Can I do this on my own or do I need a pro with a larger Format?

[BKSinAZ]

I own a Nikon N90s with several nikon lens and a SB28 flash that mounts on top of the camera. I have been into photography for several years at a novice level, not a newbe.

My wife and I would like to have a large portrait done of us, approximatly 24 X 30, perhaps larger or what ever the standard size is close the that.

Anyhow, money is tight for my wife and I and we did not really want to go out and hire a portrait studio at this time. Will my camera do the job? Will the negatives that are shot in my camera enlarge to the size I require if I use a slower film or do I need to have a studio with a larger format do the pictures?

If my camera will do the job, which film/speed? I plan on doing this in my living room with a black sheet or something like that behind us.

I was thinking of one of two nikon lens. I have the 35-70 2.8 D or the 28mm 2.8 D lens. Not sure which will do the better job.

I also have a 3.2 mega pixel digital camera if it will do better with enlargements?

Any advise is welcome.

[exposure]

Will the negatives that are shot in my camera enlarge to the size I require if I use a slower film or do I need to have a studio with a larger format do the pictures?

I have seen 35mm film used effectively on billboards, its mostly to do with viewing distance. You'll see grain at close range, but a large print like that is usually wall mounted or something.

If my camera will do the job, which film/speed? I plan on doing this in my living room with a black sheet or something like that behind us.

Using a decent 50ASA film you should be able to get a usable print. (maybe even 100ASA) Sounds like you should use negative film for this project, a bit safer exposure and color balance wise. Please note that if you use indoor lighting, you may need to buy Tungsten balanced film.

I was thinking of one of two nikon lens. I have the 35-70 2.8 D or the 28mm 2.8 D lens. Not sure which will do the better job.

Sounds like the 50 to 70mm end of the zoom lens is most appropriate.

I also have a 3.2 mega pixel digital camera if it will do better with enlargements?

I doubt the digital will make better enlargements, but it will probably be a lot cheaper and somewhat more flexible.

What kind of lighting are you plan to use? Color balance is going to be more of an issue with film wheras digital will have in-camera white balance control.

At the end of the day, if budget is the main concern... I would fool around with the digital until you get a setup and lighting you like.. it's free! Then at the end of the shoot, you can cover your bases and shoot a roll or two of film. (hint: if you set your digital camera to the same ASA as the film you use, you can use the digital like a polaroid)

hope this helps...

[Outdoorsman]

Buy the slowest film possible- ISO 50 should do it. Don't bother with the digital- you won't get the same image quality. For a smaller print you might, but for a 20X30 you definitely need the highest resolution possible. Do not use the 28mm lens- this is too wide and will not allow you the right perpective. Use the zoom at its longer end.
Don't go for a black sheet. Try something that will impart a more warm, family feeling to the image. But not too distracting, since you and your wife are the main subjects. Make sure the film is balanced to your light source, and do your best to not use the flash unit shoe mounted. If you can get a cable to use it off-shoe, do it. If you can bring in a few extra lights and then set them up to be nice and even with no harsh shadows, then do that instead.
Or better yet, go to the studio you might have used and note their setup. You might be surprised as to how simple it can be. Two floods with umbrellas hooked up to the box and a 35mm manual camera? It is not unheard of. With a little baling wire and duct tape, you might be able to come up with something that works for the one time you're going to use it. Study portraits for the lighting schemes- how do you want the image to look?
Personally I would not use slide film, since the so-called "feedback loop" is so large and the exposure latitude so small. Try some pro print film, like the Fuji NP films or the Kodak Portra films.
Also you might want an assistant to stand in for you next to your wife, wearing the same colors of clothes you will be wearing. This will allow you to be more precise with the metering and composition while you are behind the camera.

[another view]

16x20 is (my opinion) so-so for a 35mm print, taken in the best possible circumstances. This includes a very sharp lens (like the 35-70 2.8 is), tripod, moderate aperture - say f8 or so, careful focusing and everything else. It depends on your expectations as far as what you'll get. Definately stay to the slowest film speed possible, and go to a pro lab for the highest quality processing and printing.

Medium format would give you a huge boost in quality, but do you want to buy a camera system for one portrait? Sure, MF gear is selling for next to nothing these days on a "popular internet auction site" and if you ever wanted it, go for it. But to buy a system for one shot is kinda silly. A compact digital - 3.2mp or whatever - isn't going to cut it. Should give you a good 11x14 or maybe even a little larger, but I wouldn't try it that big. Might come in handy for use as a "digital Polaroid". Portrait photographers relied on Polaroids to double check the lighting, composition, etc before committing a shot to film. You could use the digital the same way for instant feedback. When you have it how you want it, shoot film.

Try it out in 35mm and see what you think. Go with an 11x14 enlargement first to make sure you're really happy with it before you go to the expense of such a large print. Even an 11x14 will start to show problems that will be more obvious in a big print (as in grain, sharpness, etc). If you really want an excellent 24x30 print, hire a pro to do it on medium format. You're not just paying for their use of the equipment but also the expertise of how to light, pose, etc. Try it yourself first and see what you think though.

