the experiment

donut

donut

Suspended / Banned
Messages
3,088
Edit My Images
No
an experiment has been taking place ,,,,,its totaly ( un ) scientific ,and it involves ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,pictures :D

can people who are not into photography tell the difference between a digitalprint or a wet print ?do they really care ?
watch this space
more to follow
very soon .
 
My prediction, if I may be so bold, they'll see a difference they'll not be able to tell why they look different and won't really be able to express a definite preference for either.
 
Oooh you tease...
 
i had an accomplice ,,,a partner in crime ,,,,andysnap had three frames on film,he scanned them and then had them printed digitaly , he then sent the negs to me , and i printed them in the darkroom. i then asked eight people if they had a preference for either print , i then explained that one of the two prints was printed digitaly and could they tell which one .i scanned the prints on a flatbet scanner and will put them up here .
 
eric_1_Copy_.jpg



eric_2_Copy_.jpg
 
of the above prints ,,one was a black and white 35mm ,,
one was a 6 x6 black and white
and the other was a colour 35 mm
my results will be with andysnap very soon and he will ( hopefuly ) ask eight people their preferences ,,we will then show the results
 
Excellent stuff Andy. I'm looking forward to seeing the actual prints.
 
Is there a way to make comments without colouring others' opinions? Other than a PM I suppose...
 
Go ahead and comment Chris. Obviously its more difficult to make any real comparisons on screen and even I don't know which is which....:D

Andy
 
Actually I've just realised my fundamental basis is wrong! I was thinking we had negative to scan versus negative to print to scan. But we've really got negative to scan to print to scan for the first option. So I'm going to have to think again!

(In the first pair the smudge on the first one had me thinking it was the negative-print-scan, but now I realise either could be smudged!)
 
Image 1
Photo 1 is the wet print

Image 2
Photo 2 is the wet print

Image 3
Photo 1 is the wet print
 
yes its either
neg to scan to print to flatbed scan
or
neg to wet print to flatbed scan
sorry about erics head in the first scan ,,,but it there in the print
 
I don't know how Rob hid his answers! All I can think of is to make the answers white text, which seems a bit daft. But on the basis that scan-print will show less detail and contrast than wet print, I'm guessing wet print is 2, 1, 1. Not at all confident, though... (is there an easy way you can do a reveal, like "Show Source"?)
 
ChrisR said:
I don't know how Rob hid his answers! All I can think of is to make the answers white text, which seems a bit daft. But on the basis that scan-print will show less detail and contrast than wet print, I'm guessing wet print is 2, 1, 1. Not at all confident, though... (is there an easy way you can do a reveal, like "Show Source"?)
Click to expand...

use [ spoiler ] and [ /spoiler ] without the spaces :thumbs:
 
donutagain said:
about what ?
Click to expand...

Well I know it can be all fun and don't wont to be a whiner but.....the only proper comparison would be to see the results at your home.....everything is scanned to be shown on a computer screen. :shrug:
 
Last edited:
excalibur2 said:
Well I know it can be all fun and don't wont to be a whiner but.....the only proper comparison would be to see the results at your home.....everything is scanned to be shown on a computer screen. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Correct Brian, which is why the original prints have been shown to people and will be shown to more when they arrive with me. Andy has posted them on here just so you can see what images we used. If you want to have a guess which is which go ahead but its not really the point of the exercise. :thumbs:

Andy
 
excalibur2 said:
Well I know it can be all fun and don't wont to be a whiner but.....the only proper comparison would be to see the results at your home.....everything is scanned to be shown on a computer screen. :shrug:
Click to expand...

the nearest we could get was to scan the prints ,as opposed to scanned neg v scanned print ,,,but if you want to see them side by side ,,,,,,they're on their way to Andy ,,,,he lives at.................................................the top of the world
 
I think you will find its called Ultima Thule and its way oop north lad, by 'eck.
 
i'd get a nosebleed past watford gap
 
donutagain said:
the nearest we could get was to scan the prints ,as opposed to scanned neg v scanned print ,,,but if you want to see them side by side ,,,,,,they're on their way to Andy ,,,,he lives at.................................................the top of the world
Click to expand...

