Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/07/10
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I am currently working on my European shots: 30 odd rolls, and most are 10 x 8. I sometimes make 8 x 5's two to each sheet, but I'm not in that production line "mood". I will then make a "selection" of 16 x 12's, and then I will "scan" the negs and put them up on the computer for final review/web page creation, and annoying the LUG ;-) Barry Thornton, in the book I read while working in the darkroom talks about getting "perfection" in terms of all factors: contrast, resolution, grain etc and states that although with a good neg you can get slightly bigger images, "about" the maximum you can expect from most negs on 35mm film is a 10 x 8 print. Cheers On 09/07/2005, at 9:27 PM, Scott McLoughlin wrote: > What typical enlargements do folks *typically* make from their 135 > format negatives exposed with their Leica gear. > > I hear alot about Walmart and Costco processing, but I imagine that > many folks make much larger prints as well. Some comments make > me think that for some folks the image lives on a slide on a light > table. > > I guess I'm also curious about lab wet printing vs. home/darkroom > self wet printing vs. scan + digital printing. > > Does the type of pic influence the enlargement size? Landscape vs. > potraiture vs. street shooting and so on? What about hand held vs. > tripod mounted camera shots? Film choice? > > Thanks in advance for any shared experiences. > > I'm trying to "dial in" my own expectations, particularly > self-scanned/ > digi-printed B&W prints vs. lab/wet printed prints (I don't have my own > darkroom). > > Scott > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > > Alastair