets for larger prints. I would like an excuse to use Lenny for good scans and also to find someone to pay for getting prints from Elevator Digital in Toronto (Bob Carnie) who can make traditional fiber-based B&W silver prints from digital files. But until a client or gallery comes along that wants to go large, I'm too damn cheap to blow money on vanity prints that I can't do anything with.

I have a bunch of 32x40s I made when I was teaching and could use your tax dollars to run the school's Epsons (that nobody knew how to run) and I have serious problem storing them, finding the safe physical space for all of this is hard enough unless you start dedicating serious resources (like building additions to your house).

Seriously, I have a 40x60 framed print of a fatass computer gamer dude that looks awesome but I don't want him taking over the living room so it hangs at Edgar's. I have a bunch more in tubes in the basement, rotting away. They are just impractical. Even if I stumbled upon Alec Soth's fame, I wouldn't want to exhibit or sell old prints anyway, so why do them other than to prove you can? It's a cool experience and worth doing to know you can but....

I just invested in building a simple, compact film-darkroom in the basement though. I figure that once Kodak and Fuji fold the color sheet film tent, I will need to process B&W and now I'll be set to return to the fumes of my youth....

[John Rodriguez]

I moved from digital to film, so I was already entrenched in a digital print process.

4x5 color is lab processed.

4x5 b+w is processed a specialty lab that only does BW hand tray processing.

I do an initial scan on an Epson 4870.

I work on the Epson scans and make letter sized prints on an Epson 3880.

If I really like a print I'll print it up to 17x22 and hang it in the house for awhile.

When I find a print I love I have the film drum scanned.

I've found a place with an 11880 I can use for cheap if I supply my own paper which I'll be using for larger prints.

I haven't found any paper I like better then Epson Luster for color.

So far my favorite paper for black and white is Harman Gloss Baryta Warmtone.

[Bob Hubert]

Thanks for the replies!

The question of legitimacy is really interesting. When I started using the hybrid process I wasn't out to copy or duplicate what I did with a silver print - but I was interested in keeping the positive aspects that I enjoyed using 8X10 film combined with early portrait lenses. I can't say they are the same as silver prints, but they are good prints in their own right. I have a number of images on my web site using this method if anyone would like to see...

http://www.studio-cameras.com

Bob

[Noah A]

I shoot almost all color, now it's Portra 160 which is a pretty amazing film.

I've been thinking I should either start getting contact prints done, or I should just suck it up and spend the time to do quick preview scans of each photo on an Epson flatbed. As it is now I edit from the film and go right to the drum scanner, in my case a Howtek HR 8000. I scan at 4000dpi which gives a 16-bit file of around 1.6gb.

I do small portfolio prints and preliminary test prints on my Epson 4880. Final prints, which start at 20x24, I do at a rental lab on a 9900. It's not a bad deal, $20/hour and $1/ml of ink and you bring your own paper. A 40x50 ends up costing around $50 if you work quickly. That same facility also does bigger prints on their 11880, but they don't rent that one by the hour.

I print color on Epson Luster. I've tried some other papers but I really like it, it looks similar to traditional c-print paper and while it's not as thick as some of the other papers, it seems just as durable. This is an issue when you print 40x50 and up, since it's very, very easy to kink or ding a print.

For a while I was doing lightjet digital-c prints, but I actually have more faith in the long-term stability of pigment inkjet prints. I had some lightjet prints on display at a university in normal room lighting and they were noticeably yellowed after only a year.

I'm loving the hybrid workflow. In my opinion it gives me the best of both worlds. I get the look and image quality of film (and with inexpensive equipment!) and I get to print with state-of-the art technology that produces stable prints and consistent, repeatable results.

I don't do that much B&W but I have been dabbling in it for fun. When I started my career I was a hard-core Tri-X 35mm documentary photographer. So it's nice to get back to the darkroom but mostly I see my work in color now.

I was really worried when the Kodak news started to get worse. I was thinking I'd have to go digital in the next few years. But now I'm thinking of going in the same direction as Frank. If color goes away, I think I'd prefer to shoot B&W film instead of going digital.

If I were to switch back to B&W, I don't know if I'll go back to the darkroom for prints or if I'll keep the hybrid thing going. I suspect it would be a combination, since I'll always need to do good scans for publication purposes.