Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Interested in film workflow, who does what and why?  
Develop and print from negatives? Or develop, scan, edit, inkjet print?

Am I wrong to think (prob nostalgically) about developing and getting prints from negatives (in a search for simplicity) and avoiding the digital edit?

Thanks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

If you don't have a darkroom, hybrid digital makes a lot of sense. The mainstream colour workflow has been this way for decades, whether we realised it or not - the last generation of minilabs made photographic prints from scans. Today we can edit the scans ourselves rather than leaving it to the minilab operator to make adjustments. I get commercial colour processing done together with scanning, then edit myself. The final output can be to traditional light-sensitive paper or to inkjet prints, if prints are needed - again, I use a commercial service for this, uploading the edited files. B&W is a lot easier to do the traditional way if you want to, but it's a long time since I had access to a traditional darkroom. You can of course develop yourself and get someone else to make traditional prints directly from the negs, but then you are at the mercy of their decisions in the darkroom. Again, hybrid digital can make sense here - there are plenty of labs that can make real silver prints from edited scans, and you'll still get the 'film look', the texture and grain that set it apart from pure digital.

Edited by Anbaric
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. @Anbaric How do get your ‘final ouput’ to traditional light-sensitive paper?  I assume once you have edited a scan, it is, of course, a digital file. Agree your point about being at the mercy of the darkroom operator in the traditional sense. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

B&W Film work flow.     Yes nothing new to me and if i may so so I can highly recommend from taking B&W the photograph to developing negs and printing the photo and print finishing + mounting the finished photo is a great rewarding hobby , especially if you have a brilliant M3.  (No batteries needed.)That reminds me I have a lot more prints that I’m really pleased with to finish and mount. Ready to do the next print presentation .

 

 

 

  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Big John said:

Thanks. @Anbaric How do get your ‘final ouput’ to traditional light-sensitive paper?  I assume once you have edited a scan, it is, of course, a digital file. Agree your point about being at the mercy of the darkroom operator in the traditional sense. 

You just need to upload the file to a lab that uses a 'digital enlarger' to print on to conventional photographic paper, which is then developed and fixed in the normal way. These might be the printers in minilabs like the Fuji Frontier, or professional larger format printers like the LightJet or Durst Lambda, which use lasers to expose the paper. You can of course have files from digital cameras printed in the same way. The labs that provide this service may call the colour prints 'C type prints' and the B&W 'silver gelatin prints' or something similar.

One example in the UK is Harman Lab:

https://harmanlab.com

Edited by Anbaric
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, Big John said:

Interested in film workflow, who does what and why?  
Develop and print from negatives? Or develop, scan, edit, inkjet print?

Am I wrong to think (prob nostalgically) about developing and getting prints from negatives (in a search for simplicity) and avoiding the digital edit?

Thanks. 

A hybrid workflow does not make much sense if you want to avoid digital edit IMO. 
Scanning negatives with either a photographic setup or a scanner always involves a digital workflow. And one that is more complicated than just using a digital camera. 
Hybrid means that you have to master the analog and digital domain.

To avoid digital edit, you could send off your film and have it developed and scanned, and possibly printed by the lab. The only problem is that this gets more expensive and it is even harder to find a good lab that does not ruin your work in the development or scan stage. Certainly with classic B&W film, modern labs can mess it up, because they are only used to the C41 type of color and B&W films.

Once you start developing film yourself, you have to do some digital editing and then some more if you want to print yourself.
Do you have a digital workflow with a digital camera now? Why do you want to avoid digital edits?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Having a darkroom, I make silver gelatin prints, so no computers involved, at all.

The darkroom is a respite from modern life, I'll never give it up.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Big John said:

Am I wrong to think (prob nostalgically) about developing and getting prints from negatives (in a search for simplicity) and avoiding the digital edit?

Depends very much on what you envision as your final result. A classic darkroom can be rewarding haptically and emotionally. But the results that proper inkjet printers provide can be on another level. 

I’m result-oriented and don't fear digital, as that hybrid workflow was already the norm when I entered the film industry. Thus, I shoot on 35mm negs (B&W stocks, Vision 3, could be as well Portra), digitise and edit them for printing and inkjet print them.

Basic workflow:

I develop at home, use a Sigma 70mm Macro with a Valoi Easy35 on my SL2-S for scanning, capture the negs in Capture On, do the editing there, export a large Tiff, and open it in Mirage for printing on my 44” Canon printer. 

The results are stunning, when you got pass that editing-printing learning curve.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

To each his own. I grew up with traditional darkroom development and printing, but only for B&W...color was always handled by commercial labs. I never found the joy in printing however, rather frustration, and my results never even came close to the output I submitted to master printers for the final product. When I switched to digital scanning I felt more comfortable that I was submitting a higher quality product to the printer, and indeed the results seemed to confirm that. So I've stuck with what works for me. Besides, my doctors advise me to stay away from chemicals as much as possible to avoid aggravating my medical issues in old age.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I shoot Kodak Vision 3 mostly and have this ordered, developed and scanned by https://silbersalz35.com. Then I'll print at home using an Epson SC-P 900. B&W film goes to another lab for development and scanning. Thinking of doing B&W myself as I have scanning equipment to scan MF and 4x5" film. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, rmueller said:

I shoot Kodak Vision 3 mostly and have this ordered, developed and scanned by https://silbersalz35.com. Then I'll print at home using an Epson SC-P 900. B&W film goes to another lab for development and scanning. Thinking of doing B&W myself as I have scanning equipment to scan MF and 4x5" film. 

