Cheapest RIP to make HUUUUUGE prints??

[Ed Richards]

David,

What do you mean by from digital sources? Drum scans or a DSLR?

[David Luttmann]

Ed,

I've run a tremendous number of tests with Qimage. I've posted samples up at DPReview as there appears to be a large Qimage cult ever present there.....heaven help the soul who suggests any other interpolation routine could be better.

As to "digital" sources, my primary sources for interpolation have been from a Nikon D100, Nikon D2X, Canon D30, 10D, 1Ds, 1Ds Mk2, and Kodak SLR/C. The SAR software wins hands down against Qimage's Pyramid & Hybrid routines, regardless of presharpening settings, or post sharpening. Qimage does not do as good a job at maintaining microcontrast differences, detail, and accutance. While it is great at memory buffering large prints, anything under 60" can be done better with PS and a decent RIP.

The film tests I ran were primarily from MF Astia and NPS160 scanned on my Imacon and interpolated for large prints. Qimage still lost the quality battle. I've never bothered testing LF film with Qimage as when scanning at 3200 or 4000ppi, I can get prints between 66" & 83" wide with no interpolation. As my prints rarely go above 40", I've never needed Qimage for printing large prints. That said, with the tests I've run, I've yet to see sample prints that show any benefit when using Qimage....in fact, I find quality decreases when using Qimage's interpolation and smart sharpening.

For a quick print, it's handy. For the highest quality, best off using a RIP or straight from PS.

Best regards,

[Greg Lockrey]

I might ad that if you are asking "what is the cheapest RIP to make HUUUUUUGE prints??" on this forum, then Qimage is more than sharp and accute enough for you.

[Kirk Gittings]

I might ad that if you are asking "what is the cheapest RIP to make HUUUUUUGE prints??" on this forum, then Qimage is more than sharp and accute enough for you.

I'm not exactly sure what this means exactly, but Chris is one of the most successful photographers on this forum (by any standard) and one of the finest technicians and digital printers I have ever seen. He has very very high standards.

[adrian tyler]

if you have already tried this then this may be a dumb-ass response chris, but the 44" wide prints i make here from 950mb files are exactly the same as the ones i make from the same file sized down to 190mb, and i mean exactly-the-same.

[Ed Richards]

David,

I use Qimage to downsample, not upsample, which is what you tested. I find that it does a good job when I am downsampling, and when I plan my sharpening in PS with Qimage in mind. If you sharpen fully in photoshop, then quimage oversharpens, and if you only sharpen in Qimage it does not do a great job. If you sharpen just enough in photoshop, with images that are big enough that you will be downsampling, then tune the sharpening in Qimage for the print size, it does a very good job for me. It has the advantage that I do not have to have different versions of the file sharpened for different print sizes.

[Greg Lockrey]

I'm not exactly sure what this means exactly, but Chris is one of the most successful photographers on this forum (by any standard) and one of the finest technicians and digital printers I have ever seen. He has very very high standards.

Simple, he wants both "cheap and huge" Qimage fits the bill. Design a RIP thats as good and cost less, I'll buy it from you. BTW I didn't mean to imply Chris wasn't a successful photographer. I deal with successful photographers all the time that don't have a clue about printing. I use Qimage and I do 85% of the wide format art printing in the Northwest Ohio/ Southeast Michigan area. Even high end artists that see the results are amazed that "only" a $50.00 program does such a fine job. Yes, there are better RIPs...however only slightly and much much more expensive...but are they really worth it? How many can really tell the difference without using a magifying glass?

[Ed Richards]

While I use and like Qimage, it is does not do anything for color management for black and white, as would a RIP like Imageprint. But then Imageprint does nothing for image management. Ideally I would use Qimage feeding Imageprint to get better black and white, but another $1100 is a little steep for the small improvement I would get.

[Greg Lockrey]

While I use and like Qimage, it is does not do anything for color management for black and white, as would a RIP like Imageprint. But then Imageprint does nothing for image management. Ideally I would use Qimage feeding Imageprint to get better black and white, but another $1100 is a little steep for the small improvement I would get.

You might want to try QTR (Quad Tone RIP) for your B&W. I use Qimage to get my size and do a "save as" then QTRgui to make it B&W. I don't recall if it cost anything, but if it did , it was very minimal. http://www.sbillard.org/Shareware/QTRgui.htm

[Kirk Gittings]

But then Imageprint does nothing for image management.

ED

maybe I don't understand your point. What does this mean exactly? Imageprint is known for its image management.