Vertical banding with Epson 1270 on a 13X19 print.

[tim atherton]

ahh yes - that was a rather courteous post I must say... I quite liked the "I have no objection" phrase especially :-)

tim

[David G Hall]

Try different kinds of paper. I have a 2000P and I have noticed that I get banding with flatter papers and no banding with glossier papers.

dgh

[Matt_1193]

Jorge - This question is as valid relating to large format as any of the million questions that have appeared here regarding darkroom processes and enlargers. Just because you use a wet process does not make your concerns in that area more relevant (sp?) to LF photography. It is, after all, just another aspect of the process.

[Bob Ashford]

Hi, I find I get the best performance from Kodak Premium Glossy. You must have the paper settings appropriate to the paper you are using. But, also do an extra clean cycle.

Rehards, Bob

[Christopher Campbell]

Pete, You don't specify which OS you're working under, but I found that running Macintosh OS 9, my previous Epson 1200 was unpredictably sensitive to various software settings before I learned how to set it up. Working up the chain of Epson technical support, I finally discovered that a whole variety of printing problems can often to traced to problems with the smooth flow of data being buffered between computer and printer. The things I do to eliminate these are: never use "background printing", allocate large amounts of RAM to Photoshop (roughly 4X your file size), and allocate large amounts off RAM to the "Epson Print Monitor." Now with a fast G4, 1 GB of RAM, and an Epson 1280 running under OS X, I'm finding that I seem to be able to relax the requirement about not printing in the background, but I haven't yet printed a lot of 13 x19s with the new set-up. Personally, I don't care for the recommendation to downgrade the printer resolution to 720 dpi. Isn't the whole point of starting with large format film and using the 1270/1280 printer at 2880 dpi so that you can end up with the best print possible?

[Pete Chipman]

Thanks, everyone. Jorge, no problem, I'll be more specific that I'm doing LF in the future. Don't mean to get people riled up. After all we should all "BAND" together....applause, groan, applause.

I'll try some of the recommendations.

Also, Chris, I am printing with my printer set to 1440 dpi, it's the output that I changed to 720dpi in Photoshop, which shouldn't affect image quality per say, but should stress my printer buffering much less. I am going to try to do some RAM reallocation in addition to head maintenance (not my head, the printer's head).

Thanks,

Pete.

[David F. Stein]

Chris and Jeff were right on. First, some models will just be more sensitive to this issue-i.e. the 1160, and , of course, certain image areas will show such an effect more. Do a Nozzle Check frequently, as well as the Head Alignment-the newest models do both a horizontal and vertical alignment check. The heads will drift. Next, as suggested, if you search in the printer reference, Epson notes Spooling to Disk before printing to minimize banding. I always do Spool to Diska nd Preview before hitting the print button. Still, certain papers and inks will work less well with each other. For some good guidance go to www.tssphoto.com and then to inkjet. Once obvious banding is conquered, part of the problem is that computers and our general nitpicking society have made us look at everything with "loupes on." A guru once told me, "your inkjet print was great but at 40x I decided problems." This was a quadtone. Let's pull back to 4x and live a little!!!!!!! Considering all the questions here about which is better-Lisco or Fidelity holder-this is a fine question-the world of large format photography is intimately involved in inkjet printing (glicee)-aesthetically, craftwise and FINANCIALLY.

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

Tim A, exactly i wrote I had no objection because I thought Pete was going to stop posting, which was not my intention. He uderstood this, obviously you were unable to connect response and reply. Maybe next time you pay a little bit more attention before you demand expalanations.

Matt, I disagree with you, the way the question was originally posted it could have come from someone using 35 mm to scan his neg. The enlarger questions usually starts something like "my Beseler 4x5, my Zone Vi4x5" etc, which clearly is related to the printing of 4x5 negatives. Other process like platinum etc, clearly are related to LF as they are contact print processes. So you see, not all the digital/scanner questions posted are related to LF as the more common Enlarger/process are most likely related to them.

[pauly]

jorge, quit your bitchin. you are a ninny.

[Pete Chipman]

Point taken Jorge, but (IMHO) a single/multiple solution to a printing problem can just as well be used by someone in small, medium, or large format, and particularly LF, as the standards tend to be somewhat higher. Higher standards are why I'm moving up to LF, I want better end results...This includes trying to get the best print results out of my 4X5 transparencies. I agree though that if someone asked "do I really need Eye control on my Elan 7e?" that that would be unnecesary clutter for this site.

I know you and Tim are great guys who would probably have a blast shooting film in the field together. Hopefully, you and Tim can buy lunch for each other (or at least exchange e-cards), and exclaim in the famous words of Buggs Bunny..., "This looks like the start of a Beeauuutiful relationship."

I'll stop kidding, I'm always very appreciative of the feedback I get here (including your point of being on topic), and will report back on how the printer problem was eventually solved.