[Jeff82]

I own a Nikon N90s with several nikon lens and a SB28 flash that mounts on top of the camera. I have been into photography for several years at a novice level, not a newbe.

My wife and I would like to have a large portrait done of us, approximatly 24 X 30, perhaps larger or what ever the standard size is close the that.

Anyhow, money is tight for my wife and I and we did not really want to go out and hire a portrait studio at this time. Will my camera do the job? Will the negatives that are shot in my camera enlarge to the size I require if I use a slower film or do I need to have a studio with a larger format do the pictures?

If my camera will do the job, which film/speed? I plan on doing this in my living room with a black sheet or something like that behind us.

I was thinking of one of two nikon lens. I have the 35-70 2.8 D or the 28mm 2.8 D lens. Not sure which will do the better job.

I also have a 3.2 mega pixel digital camera if it will do better with enlargements?

Any advise is welcome.

The best really large prints I've seen from 35mm film are slides that have been printed (not scanned). Not only are they nearly grainless at enlargements of 11x, but maintain much of the color contrast that is lost when scanning slides. You'll get really rich deep colors with great sharpness. I'd go to a pro-printer or a high-end photo shop and ask specifically about this process --how it was done prior to scanning. It won't be cheap, maybe $60 for the size you mention. See what they recommend in terms of maximum enlargement size.

You'll also need to use a tripod, and faster shutter speed, 100-speed slide film. The 35-70 2.8 D lens should be fine for the task.

Hope this helps.

--Jeff

[another view]

The best really large prints I've seen from 35mm film are slides that have been printed (not scanned)... I'd go to a pro-printer or a high-end photo shop and ask specifically about this process

Two ways that can be done - interneg and Ilfochrome (formerly Cibachrome). I've seen excellent scanned results too but they do have a different look than "wet" prints. Interneg (internegative) prints are created by the lab making a photograph of the slide onto special negative film. Try a small print here because the results might or might not be what you want. I've had a few done and sometimes they look good - sometimes they don't. You've got to have a low contrast image though. The negative is then printed conventionally.

Ilfochromes are made by enlarging the slide - instead of using an internegative. This might be the one you're talking about, these prints are beautiful. It's almost a specialty process anymore, and an 8x10 might cost close to that much!

[Jeff82]

Two ways that can be done - interneg and Ilfochrome (formerly Cibachrome). I've seen excellent scanned results too but they do have a different look than "wet" prints. Interneg (internegative) prints are created by the lab making a photograph of the slide onto special negative film. Try a small print here because the results might or might not be what you want. I've had a few done and sometimes they look good - sometimes they don't. You've got to have a low contrast image though. The negative is then printed conventionally.

Ilfochromes are made by enlarging the slide - instead of using an internegative. This might be the one you're talking about, these prints are beautiful. It's almost a specialty process anymore, and an 8x10 might cost close to that much!

It must be the Ilfochrome process. I know it wouldn't be from internegatives. I've seen these done at 11x14 in art galleries and remember marveling at how the prints faithfully represented the slide images and were grainless. I believe they print with a special paper made for slide film. I also remember that they were really expensive (like the $60 I mention). I've considered having this done with a few of my best shots, but haven't investigated it yet.

--Jeff

[another view]

It must be the Ilfochrome process. I know it wouldn't be from internegatives. I've seen these done at 11x14 in art galleries and remember marveling at how the prints faithfully represented the slide images and were grainless. I believe they print with a special paper made for slide film. I also remember that they were really expensive (like the $60 I mention). I've considered having this done with a few of my best shots, but haven't investigated it yet.

--Jeff

Jeff, from the way you describe the look of it, it's an Ilfochrome. I had one done a few years ago and that 8x12 was $40 or $50. Lab One in Chicago did it and it looks great. However, I would imagine that the price has only gone up since then - whether or not they still do it. Seems like a dying art, a lot like true B&W.

Yes, I shoot mostly digital and I did say that! The differences are all in the subtleties.

[schuchmn]

My feeling in general is that if you want prints, shoot print film -- decent prints from slides are not easy or cheap to get. But get good print film -- I've had nice results with Kodak Portra. The hard part here will be the lighting -- on-camera flash is not the thing for a formal portrait. Lighting is a deep subject so hit the library or book store for a good book on photographic lighting to get some idea of what's involved.

Regards
Dennis

[FREELANCE2004]

dude,set your camera with a wide angle if you have,set your shutter at 125 th,and let camera select aperture,take several shots by bouncing flash off of cielings,walls,floore ,ande with differant lighting tech. indoors and out.studio strobes are what you need.borrow some strobes from a friend,or buy a set for 250.00 or so.
any way take several shots,and pick your nice picture and send negative and picture to pro lab like dot photo oe someone that does poster size stuff.you should pay about 30.00 for a good size print on matt..your camera is a nice piece,use it and save the money you would of paid a photographer and buy you a sunpak 544 flash,and that will also make a night and day differance.i use it for weddings and dance reviews,to indoor basketball games where flashes are allowed.
freelance1031@aol.com.
p.s.
kodak gold 200 will work just fine.or reala by fuji.