joachim
Convicted Ektachome user
Hi,
I submitted two B&W images to the gallery in the past days. I also printed them on an Canon inkjet (iP6700D). Once I figures that "relative colorimetric" is the way to go (I print colour using intent "perceptual") I see that there is so much in the prints, which the web gallery just can not give.
I didn't do much B&W work for years. I think these differences are worse for B&W than they are for colour.
I don't want to shoot the gallery. It is a good way to share images, but no substitue for a real print.
Thanks for reading.
Joachim
I submitted two B&W images to the gallery in the past days. I also printed them on an Canon inkjet (iP6700D). Once I figures that "relative colorimetric" is the way to go (I print colour using intent "perceptual") I see that there is so much in the prints, which the web gallery just can not give.
I didn't do much B&W work for years. I think these differences are worse for B&W than they are for colour.
I don't want to shoot the gallery. It is a good way to share images, but no substitue for a real print.
Thanks for reading.
Joachim
tmfabian
I met a man once...
Prints ALWAYS look better than images displayed on a monitor or projector in my opinion.
ElectroWNED
Well-known
as well as being superior in image quality, a wet-print is so much more emotionally fulfilling.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Word!
(added some more irrelevant keystrokes to fulfill the forum's min. post length which completely undermines my attempt to emphasize the message via succinctness).
David William White
Well-known
Aye. A few hundred pixels across can't even come close.
Chris101
summicronia
I just love touching a heavy matte fiber print. The print itself just takes on a magical quality. Paper at it's highest and best use.
charjohncarter
Veteran
Blacks just don't look good on the screen (and Zone I or Zone II). You just have to live with it. It will be better in 5-10 years, maybe. In the next 4.9 years do as Chris101 say, get it off with a heavy matte fiber print.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I only just spotted this thread ... to be honest the gallery here is a disappointment and seems to have become a poor second cousin to the emphasis on gear ... now with a separate forum for over thirty different varieties of camera.
Obviously it's what we wanted!
Obviously it's what we wanted!
FA Limited
missing in action
I only just spotted this thread ... to be honest the gallery here is a disappointment and seems to have become a poor second cousin to the emphasis on gear ... now with a separate forum for over thirty different varieties of camera.
Obviously it's what we wanted!
what's wrong w/ the different categories? do you believe it has diluted RFF in any way? some of these 'other' categories have more content on them than most other forums on the same subject