Cyriljay
Leica Like
Well, That is my proof photo and I like to see how it comes out at last to correct more for the future.
Who still prints? Digital-only users
- Thread starter RichC
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 71
- Views 4K
Cyriljay
Leica Like
Proof prints ..
Proof prints ..
Well, That is my proof photo and I like to see how it comes out at last to correct more for the future.
Proof prints ..
Well, That is my proof photo and I like to see how it comes out at last to correct more for the future.
ptpdprinter
Veteran
please delete - posted in wrong thread
al1966
Feed Your Head
Print A4 a lot, most end up Blue Tacked to kitchen cupboards to get a feel of them. Some will end up framed and replace previous ones every so often. Then I give prints to other people as gifts. Then there are books, I think in books for a lot of series of work and look with groups how they will form into one.
Takkun
Ian M.
Throwing myself out there as a data point, though I shoot film/digital equally, the former almost entirely through scanning+digital processing. I'm assuming the qualifier was to exclude wet-printing.
I'm also a millennial, which to many still means teenagers, but I'm around 30 (and looking at my profile here, realize I've been on RFF half my life)
I print a moderate amount of my digital and scanned work. Never at home though: a lot of it is compilation books through online services which have yielded results of varying qualities. Most of my personal work isn't the sort of thing you hang on the wall, but I much prefer the tangible quality of physical media. Added advantage is that you don't get hung up on technical qualities with small to medium prints, or in this case books.
Everything I've shown to the public has gone through a local lab (Panda Labs in Seattle). I've never had the patience or luck to print at home. Long ago, I did have an early PIXMA printer, but wasted too much time and paper to only get awful tonality, banding, or just dried up cartridges. Never worth it to me when people are paid to know how to work a printer.
That's probably sacrilege to outsource printing, especially to film people, but I'd rather spend more time shooting and editing than messing with color profiles and recalcitrant machinery. I at least get to select the paper base.
Closest I've done to my own printing is firing off a few huge posters on the large-format plotter in my architecture department—they're worked hard and rarely set up perfectly, but you can't beat $8 for a 3'x5' print for wall decoration.
I'm also a millennial, which to many still means teenagers, but I'm around 30 (and looking at my profile here, realize I've been on RFF half my life)
I print a moderate amount of my digital and scanned work. Never at home though: a lot of it is compilation books through online services which have yielded results of varying qualities. Most of my personal work isn't the sort of thing you hang on the wall, but I much prefer the tangible quality of physical media. Added advantage is that you don't get hung up on technical qualities with small to medium prints, or in this case books.
Everything I've shown to the public has gone through a local lab (Panda Labs in Seattle). I've never had the patience or luck to print at home. Long ago, I did have an early PIXMA printer, but wasted too much time and paper to only get awful tonality, banding, or just dried up cartridges. Never worth it to me when people are paid to know how to work a printer.
That's probably sacrilege to outsource printing, especially to film people, but I'd rather spend more time shooting and editing than messing with color profiles and recalcitrant machinery. I at least get to select the paper base.
Closest I've done to my own printing is firing off a few huge posters on the large-format plotter in my architecture department—they're worked hard and rarely set up perfectly, but you can't beat $8 for a 3'x5' print for wall decoration.
FujiLove
Well-known
I print all the time, both wet and dry, colour and B&W. Without printing, you're only doing half the photographic process. And you would be missing the most creative half.
I'm a film only (+ iPhone) user, and have just started using an inkjet with roll paper again because I can't wet print my Xpan negatives big enough in the darkroom. Well, not without dismantling my enlarger, projecting onto the floor, processing in troughs etc. And I don't really have enough room in there for that. So inkjet it is.
I've just hung a three foot wide Xpan print in the living room. It's not darkroom quality, but is definitely acceptable when viewed from a reasonable distance.
I'm quite impressed with the new Epson machines (I got hold of a refurbished P400) and the Matt Ultra and Smooth Pearl Fotospeed papers I've been using. BTW: Fotospeed create free customised printer profiles to match their papers to your own printer and inks. Just sent my test prints off.
I cleaned and reorganised my darkroom recently and it's back up and running for a couple of printing sessions this week. The Nova tanks will be filled with chemicals this afternoon and I'll be in there for the next few evenings.
Happy days 🙂
I'm a film only (+ iPhone) user, and have just started using an inkjet with roll paper again because I can't wet print my Xpan negatives big enough in the darkroom. Well, not without dismantling my enlarger, projecting onto the floor, processing in troughs etc. And I don't really have enough room in there for that. So inkjet it is.
I've just hung a three foot wide Xpan print in the living room. It's not darkroom quality, but is definitely acceptable when viewed from a reasonable distance.
I'm quite impressed with the new Epson machines (I got hold of a refurbished P400) and the Matt Ultra and Smooth Pearl Fotospeed papers I've been using. BTW: Fotospeed create free customised printer profiles to match their papers to your own printer and inks. Just sent my test prints off.
I cleaned and reorganised my darkroom recently and it's back up and running for a couple of printing sessions this week. The Nova tanks will be filled with chemicals this afternoon and I'll be in there for the next few evenings.
Happy days 🙂
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
Robert,
I strongly feel that printing has made me into a better photographer.
Here is an update to this thread. I'm almost out of 17x22 cut sheets, so I'll be going to my 17 and 24 inch roll stockpile and will be loading my 7800 with ink.
I assembled the 12x18 images on 17x22 sheets into a book that has a 4 inch spine. This "workbook" is for preparing to print limited editions. I'm really proud of this self contained body of work that will help me with the editing and printing that lays ahead. I think I will advance this bookmaking into creating a book of proofs with an increased image size of 13.33x20 inches on 17x24 inch paper.
