8 ms·

Wet mounting will only help if the scanner focus can be optimized. I've got a Epson V750, and _if_ everything is just right, you can get a very good scan, but s

Wet mounting will only help if the scanner focus can be optimized. I've got a Epson V750, and _if_ everything is just right, you can get a very good scan, but still noticeably short of what a drum scan will give you. When I print my MF or 4x5 images, I don't really worry about 'all the detail', since as you say, you'd need a pretty big print to really see them. I'm just happy if they look nice and sharp on the wall. I have to give mad props to the guys still doing collodion--that is way above my pay grade, as they say. And I don't want to carry glass plates on my bike. I try to limit the toxicness of the chemistry I have in the house as much as can, but I still like doing the lab work--it is satisfying to me in a way that no digital process is ever going to be.

bigiain 11y ago
I particularly like the photo of the chemicals (including one in a bottle marked by hand with "XXX"), which includes a bottle of whiskey...
stan_rogers 11y ago
You might be amazed; printing above the industry-standard 300ppi can give you a picture you can never get close enough too, but even at more reasonable viewing distances you can tell the difference in acutance. 480 ppi is a good value for the current crop of Epsons (you'd need a RIP and a lot of farting around to do better, but you can get up to 720). It's sort of like the difference between a contact print and an optical print at the same size; there's no more detail as such at a typical viewing distance, but the edges of the details you can see are sharper. As for the scanner, if you don't really need a car, you can always get a Flextight. (They really are that good, but they really are too expensive nonetheless.)
- Finnucane 11y ago
  I'm aware of the affect of dpi on the print. Sure, I suppose I could also get a second-hand drum scanner, too; sometimes you can get them for cheap. A Flextight is nice but it still a CCD scanner, it is not going to match a PMT.

bigiain 11y ago

I particularly like the photo of the chemicals (including one in a bottle marked by hand with "XXX"), which includes a bottle of whiskey...

stan_rogers 11y ago

You might be amazed; printing above the industry-standard 300ppi can give you a picture you can never get close enough too, but even at more reasonable viewing distances you can tell the difference in acutance. 480 ppi is a good value for the current crop of Epsons (you'd need a RIP and a lot of farting around to do better, but you can get up to 720). It's sort of like the difference between a contact print and an optical print at the same size; there's no more detail as such at a typical viewing distance, but the edges of the details you can see are sharper. As for the scanner, if you don't really need a car, you can always get a Flextight. (They really are that good, but they really are too expensive nonetheless.)

Finnucane 11y ago
I'm aware of the affect of dpi on the print. Sure, I suppose I could also get a second-hand drum scanner, too; sometimes you can get them for cheap. A Flextight is nice but it still a CCD scanner, it is not going to match a PMT.