Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,908   Posts: 1,556,013   Online: 1112
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    333
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudeofus View Post
    I know that transparent material is available which can hold incredible fine structure, but is there also photo paper which can hold this level of detail? Detail which goes beyond what the naked eye can detect?
    Sure, any standard RA4 paper, even the cheapest mini-lab paper you can find should easily do this. I don't know how you would get your images onto the paper, just saying that the paper is not going to be the limit.

    I've been in a handful of these internet "discussions" before, and have found that many people don't listen to well-reasoned arguments about why, so I won't go there. Instead, I'll tell a true story.

    About 20 years ago, in a large photo outfit where I worked, we were having problems delivering a lot of detail onto color paper. Perhaps it was a Copy & Restorationservice or something - I don't remember. The main technical manager stated matter-of-factly that this was a known limitation of the textured 'E' surface paper, that it was not possible to do better. The manager's mind was closed to any other argument or consideration (we see this is not a new behaviour with the internet).

    So I decided to have some fun. With a Word Processor, I printed off a line of text in various font sizes, then rigged a c-mount lens to image this onto the 'E' surface color paper in question (focusing was a the hardest part). After some fine-tuning, I got a decent exposure and focus. My final result looked like a printed hyphen or dash: a dark line about 1/16 inch (1.5 mm) long.

    I took the piece of paper to our next meeting, along with a 5X loupe. I asked the chairman, could he see anything in the dash mark? The room was silent while he peered through the loupe. After a half minute, he smiled, saying "Nope, I don't see anything!" As it was passed around the table, more and more people became emphatic that they did not see anything either! Yet all had the same sly smile. Eventually, everyone got in on the joke - the dash mark, barely readable under a 5X loupe, said, "ACT LIKE YOU DON'T SEE ANYTHING."

    There's more. The biggest doubter, the technical manager, became the biggest believer. He later told me that he put the print under a 50X microscope, and was further astounded to discover, not only was it readable, but the letters were all sharp and crisp.

    As I said at the beginning, I don't know how you can get your images exposed, but the photo paper should not be the limit.
    Last edited by Mr Bill; 01-21-2010 at 02:21 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  2. #12
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Be that as it may, Bill, the level of detail in any paper I know is still substantially lower than the sharpness of film or instant print materials. The paper texture is simply too much, from what I've seen. Ilfo comes close but.. it is ilfo. It is a very nontrivial process compared oto making instant prints with a daylab!

    On the one hand, I definitely see your point that beyond a loupe, the extra detail is moot. But on the other hand, my understanding is that the O.P.'s whole objective is to have much more detail than is visible.... I guess so that if someone did loupe it, there'd be a lot more detail to discover, but also just to have the satisfaction of knowing that he is wasting as little as possible of the information.

    Actually I found this to be my main motivation for doing LF slides, there is something I find very attractive about knowing that there is always more detail. There is WYSIWYG... and then there is the holy crap level of detail from a slide. There are whole new worlds of detail in an LF slide, as you know well! The closest thing I have seen to that is the (now discontinued) 8x10 polaroid... and the 4x5 fujiroids are equally good, just smaller. They can be enlarged substantially.
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    333
    Quote Originally Posted by keithwms View Post
    Be that as it may, Bill, the level of detail in any paper I know is still substantially lower than the sharpness of film or instant print materials. The paper texture is simply too much, from what I've seen.
    Keith, what was your method for delivering detail to the paper? I suspect you are working from the same basis as the aforementioned technical manager.

    Since you only mention the loupe, I think perhaps you did not read the part about the microscope. I didn't think it added to the story, but I did also looked at my test strips under a microscope, in the 50-80X range. The letters were indeed fairly sharp, as they flowed across peak and valley of the 'E' matte texture (It was the Kodak professional portrait paper of the day). This texture did not seem to affect things any more than rolling hills and valleys affect sharpness of the shadow of a cloud.

  4. #14
    Shawn Dougherty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,134
    Images
    290
    I make 2 1/4 silver chloride contact prints as a final presentation. They have a tremendous presence and beg the viewer to "look closer".

    I have seen similar things done with small slides on a sort of light box as previous posts have suggested. Good luck! Shawn

  5. #15
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Bill View Post
    Keith, what was your method for delivering detail to the paper?
    Contact print.
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    333
    Quote Originally Posted by keithwms View Post
    Contact print.
    I won't argue about paper texture being a big factor for contact prints. I think that if you tried a camera exposure of color paper, in the same manner as film testing, you might have a different opinion of it.

    As a point of reference, a fellow named Ctein, in his book Post Exposure, says "the typical color-negative paper can record about 65 line pairs per millimter (lp/mm)."

  7. #17
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Bill View Post
    I won't argue about paper texture being a big factor for contact prints. I think that if you tried a camera exposure of color paper, in the same manner as film testing, you might have a different opinion of it.
    Ok. But I thought this thread was about contact printing small slides... apologies if I am missing something.
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  8. #18
    ic-racer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Midwest USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,278
    Maybe a little off topic, but I did some 'doll house' sized prints for my kids. They were around 1 to 2 cm in size. They were lith prints for a more antique look. The rule of thumb is to use a lens with a focal lentgh the same as the diagonal of the print you want to make. Negative size does not matter. I have also reduced 8x10 negatives to 4x5, 5x7 and 2x3 just for fun.

  9. #19

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    333
    Quote Originally Posted by keithwms View Post
    Ok. But I thought this thread was about contact printing small slides... apologies if I am missing something.
    I would say, for max detail, make the contact prints on glossy, not textured paper.

    I guess I should apologize for mentioning textured ('E') paper, but it IS what was tested in my story. So if one is going to optically project the image, then some texture ('E' surface) probably doesn't matter.

  10. #20
    hrst's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Finland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,300
    Images
    1
    Also, when contact printing, if you use a small, point-type light source and/or take it further away from the paper, you will get higher definition images as the paper surface / film emulsion thickness won't matter so much anymore.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin