The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Printing and Medium Format... Holy Cow!!!

S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
This whole post will be a big yawn to most here. :D

As most here know, I just moved to MF digital less than a month back. Shooting a 28mp Aptus II 6 on the mamiya 645 platform (afd iii).

Well, as I had mentioned in the printing forum about 6 months ago, I was GIVEN an Epson 7800 from a client who had one that was basically unused. They didn't have a lot of money for an upcoming shoot and offered to give it to me as part of my payment. Luckily it had been stored in a pretty humid environ and I was able to get it up and running in a week's time.

Well it sat for another 6 months during the first semester here at LSU... but a few weeks ago I bought some trial rolls of Breathing Color Chromata White and Lyve, their top end canvases with no OBAs.

I spent the entire evening tonight getting the 7800 running again... loaded up a trial roll of Chromata and then worked up these two images for print:





Printed them at native size (roughly 17x21 @ 240dpi)...

All I can say is HOLY COW!
Even printed on canvas, which isn't an inherently sharp medium, the images have a presence I've not seen before in my work. Sharp. Lot's of tonality. Just beautiful. I'm sure the 7800 helps the wow factor as well. I do have some gamut problems... and I didn't soft-proof the images (duh!)

I really can't wait to get some more carefully shot images into the printer... and Dante tells me that the new Epsons are substantially better. :ROTFL:
 

tjv

Active member
When I printed, using a 7800, some images I took using a Leica S2, I couldn't believe how detailed and vibrant they were. Like nothing I'd ever been able to accomplish before, really. Made it hard to head back to scanning film with a nikon 9000 that's for sure.
 

woodyspedden

New member
When I printed, using a 7800, some images I took using a Leica S2, I couldn't believe how detailed and vibrant they were. Like nothing I'd ever been able to accomplish before, really. Made it hard to head back to scanning film with a nikon 9000 that's for sure.
Same for me. I am still using the 7800 although I am at least contemplating the 7900 now. I need to see some actual prints to convince myself that the extra two color inks (Orange and Green) have relevance to the finished IQ. If not, I will keep plugging away with the 7800

Woody
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
I am sorry to report, that yes, the 7900 is even better LOL
There is nothing like printing large at 360 dpi with no resizing.
-bob
 

Laurent

New member
I do have a 7800 and have been using it for years now. I love it. I have been printing on multiple medias including Breathing Color Canvas and I must say that building your own ICC profile using the Xrite tools makes a substantial difference. Though the media manufacturers ICC profiles are good they are not as good as the ones you’ll make for your own printer. If you are serious about printing your own work then the Xrite iOne makes a big difference.
 

tjv

Active member
We've just got a new 4880 at work but I don't know if that uses the same ink set as the 7900? Looking forward to printing on some Harman Matte Cotton Smooth in the next few weeks. Hard to imagine printing getting any better, but there we have it; straight from the mouths of believers.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Shelby, your title says it all. Take all of the MF naysayers on another popular forum and when you try and tell them that, their canned answer is you should be able to show it online. I've explained until I'm blue in the face that you have to see a print. Every MF shooter -- assuming they process and print well -- can and does see the difference.

Re printers, there is no question the x900 series is the bomb for photographers -- the added orange and green inks really make natures colors -- vegetation AND skin-tones -- sing. (Note: Not saying the newest HP or Canon are not equally as good, I just do not have direct experience with them. I know Epson and how they work, and will likely stick with them forever.)

Welcome to the enlightened side :)
 

robmac

Well-known member
Shelby's posts are going to be the death of my wallet. Sigh. Couple questions - any issues migrating the Aptus 6 to the DF body? Also, Shelby - What would you consider a clean iso range for the back?
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Shelby, your title says it all. Take all of the MF naysayers on another popular forum and when you try and tell them that, their canned answer is you should be able to show it online. I've explained until I'm blue in the face that you have to see a print. Every MF shooter -- assuming they process and print well -- can and does see the difference.

