Digital image to film.

[Grandpa Ron]

This is a bit of a twist, but I have a couple of really nice digital B&W photos that I would like to transfer to film.

I have printed them 4x6 and 5x7 on my HP printer/ scanner/copier with good results and I have scanned my film negatives into the computer with good results.

Recently I have returned to the dark side or the dark room side actually. I have all this gear I bought years ago, so I decided to use it. My first approach would be to photograph the monitor screen but I do not want to reinvent the wheel.

So the question is, "Has anyone transferred their favorite digital image to film?"

 

[webestang64]

I'm working on getting my film recorder to work (has to run on Windows 98). Once it gets going I will offer 6x7 negs, BW or C-41. I could do 35mm but the larger format is more wanted by my customers plus no place here in St. Louis to process E-6, E-6 seems to be the standard for dig to 35mm film.
Not sure on price yet.

 

[terri]

So the question is, "Has anyone transferred their favorite digital image to film?"

Have you thought about simply making digital negatives? That's what I've done. Depending on how many digital photos you really want, it might be the easiest option. Just get some kind of inkjet transparency film like Pictorico, pull up your digital image and take it from there. After you get your B&W file the way you like it, you'll just convert it to "negative" values. There's all kinds of information out there on printing digital negatives, and you can make them as small or large as you like. Usually, taking them into the darkroom means you'll be doing contact printing only, so usually the larger the negative you print, the better.

Having said that - I made a perfectly good silver gelatin 8x10" work print from a 4x5" digital negative. And the digital negative was obtained from a tiny thumbnail-sized photo from an old photo booth picture of my grandmother when she was young. My mom found it, wrinkled and cracked, in my grandfather's wallet when he died. She really wanted a print of it. So I scanned that first, "repaired" it digitally and enlarged it as much as I dared. Followed directions from either Dan Burkholder or Brad Hinkel's books and used the transparency paper above. In the darkroom, I only went from 4x5 to 8x10 and got a B&W print:

Hand colored with photo oils for my mom:

So - not a contact print. But if you don't want to make prints, just have a physical "negative" of your digital work, this might still be a pretty simple option. If you store these transparencies in glassine sleeves, they should last for decades, and you can make prints whenever you like. Just my suggestion.

 

[Grandpa Ron]

Terri,

I has thought about it but did not know they made transparencies just for that purpose. Thanks for the info.

That is a rather impressive bit of work, salvaging and old picture. You mom certainly has a great feel for color restoration also.

 

[Derrel]

Film recorder was the name of the old machine used for this, but most of these devices are long gone. The transparency method sounds good.

 

[TWX]

Back in the day it was not uncommon for local affiliate TV stations to make what was called a telerecording or kinescope. It was literally pointing a motion-picture camera at a television screen and capturing the TV screen view on-film, presumably recording the audio in some related process.

The problem with trying to do this for photography is the resolution. TV programs recorded via kinescope are generally poor quality because the maximum resolution is the same as the television's resolution. The playback device defines the quality of the final product. Unfortunately if you want to make a film-copy of an electronic image, you need the highest resolution possible display, ideally matching the resolution of the image you wish to capture. That display also likely needs to be of sufficient quality and calibration such that the resulting images are true to the intended colors.

The highest resolution monitor I find that has a chance of being decent is a 5k monitor from Planar, the IX2790. It's around $800, and is 5,120 x 2,880 resolution, or 14.7 megapixel, though for a 3:2 ratio image the most you're going to get is 4,320x2,880, around 12.4 megapixel. The best commercially available monitor I find is an 8k Dell UP3218K, 7,680 x 4,320, or 33.2 megapixel, but again, at 3:2 aspect ratio you're looking at 6,480x4,320, or 28 megapixel, but that monitor is an eyewatering $5000.

I assume to do this right one needs to know the viewfinder coverage of one's camera, probably create a setup, document that setup, and make a test roll to have developed to see if the viewfinder coverage is indeed set up to maximize the film, and then do all of the work. Not going to be a fast process.

 

[webestang64]

Film recorder was the name of the old machine used for this, but most of these devices are long gone. The transparency method sounds good.

Mine is a Lasergraphics. Does 35mm or 6x7 120. Can't wait to hook it back up. I used it at work many years ago and when the company went under they gave it to me.

 

[terri]

Terri,

I has thought about it but did not know they made transparencies just for that purpose. Thanks for the info.

That is a rather impressive bit of work, salvaging and old picture. You mom certainly has a great feel for color restoration also.

You're welcome! I hope it gives you some ideas.

To be clear, the resulting color print up there was hand colored by me, using Marshall's Photo Oils and oil pencils directly onto the print. Likely used Agfa matte paper, the best to hand color on, now D/C.

I looked on my other computer where I found a couple more shots of the project that you might find helpful.
Here is the original little photobooth pic my mom discovered in my grandpa's wallet. In addition to giving me an eventual reference for the colors of the clothes, it gives some scale:

After digitally cleaning up that sad little photo, I took the steps to get to this, the final "negative" that I printed out using that inkjet transparency sheet "film." I cut out the image to fit my 4x5 filmholder, so I could make an 8x10 enlargement in the darkroom.

If you decide to go this route, it would be a lot easier for you. You're already set up with your good quality digital files on your computer, and don't have to jump through these extra hoops!

 

[vintagesnaps]

I'd thought of digital negs but have yet to try doing one. Terri you make it look easy!! I'd heard it can be rather tricky but maybe not. You got nice results from a little ol' photobooth picture. Nice story that it was carried in his wallet, even if it didn't help the quality of the photo over time, it was valued.

 

[terri]

Thanks, Sharon! I think it's pretty straightforward, once you marry your printer with whatever processing software you have. Lots of info out there, mainly because there are lots of folks who shoot digitally but still want to play in the dark room.