Can you disable this spray??
Originally Posted by SergeyT
Can you disable this spray??
Ok this thread took awhile to start but I also have a few other questions on current ink printers that may be relevant to my paticular needs.
Has anyone here, or does any one here know of a way to put paper back in the exact position to run a image or better said, masks layer that printon top of an existing image much like multiple hit platinums , or screen printing for a more simple example.
I have laid down a layer of ink ,, and then ran a image back over, much like flashing paper in the darkroom ,, some reasons would be a high contrast image(or cross process image with lots of contrast ) where you want to build up density.
But this was not done in perfect registration , rather the light ink or colour canvas was larger than the basic image.
I think the ability to build up ink with various elements of an image would be cool but the major draw back IMO would be registration, that may be solved by some pin system to start the process and then lift the paper off the pins before printing.
As well not letting the paper and ink dry and shrink , so therefor a print sequence ready to go before printing.
Any thoughts on current printers that may be able to exact register mask layers on top of existing ink laid down.
Also of all the ink printers , or inks running through these machines which unit, or inks would one consider most permanent.
I know what the manufactures will say but frankly their marketing bullshit goes in one ear and out the other.
I would like to proceed with a unit that has some type of archival properties, that have a good chance of lasting over a few hundred years in good storage and future lighting.
Bob,
The best info on longevity that I know of is at: http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/.
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
Thanks Peter
I wouldn't recommend the Epson for someone who wants to print on both gloss and matte, personally. The 7900 doesn't waste as much ink as the older models when swapping blacks, but there is still a swap process and it does waste some ink. Plus the Epsons tend to waste more ink in general on cleanings and clogs, especially if you're not a high-volume user (running the printer every day).
The output from the Epsons are good, but so are the other brands. I would say the 7900 and 6300 are running neck and neck, with the HP just a bit behind (HP is due for a refresh, their model is quite a bit older than the other two).I am very happy with the Cannon , but I have heard a lot of good things about the current Epsons. In fact we borrowed one**epson24 inch** for a workshop project and it was a solid performer.
About the "spray" on the HP's. It's a gloss optimizer, the idea being that by laying down some "clear" ink in the white areas, you ensure a uniform surface gloss over the entire print. Without it you could get what's called gloss differential, where when looking at the print at an angle you can see a difference in the gloss characteristic of the areas where ink is heavy versus areas where there is little or no ink. It's only used on glossy papers, not matte, and you can disable it in the media settings if you want. The HP needs this for high-gloss papers, though.
My experience with Canon Lucia and LuciaEx inks is that gloss differential just isn't a problem anymore, so a gloss optimizer isn't needed.
About archival ratings of the inks. From past testing, HP inks have had the best archival ratings, with Canon in 2nd place, and Epson a distant third. The 7900 and ipfx300 models have new inksets that haven't been extensively tested yet, but I don't expect the relative rankings to change. Aardenburg Imaging already has some 6300 samples beginning testing (I sent them in).
Here's a review you may find of interest: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...ers/x300.shtml
A couple of notes to add to my earlier post.
First I questioned whether the HP z series printers were the best for alternative process negatives. Apparently at least the z3200 is just fine and HP now supports the making of negatives. See this link:
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/con...=7-10053-10768
Also there has been some confusion about the HP Gloss Enhancer:
First - you can turn this on and off - so there is no need to use it with matte papers or even with glossy ones if you feel you do not need it.
Second - it is indeed a very thin over coat. In Full Sheet mode it is applied everywhere and you can sometimes see just a trace of it on the white sheet around the image. In Econo Mode - which I don't find useful - it is applied only to the non-white areas.
This is a different strategy than Epson's, where a gloss optimizer is mixed with the inks. Both strategies work well. I like HP's because it gives me a range of control not offered by Epson.
Cheers,
Photomagica
I quickly read both articles, one from Jeff and the other from photomagica. thank you both.
What I am beginning to feel is that all three units are basically at a level that my friend would be very happy with, I sense that each machine has a slight advantage/disadvantage over the others , but in a real world setting , prints hanging behind glass in a show would be difficult to tell apart by manufacture printer. ** if indeed you were luck enough to have all three or four units available to print a paticular show.**
I am interested in HP 's adventure into software for large ink negs, which for my particular setting would be useful to compare my Lambda Black White negatives to this units ink negatives.
I am a big fan of apples to apples testing and since we plan to make big negs , I would see the additional option of this software appealing.
How long would it take the other two to catch up?? months weeks?
So far no one has tackled my question about registration and multiple hit printing with a ink jet machine.
I would think there are those doing it, ** maybe not wanting to give away trade secrets**
This would be an amazing feature for a printer able to do as I think building up tones and contrast much like split printing would be a ton of fun.
And visually a improvement over a straight print pass.
Bob,
I hope I remember this correctly, but I think that Craig Blacklock did a double pass printing on some b&w nude images. I am trying to remember where I read that and I think it might have been in an article in Outdoor Photographer. As I recall, he made a guide and just lined the paper up in the same spot each time. That being said, recently I sent a piece of paper through twice and the printing lined up just about perfectly and I wasn't trying to be perfectly aligned, so I imagine it can be done. (I'm using an Epson 9600.)
You might give his gallery a call and see if they can enlighten you about this. Hope this helps. Jim Becia
Bob,
Your assessment of it being impossible to tell which printer is which from prints under glass coincides with my view. I have shown my HP images in group shows with product from a variety of Epson printers and a Fuji Frontier. What shows up much more is the skill and preferences of the photographer/printer operator.
Were I buying another printer today I'd look at archival rating on the kinds of papers I want to use and usability for what I want to do. This last factor, as you note is best determined in apples to apples testing. For example, unless I had used the HP z3100 in the same studio as an Epson, I probably would not have fully appreciated HP's built in profiler.
The archival rating is of serious concern to both art buyers and gallery owners. I have had frequent questions about this and I've decided my response will be, "I use the most permanent papers and ink combinations available based upon scientific conservation testing". This commits me to keep up with developments in the field and to upgrade my printer from time to time to maintain the integrity of this statement.
About multiple hit printing, I have not done this. However it should be possible, as our current inkjet printers are derived from large format plotters that could competently move an architectural drawing back and forth. I think some testing would be needed with the various printers to see which, if any, have the built in ability to move a sheet back to the beginning without reloading or alternatively reload the sheet with pixel precision. If this feature is lacking perhaps a printer manufacturer could be persuaded to provide it in software, or alternatively a provider of 3rd party driver software like Qimage. Jim Becia's note on this, which I just saw as I was writing this is encouraging.
Cheers,
Photomagica
Thank you both for the responses
If the second pass is not critical due to lets say an spread second colour hit then I am sure that just lining up would be sufficient.
(lets say) If the second pass is to enhance sharp black detail as a skelatin black then sharp register would be of importance.
The fact that these printers are also designed for large format plotting, it makes total sense to have the paper just go back to a starting point rather than reloading the paper onto register pins.
Maybe this is a current feature that the main three who are not printers may think not relevant to our needs, and therefore not part of the package.
Thinking from their perspective, one should be able to lay down tone from a file without further enhancement, but I feel the ability to hit in detail, colour or contrast would improve dramatically the look of inkjet images.
I know that when I was laying down light skin tone colour it helped in the upper highlight areas of portraits and allowed me to concentrate a little bit more with the middle regions of the file.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks