Printing vs Lab threshold

The Dell Ultra Sharps are also recommended from past discussions.

goalerjones wrote in post #19493690
At this stage I cannot justify $2k-$4k for an editing monitor. As nice as they may be.

I think you already have a decent monitor. You just need to get a calibration puck w/software (ColorChecker Display or Spyder X Pro).

Even with a calibration puck you’ll still need to adjust brightness manually. Get it close with the chart Wilt linked to … print … adjust/fine tune … print again to confirm.

I use the Spyder X Pro.

Trying to get my prints to match my monitor, had me manually adjusting the overall brightness
of my monitor way too low for my old eyes.

So I adjusted my monitor brightness to a comfortable level.

Adjust my image as needed in PS .... then before printing, add a levels or curve and simply put the
blend mode to Screen, and adjust opacity of that layer to approc 33%. ( may adjust the 33% depending on image )

Setup an action to do this.

Not perfect solution but it works.

I ordered a Spyder X Pro should be here Friday.

In general there are two types of devices - a colorimeter, which will measure transmitted light, and a spectrophotometer, which will measure reflected and transmitted light. For dealing with your display, a colorimeter (a "puck" that most here are describing) is sufficient. If you want to get into custom profiling printer paper-ink combinations, then a spectrophotometer is what you want, but that seems like overkill here.

There are choices for devices (DataColor, XRite) and software to work with those devices (device manufacturer's proprietary software, Argyll CMS, DisplayCal [a GUI front end for Argyll CMS]). The key is to understand how your computer and display work together to achieve calibration and profiling. Some displays permit hardware calibration and profiling, some have limited controls and most of the magic occurs on the video card level.

Another important aspect of calibration and profiling is your choice of target values for parameters like display luminance, gamma, and white point. It is probably easier to go with a software application's default or preset values for photography or a similar kind of preset, and then experiment from there once you get the hang of it

Have fun!

Kirk

goalerjones wrote in post #19493969
I ordered a Spyder X Pro should be here Friday.

Now for your next adventure in photo editing!

As Kirk said, the software will ask you for:

Gamma: Leave at the default 2.2
White Point: The default of 6500K is too high (way too cool) for photo editing. Use 5800K. Some software suggests 5400K for photo editing, but I find that a bit too warm.
Brightness: Leave at the default "Do Not Adjust - Recommended". For your monitor leave it at what you arrived at using Wilt's linked-to chart and your test prints
Room Light: Leave at the default "Off - Recommended" since you are setting the brightness manually


I calibrate with my room lights off. Probably not needed, but I always felt I'd get a better result with no light leak where the puck meets the screen.

Also, run your monitor for 1/2 hour or more befor calibrating. I also calibrate 3 times in a row.

Thanks Bob. I've already done the brightness chart, so all I need to do now is use the Spyder.

Okay, color issues addressed, now onto the final phase, getting an actual printer. Would like some feedback.

I will not be doing a volume business at this point, so I'm not looking at printers like the Epson p5000.

My typical use is 8x10's, 11x14's for people at the track who want images, and framed 12 x 18's for sale at a local restaurant until I use up my current stock of 16 x 20 frames. If you look at my gallery I take bright colored images at the track, so that's a need, and also some of my darker images will need to render blacks well.

I'm sitting here watching videos by Keith Cooper ATM, so I'm seeing some of the benefits of being able to print larger sizes myself. I've also gone to the Red River Paper cost to print pages.

The 2 printers that stick out currently are the canon Pro-1000*** or the Epson p900. Now it might be more practical to go smaller for now, but I noticed a doubling of cost per print numbers for the Epson p700, while canons print costs for the Pro 200/300 models seem to remain somewhat constant.

*** there are some rumors the Pro 1000 may be replaced soon.

goalerjones wrote in post #19494276
Okay, color issues addressed, now onto the final phase, getting an actual printer. Would like some feedback.

I will not be doing a volume business at this point, so I'm not looking at printers like the Epson p5000.

My typical use is 8x10's, 11x14's for people at the track who want images, and framed 12 x 18's for sale at a local restaurant until I use up my current stock of 16 x 20 frames. If you look at my gallery I take bright colored images at the track, so that's a need, and also some of my darker images will need to render blacks well.

I'm sitting here watching videos by Keith Cooper ATM, so I'm seeing some of the benefits of being able to print larger sizes myself. I've also gone to the Red River Paper cost to print pages.

The 2 printers that stick out currently are the canon Pro-1000*** or the Epson p900. Now it might be more practical to go smaller for now, but I noticed a doubling of cost per print numbers for the Epson p700, while canons print costs for the Pro 200/300 models seem to remain somewhat constant.

*** there are some rumors the Pro 1000 may be replaced soon.

Both the Epson P900 and Canon Pro-1000 should produce outstanding prints.

I don’t know what the new Canon inks are like, but keep in mind that the Epson pigment inks will clog nozzles if you’re not printing much. Dye based inks are less archival (but still pretty good), but don’t clog.

https://www.redriverca​talog.com …e-dye-or-pigment-ink.html

I have an older Epson Stylus Photo R3000 and waste about $20/year in ink cleaning clogged nozzles. If I used it weekly this wouldn’t happen but sometimes the printer sits for a few months unused.

I’m very happy with my Epson though and glad I went that direction.

Bob_A wrote in post #19494444
Both the Epson P900 and Canon Pro-1000 should produce outstanding prints.

