Digital BW, The Print

On 9/19/02 10:52 AM, "Mitch Alland" <malland@...> wrote:

> I then made a 12x18 inch color print on the 7600 using the Epson driver
> on Archival Matte and compared it to a 12x18 print I had made my 1290
> in Bangkok on Heavyweight Matte. There's simply no comparison: the 7600
> print looks washed out in comparison to the 1290 prints.

Driver settings and profiling are critical issues here.  Various options in
the epson driver change gamut substantially.  The issue really comes down to
whether you believe the 25 years for epson oem dyes on heavyweight matte.

Robert

I have been thinking about replacing my 1290 for color and 1160 (with 
Piezography) for B&W with a 2200. Subsequently, I started thinking 
about getting a 7600 with ImagePrint, so that I could make prints 
larger than 12x18 inches, both in color and B&W.

I just spent 3-1/2 hours at a local dealer trying out the 7600. First, 
I tried to make a B&W print with ImagePrint. After working on this for 
some 2-1/2 hours, all we were able to get ImagePrint to do was to print 
a "demo" print. Okay, this wasn't the fault of ImagePrint: the staff at 
the dealer didn't seem to know how to get ImagePrint to work. They had 
trouble with the IP address and the "encryption" number for the dongle. 
Yes, the blasted thing has a DONGLE! I am not sure that I want to buy 
software using a dongle as I haven't had good experience with this in 
the past. In the end, I gave up trying to make a B&W print. What I did 
see is that ImagePrint is awfully kludgy on Mac System 9.

I then made a 12x18 inch color print on the 7600 using the Epson driver 
on Archival Matte and compared it to a 12x18 print I had made my 1290 
in Bangkok on Heavyweight Matte. There's simply no comparison: the 7600 
print looks washed out in comparison to the 1290 prints.

I had always read statements on various internet forums that the color 
gamut of the 2200/7600 were close to that of the 1280. Perhaps the 
particular photo that I printed has a lot of colors that are within the 
gamut of the 1280 but outside that of the 2200/7600: my photograph is a 
close-up of parts of a Thai temple, the colors of which are various 
gold colors. The 7600 print is much less saturated and much less yellow 
than the 1290 print.

Now this particular photograph is part of a series of pictures of Thai 
temples for an exhibition that I am preparing. The richness of the gold 
colors, as well as the harmony" of such rich, strong colors and shapes, 
is the major point of this photograph. The 7600 print is so flat and 
dull that I would never exhibit it. While, according to Epson, the 1290 
photo is supposed to "last" 25 years and the 7600 photo 100 years, it 
seems to me that the 1290 photo in 25 years is likely to look like the 
7600 photo, so I'd rather enjoy 25 good years :-)

So the questions are:

1. Am I missing something?

2. Has anyone else had this experience? Or have I just happened to 
print  a photograph that is outside the gamut of the 7600 but just 
inside the gamut of the 1290? Is this likely?

3. From this experience I find it difficult to understand why hordes of 
protographers are rushing to buy the 2200. I certainly cannot 
contemplate getting either the 2200 or the 7600 after seeing this 
print. What do you think?

--Mitch

I need to get a US passport for my daughter.  I have downloaded the 
application form from the State Department's site, along with its 
instructions.  The application must include two photographs, 2x2 inches, 
color or B&W, with certain other features.  I'm sure I can produce the 
photos starting with my digital camera, but the instructions say that the 
photos must be "printed on thin paper" and "must be capable of withstanding 
a mounting temperature of 225" degrees Fahrenheit.  The photos in my old 
passports are on glossy paper, but the instructions today aren't specific 
as to paper surface

I'd probably print the photos in black and white just to be retro, and 
because that's the form that most of my other printing takes.  (And to keep 
this semi-on-topic.)  I have a variety of papers, glossy, pearl and matte, 
and can print on HP, Canon or Epson color printers or an Epson 860 with 
Lyson Small Gamut inks.  (All of these would be dye inks, not 
pigments.)  Anybody have any experience printing passport photos and 
suggestions for the sort of paper to use for this purpose?

Thanks for any help.

Cheers,
Kip Babington

On 9/19/02 10:52 AM, "Mitch Alland" <malland@...> wrote:

> I then made a 12x18 inch color print on the 7600 using the Epson driver
> on Archival Matte and compared it to a 12x18 print I had made my 1290
> in Bangkok on Heavyweight Matte. There's simply no comparison: the 7600
> print looks washed out in comparison to the 1290 prints.

Driver settings and profiling are critical issues here.  Various options in
the epson driver change gamut substantially.  The issue really comes down to
whether you believe the 25 years for epson oem dyes on heavyweight matte.

Robert




Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- Include your full name with your message.
- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
- Complete your Yahoo profile.
- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.


