Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/10/23

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: chrome for prints
From: Jim Brick <jim@brick.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 11:27:31 -0700

At 09:03 AM 10/22/97 -0500, Eric wrote:
>
>Why do you choose chrome film if the final goal is a print? The only
>printer I know who does Ilfochrome in a way that doesn't lose shadow detail
>and give blown out highlights (i.e. match the film's potential beauty) is
>Portland Photographics, and last time I looked their 8x10 with a contrast
>mask just under $100. Do you print your own?
>
>I know chromes are a lot more fun to edit (and easier to judge). But if the
>final goal is prints, I'd be using slow neg film. What are your reasons?
>Just curious.
>
>Eric Welch

Eric,

There are two grades of Ilfochrome, normal and low contrast. Most pro labs
(at least here in CA) will make a mask (35mm - 4x5) for $15 to $20. Calypso
Imaging here in Silicon Valley charges $19. An 8x10 Ilfochrome print is
$20. But with the low contrast material, many times, masking is not
necessary. If you are doing your own printing, making your own mask (if
needed) is really simple. Almost all (actually 100% of those that I
personally know) of the fine art photographers that sell their work in
galleries use chrome film and Ilfochrome prints. Black abyss shadows and
blown-out highlights is a thing of the past with the current Ilfochrome
process. Check-out:

http://www.lightroom.com/services.html

for the complete story. After years of printing both pos & neg, I've
given-up on neg printing.

Jim