BTW I used self adhesive linen tape to join these pages to my spine that is held together with binding posts. Later this month I'm registered for a portfolio review, and I will edit from my workbook and select 24-30 images from my workbook utilizing the covers from my workbook.
Having images on hand that are printed makes this easy.
Also these books made of prints are mighty impressive. An art dealer said, "If you make a one-off book that is for your personal use, one day it will be worth a lot of money." As I live it won't be for sale, but will be part of my estate and legacy.
Perhaps the question has to be asked: if you don't print are you creating a legacy? Is the documentary aspect/history of photography being excluded or purposely forgotten? And is not printing a way to create immortality for an artist?
Anyways to me a print is a better more valuable artifact. It is a finished work, while being a photographer is an ongoing process.
A bit off topic: I bought a remastered version of "Aqualung" by Jethro Tull. On my 300B single ended triode tube stereo this remastered album sounds muffled and compressed. The great analog dynamics that once were are gone. Pretty much the older recording I love better.
As far as fine art printing goes I consider myself a work in progress. As skill and technology goes I have both adapted and evolved. My prints have gotten better.
I think the best asset a photographer can have is a "trained eye." I see every defect, where others don't see unless I point it out. I think printing brings out a very critical view, especially at a fine art level, and printing is not a brief instant like taking a shot. There is mucho time to analize, compare, and time to add improvements when printing.
I also know that I can print what I can't see. My 27 inch Eizo, even dimmed down to 50 Lux in a darkened room can't reveal all the shadow detail that I can print. This is with files taken with a Monochrom, a rather primitive CCD sensored camera. Of course CMOS cameras like my SL have even more shadow detail.
Pretty much I can't see having other people printing my files. Too much data would not get used and my vision would be lost.
Forget seeing or editing using a computer screen. My 27 inch EIZO can't compete against my prints.
Cal
Steve M.
Veteran
I only shoot film cameras, so we'll restrict this to my only digital camera....my phone. Although for years I scanned the negs and digitally printed them on an inkjet, so that's the same thing.
I have yet to print one thing from my phone, although the quality is very good. It's a PITA to pass it around to show pics to people, or have them crowd around for a view. The "keepers" get sent to my computer to store on it's HD, or I send them via text or email to friends. It feels very strange not printing them.
On the other hand, I probably shouldn't complain. Being able to pass the phone around and show the shots is not really that bad. It's a lot better than handing someone my film camera, because there is no way they're gonna see any pics on it 🙂
I have yet to print one thing from my phone, although the quality is very good. It's a PITA to pass it around to show pics to people, or have them crowd around for a view. The "keepers" get sent to my computer to store on it's HD, or I send them via text or email to friends. It feels very strange not printing them.
On the other hand, I probably shouldn't complain. Being able to pass the phone around and show the shots is not really that bad. It's a lot better than handing someone my film camera, because there is no way they're gonna see any pics on it 🙂
fireblade
Vincenzo.
Reading a few comments i will agree and it is this. Owning a decent printer, buying the paper, ink cartridges etc etc, is going to be a touch more expensive than going to a print lab. It may be more than a touch expensive, depending on your taste and pockets. BUT, like all hobbies, the return is the pleasure. Everything in life costs, and they are robbing us by replacing cash with plastic cards. I suppose they think that it is easier to take a couple of plastic cards with you to your next life.
Gents, and some Ladies...spend and enjoy life now. 🙂 Cheers.
Gents, and some Ladies...spend and enjoy life now. 🙂 Cheers.
joe bosak
Well-known
I've just started printing recently, a few from a lab initially, then today i dug out the remains of the first only only box of photo paper i ever bought which i half-used a decade or more ago (but put away due to expense and frustration), and i've printed some of my favourite photos from the last couple of years. Amazed what a difference it makes to have hard copies on the table! Reinvigorated my interest in photography, which had been waning.
I do have the issue of printer calibration to grapple with though (that said, the pix aren't too bad, maybe a stop or three too dark compared to my monitor, which had been calibrated though i realised i've changed my pc since.... always something eh?). But at least with these cheap inks from ebay my epson r300 doesnt seem to get (as) clogged as frequently as it used to.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I do have the issue of printer calibration to grapple with though (that said, the pix aren't too bad, maybe a stop or three too dark compared to my monitor, which had been calibrated though i realised i've changed my pc since.... always something eh?). But at least with these cheap inks from ebay my epson r300 doesnt seem to get (as) clogged as frequently as it used to.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
jsrockit
Moderator
These days I only make books... it is an economical way to print and a great way to see a body of work... and great for editing. I will only print large single prints if I have a show or if someone wants one of my photos. For my purposes, I don`t see the appeal of having boxes full of prints sitting around when I can print on demand. I prefer the book format.
Bob Michaels
nobody special
I print when appropriate but gave up making 8x10 proofs about 5 years ago as they only piled up on the shelves.
I printed 19 11x13.75 prints last weekend to be framed for an exhibit. That is where prints were needed. Since I have a totally calibrated system and seem to know what I am doing, my initial print was the final in every case.
Interestingly, these same photos have been exhibited before but in an automatic slide show with accompanying music using a large monitor. That was in a venue that was not big enough for a collection of 16x20 framed prints but the subject matter of the series was appropriate for the venue and the date. So I differ from others here who contend that a photo is not real unless it is printed.
I printed 19 11x13.75 prints last weekend to be framed for an exhibit. That is where prints were needed. Since I have a totally calibrated system and seem to know what I am doing, my initial print was the final in every case.
Interestingly, these same photos have been exhibited before but in an automatic slide show with accompanying music using a large monitor. That was in a venue that was not big enough for a collection of 16x20 framed prints but the subject matter of the series was appropriate for the venue and the date. So I differ from others here who contend that a photo is not real unless it is printed.
Similar threads
