Help me add digital for Christmas!

[Darin Boville]

Yet another "I'm going digital...help" question--I've browsed tirelessly online but thought it might be better just to ask others who have gone before...

Thsi si where I'm at now:

I shoot 4x5, primarily B&W but some color. I have and plan to keep my 4x5 B&W darkroom but due to a move to the West Coast (i.e. smaller house) it will now only be set up for a month or so as needed rather than being in a dedicated space. I've played with Photoshop and scanners over the years but have not done any serious work with them aside from correcting minor defects, scanning in darkroom-produced prints, etc. I currently have a Epson 1280 printer and an Epson 2450 scanner. For some projects I would like to do the image manipulation entirely electronically.

I need to be able to produce the following:

1) Small digital files of images (from whatever source, but especially 4x5 B&W neg) for web display, presentation on computer/television monitors, etc.
2) Larger digital files of images for reproduction in magazines/books.
3) Inexpensive 8x10 prints of high quality to send to clients, publishers, etc.
4) Highest quality exhibition prints in all sizes (commonly 8x10 through 20x24) for display and sale.

One of my guiding principles here is NOT to get caught up in the equipment hamster wheel and to get by with the simplest, least expensive solution.

Taking them out of order, it seems to me that #3 I can accomplish with the 1280 with stock ink. The fading issues of the 1280 inkset would be of little concern here (and possibly an advantage since I would not want these prints to last forever!).

For #4 I'm wondering if it makes sense to use my current 1280 as a "proofing machine" to produce a guide print and let a lab print the final work on whatever technology is most current--does that make sense? That would certainly be a cost effective solution in that I'm not required to upgrade and maintain printer hardware through future technology cycles--use the lab just like I would for regular color work. Does that make sense? It would seem that 99% of the creative work would be done before I reached the lab, which is just fine with me (even better than with film).

For #1 &#2 I'm tempted to use my current scanner but in the past I've noticed that it scans unevenly. There seems to be no effort at reducing reflections internally, etc. I don't see a way to remove the glass to clean underneath. So I'm wondering if an upgrade is warranted. Would something like a Microtek i900 be an improvement in terms of evenness? I recognize that a drum scan would be ideal here but the cost of such scans is prohibitive (I'm not a commercial photographer).

So then, is upgrading the scanner and learning photoshop the right solution? I could spend up to $3000 if need be but have other (photo) uses for the money if it doesn't need to go here...

Advice and thoughts are most welcome...

--Darin

www.darinboville.com

[Ralph Barker]

You may find upgrading your scanner to be an advantage. I don't recall the specs on the 2450, so I'm not sure how it compares to the Epson 3200 or the current 4870. (Recognize, however, that the true resolution of these newer models is really somewhere around 2200 DPI.) Either of these scanners should suffice for most of your needs, along with good scanning software (SilverFast preferred) and the full version of Photoshop for post-scan tweaks. In some cases, you might opt for drum scans of negatives if higher resolution is required for a special purpose.

For your stated purposes, I would agree your current printer might suffice.

One cautionary note, though. Photoshop is a memory hog. It likes to have at least 3x the size of the image file in RAM to work well. So, if you're working with a hi-res, 300MB file, you might need to upgrade the computer you're working on.

[Gary Nylander]

Darin,

I'm not sure if I can offer much advice, I can offer some of my own thoughts and experiences in my quest for making digital fine art prints . I shoot with large format cameras ( 4 x 5 to 8 x 10 ), and about 6 months ago after more than 18 years of darkroom printing I decided to buy myself an Epson 4000 printer along with a Microtek i900 scanner, and I have to say I really enjoy making prints with this system, I don't have a lot of experience with different scanners and printers, as my scanner before the i900 was a Epson 2400, I bought the i900 for its reasonable price tag and it can scan my 8 x 10 negs, its well built machine and I'm outputting mostly B/W prints to the E4000 at about 16 x 20 inches in size.

The E4000 is a wonderful piece of equipment, I don't regret for a second in buying the machine. I have found in switching to digital, if you want the very best quality its difficult not to keep it down to the simplest, least expensive solution . Its almost impossible not to get caught in the "equipment hamster wheel" as you say, you just have to know when to jump off before you get too dizzy!

