Anyone here still print?

Pookeyhead

Pookeyhead

Suspended / Banned
Messages
11,746
Name
David
Edit My Images
No
Just curious. Most people are scanning their negs, and I wondered if there are any printers left in here?

Just realised I posted this in Photos.... not talk film. Mods please move.
 
Last edited:
Yes. I have an old DeVere 54 (not 504) enlarger which I have converted with an LED light source.

Whilst I believe that digital is now (probably) the superior medium for colour when you consider practicality as well as quality, for black and white, it is nowhere near the quality you can get from a traditional print.


Steve.
 
I've not done any printing since I left school (more than a couple of years ago) I just don't have the space in my current house. However I'm hoping to move soon to something with an area I can make dark; if nothing else I'd like to do contact prints from the 54.
 
No point darkroom printing for colour as most people show their shots on the net or do a A4 print from their inkjet and a VG inkjet an give VG results ....if you have a winner then send the neg\pos off to a good lab for a very large print.
 
Last edited:
Does it count if I get a lab to do them? I don't print myself, haven't since my mum stopped working for Middlesex Poly art dept. Then it was a cheap way (ok free) to produce prints but there was fun in experimenting
 
I'd love to set up a darkroom in my house to do printing, but lack the space. Best I have at the moment is a 3' x 5' WC downstairs, which is a bit of a squeeze.
 
twhite87 said:
I'd love to set up a darkroom in my house to do printing, but lack the space. Best I have at the moment is a 3' x 5' WC downstairs, which is a bit of a squeeze.
Click to expand...

Have you checked to see if there's a public darkroom nearby?
I use a public darkroom in Glasgow city centre for my printing, as I don't have enough space at home either. I develop at home though in the spare bathroom.
 
I still print by 'enlargers' -- I have three -- two given, one bought, A Free Durst M601 6x6 to 35mm, a Free Durst M305 35mm and a b ought LPL C7700 Pro 6x7 to 35mm . I do large B& W in dishes and RA4 Colour prints in a 16x12 " 'NOVA' Slot processor.
 
Byker28i said:
Does it count if I get a lab to do them? I don't print myself, haven't since my mum stopped working for Middlesex Poly art dept. Then it was a cheap way (ok free) to produce prints but there was fun in experimenting
Click to expand...

...who cares how you get a print (whether from digi or film) as it's your shot and the subject in the shot is the most important part.
 
Yes, I have a makeshift darkroom set up in our spare bathroom. Sat on boards over the bath are a Durst AC707 enlarger which can handle negatives up to 6x7, and a set of Nova tanks. I print B&W up to 12x16" using a three slot Monochrome tank and colour (RA4) with a four slot heated tank. The prints then move along the line and are washed in a Nova two slot speed washer that somebody chucked in for free when I bought one of the other tanks (got to love eBay for darkroom purchases!) It's a bit cramped, but it's just a wonderful place to be. I'm particularly taken with colour printing at the moment. I'm amazed every time I see a big colour print come out of the tank. From taking a blank sheet out of the paper safe, to dropping the print in the washer takes about 4 minutes. Much more fun than waiting for goodness knows how long while my ink-jet grinds out an image line by achingly-slow line. Also a hell of a lot cheaper.
 
I always wanted to do some proper printing and came close to it, but since I purchased my Canon Pro-100 and set tp up I am just sold with that.
I also buy all the ink and papers through my ltd company so it costs buttons to do A3+
 
FujiLove said:
Yes, I have a makeshift darkroom set up in our spare bathroom. Sat on boards over the bath are a Durst AC707 enlarger which can handle negatives up to 6x7, and a set of Nova tanks. I print B&W up to 12x16" using a three slot Monochrome tank and colour (RA4) with a four slot heated tank. The prints then move along the line and are washed in a Nova two slot speed washer that somebody chucked in for free when I bought one of the other tanks (got to love eBay for darkroom purchases!) It's a bit cramped, but it's just a wonderful place to be. I'm particularly taken with colour printing at the moment. I'm amazed every time I see a big colour print come out of the tank. From taking a blank sheet out of the paper safe, to dropping the print in the washer takes about 4 minutes. Much more fun than waiting for goodness knows how long while my ink-jet grinds out an image line by achingly-slow line. Also a hell of a lot cheaper.
Click to expand...

