A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Featured Equipment Deals

Five Top U.S. Photography Schools to Consider Read More

Five Top U.S. Photography Schools to Consider

Are you thinking of going to photo school? Photo.net conducted an independent survey to find out which schools are the most recommended by other photographers.

Latest Equipment Articles

Sony a6300-First Impressions Read More

Sony a6300-First Impressions

When Sony's invitation to spend a couple of days shooting with the new a6300 in Miami arrived via email, I didn't have to think twice before sending my RSVP. Announced in February and shipping this...

Latest Learning Articles

Macro Photography Slideshow Read More

Macro Photography Slideshow

*These are some of the highlights from our recent Macro Photography Contest!* Click the arrow to begin the slideshow. h1. William Banik "Bayou...

digital enlarger

Ray Clemmer , Aug 22, 2011; 07:53 a.m.

anyone ever retro a cheap digital projector into a digital Enlarger for their darkroom?... looking for equipt used and the results obtained....


    1   |   2     Next    Last

Steve Smith , Aug 22, 2011; 08:08 a.m.

The resolution would be terrible but it would work.

Ray Clemmer , Aug 22, 2011; 08:18 a.m.

steve, you mean the lens will be soft or there will be pixel problems?

Marc Rochkind , Aug 22, 2011; 08:43 a.m.

I suppose you know this, but producing a wet print from a digital image would be more expensive than and produce worse results than would making an inkjet print.

Dave Redmann , Aug 22, 2011; 09:49 a.m.

Any "cheap digital projector" is going to have extremely low resolution, 1 MP or less. Unless you're making wallet-size prints--and that would harly seem worth any trouble--the resolution is going to be very low. And that's ignoring all of the other problems and challenges that could well exist.

Durst or somebody made a digital enlarger, I guess mostly for printing digital images onto FB paper in a wet darkroom. I suspect it cost many thousands of dollars. From what I've seen (a couple of test prints), the quality was good, though.

Ray Clemmer , Aug 22, 2011; 09:53 a.m.

there is no 'ink jet' print that can compare with a silver gelatin b/w print and never will be... i'm not a rich man and can't afford this-->http://de-vere.com/products.htm .... looking for alternatives.... digital negative processing is simple with software, much more so than dodging and burning ever was . . . why the photo community hasn't embraced a cross between the old and new technologies, taking the best of both, and made the best of both possible i dont understand other than to say the corporate has had their influence too much so for the artist to see such a happening take place.... side by side in a gallery the 'ink jet' to me looks like a piece of @%^$ when hung beside a quality darkroom made product... the digital camera is a blessing but the counterpart inkjet print is not, and that is my humble opinion.yours will probably be different, i'm sure

Michael Axel , Aug 22, 2011; 10:01 a.m.

The problem they speak of with a digital projector is that there will be a lot of pixelation. It could be a neat effect if done right, but it would be nowhere close to that of a regular enlarger. DeVere and Durst make/made digital enlargers, and the price on the Dursts were well into the tens of thousands of dollars. Expensive enough you could only justify the cost by using it in a commercial lab setting.

Ray Clemmer , Aug 22, 2011; 10:06 a.m.

everyone, please explain what you mean by the 'resolution'..? pixels showing? what?... when i see a projected LARGE image from a projector it looks fine, why would it not result in a decent 16x20? when it looks good wall size..?

Dave S , Aug 22, 2011; 10:18 a.m.

You can get a B & W gelatin-silver print from a digital file using a lightjet printer, if that's what you want. Mpix (and probably many other labs) offer this as a routine service at a reasonable price.

IIRC, the paper is a special Ilford RC paper optimized for lightjet. Some high-end custom labs will do lightjet to fiber-based paper.

Ray Clemmer , Aug 22, 2011; 10:36 a.m.

Dave, thanks, never heard the term 'lightjet' so i did a search ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LightJet .... and of course this cool idea is out of production, i guess its cost was just too much.. but i do see the labs that still have them in use.. thanks for the alternative.. but heck, i like to diy, of course, satisfying the creative urge.... but have almost completely given up film for a memory card from the great convenience, but the for the few 'good ones' i do prefer silver prints.. dang, just wish there was a good cross technology darkroom product avail for the home, guess not..

    1   |   2     Next    Last

Back to top

Notify me of Responses