Continuing search for quality

[butterfly]

Hello everyone,

Although in terms of perfecting technique, I am a bit disappointed so far with the output from my 4x5 negs after scanning, and it's time to think about where the weak links are.

So far this is what I do. I use an Ebony 45SU and schneider lens. I take loads of time over each shot. Equipment cannot be faulted. I have processed Tmax negs and they look extremely sharp.

I scan using an Epson 4990 (setting as colour negative at 3200 seems to look best) and print on an Epson 1290. I use Epson inks and premium paper. I've yet to get a decent Black and White off the printer, whatever the file, be it film or straight digital. That aside, the prints do not look as sharp as I would like, although the detail is there - just a slight softness on screen and print.

So, any advice or comments. Is there a better flat bed out there than the 4990? Or should I invest in a higher quality printer, or both? Does anyone think that a wet-chemistry print would be sharper than the output from the Epson? I haven't anything to compare my prints against.

As a one-off, I am thinking of sending a 'perfect neg' to a commercial lab to have a 20x16 or larger printed to compare. I just wonder if I am expecting too much?

I suppose my question is, at the moment, will a 4x5 negative printed in the darkroom be sharper than my current workflow? I'm not interested in volume work, just take a small number of photos that I want to be high quality.

Thoughts appreciated on maximising quality from the 4990 and 1290, or if I should think about upgrading. Or should I just find a good hand printer in a lab that can do the prints for me on the occasions I have something that I may want to put on the wall, using my existing set-up as a sort of draft/proof system.

Best wishes

Steve

[Walter Calahan]

What level of sharpening are you using when scanning? All scanners add softness to the original neg or transparency. I use just a touch of unsharp masking when scanning with either my Nikon 8000 for small formats or my Epson V750 for LF negs. You're 4990 should produce the same quality as the V750. No need to upgrade.

Also, learning a little about unsharp masking after the scan in the 'L' channel of LAB color can help. Or unsharp masking in RGB and then using "fade to luminosity" to convert the masking to the 'L' channel only.

Also are you resizing your image as the second to the last step in your digital workflow? I correct everything in the native scan size, resize at the end, and then do an unsharp mask as the very last step before printing.

You might also think about getting an Epson 3800 to replace the 1290.

You do not need to replace the scanner.

These are a few thoughts I have. You might already being doing these steps with unsharp masking. We need to know about your work flow and software used.

[Scott Kathe]

Hi Steve,

I would take a look at the MIS black and white inksets for your printer from inksupply.com However, the printer you have is set up for dye based inks and the MIS inksets are pigment based, some people have clogging issues with the MIS inks and the Epson 1280/1290. I have used a cheap Epson C86, MIS inks and EEM paper and made some nice prints, limited to 8 1/2 x 11". I just got a Epson R220 and should get the MIS inks today. Supposedly the C86 prints better glossy and the R220 does better with matt and black only printing. Take a look at Paul Roark's web site (www.paulroark.com) and Clayton Jones website (www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm) and check out the black and white printing group on Yahoo (tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/). It may take a while to digest all the information in those sites

As far as traditional prints go check out Praus (www.4photolab.com), I haven't tried them yet but they respond to e-mails and seem to be very nice. When I get a decent enough 4x5 negative I'm going to have them make a 16x20!

I am by no means an expert at any of this so take what I say with a grain of salt

Scott

[paulr]

There are so many variables ... every step in the process involves choices, and they all come with a bit of a learning curve.

Your scanner is fine for what you're doing, although there are ways to get much better scans out of it than the stock approach. It would be worth reading back a ways on the epson scanner forum on yahoo, and especially posts that involve calibrating the focal plane or wet mounting. You might also prefer aftermarket scanning software (like vuescan or silverfast).

The best source I've found on how to process images with the mimimum amount of damage is the Fraser and Blattner book, "Real World Photoshop." A new version comes out for each new version of the program, but the general principles stay the same. This book is a master class on non-destructive tonal adjustment and sharpening workflows.

As far as printing, if you're doing black and white, you'll absolutely get the best results if you use on of the dedicated monochrome pigment printing systems (MIS or Piezography). Each of these systems involves its own myriad choices and learning curves, so be prepared to practice and waste some ink and materials if you go this route.

I use an older version of your scanner with wet mounting, workflows adapted from the Frasier and Blatner book, and Piezo printing, and my ink prints are sharper (sometimes shockingly) than my darkroom prints from the same negatives. And these are darkroom prints that I thought were sharp as hell before I saw the contrast--all are small prints made from 4x5, with an apo lens, an aligned enlarger, a glass carrier.

[windpointphoto]

Scott and Paul are right about the MIS Inks. They work great!

[Kirk Gittings]

Just to separate things out. Spring for a drum scan of your favorite negative and compare it to your 4990 scans. I did this and it taught me allot about what to expect from a flatbed scanner and taught me allot in general about what makes a good scan period. It improved my scanning on the flatbeds and convinced me that at above 16x20 I always needed a drum scan. Then have some comparison prints made on different printers.

[Dick Hilker]

The best comination I've found for B&W prints is an Epson printer using K-3 pigment inks and Crane's Museo Silver Rag paper. The results exceed anyting I've ever been able to do in a darkroom. With any scanner, USM is always the last step before printing. Some scanners will offer it as an option, but wait until you're done adjusting and resizing the image for best results.