Congrats but you must have a lot of winners per roll of film to set it all up......of course you can wait till the winners accumulate then do them all one go. For just a few winners you can't beat the convenience of an inkjet and get the results quickly.
 
I have done a little bit of printing when Hooley kindly let me use the darkroom at his uni but nothing since. I have to agree with J that it is definitely a little bit of magic when the print appears.
The plan is to eventually get a little darkroom set up in a shed next to the kitchen but that will be in a few years so for the moment its just digital printing.

Andy
 
excalibur2 said:
Congrats but you must have a lot of winners per roll of film to set it all up......of course you can wait till the winners accumulate then do them all one go. For just a few winners you can't beat the convenience of an inkjet and get the results quickly.
Click to expand...

But Brian it isn't just about the result. Yes, digital printing is very good nowadays but for me the whole point of film photography is that it isn't digital and the more I can do myself, using the 'traditional' methods, the better.
 
excalibur2 said:
For just a few winners you can't beat the convenience of an inkjet and get the results quickly.
Click to expand...

Brian, sometimes you really leave me scratching my head. :thinking:

How can you bother to shoot film yourself, but then question why others might want to print traditionally because it's not as fast or convenient as your inkjet?
 
Last edited:
skysh4rk said:
Have you checked to see if there's a public darkroom nearby?
I use a public darkroom in Glasgow city centre for my printing, as I don't have enough space at home either. I develop at home though in the spare bathroom.
Click to expand...

This is great. Ta! Going to try ringing a few people tonight and see if I can get me on some workshops.
 
Andysnap said:
But Brian it isn't just about the result. Yes, digital printing is very good nowadays but for me the whole point of film photography is that it isn't digital and the more I can do myself, using the 'traditional' methods, the better.
Click to expand...

Yes Andy you are right as I've been doing photography for so long (yanno been there done it) that the DIY excitement has gone :(...but would just add that I once read that in a picture gallery it was very very difficult to see the difference between a digi and darkroom print...can't remember whether it was just for colour or B\W.
 
I have an LPL 3301D enlarger (badged Jessops) but only as it doubles as a copy stand.

I have the dishes safelights etc. still but have no desire to use them.

Way too expensive compared with digital.
 
skysh4rk said:
Brian, sometimes you really leave me scratching my head. :thinking:

How can you bother to shoot film yourself, but then question why others might want to print traditionally because it's not as fast or convenient as your inkjet?
Click to expand...

I'm a pretend pro now, so take the shots and let someone else do the work :D...remember Kodak had something like "just click and we do the rest"......................anyway it's congrats from me anyone doing DIY in the darkroom.
 
I use large format film, and find it easier to load the darkslides on a darkroom bench than in a changing tent (which I use when on holiday) so I wouldn't convert my darkroom (purpose built but small). I haven't done any conventional printing since I fractured my elbow 10 years ago and found it too difficult to manipulate the negatives into the carrier with the limited arm/hand use I had for a time afterwards. Up to that point, I'd had a Nova slot processor on the bench and would pop in for a few minutes when I wanted to make a print. It was fast and convenient. I had at that time experimented with inkjet printing, but found that the black and white prints that I produced were seriously let down by the ink.

I haven't given up on the idea of going back; and I've left the LPL 5x4 enlarger and Durst M805 black and white set up on the bench; the slot processor is now in a cupboard under the bench and an Epson 3880 sits on the bench instead.

I regret to say though that I can produce a better black and white print digitally than I could in the darkroom from most negatives, mainly, I think, down to my lack of patience.
 
excalibur2 said:
Congrats but you must have a lot of winners per roll of film to set it all up......of course you can wait till the winners accumulate then do them all one go. For just a few winners you can't beat the convenience of an inkjet and get the results quickly.
Click to expand...

I leave the darkroom semi-permanently set up. I.e. the boss makes me dismantle it when we have guests staying for an extended period, such as over Christmas. So most of the time it's all ready to go. One of the many advantages of the Nova tanks is you can leave the chemicals sat in them for ages and they keep really well. For instance, when I print in colour, all I have to do is look in my note book to see how many prints I made in the last session, drain off 20ml per print from the tanks and add the same amount of fresh chemical (which I have pre-mixed and ready). That typically takes less than ten minutes. I turn on the heater two hours before I want to print and off I go. B&W is even easier as the chemicals are already at the correct temperature. It's very quick and easy.