Re printers, there is no question the x900 series is the bomb for photographers -- the added orange and green inks really make natures colors -- vegetation AND skin-tones -- sing. (Note: Not saying the newest HP or Canon are not equally as good, I just do not have direct experience with them. I know Epson and how they work, and will likely stick with them forever.)

Welcome to the enlightened side :)
Ditto Bud. I completely gave up on explaining MF over anything else. Happy to shoot and print these monsters with a HUGE smile on my face. Never have I been happy with files until I got to MF and that is since 1990 at the birth of digital or damn close to it. LOL
 

ceh

Active member
I have Epson 3800 and RIP ErgoSoft Poster print - absolutely great combination
16bit management denzitic curve..
 

etrump

Well-known member
Ditto Bud. I completely gave up on explaining MF over anything else. Happy to shoot and print these monsters with a HUGE smile on my face. Never have I been happy with files until I got to MF and that is since 1990 at the birth of digital or damn close to it. LOL
Ditto!
 

gogopix

Subscriber
well it gets better (or worse :D depending...). This pano was over 1.5GB tiff and I printed on the 7900. here's the pano and crop but doesnt do justice. This large printing, high detail may not be the tea cup for the matte, art print crowd, but for sheer tour de force,detail and impact it is really something.

P65+ 5 images spliced, printed 2'x5' 7900 on espson high gloss...

Victor
 
S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
Shelby, your title says it all. Take all of the MF naysayers on another popular forum and when you try and tell them that, their canned answer is you should be able to show it online. I've explained until I'm blue in the face that you have to see a print. Every MF shooter -- assuming they process and print well -- can and does see the difference.

Re printers, there is no question the x900 series is the bomb for photographers -- the added orange and green inks really make natures colors -- vegetation AND skin-tones -- sing. (Note: Not saying the newest HP or Canon are not equally as good, I just do not have direct experience with them. I know Epson and how they work, and will likely stick with them forever.)

Welcome to the enlightened side :)
Yep.... seeing is believing... Happy to be here!

One of these days I'll make it out west and get some time on a workshop with you all so I can really see how to make this gear sing. As it is now, I'm gobsmacked by the "step up" from what I've been shooting.

The prints are like icing on the cake. :D
 
S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
Ditto Bud. I completely gave up on explaining MF over anything else. Happy to shoot and print these monsters with a HUGE smile on my face. Never have I been happy with files until I got to MF and that is since 1990 at the birth of digital or damn close to it. LOL
:thumbs:
 
S

Shelby Lewis

Guest
Shelby's posts are going to be the death of my wallet. Sigh. Couple questions - any issues migrating the Aptus 6 to the DF body? Also, Shelby - What would you consider a clean iso range for the back?
LOL!!!

I'm interested in the migration as well. As much as I like the afdIII body, I want to be able to use those LS lenses, so a DF is in my future.

Clean ISO... I keep to ISO 50 and 100. 200 is really usable, but the detail level already begins to break down a tad. 400 and 800 are IMO a no-go unless printing small or downsizing for web.

I love, for my applications, the 28mp sensor in the II-6. Lots of resolution (for me) compared to the 5dii and the look of the ii 6 seems to mate well with the Mamiya glass.... I have the older 210/4 ULD, which is sometimes maligned, and the files from it are just fantastic.
 

robmac

Well-known member
Thanks Shelby. Like idea of migrating to DF (after getting to something approximating your stage first of course ;>) for the LS glass option and grip for, well, the grip... and the AiR component as I shoot Profoto.

Have a lot of M645 glass in cabinet (and growing..) which I love using on DSLRs, so while I like the idea of Hassy and TF, from a $$$ perspective it makes more sense to start with a clean used Phamiya-based system - even if my existing lenses would be spot-meter and manual stop-down only (little changed from what I do now..) and add some choice AF units (150/2.8D, etc).
 
Top