Kai
Hello everyone,
I’m new to the forum. I’ve been shooting medium format for a year now. So far, though, I’ve only been shooting in black and white, developing the film myself and printing the enlargements in my own darkroom. I’m really enjoying it. But now I’m also keen to try colour photography. What advice can you give me? I don’t fancy developing the colour positives myself in the darkroom. Are there any affordable large-format prints available for medium format, or is it really expensive? Does anyone have any experience with scanning negatives and then printing them? If so, which scanner would you recommend? Or is it possible to have scans done professionally?
As you can see, I need a bit of guidance. I’d appreciate any tips or personal experiences.
Kind regards,
Kai
SxDx
You can also hand in roll films at chemists.
At DM, for example, development and prints cost the same as for 35mm film. The quality of the prints is fine; in my opinion, the ‘premium paper’ option is also worth it here.
Of course, you need to bear in mind that the print size depends on the image format. For example, if you’re shooting 6x6 and tick the 10x15cm option on the film bag, you’ll get 10x10cm prints rather than 15x15cm. The shorter side of the image is therefore always the deciding factor, and the longer side is automatically determined by the aspect ratio.
michael-kielgmxnet
Hi Kai,
I use a Canon 8800F to scan medium-format film. It offers decent value for money, but of course it can’t compete with proper film scanners when it comes to resolution. It’s more than enough for 20 x 30 cm prints, though.
Once you’ve digitised the negatives, you can order prints from all sorts of providers. I usually order from dm online; they even manage to cut square prints properly :)
If you’re looking for something a bit more upmarket, I can recommend Farbglanz. There, you can also order prints directly from the medium-format negative or request a photo CD when the film is developed.
cfb_de
I simply take my 120 colour films to my trusted photo shop, where they are printed on their in-house Frontier printer in sizes ranging from 6x6 to 30x30 and from 6x9 to 30x45. I pay exactly the same there as I would for a 35mm print.
With large prints, you have to bear in mind that 13x13 is often the maximum size for 6x6. And I don’t really use medium format for stamps...
Best regards,
Franz
Kai
You can also hand in roll films at chemists.
At DM, for example, development and prints cost the same as for 35mm film. The print quality is decent; in my opinion, the ‘premium paper’ option is also worth it here.
Of course, you need to bear in mind that the print size depends on the image format. For example, if you shoot in 6x6 and tick 10x15cm on the film bag, you’ll get 10x10cm prints rather than 15x15cm. The shorter side of the image is therefore always the deciding factor, and the longer side is automatically determined by the aspect ratio.
Hello SxDx,
thanks for your reply. That sounds quite straightforward and I think I’ll give a chemist’s a go first
.
Kind regards
Kai
Kai
Hi Kai,
I use a Canon 8800F to scan medium-format film. It offers decent value for money, but of course it can’t compete with proper film scanners when it comes to resolution. It’s more than enough for 20 x 30 cm prints, though.
Once you’ve digitised the negatives, you can order prints from all sorts of suppliers. I usually order from dm online; they even manage to cut square prints properly :)
If you’re looking for something a bit more upmarket, I can recommend Farbglanz. There, you can also order prints directly from the medium-format negative or request a photo CD when the film is developed.
Hello Michael,
Thanks to you too for your explanation. I’d already had my eye on the Canon 8800F. Your comments on print quality and size have convinced me a little more, because proper film scanners for medium format are, after all, almost unaffordable.
I’ll definitely give dm a try then.
Kind regards,
Kai
Kai
I simply take my 120 colour films to my trusted photo shop, where they are printed on their in-house Frontier printer in sizes ranging from 6x6 to 30x30 and from 6x9 to 30x45. I pay just as much for this as I do for a 35mm print.
With large-format prints, you have to bear in mind that 13x13 is often the maximum size for 6x6. And I don’t actually use medium format for stamp-sized prints...
Best regards,
Franz
There’s some truth in your comment about the stamp format.
Many thanks for pointing that out.
Kind regards, Kai
Wolfgg
Hi Kai,
Real film scanners aren’t actually that great. With medium format, you only need a real film scanner if you really need to get the very best out of your images. You’ll only notice a difference compared to good flatbed scanners with a transparency option when you look at them side by side – simply because of the larger ‘permissible’ circle of confusion in medium format compared to 35mm. Just one example: with the Epson 4870, you can scan a 35mm slide at, say, 3200 dpi and then blow it up to A3 on a colour printer (I have prints like that hanging on my walls); in the finished image, if at all, only an eye well-trained by drum scanners would find anything to complain about. With medium format originals, naturally, correspondingly larger final formats are possible, and the scanner can handle up to two 4x5" sheets at once.
The 4870 handles everything for me, including colour negatives (which are the most difficult originals for any scanner) from all manner of film and developer combinations from my former days in the darkroom.
Regards, Wolfgang
Kai
Hi Kai,
Real film scanners aren’t actually that great. With medium format, you only need a real film scanner if you really need to get the very best out of your images. You’ll only notice a difference compared to good flatbed scanners with a transparency option when you look at them side by side – simply because of the larger ‘permissible’ circle of confusion in medium format compared to 35mm. Just one example: with the Epson 4870, you can scan a 35mm slide at, say, 3200 dpi and then blow it up to A3 on a colour printer (I have things like that hanging on my walls); in the finished image, if at all, only a keen eye trained on drum scanners would spot anything to complain about. With medium format originals, naturally, correspondingly larger final formats are possible, and the scanner can handle up to two 4x5" sheets at once.
The 4870 handles everything for me, including colour negatives (which are the most difficult originals for any scanner) from all manner of film and developer combinations from my former days in the lab.
Regards, Wolfgang
Hello Wolfgang,
Thanks for your message. I’ll have a look at Epson’s flatbed scanners as well.
Regards, Kai
TeeGee
I can only agree with Franz’s suggestion: a good minilab is likely to deliver the best results to begin with. If necessary, you’ve also got a member of staff on hand whom you can either pat on the back or have a word with, depending on the results.
GeorgK
The best a flatbed scanner can achieve with medium format is, at best, (mediocre) 35mm quality. If that makes you happy, I won’t try to talk you out of it. I still doubt the point of it, though. I reckon the time wasted on mediocre results is far greater than the financial investment. I’ve had an 8800F sitting around for two years now, and I’ve actually given up on working with it – it’s not worth it. 35mm from an old Minolta Scan Dual (2700 dpi) comes out better than 6x6 MF on the Canon. You can use it for archiving old stuff and for tinkering, but for serious work, there are better options.
Georg
Wolfgg
Black-and-white images are the best way to see what the scanner is capable of. Attached is a section of a TP2415 scanned with the 4870 (films with lower resolution cannot ‘push the scanner to its limits’). It is a section of a 4.5 x 6 cm negative, the 6 cm edge of which would now measure 140 cm on my screen (which has a pixel pitch of 0.28 mm), i.e. exactly a 25x enlargement (1400 mm / 56 mm). It was scanned at 3200 dpi with unsharp masking set to medium. Isn’t that enough?
Regards, Wolfgang[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
