Gretings from Sweden

[(*L*)]

Been working with photo in many different ways for over forty years. In the early -80s with a store that sold photo and computers. Later I worked as a photographer, when the industry went digital much changed. The biggest change for me wasn’t t the digital camera but that you could edit the files and make your own prints. For me there is something special about analogue photography and for my own projects I use everything from 135 to large format. Mostly B&W but also color most often with a panorama camera.

Photography has changed so much over the years and we have things that we couldn’t dream about forty years ago. But there are two things that I miss, first 220-film and also a workflow/ software that can reproduce the colors from a negative color film in a very good way!

So very excited about processing my own files/ negatives and make inkjet prints in colors. So looking very much forward to see what CP 3 can do to all my color negatives,

And last thank you Christoph for all the time and effort you have put into CP.

Have a Minolta Dimage that I don’t really use (since I can’t scan 6x17). Epson V700 and a Canon R.

[robyferrero]

Welcome (*L*)

From analog to digital, the passion continues; that's important.

For 220 film, we need to ensure that many people use 120. In short, there needs to be a lot of demand for 120, so they'll make 220 later.

For the excellent colors of the film through software, I'd recommend consistently using ColorNEG
And for inkjet printing, I'd wholeheartedly recommend an Epson.

For the 6x17 format, I think it's a bit of a problem.
To reproduce it with a digital camera and get a nice print size, you need a camera with a lot of megapixels. Even better with a digital medium format.
But with your Canon R, you can already make beautiful prints.
Otherwise, whether scanning or reproducing, you'll have to split it into at least two parts, and then stitch them together with Photoshop or other software. It won't be the best job in the world.
Depending on the frame's content, a perfect stitching may not always be possible.
In this case, you can divide the frame into a portion where the image content allows for good stitching. It doesn't matter if the two parts are made up of 2/3 and 1/3, for example.
You also have to take into account the edge quality of the lens you're shooting with. But all this is better than nothing.

Roberto

[AlexisMagni]

Welcome (*L*)!

The aspect I like 120 film the most is that it doesnt have as many frames I have to shoot until I can develop it, unlike the endless 36 frames of 135 Format! But that's just me! I know some photographers who shoot 4 rolls of 35mm in a single day!

Regards!!

[robyferrero]

I think it always depends on what you're doing. With 120, you get slower, more thoughtful photography. With 135, you can adopt very different approaches.

[(*L*)]

Thank you Roberto,

I have been in contact with llford and they say they have no machine to make 220-films so I guess it will never come back. But I have been wrong many times before!

I have been a distributor for inkjet paper in Sweden and thru my customers I have some experience. Epson makes very good printers but they also burned many bridges with customers regarding nozzle clogging. I gave away an Epson 4900 many years ago and bought a Canon. Always pro and cons. with everything.

Haven't try stitching within PS, only scanning with Epson. Made some 24" prints x >1m and quality was good enough for me
No problems with edge quality of the lens, using a Schneider Symmar 110mm XL, as sharp as it gets

I will need a lot of help regarding ColorNEG!

All the best!

(*L*)

[(*L*)]

Hello Alexis,

Also like limitations, so I love Rolleiflex, just one lens and one light meter and only 12 exposures!
4 exposures with the panorama camera maybe is to few?

I know digital photographers that sometimes shoots thousands of photos for every session

The most important thing is what comes out and that we are enjoying what we do!

All the best!

(*L*)

[robyferrero]

I have been a distributor for inkjet paper in Sweden and thru my customers I have some experience. Epson makes very good printers but they also burned many bridges with customers regarding nozzle clogging. I gave away an Epson 4900 many years ago and bought a Canon. Always pro and cons. with everything.

Unfortunately, there are always pros and cons to everything.

In my opinion, the technical cons, while obviously not serious, are less important than the pros inherent in the final result, that is, the appearance of the image on paper.

It's clear that, in any case, we're talking about two excellent brands. In terms of final results, they're both good.

However, it would be interesting to know, from your perspective, which print is more satisfying to look at, both technically and expressively.
Of course, it's a matter of opinion; mine or someone else's could be different.
But the perspective of a printer who has worked with both certainly counts.

[C.Oldendorf]

I will need a lot of help regarding ColorNEG!

Splendid, looking forwards to it.

[(*L*)]

Unfortunately, there are always pros and cons to everything.

In my opinion, the technical cons, while obviously not serious, are less important than the pros inherent in the final result, that is, the appearance of the image on paper.

It's clear that, in any case, we're talking about two excellent brands. In terms of final results, they're both good.

However, it would be interesting to know, from your perspective, which print is more satisfying to look at, both technically and expressively.
Of course, it's a matter of opinion; mine or someone else's could be different.
But the perspective of a printer who has worked with both certainly counts.

So many things to take in account, so a very difficult question. I guess most often the user is the limitation. One issue with Canon printers are that there often aren't as many icc-profiles compared to Epson. I talked with Canon Sweden if they could assist and print colour charts on different papers and I would make icc-profiles. The reply wasn't nice, they had no interest in this since they wanted to sell their own papers. And so it is, many users print only on Canon paper for Canon and only use Epson paper with Epson printers. The irony is that neither Canon or Epson make any inkjet paper. But then again also well regarded brand makes no inkjet paper, it's just their own label on the box. You could buy the same paper and pay less if you chose another brand.

[robyferrero]

I understand the issue is much more complex.

I see many people preparing their profiles for papers that aren't Epson or Canon. It seems to me that some even customize them for the Epson and Canon papers themselves.

Thank you.

[C.Oldendorf]

Printing is exactly where the ICC table-based approach really does make sense. A printer is not like a monitor or a camera where each channel simply adds to the others. With ink on paper, the same perceived color can often be produced in multiple ways – you can build it up with a neutral build (gray component replacement, or GCR) that leans on black ink for balance, or with a more chromatic build (under color removal, or UCR) that uses stronger amounts of cyan, magenta, and yellow.

That flexibility is both a blessing and a curse. On the one hand it allows different blends that are technically “right” to coexist; on the other hand it means you really do need a mapping that takes into account not only where a point in color space should land, but also how to drive the device there. That is what the LUT tables in an ICC profile are doing – they describe those multidimensional look-ups between device space and the PCS in a way that a simple matrix could never cover.

There is also an artistic side to this. Because printing involves an excess of possible tone builds, you can deliberately put more ink down than you strictly need for the target color. This can deepen shadows or give the print a different feel, especially under varied illumination conditions. Two prints with the same nominal Lab values may look subtly different in depth or richness depending on how that ink balance was chosen.

It’s important to remember that this is specific to printers. For a three-primary system such as an RGB display, LUT-based profiles are frankly nonsense. There is exactly one path to each color coordinate. But for CMYK and extended-gamut printers, where overlaps, ink limits, and competing strategies (UCR vs. GCR, deliberate over-inking, etc.) all come into play, table-based ICC profiles are not only reasonable, they’re practically unavoidable and a design well crafted.

That said I never figured out how to print my work and it would be for the better of all here if I don't get the idea that I should as that would be a major distraction for months, maybe years.

[robyferrero]

That said I never figured out how to print my work and it would be for the better of all here if I don't get the idea that I should as that would be a major distraction for months, maybe years.

Would this mean dedicating less time to the Forum, and less attention to us users?

But no!

But if you think about it, printing your own photos...