I don’t know what the new Canon inks are like, but keep in mind that the Epson pigment inks will clog nozzles if you’re not printing much. Dye based inks are less archival (but still pretty good), but don’t clog.

https://www.redriverca​talog.com …e-dye-or-pigment-ink.html

I have an older Epson Stylus Photo R3000 and waste about $20/year in ink cleaning clogged nozzles. If I used it weekly this wouldn’t happen but sometimes the printer sits for a few months unused.

I’m very happy with my Epson though and glad I went that direction.

I print with an Epson 3880 that I have had for about 10 years or so. I print in spurts and then the printer sits for weeks without printing. I have not had clogged nozzles, using both Epson ink and refillable InkJet Mall (Cone inks) ink. I do realize, however, that my experience is the exception. InkJet Mall sells a product called Piezoflush that cleans the printer lines and heads, mostly used by people that are switching inksets between the standard color set and custom all black and white inks for monochrome printing and digital negative printing. I have not had to use this product, but my understanding is that it is very good at what it does.

I have been able to print on various media and have tried profiling Epson papers with Cone Inks to see if there is any difference compared to the stock profiles from Epson - there really is not. I have noticed a distinct improvement in tonal separation for black and white printing using QuadTone RIP and linearized profiles for the black inks in the color inkset.

You probably will get great prints with both printers (I have not used a Canon printer) and it may just come down to personal preference. If you intend to ever venture into black and white prints, you will find that QuadTone RIP is the de facto advanced solution for obtaining exemplary prints, if you invest the time and effort. It only supports Epson printers, if that at all sways your decision.

Have fun! Personally, I find printing my work extremely satisfying and rewarding. It is not as cost effective as sending your files to a lab, but for me it is more about experiencing and controlling my process and exploring interesting variations and techniques. I am currently researching digital negative printing for the alternative platinum-palladium printmaking process. In the platinum-palladium process, the sensitized paper is exposed to UV light directly through the printed digital negative (contact printing). The negative blocks the UV light where the negative is dense - turns out photo black ink and yellow ink are the two inks that are most UV resistant. Interesting! The Epson printers permit the user to develop custom ink profiles in QuadTone RIP to lay down ink in a very deliberate way for such alternative processes.

Printing is exciting - glad to see you are printing your work. Most of my digital images live on a hard drive, but printing is probably the most archival way to preserve your work if printed correctly with the right inks and paper and stored properly. Enjoy!

Kirk

kirkt wrote in post #19494460
I print with an Epson 3880 that I have had for about 10 years or so. I print in spurts and then the printer sits for weeks without printing. I have not had clogged nozzles, using both Epson ink and refillable InkJet Mall (Cone inks) ink. I do realize, however, that my experience is the exception. InkJet Mall sells a product called Piezoflush that cleans the printer lines and heads, mostly used by people that are switching inksets between the standard color set and custom all black and white inks for monochrome printing and digital negative printing. I have not had to use this product, but my understanding is that it is very good at what it does.

I have been able to print on various media and have tried profiling Epson papers with Cone Inks to see if there is any difference compared to the stock profiles from Epson - there really is not. I have noticed a distinct improvement in tonal separation for black and white printing using QuadTone RIP and linearized profiles for the black inks in the color inkset.

You probably will get great prints with both printers (I have not used a Canon printer) and it may just come down to personal preference. If you intend to ever venture into black and white prints, you will find that QuadTone RIP is the de facto advanced solution for obtaining exemplary prints, if you invest the time and effort. It only supports Epson printers, if that at all sways your decision.

Have fun! Personally, I find printing my work extremely satisfying and rewarding. It is not as cost effective as sending your files to a lab, but for me it is more about experiencing and controlling my process and exploring interesting variations and techniques. I am currently researching digital negative printing for the alternative platinum-palladium printmaking process. In the platinum-palladium process, the sensitized paper is exposed to UV light directly through the printed digital negative (contact printing). The negative blocks the UV light where the negative is dense - turns out photo black ink and yellow ink are the two inks that are most UV resistant. Interesting! The Epson printers permit the user to develop custom ink profiles in QuadTone RIP to lay down ink in a very deliberate way for such alternative processes.

Printing is exciting - glad to see you are printing your work. Most of my digital images live on a hard drive, but printing is probably the most archival way to preserve your work if printed correctly with the right inks and paper and stored properly. Enjoy!

Kirk

I've had my 3880 for about that long too and haven't had clogged nozzles. I use it in similar fashion and keep it covered when not in use.

Quint on Trask wrote in post #19494466
I've had my 3880 for about that long too and haven't had clogged nozzles. I use it in similar fashion and keep it covered when not in use.

I think it also has to do with the humidity in your home/workspace. Our house used to get pretty low at times (12-20% RH), although with new triple glazed windows I can now run at 35% in when it’s 40 below outside without water pouring off them.

Bob_A wrote in post #19494476
I think it also has to do with the humidity in your home/workspace. Our house used to get pretty low at times (12-20% RH), although with new triple glazed windows I can now run at 35% in when it’s 40 below outside without water pouring off them.

LOL. Wow! But yes, RH definitely is a factor.

Kirk

kirkt wrote in post #19494495
LOL. Wow! But yes, RH definitely is a factor.

Kirk

The pitfalls of living in the north LOL. I ruined a lot of baseboard under my windows trying to keep the humidity up in December and January. The water would run down the walls! Not an issue anymore

Okay, found a factory refurbished Epson P900 for $900 @ Adorama, will be here next Wednesday. I'll check Red River for paper suggestions. Looking forward to this part of my photography journey!