Thanks Susie and others. Susie's suggestion looks like the best chance I have so my much neglected pentax can come out of moth balls. Helen ----- Original Message ----- From: "Susie Zada" <szada@zades.com.au> To: <AUS-VIC-GOLDFIELDS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 12:19 AM Subject: Re: Photos > Hi Helen, > > Unfortunately no-one can create something out of "nothing" - if the operator > says they will lose definition if bigger than 8x10 then anyone else is going > to have exactly the same problem. > > Your problem appears to be that you have had digital copies done in the > first place and obviously that means a limited number of pixels, hence the > reason they can't be blown up to poster size. > > Your best option is to photograph the original (NOT digital unless you have > an extremely high powered digital camera although even then that may not be > sufficient). You then can get your poster print done from the negative. > You are still likely to get a grainy result but not as bad as trying to blow > up a digital image. > > Hope that makes sense. > > Regards ............ Susie Z > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert & Helen Kenney" <kenney10@bigpond.com> > To: <AUS-VIC-GOLDFIELDS-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2005 11:39 PM > Subject: Photos > > > > Can any one assist me. I have copies of old photos which I have had copied > > using the Kodak photo centre at the chemist. I want them to be taken to > > poster size and the operator tells me that they can't take the photos any > > bigger than 8x10 as they will lose definition. > > Can anyone suggest where I can get them copied to a larger size and > > roughly how much it will cost, as I am having them copied for the > > Historical Society so costs are important. > > TIA Helen > > > > > > ==== AUS-VIC-GOLDFIELDS Mailing List ==== > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list send the word 'unsubscribe' in > > the body of a message to AUS-VIC-GOLDFIELDS-L-request@rootsweb.com > > > > > > > ==== AUS-VIC-GOLDFIELDS Mailing List ==== > Victorian place names database > http://www.rootsweb.com/~auswgw/vic_place_names.htm > >

Hi Folks Sorry for the late coming in on this - been on a all too short holiday and just got back to catch up on mail and I noticed this one from Helen so I though I would chuck in my 2 cents. Sorry Suzie you are not quite correct - When copying a Photo from a Photo be it a conventional silver haloid or digital image you must first make what is called an InterNeg. In other words you simply take a picture of the photo on film as you would a picture of the kids or family dog but under much more controlled circumstances. Its not just a case of grabbing a camera and taking a photo. In most cases the average Weekend snapper does not have a decent enough camera, equipment or expertise to do this specialised task. You need special Close Up lenses and filters to maximise detail and clarity of the final negative which is then used to produce the final Photo. Setting aside the issue of the camera and expertise etc the final quality is also directly effected by the size of the IntegNeg so the Chemist is quite correct because most commercial photo processors only use 35mm film stock and indeed the maximum recommended final print size from 35mm is 8x10 inches and before anyone jumps up and shouts "but I have a bigger one" yes you can indeed produce bigger prints from 35mm BUT the quality does start to fall off. The better the camera and photographer the larger you can go before the drop in quality becomes noticeable. The 8x10 size is recommended because that is all the AVERAGE camera and weekend snapper can produce. Now addressing Helen's problem - yes you can go larger in the final print Helen in fact up to 16x20 Inches or even bigger BUT you will need to seek out a Professional Photo Lab NOT your local Chemist or even a Camera Shop although they may know of a Pro Lab. The Professional Lab will shoot the InterNeg on 600x600mm film stock which is near 4-5 times bigger than 35mm film stock. Its all to do with enlargement. To get 8x10 from 35mm film you will need to enlarge the negative image about 15 times and that enlarges all the flaws 15 times as well. To get an 8x10 from 600x600mm film stock you only need to enlarge the negative about 5 times so all the flaws are only enlarged 5 times as well thus you can get a far superior final image. Now it follows that if you are prepared to put up with a quality drop of 15 times (equal to an 8x10 from 35mm film) then clearly you can enlarge the image much much more! A 15 times enlargement from a 600x600 negative will produce something we call poster size which is about 40 inches by 80 inches but you will have to stand back a bit to view it clearly because at that size the image will be full of flaws. I suggest you get your Yellow Pages and look under Professional Photo Labs but be warned - it will cost dollars! This process is not cheap nor are the Photo Labs! If you are in Melbourne I can suggest a couple that may still do it but if you are interstate I'm afraid its the Yellow Pages. Hope this helps - belatedly. Cheers Ron Phillips Melbourne Vic ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert & Helen Kenney" <kenney10@bigpond.com> To: <AUS-VIC-GOLDFIELDS-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 12:00 AM Subject: Re: Photos > Thanks Susie and others. > Susie's suggestion looks like the best chance I have so my much neglected > pentax can come out of moth balls. > Helen > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Susie Zada" <szada@zades.com.au> > To: <AUS-VIC-GOLDFIELDS-L@rootsweb.com> > Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2005 12:19 AM > Subject: Re: Photos > > >> Hi Helen, >> >> Unfortunately no-one can create something out of "nothing" - if the > operator >> says they will lose definition if bigger than 8x10 then anyone else is > going >> to have exactly the same problem. >> >> Your problem appears to be that you have had digital copies done in the >> first place and obviously that means a limited number of pixels, hence >> the >> reason they can't be blown up to poster size. >> >> Your best option is to photograph the original (NOT digital unless you > have >> an extremely high powered digital camera although even then that may not > be >> sufficient). You then can get your poster print done from the negative. >> You are still likely to get a grainy result but not as bad as trying to > blow >> up a digital image. >> >> Hope that makes sense. >> >> Regards ............ Susie Z >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Robert & Helen Kenney" <kenney10@bigpond.com> >> To: <AUS-VIC-GOLDFIELDS-L@rootsweb.com> >> Sent: Sunday, August 28, 2005 11:39 PM >> Subject: Photos >> >> >> > Can any one assist me. I have copies of old photos which I have had > copied >> > using the Kodak photo centre at the chemist. I want them to be taken to >> > poster size and the operator tells me that they can't take the photos > any >> > bigger than 8x10 as they will lose definition. >> > Can anyone suggest where I can get them copied to a larger size and >> > roughly how much it will cost, as I am having them copied for the >> > Historical Society so costs are important. >> > TIA Helen >> > >> > >> > ==== AUS-VIC-GOLDFIELDS Mailing List ==== >> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list send the word 'unsubscribe' in >> > the body of a message to AUS-VIC-GOLDFIELDS-L-request@rootsweb.com >> > >> > >> >> >> ==== AUS-VIC-GOLDFIELDS Mailing List ==== >> Victorian place names database >> http://www.rootsweb.com/~auswgw/vic_place_names.htm >> >> > > > > ==== AUS-VIC-GOLDFIELDS Mailing List ==== > To unsubscribe from this mailing list send the word 'unsubscribe' in > the body of a message to AUS-VIC-GOLDFIELDS-L-request@rootsweb.com >