Jump to content


Photo

printing from double-x vs printing from tri-x


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 chris hoag

chris hoag
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 17 posts
  • Student
  • Chricago

Posted 27 August 2010 - 11:07 PM

I was wondering what would give better end results in general: shooting on double-x and making prints from the camera negative or shooting tri-x reversal (or plus-x reversal if I can find some) and making an interneg with 7234 and then making release prints from that. How would the end prints of these two workflows differ? I understand that the reversal-interneg-release print route has an additional print generation which would add grain but I would be able to avoid using double-x which I hear is a very grainy stock.

thanks,
chris
  • 0

#2 Chris Burke

Chris Burke
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1675 posts
  • Boston, MA

Posted 31 August 2010 - 09:22 AM

I was wondering what would give better end results in general: shooting on double-x and making prints from the camera negative or shooting tri-x reversal (or plus-x reversal if I can find some) and making an interneg with 7234 and then making release prints from that. How would the end prints of these two workflows differ? I understand that the reversal-interneg-release print route has an additional print generation which would add grain but I would be able to avoid using double-x which I hear is a very grainy stock.

thanks,
chris


if you shoot on reversal (7266 or 7265), you can optically blow it up to 35mm interneg, can you not? I would think this route would give you the best image quality. have you tested? you will really have to watch the shadow detail with the reversal stock, that is why going directly up to 35 and skipping the 16mm internegative will yield the best possible image.
  • 0

#3 chris hoag

chris hoag
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 17 posts
  • Student
  • Chricago

Posted 31 August 2010 - 11:43 PM

I wish I could but the optical printer I have access to is 16mm only and getting 35mm prints made at a lab is probably too costly. I guess I'm asking which is grainier: a first generation print made from double-x or a second generation print made from tri-x reversal? you're right though, I should probably just do some tests.
  • 0


Broadcast Solutions Inc

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

FJS International, LLC

Technodolly

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Ritter Battery

Glidecam

Metropolis Post

CineTape

Opal

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Wooden Camera

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

Visual Products

The Slider

Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

CineLab

Tai Audio

Visual Products

CineLab

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

rebotnix Technologies

Metropolis Post

Abel Cine

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

CineTape

Willys Widgets

Opal

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Wooden Camera

Aerial Filmworks

The Slider

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Paralinx LLC

Rig Wheels Passport