Are you happy with the scans you get back from silbersalz35? I am trying this at the moment with 500T. I used to do development and scanning myself but at the moment I just don’t have the time. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 7 Stunden schrieb roelandinho:

Are you happy with the scans you get back from silbersalz35? I am trying this at the moment with 500T. I used to do development and scanning myself but at the moment I just don’t have the time. 

Yes, I am very happy with the scans. They offer two types of scans, the one that is part of the development process creates 4000 × 2437 pixel JPEG images and then they have this "Apollon" scan that costs extra which delivers 14204 × 8827 pixel JP2 images. I can send you some scanned files from 500T if you are interested. I shoot 250D mostly though.

Regards, Ralf

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I use both.

For BW I develop and scan the negs at home.

Then I select the ones I care most and print them the traditional way in my darkroom. I’ve always been wary of rebuilding a darkroom, only to be surprised how little space it actually requires in a shed.

For colour it’s 100% hybrid, getting negs developed by a lab, then scanning at home.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is how I do it. Expose a roll of film, develop it at the kitchen sink, make a digital contact sheet, make full resolution scans of only the good ones with my digital camera, post process the files to get the best out of them, post or print the results.

I never worry about the work involved because if something is good it's clearly worth the effort, and there are never 36 worth working on anyway, two or three from 36 is an excellent average. So if you can edit your own photographs it shrinks time. But a negative is a very neutral thing and it's content needs translating into what you saw or want it to be, and nobody can do that properly except you, and this is true of using a darkroom or opening Lightroom. Otherwise I don't think starting with film is worth it, anybody would be wasting much of the potential of film if a bit of darkroom or post processing work causes you to come out in a sweat. 

 

 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, rmueller said:

Yes, I am very happy with the scans. They offer two types of scans, the one that is part of the development process creates 4000 × 2437 pixel JPEG images and then they have this "Apollon" scan that costs extra which delivers 14204 × 8827 pixel JP2 images. I can send you some scanned files from 500T if you are interested. I shoot 250D mostly though.

Regards, Ralf

Thanks for responding. If it's not too much trouble, yes I would like to see a few scans, thank you!

I'm wondering if these upgraded "14k" scans are a bit overkill, especially with 500T which is probably not the most detailed... Do you expose these films at +1 stop like they are recommending? I'm not sure how the exposure latitude and dynamic range of these films compare to something like Portra 400. Also, is there a big difference in resolution and grain size between the 500T and 250D in your opinion? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
vor 9 Stunden schrieb roelandinho:

Thanks for responding. If it's not too much trouble, yes I would like to see a few scans, thank you!

I'm wondering if these upgraded "14k" scans are a bit overkill, especially with 500T which is probably not the most detailed... Do you expose these films at +1 stop like they are recommending? I'm not sure how the exposure latitude and dynamic range of these films compare to something like Portra 400. Also, is there a big difference in resolution and grain size between the 500T and 250D in your opinion? 

Hi, 

can you send me your email address via PM, I'll send you few scans, high- and full resolution from 250D and 500T. However I'm out of home over the weekend so the earliest I can send those is on Monday.

I do expose the film with +1 stop as suggested and yes, the 500T has significantly more grain. I haven't used the 50D yet, where I live there is rarely so much light for ISO 25. The 14k scans have a lot of latitude in post, you can tweak in all kind of directions and the scans are absolutely clean.

One thing to mention is that the scans are kind of raw and include the surrounding film, so you have to crop the scanned images.

But check for yourself once I have send you few samples.

Regards,

Ralf

Edited by rmueller
typo
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, rmueller said:

Hi, 

can you send me your email address via PM, I'll send you few scans, high- and full resolution from 250D and 500T. However I'm out of home over the weekend so the earliest I can send those is on Monday.

I just sent you a PM. Thanks for this and enjoy your weekend! 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

My workflow for 35mm (b&w and color film) is shoot the roll, develop the roll at home & dry. 
 

I then bulk scan low res j-pegs using Epson V850 and “epson scan” software.  Import to Lightroom and these scans act as my contact sheet to review the images.   Selected images are then rescanned into DNG with my Plustek scanner, imported into Lightoom (same folder as the low res jpegs), converted to Positive with Negative lab Pro plug in and post-processed. 
 

I’d love to dark room print someday but until then this works for me.  The next step I’m trying (this weekend actually) is bulk-loading Vision3 250D, which will dramatically cut down on my costs per roll. I already bulk load B&W 

Edited by grahamc
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
On 5/8/2024 at 8:45 PM, Danner said:

Having a darkroom, I make silver gelatin prints, so no computers involved, at all.

The darkroom is a respite from modern life, I'll never give it up.

Me too; for many decades, I have loved it. Plus, in the wake of the digital revolution, you can now get really great enlargers at low prices. I scan some of my silver gelatin prints on a flatbed scanner to share by email or for Flickr.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...