Like others have said, for me it isn't about convenience. If I wanted that, I would be still be using my old Fuji X100S and viewing everything on screen and syncing them with my iPad. I shoot film and wet print because it connects me to my photographs and I get an enormous sense of satisfaction from feeling that I have 'crafted' each print. I find the more I keep away from digital, the happier I am. Maybe it's my age, but I've started doing the same with music. I listen to vinyl almost exclusively now. It's probably five years since I played a CD, except in the car.

RA4 printing is so quick, cheap and easy that I'd estimate I print at least double the photos I would have done if I'd had to scan and inkjet print them. I think that's partly down to finding the process addictive, so although a negative may not look perfect or an obvious keeper, I will still often print it. It's surprising how great some prints turn out to be when you see them at 12" x 16" compared to a quick test scan.

I accept that what I do isn't for everyone, or for the vast majority, but it makes me really happy and that's 99% of what I want from photography.
 
:agree: and that my friends sums it up for me just perfectly.
 
FujiLove said:
I leave the darkroom semi-permanently set up. I.e. the boss makes me dismantle it when we have guests staying for an extended period, such as over Christmas. So most of the time it's all ready to go. One of the many advantages of the Nova tanks is you can leave the chemicals sat in them for ages and they keep really well. For instance, when I print in colour, all I have to do is look in my note book to see how many prints I made in the last session, drain off 20ml per print from the tanks and add the same amount of fresh chemical (which I have pre-mixed and ready). That typically takes less than ten minutes. I turn on the heater two hours before I want to print and off I go. B&W is even easier as the chemicals are already at the correct temperature. It's very quick and easy.

Like others have said, for me it isn't about convenience. If I wanted that, I would be still be using my old Fuji X100S and viewing everything on screen and syncing them with my iPad. I shoot film and wet print because it connects me to my photographs and I get an enormous sense of satisfaction from feeling that I have 'crafted' each print. I find the more I keep away from digital, the happier I am. Maybe it's my age, but I've started doing the same with music. I listen to vinyl almost exclusively now. It's probably five years since I played a CD, except in the car.

RA4 printing is so quick, cheap and easy that I'd estimate I print at least double the photos I would have done if I'd had to scan and inkjet print them. I think that's partly down to finding the process addictive, so although a negative may not look perfect or an obvious keeper, I will still often print it. It's surprising how great some prints turn out to be when you see them at 12" x 16" compared to a quick test scan.

I accept that what I do isn't for everyone, or for the vast majority, but it makes me really happy and that's 99% of what I want from photography.
Click to expand...

Well that sounds a good setup with the right gear......my colour setup was with a Paterson tank on a hot plate turning the drum by hand when the motor broke down and all the washed prints on newspaper strewn over tables and settee......I just can't go back to that.

PracticalPhotography_Aug79.jpg
 
excalibur2 said:
...who cares how you get a print (whether from digi or film) as it's your shot and the subject in the shot is the most important part.
Click to expand...

I don't agree. For me, part of the fun is producing the print.

Also processing the film and even making the camera are part of the process.


Steve.
 
I'm a shooter and printer of b/w, pretty much exclusively.
I don't scan hardly anything anymore.
If I want to share a print digitally, I take a picture of the print, usually while its still hung from drying.
Sharing is ok, but I want to please myself first...:)
 
Steve Smith said:
I don't agree. For me, part of the fun is producing the print.

Also processing the film and even making the camera are part of the process.


Steve.
Click to expand...

It's easier now compared to when I did colour prints many years ago as you can scan the negs to see the good ones and then select those ones to do in the darkroom....for me it was print all the shots on B\W paper (to save money) then choose the ones I\we liked to do in colour and hope there was no dust spots (one reason I went up to MF)......it got to the stage (I suppose because of the volume) when I didn't enjoy it any more.
 
Last edited:
I choose my negs first with a loupe, and then by projection on the base board.
Often, what looks ok through a loupe ends up being a non print on the base board, due to debris, density, damage, missed focus....whatever
You could do it with scans I suppose but if your output is a wet print, scanning is a waste of time, time better spent making the print..:)
 
joxby said:
I choose my negs first with a loupe, and then by projection on the base board.
Often, what looks ok through a loupe ends up being a non print on the base board, due to debris, density, damage, missed focus....whatever
You could do it with scans I suppose but if your output is a wet print, scanning is a waste of time, time better spent making the print..:)
Click to expand...

