Some 7900 questions

[Paratom]

After struggeling with myself for nearly 1 year I finally replaced my 7600 with a 7900 and I would have some questions - maybe you guys can help me:
Is 240,360,480 dpi still best for Epson printers? Ot is it 300?
Would 180dpi work as well?
Would you expect better results to upsize an image and print it with higher dpi (240 or 360) or to leave the native resolution and print it with 180?

Whats the experience with 1440 vs 2880 printer resolution?

SO far I am printing mainly on Luster Paper (Tetenal) - the supplied profile works fine.

Ah-and last question - for printing photographs do you see a clear difference/improvement in printing an adobe-file over SRGB-file ?

I will test myself but maybe you guys can give me some idea and help me to not spending too much time, paper and ink with testing.
Thanks a lot

Finally I feel I can put on paper what I have in the files from my MF-gear, and my doubts from some weeksago if I should keep it have gone away.

 

[Jack]

Don't own my own yet, but have printed on a friends.

360/240 is still best, but the sizing and dithering is so good I suspect maybe 1 in 100 folks can tell the difference between 360 and 300 from that machine. Oh, and bi-directional now looks identical to uni-directional (prints 2x as fast)!

180 works, but you can see the limitations at 18" viewing distances.

I'd still opt for the uprezzing and try to print at least 240.

No discernable difference between 1440 and 2880, but you might see it on the glossiest metallic style papers -- I have not printed on any of those with it yet (and probably never will).

You're not printing an Adobe or sRGB file, you are first converting your file to the paper profile then printing it -- this is why you have a paper profile. And yes, use at least Adobe as the gamut of the 7900 actually exceeds Adobe in some areas. I work in Prophoto 16bit then convert to the paper profile. If you read this review over on LL, you can see the gamut plot and why I use Prophoto: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/7900-9900.shtml. The wireframe sticking out is colors you will lose by converting to Adobe. SRGB should not even be considered with this printer, ever as you are trimming off all of its color advantages...

You do need to test this all for yourself regardless.

Yes, an outstanding printer! Personally, I'm still trying to decide between the 7900 and 9900

 

[Paratom]

Jack,
thanks a lo for your help.
What I do in photoshop is to apply the paper profile when I print the image (let photoshop control color and choose the profile).
If you say you convert it to the printer profile, do you do this before you print??

 

[Jack]

The print dialog in CS is doing a profile conversion for you when you choose CS managing color and then set the paper profiles and rendering intents. You can alternatively do all that manually first in CS, then print the image without any color management and get the same result. I use the print dialog because it is more convenient for my purposes.

My point with all of this, was that you are actually giving up some of your printer's color capability by working in Adobe RGB to begin with... We're getting a bit off topic, but the bottom line is you want to work in a space that is capable of containing all of the colors from your capture device, big enough to continue to contain those as you manipulate the colors in post, then send them to a print color space that is hopefully also large enough to contain all of them. However, this last part wasn't a reality until the latest wide-gamut printers came along. So while working in Adobe RGB was fine with the x600 and even x800 printers, it really isn't anymore with the x900 series IMO...

 

[gogopix]

Dear Jack,
Go for the 9900!

I have the 7900, and it is my first injet., But I am greatly impressed, and do large panos... that means with P65+ I have over 10,000 vertical pixels to play with. So at 240 you get over 40"

I dont have scale but here is a 1 gig file from 5 shots I think, from 7900... really impressive, until I realize I am at over 400pixels per inch; wasting rez

The 7900 is a monster; the9900 must be Godzilla. Get a six pack ( make that 2 or 3) and Guy and a few friends and you MAY be able to move that sucker.

Anyway I think you will be please. 24" in all reality is certainly enough for most work... but at times????

But if I did by it, where would I HIDE it??

:ROTFL:

Victor

 

[Jack]

Good point Victor,

The one thing I'm considering is that for the extra cost of about $2000 for the 9900, I could probably pay for all the custom prints larger than 24" I'd want over the life of the printer... My P65+ is just over 8980 pixels on the long dimension, so at 240 that is still over 36" tall for vertically captured panos printed at native file sizes. (Is an interesting visual of just how big the P65+ files are, isn't it?) Anyway, that makes your argument for the 9900 a good one...

 

[gogopix]

...and the temptation to print BIG. Even more than the initial cost, the ink, the ink....
The thing I MOST order on-line now is INK!

I also figured to just job out the over 24"; the trouble is, you either don't do it or not enough. Once you have the size, you really come to appreciate it. However for me that was from a 8x12 Kodak 8660 dye sub to the 7900.

I think I'll digest this for a while.

regards
Victor

 

[Paratom]

I also considered the 9900 but in my case it is not enough really big prints to justify it.
The 7900 is a monster, I didnt expect it to be that much bigger than the 7600.
Jack-thanks for the feedback, I couldt experiment so far because I needed to order further ink first (just did that).
The first ink was just sucked into the printer.
If I was a pro like you I wouldprobably have ordered the 9900.
Just at Saturday I saw an exhibition with really large arieal shots and such large prints are impressive.
However I am happy with the 7900, after prting the first 60x80cm print from my Sinar back I was sold all over again a) forthis printer and b) for MF.

