This question may duplicate. What process can you use to get book quality prints, such as appear in Brian Bower's book on the M, from slides. My prints from slides look pretty flat compared to the original slide. Thanks

-- Bob Haight (rhaigh5748@aol.com), November 28, 2001

Answers

Bob:

For years I lamented the poor quality of prints from slides, having tried direct type R prints as well as internegs- poor second rate. NOW there is the FUJI Frontier system that scans a slide digitally, then outputs at at least 400 dots per inch onto good quality Fuji Archive paper: Fantastic results. Fuji has an even newer version of the archive paper out that is supposed to be better.

The Frontier system can make prints up to about 10x 15 for about .75 US an inch, or 10 bucks for the 15 in size. Kodak and Konica may have similar systems but I have not seen them yet.

A good negative scanner-Nikon LS 4000, or even the LS 3000 will give you a big file and it can then be printed on a new generation inkjet printer with very good results- much better than the old photographic processes.

I love them and have 3 on my office wall.

-- RICHARD ILOMAKI (richardjx@hotmail.com), November 28, 2001.

I use a Minolta Diamage F-2900 scanner and print on an Epson 1280 printer. I like the Ilford inkjet photo papers. The heavy weight semi mat is particularly nice. This printer allows me to print up to 13X17. Plenty big for 35mm enlargements from slides.

But when I want a real "knock your socks off" print from a slide I will print up an Ilfrochrome. I've been printing them for 20 years and still think there is nothing like it. An almost 3 dimensional quality. Maybe after I have been scanning and printing from scans for a few more years I'll be just as happy with those prints.

Regards Steve

-- Steve Belden (otterpond@tds.net), November 28, 2001.

Just to add there is also low tech way with kodak R3 process my local lab charges only 10usd for a 5x7 , 15usd for a 8x10 .

To my eye R3 prints look better then the intra nen rought and intra negs are very difficult to do properly .

Just another option for you to mull over .

-- Charles Stirk (ccstirkjr@yahoo.com), November 28, 2001.

I was told (today) by the photo lab that I'd lose 10% sharpness with an internegative over what I'd get with the "R" process. I can't add personal experience to that, however, as this is my first slide-to-print job.

-- mary (mebloxsom@yahoo.com), November 28, 2001.

Bob and Mary, forget type-R and internegs and any printing process other than digital. On the cheap, find a lab that uses the Frontier printer. If you want exhibition quality prints, try a lab that uses the Lightjet or Chromira printers (the Lightjet uses lasers; the Chromira uses LEDs). I have 16x20 prints from both of these processes. The look is astounding. (If you tell me where you are, I may be able to recommend some labs).

-- john costo (mahler@lvcm.com), November 28, 2001.

The best Type R prints I have had done were by Fuji, their custom printed "gold" prints at a cost of about $20.00 for an 8X10. I also had some digital prints done and the detail they capture from the slide can be amazing. It can be costly to have only 1 8X10 done, however, so I highly recommend the Fuji gold R prints on high gloss paper.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), November 28, 2001.

John -

I live in NYC. I needed some prints to show potential buyers who aren't slide-oriented and went with the "R" process but would be interested in a place here (there must be one) who can do high-quality digital prints.

-- mary (mebloxsom@yahoo.com), November 29, 2001.

Mary, the best lab in NYC is probably Ken Lieberman . I have a whole list of labs across the country; if you'd like more links, E me and I'll send ‘em to you. I personally use Bill Nordstrom's Laser Light labs , even though I live in Las Vegas.

-- john costo (mahler@lvcm.com), November 29, 2001.

...even though he's in Aptos CA and I'm in Las Vegas.

-- john costo (mahler@lvcm.com), November 29, 2001.