Well I meant initially scanning the negs to see on the computer the ones that are winners just a low dpi would do for speed, also while on the screen you can crop or whatever to decide how you would like the print.......then use the enlarger and print gear for the ones you have chosen. So digi helps but the final result is all analogue
Before scanners for negs were invented there was no quick way, although with B\W negs I used to tilt the neg in a bright light esp sunlight and would see a positive and that helped a bit.
 
Last edited:
Still have a dark room set up but have not used it in years, digital and inkjet printer have taken over.
 
excalibur2 said:
Before scanners for negs were invented there was no quick way, although with B\W negs I used to tilt the neg in a bright light esp sunlight and would see a positive and that helped a bit.
Click to expand...

I'm confused. Didn't they have contact sheets and loupes in your day?

I find it a lot easier and a lot faster to do a contact sheet than to scan a whole roll of negatives, personally. No scanner that I've ever owned has allowed me to scan all of my negatives in one go like I can with a contact sheet.
 
skysh4rk said:
I'm confused. Didn't they have contact sheets and loupes in your day?

I find it a lot easier and a lot faster to do a contact sheet than to scan a whole roll of negatives, personally. No scanner that I've ever owned has allowed me to scan all of my negatives in one go like I can with a contact sheet.
Click to expand...

Well you can't beat a large picture on your screen and it all depends on the scanner or what price you want to spend on your hobby as the V700 etc will scan 24-35mm negs in one go
 
Pookeyhead said:
Just curious. Most people are scanning their negs, and I wondered if there are any printers left in here?

Just realised I posted this in Photos.... not talk film. Mods please move.
Click to expand...
A timely reminder. I went to the Photography Show and saw Scott Kelby, who gave a wonderful 90 minute lecture and finished with four main points. One of them was to make prints. He wasn't bothered how or who made them but just to make them and give them away. He gave one away one year and made a fair few hundred dollars with further work as a result.

I've produced one since March (for an advert) but must create a few more and give them away as a sort of loss leader - which is what Scott's print was at the end of the day. It just proved to be very profitable.

Digital ... Film ... whatever, and I don't think it matters, the hard and tactile article means so much more than an image on a screen.

As I started this post - a timely reminder :)
 
I have a 6*7 enlarger and Nova processor permanently set-up in a spare shower room. However I regret to say that the Nova has no chemicals loaded at present and I haven't done any printing for a couple of months. I feel that I will get back into the habit soon-ish but something has come up that will eat up my spare time for the next two weeks. Unfortunately, even with the permanent set-up and the Nova, there is still some physical and mental inertia to overcome to start a darkroom session.
 
Steve Smith said:
There was/is.

If you have a 10 x 8 enlarger you can print the whole of a 35mm or 120 film in one go.


Steve.
Click to expand...

Well a few times put the negs on B\W paper in the frame and exposed with the enlarger (any would do)..... if the negs are all similar densities the results were ok and I suppose it was fairly quick if you had all the dev and fixing trays ready and hot plate to dry the paper...but never like it as it was "keyhole surgery" and my wife (or friends) would laugh looking through a loupe deciding on the ones to print.
 
excalibur2 said:
...who cares how you get a print (whether from digi or film) as it's your shot and the subject in the shot is the most important part.
Click to expand...

With black and white it really DOES matter. A beautifully made fibre based print is a thing to behold. No digital printing method can even get close.

With colour.. no, it doesn't matter, and digital is actually better if you get it right.
 
Last edited:
A guy on another forum said:- his digi shot of the some subject (wooded scenery) was inferior compared to his MF camera using I think Velvia...I can't remember if he was using a light box, but more interesting is how a cibachrome print compares to a digi print.
 
In answer to the original question, I never print anything these days. I don't even print on inkjets, regardless of film or digital. I printed some Cibachrome back in the day, and while it was much easier to control the temp compared to C41, and the colours were always easier to get, the sharpness of the print on Cibachrome paper was always much worse than on C41 paper. Yet projecting the slide could reveal the original to be super sharp. And you could pour the chemicals down the drain if I remember correctly (ph neutral?).

I'd never print colour again in a darkroom, but could be persuaded to print BW in a tray again as has been said, watching the image appear under red light is somewhat magical.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top