 

[Jack]

...and the temptation to print BIG. Even more than the initial cost, the ink, the ink....
The thing I MOST order on-line now is INK!

I also figured to just job out the over 24"; the trouble is, you either don't do it or not enough. Once you have the size, you really come to appreciate it. However for me that was from a 8x12 Kodak 8660 dye sub to the 7900.

I think I'll digest this for a while.

regards
Victor

If I was a pro like you I wouldprobably have ordered the 9900.
Just at Saturday I saw an exhibition with really large arieal shots and such large prints are impressive.

dammit...

 

[Mark Gowin]

dammit...

That sums it up pretty well.

 

[Paul_Kerfoot]

As soon as B&H has them in stock again, I am about to pull the trigger on an Epson 3880. There should be a requirement for a letter of permission from Ben Bernanke before being allowed to join GetDpi.

Paul

 

[charlesphoto]

I just got an HP Z3200 44." I would have loved the 9900 but a few things swayed me to the HP. The built in spectrophotometer for one. The fact that I go long periods without printing for two (the HP's are known for being virtually clog free) and thirdly there was no way in hell I was getting the 9900 down into the basement! The 7900 would have been a stretch (the HP 44" weighs about the same as the 24" Epson). Plus the HP was about $1100 cheaper. So far the prints are beautiful though the first 44"X66" b&w had some gloss enhancer banding at the very end. Cleaned and aligned and crossing my fingers on the next one coming out now.

So all things to consider. The HP does have some drawbacks like poor sheet feeding.

Anyway, good luck. It's great to see how amazing digital print technology has come in such a short time.

 

[gogopix]

Sheet feeding isn't a dream on the 7900, either. It does eventually line up, but takes several tries before the auto align gets it right.

Am I the only one who feels this? It all WORKS, but it can't seem to figure out exactly how much feedthru it wants. Usually takes a few tries

Couldn't possibly be MOI :ROTFL:

 

[Wayne Fox]

Sheet feeding isn't a dream on the 7900, either. It does eventually line up, but takes several tries before the auto align gets it right.

Am I the only one who feels this? It all WORKS, but it can't seem to figure out exactly how much feedthru it wants. Usually takes a few tries

Couldn't possibly be MOI :ROTFL:

How are you feeding sheets? I have no problems at all ... just insert the sheet until it stops, make sure the right side is close to the alignment mark, and push the button. Not sure if I've ever had to reload a sheet using this method.

The "recommended" method in the manual is something I only do with very think paper that won't automatically load.

 

[Paratom]

Sheet feeding isn't a dream on the 7900, either. It does eventually line up, but takes several tries before the auto align gets it right.

Am I the only one who feels this? It all WORKS, but it can't seem to figure out exactly how much feedthru it wants. Usually takes a few tries

Couldn't possibly be MOI :ROTFL:

Havent tried sheets so far on the 7900.

 

[Jack]

Well, I measured my space and can squeeze the 9900 in, but a portion of the left front is blocked by a counter for out-feed, for about 18" in from the Left side of the printer. Not a problem for 36" paper, but may be for 44"? Can somebody tell me how far from the Left edge of a 24" roll in their 7900 out-feed to the far LH edge of the printer? The 7900 is a no brainer fit...

 

[DougDolde]

I have the 7900 and it is really superb. I don't really want a bigger one, mainly because mounting/matting/framing larger than a 24" wide print becomes more of a hassle than I want to deal with.

So I am printing 24x30 or 24x32 max or 24X72 panoramas. Even the 24x72 pano is a bit big to deal with, generally max out at 20x60.

I'm finding I like printing on Breathing Color's Lyve canvas better than paper. I dry mount it to 8 ply board then varnish with Glamour II. I like the look much better than a print that's hidden behind glass or acrylic. It's more intimate, you can touch the print, and no reflections ! Some detail is lost in printing on canvas due to the weave but not as much as you'd think; the canvas prints are still quite detailed.

As far as profiles, I avoid sRGB unless its for the web. Otherwise just leave it in your working profile which in my case is Joe Holmes' Ektaspace usually with a chroma variant assigned. Then just pick the paper or canvas in the Epson dialogue box, no conversion required.

 

[gogopix]

Well, I measured my space and can squeeze the 9900 in, but a portion of the left front is blocked by a counter for out-feed, for about 18" in from the Left side of the printer. Not a problem for 36" paper, but may be for 44"? Can somebody tell me how far from the Left edge of a 24" roll in their 7900 out-feed to the far LH edge of the printer? The 7900 is a no brainer fit...

May be OBE
but

the distance from left edge of 24" paper to outside TOP part of 7900 is 15"

Underneath, the left edge is 4" from inside of leg and 6" from outside.

The legs of 7900 sit about 9" inside the top part

Victor