"reverse hybrid" printing

[naugastyle]

SO glad this thread was posted. I have been wanting to print old family photos as well, and really didn't like the digital negative route--not because I care that it's digital, but because it sounds really expensive and uses equipment I don't have. I never even considered this option, and it's so simple! I might try the outdoor-overcast light approach rather than trying to set up lights.

[Jim Noel]

My family wants me to try to reproduce some photographs they have of my great-great-grandparents, they want 11x14" prints. However, I suspect all they have for source material is 2000x1600 scans. Is there a workable technique I can use to print those optically? Something along the lines of maybe printing to transparency and enlarging from that?

I have a 45MXT, so perhaps I could reverse the scans digitally and print a 4x5" transparency...

anyone have any experience with a process like this? I'm hoping I'll hear back from them and they'll tell me that they have negatives to work from, but I'm not sure I'm that lucky!

If they have scans, someone has prints. In fact, isn't it more likely they have original prints? IF SO JUST COPY THEM AND PRINT THE NEW NEGATIVE.

[c.louis]

Anyway... There are transparent film for inkject. People use it to print digital images then use it for cyanotype... Van dyk Brown.... Some of my classmates print in 4 image in 4"x5" on8.5x11" inkject transparency then cut it individual 4x5 neg for enlarger.


http://www.freestylephoto.biz/sc_search.php?q=transparency&rfnp=3000&&sp=d

[richard ide]

Garbage in; Garbage out! That is a digital, not analogue method.

[jp498]

I used to a great deal of copying with a copy stand. If you don't have or can't get a copy stand, you can do it with a tripod over the artwork, just as long as you setup the lights not to cast a shadow of the tripod legs. 2 aluminum clip-on work lamps from the hardware store is all you need for light. I shot the images with tmax 100 on 35mm with a macro lens. Exposure should not vary from image to image, but sometimes bracketing was useful if you need to bring out shadow detail not well represented in the original. That was plenty of quality for 11x14 and smaller prints and often exceeded the quality of the originals, which weren't usually high end imaging. They tended to be scenes of local historical importance or small soft portraits. I'd then process and print them as normal. Sepia toning the finished print was often a desirable way to make prints for display.

If you need to use a computer, I'd suggest using a quality dslr+lens, inverting/touching it up in PS, etc...and printing onto clear film like pictorico for contact printing.

[fotch]

Having done thousands of copy negatives of prints of all sizes, the best set up was using a view camera on a tripod, holding the print on a metal board with magnetic strips, and studio stobes set at 45 degree angles.

Most of the time, would use a roll film back making 6x9 negatives, occasionally a 4x5 negative if restoration was needed.

Your Mamaya 645 should work fine. I always used a slow film.