Displaying large K3 prints -- same issues as with large silver halide prints
2006-03-11 by Mitch Alland
How to display large prints -- 24x36 inches (60x90cm) and as large as 40x60 inches (1x1.5m) -- has been a perennial problem. I mean that for prints this large I don't like to use a mat and frame under glass. Until now I've been printing on an Epson 7600 printer using Epson Premium Semi-Matte paper and have had the prints (cold) laminated with a glossy laminate. This was necessary to eliminate bronzing and gloss differential and to make the blacks deeper and richer, as the K2 inks of the x6xx series of printers still had dull blacks that had a "veiled" look -- a look that made me uncomfortable trying to sell an un-laminated print. But lamination also served to protect the print, and allowed display and framing without glass, as the lamination protected the print and allowed cleaning it with a soft, damp cloth. My most recent series of 58 24x36 inch prints that I'm preparing for an exhibition are printed on Semi-Matte with a 1/2 inch-wide white border and are laminated and mounted on 2mm-thick black acrylic panels, which gives a nice black edge to the prints: for this particular series I like exhibiting the prints in this way, as I don't want these prints too look like precious objects -- and this also has the advantage that the buyer can display the print as is or frame it any way he wants to. Now the plot thickens: I've recently replaced my 7600 printer with a 9800, and for glossy-type papers I find the new K3 inks to be a great improvement. Using the ImagePrint v6.1 RIP I find that now my prints on Semi-Matte paper have no bronzing, no gloss differential and the blacks no longer have the dull, veiled look: I can now sell these prints without lamination. (And, if I don't laminate, perhaps I should start using Epson Luster paper as suggested in the quote from Bill Atkinson below). Now that I don't need to laminate to solve problems like bronzing and inadequate blacks I suddenly realize that the issues of how to display large silver halide prints. For example, if I print on Crane Museo Silver Rag I wouldn't laminate, and would have to figure out how the prints should be displayed, just like I would with very large silver halide prints. One way to display large prints is to have them face-mounted on acrylic using a clear double-sided adhesive like Diasec for silver halide prints and Seal Optimount for digital prints. This may be the solution that looks the best as prints that are face-mounted on, say, 1/4 inch-thick acrylic have great depth and have the look of wet prints straight out of the lab. But face-mounting is very costly: for a 24x36 inch print the cost is about $200+ (priced in Washington and Paris) and I hate the thought of the spending this amount of money for 58 prints; for 40x60 inch prints the cost is huge. And, anyway, where I live (Bangkok) there is no lab doing face-mounting on acrylic. I suppose that another solution is to spray the prints with something like PrintShield of PrintGuard; but spraying a 40x60 inch print with three coats doesn't seem like a practical proposition. And, again, these sprays are not available in Bangkok. A third solution would be to sell the prints as is and let the buyer worry about how he frames the prints; but that still leaves the issue of how to display these large prints at an exhibition. So all this makes the original solution of laminating the prints look like the most practical one. But if I'm going to continue laminating the prints then I might as well stick to using the Epson Semi-Matte paper which is relatively inexpensive and gives great results with lamination, producing prints with deep, rich, satisfying blacks and good depth. Any thoughts or suggestions? But remember we're talking about really large prints, not 12x18 prints and smaller. --Mitch/Potomac. MD And here's the quote from Bill Atkinson: I keep testing fine art papers because I like the texture and feel of a nice heavyweight matte paper, and I have seen some attractive work by other artists printed on matte papers. However, I have not yet found any art paper that can come close to the depth and clarity that I get from photo papers. The best black I can get with most matte papers is L=23 instead of L=3.4 This makes a huge and unacceptable degradation of image quality. When I make the exact same print on both papers and place framed prints side-by-side on easels, I and my friends always end up choosing the print made on photo paper. Once the textured edges are covered with a mat, and the rest of the image is framed with plexiglass, all that is left of the art paper print is a huge drop in clarity, saturation, depth, and detail. Even pastel orchid prints look better on photo paper. I am still waiting for someone to make a rag paper that will deliver the depth, clarity, and and tonal range of luster. It would be nice if this paper could use the photo black ink so I didn't have to compromise the reliability and repeatability of my printer by switching back and forth between different inks. I use Epson Premium Luster Photo Paper (250), mostly in 36 inch rolls. I used to use Epson Premium Semimatte Photo Paper (250) because I prefer its smoother surface. I switched to Premium Luster because with the 9800 the luster gives deeper blacks and richer colors. On premium luster, the best black I could get with the 9600 was L=10.2, but with the 9800 I now get L=3.4 This makes a significant difference in the overall clarity and tonal range of the print. When I place a 9800 print next to a 9600 print, the 9600 print looks "smoked" in the shadows by comparison. When Epson Premium Luster is used with the 9800's advanced black and white mode the results are gorgeous. I am always experimenting with different papers, but the Epson Premium Luster still gives me the best results. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]