Re: slide vs print

[P3D John Ohrt <johrt@xxxxxxx>]

P3D ron labbe wrote:
> 
> > I have a
> >state-of-the-art super-duper condition Themelis Red Button viewer, and the
> >slides I've viewed look great to be sure, but I haven't seen anything to make
> >me think that good prints seen with a good Holmes viewer are inferior.
> 
> Prints are always second generation images- never as crisp as originals.They
> are best as contact prints which is rarely done.  Also, I've never seen any
> color prints- including Cibachromes and dye transfers- with color as
> brilliant as with color transparencies-
> 
> I do love the good, classic b&w prints- they were generally done extremely
> well.
> No comparison, however (in my opinion) to modern transparencies~

I think you are talking apples and oranges here.  :-)


You are overlooking the fact that positives are not necessarily
transparencies. (eg. Polaroid positives, or shooting directly to print
stock.)

It is absolute resolution that counts.  A contact print for a Holmes
card can have greater resolution than a 35 mm transparency or perhaps
even a 60 mm transparency simply because it is a larger format. Either
approach is not inhibited by resolution.  

I fear far to many of us think of the output of a 1 hr lab when we think
of enlarged print quality.  Ask to see some examples from a lab
recommended by an experienced professional photographer.  Your 1 hr lab
won't likely "damage" your negative, and the prints make a convenient
means to screen your work.  But when you go for the gold, a professional
lab with higher quality print stock, chemistry, enlargers, and most
importantly, a highly qualified operator will deliver markedly superior
results.

If the professional lab exceeds your means, there are higher quality
minlab operations which do use better print stock and have more
attentive and experienced operators.

Paying more is no guarantee of quality, so do compare notes with other
photo enthusiasts.

There are some "limits" to slide films:

There is a very limited choice of B&W media.

While ISO 400 speed and lower covers a lot of photographic "territory",
above ISO 400, there is a very limited choice of any slide media.

If you prefer colour and can avoid extreme low light situations, then
you can "live" with "slide" technology.  I think a lot of P3D members do
just that, and are very pleased with the results.  I am not suggesting
that 35 mm slides are inadequate for the majority of applications.

If you like to work in B&W or low light or large format, then the
"slide" approach could be inhibiting.

regards,
--
John Ohrt,  Regina, SK, Canada
johrt@xxxxxxx


------------------------------