BetterPhoto Q&A
Category: New Answers

Getting Quality Prints From Slide Film

My questions:

1. Does this happen often? Do they "correct" the image exposure? My slide was underexposedon purpose to bring out the colors more.

2. Was it the quality of the print? I honestly don't know what type they used. What should I request that they use? Should I request "do not alter the exposure" or something like that?

3. Also, I am not sold on this place, so any recomendations for web sites or reputable companies for enlargements would be great.

4. Lastly, when viewing slides, do most of you use a projector or just a loupe or a little slide viewer? I am so used to prints, that it is a little annoying to look a tiny image like that.

That said, slide film is really teaching me how to shoot better and it looks much better than prints. But I want to see it look better in print!!

Thanks!
Dave

To love this question, log in above
April 04, 2002

To love this comment, log in above
April 04, 2002

2. There are several different ways to print from a slide. I suspect they made an internegative and that's why you got the results you did. You shouldn't have to give many instructions since they have your slide as a guide. If you can find a place that will scan the slide and print from the digital file you will be much better off.

3. If you want a really high quality job and don't mind spending a little money then check out West Coast Imaging @ wwww.westcoastimaging.com.

4. Projecting is not the best way to evaluate slides. It looks really nice but as I said before, underexposed slides look very good projected but print lousy. The best method is a lightbox and loupe. If you don't like the tiny image then use bigger film. ;-)))

To love this comment, log in above
April 04, 2002

I have to learn to take decent photographs with 35mm and then I'll get up to medium format. But that is a great point!

To love this comment, log in above
April 04, 2002

The SlidePrinter in Denver, Colorado direct prints to Fuji "R" (reversal) paper and they are relatively inexpensive compared to custom labs. It works best if the slide is reasonably "printable" (good exposure) and does not require any special work with color balancing or adjusting print density (print exposure). The downside is the turnaround time having to send them slides by mail (they have "postage paid" mailers) and waiting for the prints to return by mail. This doesn't bother me that much, but many people are accustomed now to "instant gratification." I've had them do some super-gloss larger display prints and they've done an acceptable job.

For large exhibition prints I send the slides to Holland Photo Imaging in Austin, Texas for direct printing to Ilfochrome, a very special print material made by Ilford (a British company). Holland has done excellent work for me. It also has a super-gloss finish. These are not inexpensive, but you have to see an Ilfochrome that's printed well!!! There is a "glow" to the print that is quite unique. It's one of several reasons fine art gallery and museum prints from slides are done on Ilfochrome. There are only a few labs around the U.S. that can make Ilfochrome prints.

I'm very selective about what gets printed, even for small 4x6 prints from The SlidePrinter. Unlike having color negative developed and all frames printed, I'm not paying for and then destroying unwanted prints.

BTW, I'm one of the "diehard" Kodachrome users. Turnaround is a week. Among slide film users, most love it or hate it with only a few in between. Like it or not, nearly all will agree that *nothing* else looks like Kodachrome (Kodachrome is K-14 process for developing; everything else is E-6 "Ektachrome" processing; Kodachrome's emulsion structure is fundamentally different). I suggest that you try it at least once after you've gotten a little experience with slide films.

-- John

To love this comment, log in above
April 04, 2002