Ah! but was the colour neg converted to sepia or B/W?
 
I have to agree with Brian on this one, it seems a bit confusing. There is massive difference in the processing of each picture, making any sort of digi vs wet print almost impossible. The tonal differences in the 2 prints of Eric for example are huge, significantly beyond the scope of scanner DMax/DR vs wet print DMax/DR. This is almost the equivalent of me taking a RAW file and processing it, then posting the same file to someone else and getting their interpretation of the file.

The test here is whether people like the printers interpretation of the neg, not whether the digi or wet print is better. I happen to think this is a more interesting comparison mind :thumbs:, and something that would be interesting to see more of in this odd little corner of the forum, where perhaps the talk is less "latest and greatest" gear oriented, and more of a chat about cameras and pictures atmosphere :D
 
I see your point Chris but I still think its an interesting thing to see if people who don't know much about photography prefer the digi or the wet print.
 
Generally, peeps tend to prefer what they are most familiar with, what they are used to seeing everywhere, everyday.
 
the idea was to put a print from a scanned neg next to one printed in the light tight room
now unless you are in said room then most people aren't goint to see them ,so the nearest we could get to show them was to scan both prints and put them up here ,.
anyway , on with my excuses
Andy sent me two negatives ,he had cut them from the film strip individualy ( goint to slap the back of his legs when i see him ) the 6x6 took on the charcteristics of a bow window ,so i put it in a book for a night to flatten it.at this stage i hadn't seen Andys digi print ( the ford ) so i printed in portrait ,,,but when it turned up the next day ,it was in landscape ,so i had to ge back in and re print it ,unfortunately it had reverted back to a bow window ,so it was not in the holder as flat as i would have liked , it was printed at f11 or f22 but does look a bit soft ,,
i had't printed from a colour neg before ,so it took me quite a while to get the exposure time anywhere near what it should have been ,,,maybe with hind sight i should have burnt in some darkness around the stone
and as for Eric,i was down to my last piece of paper ,,so that was my only attempt ,,would like it to have been a bit lighter ,with a bit of sky ,but that was my first and only go ,im fairly pleased it came out as good as it did ,
anywat its now over to Andy ,who will ask a few more people their thoughts on the prints ,then he will welease the wesults .......watch that space
 
excalibur2 said:
Ah! but was the colour neg converted to sepia or B/W?
Click to expand...

you would have to ask Andy what he did for his process , as for me i just printed it normally in the darkroom


the stone gate post was the colour film ,,just in case anyone from other areas is visiting and didnt know :D
 
Last edited:
seems like the wrong way to compare the two mediums to be honest, there are such a silly amount of variables to consider.
 
to be honest Nick , it was more a case of Andy and me wanting to see the difference between a print produced from a neg scan that was printed digitally and one that was done the old way ,so not really meant to be serious ,,,as i said in the op ,a very unscientific experiment ,,
so , how would you compare them then ?
 
Last edited:
Its a great way to compare them, just impossible to share.
I'm looking forward to both your opinions on it.
The only variable I can think of that could effect results significantly would be size, the bigger the prints the more magnified and obvious the individual nuances will be.:thumbs:
 
the package of prints is with Andy at the moment, so when he has his results in he will post them ,,,,that was the reason for scanning the prints John ,its the nearest we could get to showing any differences,,,the best way is to have them on the table in front of you as most people have suggested ,who knows Andy might even post them on to anyone who would like a butchers,,,,,maybe have to send him a beer token or something.
mind you John ,we have to be careful what we say ,in case we get jumped on and called heretics :lol:
 
Last edited:
I shall be shoving them under the noses of various unsuspecting members of the family and some so-called friends this weekend so I'll hopefully have the results on monday.
If anyone does want to conduct further 'tests' on human guinea pigs just let me know and I'll forward them on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top