I think if you are looking for high quality exhibition quality prints for display and sale from 8 x 10 to 20 x 24 inches in size, you can't cut corners, you might want to consider either the E2200, the E4000 or the E7600 ( for the 20 x 24 prints and bigger ). Alternatively you can send your prints out to a lab , but as a photographer myself who has been used to having my own quality control I like the idea of making my own prints in my own digital darkroom.

Photoshop is also a invaluable tool, I use it everyday as a working photojournalist and I use if for my fine art work I do at home on my time off with above system, what I can do with PS would take me hours in the darkroom to do in some cases. I'm not sure if what I have written will help you in your decisions as everyone has their own work flow , you need to find out what works for you and stick to it, best of luck in your endeavours.

Gary


http://www.garynylander.com (http://www.garynylander.com)

[Brian Ellis]

You can't make a 20x24 print with your 1280 printer, that printer's maximum width is 13 inches. I doubt that you can make an exhibition quality print of any size larger than maybe 8x10 with scans from the 2450 scanner though I've never used that scanner so I could be wrong. If you want to do anything serious beyond proofing and web posting I'd suggest buying a better scanner, perhaps the Epson 4870 scanner for about $350 or leaving the exhibition prints to a good lab and limiting your digital stuff to proofs and the web. However, it seems kind of a shame to invest the time you'll need to spend learning more about Photoshop and then use it only for those two purposes.

You also won't be able to make a neutral, matamerism-free black and white print using color inks. Unless you buy a second printer, dedicating one to color and one to black and white with quadtone inks such as those sold by MIS Associates, you'll have to try either printing black only (which produces surprisingly good results but I think there's some fading or discoloration problems using the black ink in the 1280, even the MIS Eboni black) or investing in a RIP. Until recently the least expensive RIP was ImagePrint for about $500. But now for $50 you can download a RIP for the 1280 from Roy Harrington's web site (www.harrington.com). Combined with Stephen Billard's QTR GUI (www.sbillard.org) which costs nothing, this is a great solution to the problem of using the same inks for color and black and white that I've been using for a couple months now with my Epson 2200 printer..

You can use that RIP with a Mac or with any Windows 2000 or XP computer, home or pro version. You can't use it with Windows ME and I'm not sure about Windows 98. Apart from that, my only qualification in recommending that solution is that I'm not sure Roy has a RIP for the 1280 and the Epson color inks. I know he has one for the 1280 with the MIS Ultratone 2 inks (monochrome inks that wouldn't be useful to you because of your need to do color) and I know he has one for the Epson 2200 printer and the Epson color inks, I'm just not sure about the 1280 and Epson inks. You can find out by going to his web site.

My thought on the hamster wheel of continuous spending is to spend the money to buy something that works well for you at the outset and then resist the urge to constantly "upgrade" until an upgrade comes along that has something you really need. I still use Photoshop 6, until very recently I used an old version of Windows, and I've had the same scanner,(a Linoscan 1400, no longer made) for about five years). So I'd probably suggest that you replace your printer with either an Epson 2200 (limited to 13 inch wide prints but otherwise an excellent printer that uses very long-life inks) or better yet the Epson 4000 someone else mentioned (so that you could dispense with a lab entirely and make your own 20x24 prints) and a better scannter, maybe the Epson 4870 or the i900 you mentioned or something else. Assuming you have Windows 2000 or better yet XP, and a computer with a minimum of 512 mgs of RAM but preferably a gig, you should be in business for quite a while without spending any more money.

[Ken Lee]

Help me add analog for Christmas.

Send me an email, and I will tell you where to send Bank Drafts, Certified Checks, PayPal, etc. !

[Andre Noble]

Dear Santa, help me subtact digital for Christmas.

[Ralph Barker]

Careful, guys. I'm watching, and taking notes. ;-)

[Darin Boville]

Oh, Santa. I've been a good boy this year, aside from all the times when I was bad...my fingers are crossed for the i900.

Thanks to all who responded...very helpful.

--Darin

[Bob Fowler]

"...I doubt that you can make an exhibition quality print of any size larger than maybe 8x10 with scans from the 2450 scanner though I've never used that scanner so I could be wrong. "

I get real nice 11x14's and 16x20's from cropped 6x6 negatives scanned on a 2450. It's all a matter of having a good negative to start with and knowing what you're doing. I use a 3200 at work and it's much faster than the 2450. I haven't tried the newer models yet.