making 16x20's

[ignatiusjk]

When I make a 16x20 size print I proof it on 4x6 glossy paper then make the 16x20 on Ilford Gold Fibre paper. I think I have been noticing the 16x20 doesn't seem to have the same snap that the 4x6 does.My question is when you make a 16x20 do you use the proofs from the same paper as the 16x20?

[Michael Gordon]

I would suggest that it's not a proof unless the materials and process are identical. There are some exceptions, of course, like when the papers are close enough so as to provide no discernible difference. "Glossy paper" and Ilford GFS are rather different...

[Bruce Watson]

I would suggest that it's nota proof unless the materials and process are identical.

Yup. What Michael said.

It's actually somewhat worse than that. Size matters too. You can use small work prints to get close, but the final proof has to be near full size. It's the difference between looking at the color in the paint can, and looking at the color on the wall. What looks too dark in the can can look too light on the wall, etc.

[Richard M. Coda]

In "darkroom" times... there would be a noticeable difference between sizes and you would sometimes have to compensate with longer times and/or different contrasts for larger prints. In the "digi-world" if I know I want to make a large print I will proof it on the same paper/ink, etc., BUT just selected "key" areas of the print. You can take 2x2" snips from these areas and gang them on an 8x10 sheet to get a good idea of what they will look like in the final large print.

[Lenny Eiger]

When I make a 16x20 size print I proof it on 4x6 glossy paper then make the 16x20 on Ilford Gold Fibre paper. I think I have been noticing the 16x20 doesn't seem to have the same snap that the 4x6 does.My question is when you make a 16x20 do you use the proofs from the same paper as the 16x20?

Use the same paper. Make larger tests, you can't see anything on a 4x6. There are a whole pile of reasons why a larger print would have less "snap". You need to compensate for it... You can't imagine you can always do it in one shot.

Lenny
EigerStudios

[Preston]

I agree with all the previous comments. I have found that larger prints will typically require a boost in contrast. As has been said, you really need to make larger proofs on the same paper (and with the same settings) you'll be using for the final large print.

--P

[Noah A]

You definitely need to proof on the same paper...otherwise it's mostly a waste of time.

As for the size differences, I do normally start with a 4x5 proof--actually I gang them up and print a few at a time either on 8.5x11 paper or on a narrow strip of roll paper. Then I may try some at-size sections of various important parts of the print (key highlights, shadows). Then for 16x20's I'd probably go to the final print. For big prints (40x50, etc.), I may either do a larger 16x20 proof or a bigger test strip, like an 8x44in. section that covers key areas.

Color (especially) and contrast (to some extent) shouldn't technically change when printing digital files at different sizes. It's not nearly as bad as printing optically, where there is a huge difference between print sizes.

But your eye will see the different sized prints differently, so I do tend to agree with the others that a 4x6 proof will look different from a 16x20.

But I'd bet your biggest problem is the differences in the paper.