 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



------ End of Forwarded Message

Mitch,
You can definitely estimate the output quality of a printer not until 
you have calibrated and profiled the beast. You need profiling 
software and a spectrophotometer.
Hope this helps.
B.A.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Mitch Alland <malland@m...> 
wrote:
> I have been thinking about replacing my 1290 for color and 1160 
(with 
> Piezography) for B&W with a 2200. Subsequently, I started thinking 
> about getting a 7600 with ImagePrint, so that I could make prints 
> larger than 12x18 inches, both in color and B&W.
> 
> I just spent 3-1/2 hours at a local dealer trying out the 7600. 
First, 
> I tried to make a B&W print with ImagePrint. After working on this 
for 
> some 2-1/2 hours, all we were able to get ImagePrint to do was to 
print 
> a "demo" print. Okay, this wasn't the fault of ImagePrint: the 
staff at 
> the dealer didn't seem to know how to get ImagePrint to work. They 
had 
> trouble with the IP address and the "encryption" number for the 
dongle. 
> Yes, the blasted thing has a DONGLE! I am not sure that I want to 
buy 
> software using a dongle as I haven't had good experience with this 
in 
> the past. In the end, I gave up trying to make a B&W print. What I 
did 
> see is that ImagePrint is awfully kludgy on Mac System 9.
> 
> I then made a 12x18 inch color print on the 7600 using the Epson 
driver 
> on Archival Matte and compared it to a 12x18 print I had made my 
1290 
> in Bangkok on Heavyweight Matte. There's simply no comparison: the 
7600 
> print looks washed out in comparison to the 1290 prints.
> 
> I had always read statements on various internet forums that the 
color 
> gamut of the 2200/7600 were close to that of the 1280. Perhaps the 
> particular photo that I printed has a lot of colors that are within 
the 
> gamut of the 1280 but outside that of the 2200/7600: my photograph 
is a 
> close-up of parts of a Thai temple, the colors of which are various 
> gold colors. The 7600 print is much less saturated and much less 
yellow 
> than the 1290 print.
> 
> Now this particular photograph is part of a series of pictures of 
Thai 
> temples for an exhibition that I am preparing. The richness of the 
gold 
> colors, as well as the harmony" of such rich, strong colors and 
shapes, 
> is the major point of this photograph. The 7600 print is so flat 
and 
> dull that I would never exhibit it. While, according to Epson, the 
1290 
> photo is supposed to "last" 25 years and the 7600 photo 100 years, 
it 
> seems to me that the 1290 photo in 25 years is likely to look like 
the 
> 7600 photo, so I'd rather enjoy 25 good years :-)
> 
> So the questions are:
> 
> 1. Am I missing something?
> 
> 2. Has anyone else had this experience? Or have I just happened to 
> print  a photograph that is outside the gamut of the 7600 but just 
> inside the gamut of the 1290? Is this likely?
> 
> 3. From this experience I find it difficult to understand why 
hordes of 

> protographers are rushing to buy the 2200. I certainly cannot 
> contemplate getting either the 2200 or the 7600 after seeing this 
> print. What do you think?
> 
> --Mitch

To: Robert Morrison <rmorrison@...>

> Driver settings and profiling are critical issues here.  Various 
> options in
> the epson driver change gamut substantially.

Come to think of it,  the 7600 had the photo black ink and I used the 
an Epson profile for photo black. I was ignoring the shadow area in one 
corner of the picture, and thought that the stupa section of the 
temple, which looks like it's made of gold ingots, would not be 
affected by the photo black but, I understand from Bruce Fraser, that 
may not be the case. Perhaps I should go back tomorrow and make the 
same print on Epson glossy paper?

--Mitch

Mitch,

for the color part of your questions, you may be better served discussing it 
over at  the archivalphoto or Epson 9000 etc groups. For the bw, and for IP5, 
here is some food for thought:

- IP5 is klunky under Mac OS 9, no doubt. And an inexperienced dealer may 
well be frustrated with the security and installation steps. But, once you get 
past that (with help from Colorbyte if you own a copy), the results are worth the 
trouble. I have only seen monochrome prints on my 7000 with Piezotones and 
like the results and the ease with which they printed. 
I am now waiting for the much anticipated 2200 diver to see all the claims that 
Andrew was making about its bw printing capability. Down the line, I believe 
that Colorbyte will provide functionality and performance that the Epson 
drivers will simply not touch. 

- I still believe that a quad (hex) tone print will be superior to one made by the 
7 ink Ultrachromes or any color inkset, but I haven't done serious side by side 
using ImagePrint yet. 

- The 2200 delivers good gamut and dmax, but no pigment printer beats a dye 
printer for dmax. To compare gamuts, install the profiles for each and check 
the Gamut Warning in PS 6 or 7. You'll find that the 2200 beats the 1280/90 
when using photo black on glossy or luster papers. 

- Generally speaking, the landscape is shifting very rapidly: What is the latest 
and unique Epson printer/ink combo with seemingly unbreakable chip code 
may be tomorrow's best CIS-adaptable printer with clone inks. And what was 
yesterdays best monochrome inkset, is today a pile of junk taking up space in 
my closet (as do the prints from said inkset). 
And all those claims of "years" of "longevity" and "archival" are bogus 
extrapolations that we'll discover a century from now when some collectors 
will be tearing their hair out and others sitting pretty with their silver prints. And 
if you enjoy the look of the "good" 25 years-under-glass, so be it. You'll 
probably find out  - sad to say - what it really means in only a few humid years 
in Bankok (as you unfortuantely did with those other color prints, if I recall). It's 
just the nature of this digital printing beast that we are trying to tame.

So, for now, pick your poison carefully!.....<g>


Antonis





--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Mitch Alland <malland@m...> wrote:

> I have been thinking about replacing my 1290 for color and 1160 (with 
> Piezography) for B&W with a 2200. Subsequently, I started thinking 
> about getting a 7600 with ImagePrint, so that I could make prints 
> larger than 12x18 inches, both in color and B&W.
> 
> I just spent 3-1/2 hours at a local dealer trying out the 7600. First, 
> I tried to make a B&W print with ImagePrint. After working on this for 
> some 2-1/2 hours, all we were able to get ImagePrint to do was to print 
> a "demo" print. Okay, this wasn't the fault of ImagePrint: the staff at 
> the dealer didn't seem to know how to get ImagePrint to work. They had 
> trouble with the IP address and the "encryption" number for the dongle. 
> Yes, the blasted thing has a DONGLE! I am not sure that I want to buy 
> software using a dongle as I haven't had good experience with this in 
> the past. In the end, I gave up trying to make a B&W print. What I did 
> see is that ImagePrint is awfully kludgy on Mac System 9.
> 
> I then made a 12x18 inch color print on the 7600 using the Epson driver 
> on Archival Matte and compared it to a 12x18 print I had made my 1290 
> in Bangkok on Heavyweight Matte. There's simply no comparison: the 7600 
> print looks washed out in comparison to the 1290 prints.
> 
> I had always read statements on various internet forums that the color 
> gamut of the 2200/7600 were close to that of the 1280. Perhaps the 
> particular photo that I printed has a lot of colors that are within the 
> gamut of the 1280 but outside that of the 2200/7600: my photograph is a 
> close-up of parts of a Thai temple, the colors of which are various 
> gold colors. The 7600 print is much less saturated and much less yellow 
> than the 1290 print.
> 
> Now this particular photograph is part of a series of pictures of Thai 
> temples for an exhibition that I am preparing. The richness of the gold 
> colors, as well as the harmony" of such rich, strong colors and shapes, 
> is the major point of this photograph. The 7600 print is so flat and 
> dull that I would never exhibit it. While, according to Epson, the 1290 
> photo is supposed to "last" 25 years and the 7600 photo 100 years, it 
> seems to me that the 1290 photo in 25 years is likely to look like the 
> 7600 photo, so I'd rather enjoy 25 good years :-)
> 
> So the questions are:
> 
> 1. Am I missing something?
> 
> 2. Has anyone else had this experience? Or have I just happened to 
> print  a photograph that is outside the gamut of the 7600 but just 
> inside the gamut of the 1290? Is this likely?
> 
> 3. From this experience I find it difficult to understand why hordes of 
> protographers are rushing to buy the 2200. I certainly cannot 
> contemplate getting either the 2200 or the 7600 after seeing this 
> print. What do you think?
> 
> --Mitch

About a month ago I posted a question about the paper to use to make 
passport photos with an inkjet printer.  Not having received any replies I 
went ahead and made some photos on Epson Premium Glossy Photo Paper, using 
a Canon S9000 printer and selecting Grayscale in the printer driver to get 
a monochrome print with the Canon inks.  The Post Office where we applied 
for the passport (for my daughter) accepted the prints without comment, and 
today the passport arrived in apparently fine shape.

I can't quite figure out what they did with the photo - it looks like it is 
melded into the inside of the front cover of the passport.  There is not 
the slightest trace of an edge to the thing, nor is there any difference in 
the flexibility of the cover where the photo is compared to the rest of the 
cover, so it isn't like the photo was just laminated on top of 
something.  There is a hologram over part of the image (an American Eagle 
and USA), and another hologram (Ben Franklin, I think) on another part of 
the cover.  Overall, a pretty cool deal.

There may be other papers that would work too, but at least you can use 
this one with confidence if you have a printer using dye based inks.  I 
don't know if pigments would adhere to this paper well enough to go through 
whatever it is that they put the photo through to get it onto the passport 
cover.

Cheers,
Kip