Now if you used a bigger file, but used the maximum resolution of the printer instead of the typical 300dpi we would typically use for a photo, would you see a significant increase in the quality? Granted you can't make film without a great deal of expense, but would this be a usable alternative?
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: digital to analog conversion
From: "James B. Davis" <jim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, August 12, 2009 11:20 pm
To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students
<photoforum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 15:18:27 -0700, mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote/replied to:
>Well something got me wondering today. Is there a practical way to
>convert a digital file to a negative for conventional printing at home.
>I know the best way is a film recorder, but is there another way that is
>more practical for home use? Some type of copy negs, printing on a
>material I might not be aware? I am sure there are some ways other than
>the film recorder, then again maybe not.
Simply take a photo of the image on a good monitor. Then of course you'll have
to wait until the film is finished, and find a lab that will process the film.
Finally you'll be able to print the negs at home. Good luck.
--
Jim Davis, Owner, Eastern Beaver Company:
http://easternbeaver.com/ - Motorcycle Electrics
Check out my incredible fuse panel - the PC-8 is a hit!
1990 Honda VFR750, 1988 Honda Africa Twin 650
