Not by much if you print Black Only on an Epson, and possibly cheaper if
you use 3rd party ink.
I pay $40CDN for 100 sheets of Ilford Pearl 8x10 RC paper. I usually
need 2-3 sheets to get an acceptable print (not a good one, I'm barely
competent in the darkroom). Total cost is around $0.80-$1.20 a print.
I pay about $44 for 100 sheets of Epson Enhanced Matte, plus $50 for a
full cart of Black Ink that's good for 100+ prints (I use the larger
black carts). I rarely print more than one print, as I do all my
corrections in PS and have a profiled system. That's around $0.95 a
print if my ink only lasts for 100 prints. If I used Eboni from MIS I'd
be paying about $15 a cart ($10.95 US) which would drop my costs to
$0.60 a print or lower.
This doesn't count chemical costs. And multi-ink printing is a fair bit
more expensive than BO.
Capital costs are equal for me, as my Enlarger cost roughly what my
printer did (~$100CDN)
-Adam
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
I don't think that there's any question -- the chemical darkroom has never been
more expensive to run, per print, than digital. Digital printing has a long,
long way to drop in terms of cost per print to get even into the same
neighborhood as the traditional darkroom.
-Aaron
-----Original Message-----
From: Collin R Brendemuehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subj: Re: OT: Why big negs
Date: Fri Mar 31, 2006 7:05 am
Size: 1K
To: [email protected]
>Well, if you want to show your work on the web,
>you have to scan it at some point. Try to find a cheap used 4x5 scanner...
>
>There are fine art photographers who scan their 8x10 negs or slides
>to make prints, it is much cheaper than buying an 8x10 enlarger and
>setting up to do 30x40 chemical prints. The ones I have actually talked
>to pointed out the deficiencies of their digital prints. You had to put your
>nose against the print to see them, but then folks who shoot 8x10 by
>choice are usually perfectionists by nature.
>
>graywolf
There are flatbeds which will do 4x5. But you can end up with moire because
of the glass. Then there's Microtek and you're getting into the $400 range.
They're nice but not as good as a drum scan. Do those very frequently
(4x5 is often $25 per scan) and one had better be making money doing
large format.
So, for us hobbyists, the chemical darkroom is still the cheapest option.
A 4x5 or 8x10 neg or chrome still makes a nice, displayable contact print.
Personally, I've met none who care to do mural-size prints or even wall size.
That's a special requirement. But many do enlarge 8x10 to 16x20 for display.
And for that some have just used their camera body with a new back as the
neg holder & light source.
Sincerely,
Collin Brendemuehl
http://www.brendemuehl.net
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose"
-- Jim Elliott
