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 Medium format images

flyrcairplanes

New member
Just wondering where people send their medium format images for printing. Am I wrong in assuming that if I get a wider color gamut printer etc I will get to see the full advantages of medium format in print? Thanks
 

torger

Active member
Large color gamut only means you can show more saturation, most natural images don't have that saturated colors to require very wide gamut, and mf won't gain more than any other.

I usually send away for digital C print, simply because results are predictable and repeatable. Pigment ink is "best" but harder to find a good printing service.
 

dchew

Well-known member
I print myself on an standard Epson wide-format printer.

I don't ever remember hearing that MF has a wider gamut than 135 or other smaller formats. How you prep the file for printing has a lot more to do with print quality than what camera format you use, assuming you have enough data for the print size you want to make.

Jeff Schewe has an excellent (and relatively current) book called The Digital Print. I suggest you read that before going too far down a specific printer and/or printing path.

Dave
 

BANKER1

Member
I also print medium format on an Epson large format printer. No matter if I print 35mm or MFD, I am always amazed by the finished print. However, the way Hasselblad handles colors make them even more special

Greg
 

flyrcairplanes

New member
thanks everyone for the info. I will look for the Schewe book. My limited understanding of printing makes me think it is a whole art unto itself and I don't know that I am ready to print my own work yet.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
I do all my own printing whether from 35mm or the IQ160 and am currently using an Epson 9900.

The way I see it - printing can be an art in itself and if done correctly will furnish outstanding images. If you've taken the time to shoot the image then process it why not take the extra step and print it yourself so you keep total control throughout the entire process? Most of what I do is on canvas however I offer paper as well and searching for the "perfect" media while taking time was just another step in perfecting the art.

Printing at times can be difficult yet the rewards are there.

Don

My clients might not be all that interested in what camera I used to capture the image but they are pleased when they learn I had total control cradle to grave. We tell them on a canvas print we leave a little DNA with each print as we shoot the image, processed it, printed and stretched it all in house.
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
....My limited understanding of printing makes me think it is a whole art unto itself ....
That's a pretty fair assessment IMHO. Printing does require some background knowledge and a bit of understanding of the workflow and what makes an "acceptable" fine art print on various substrates. It's not as easy as simply "pushing the button" which is the same mentality that the general public also thinks that is all professional photographer does with a camera.

But I do think that the learning curve is very manageable and not difficult. Once you spend a few days with Guy's Epson 7900, you'll be ready to go!

:D
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
You shouldn't expect to master printing easily. Actually everywhere I think I know what I'm doing I screw it up.

Don't know which post processing software program you're using however they all should offer some sort of limited training/tips on printing. Likewise whichever printer you decide to buy will also have tips available from the manufacture. You might also look into Lynda.com for on-line training that includes both processing and printing.

Good printing isn't done overnight. You must have a properly calibrated monitor to begin with. Follow that up with profile(s) for the various media you'll be printing on. Once you have these first 2-the rest should fall in place. Just as learning C1, Photoshop or Lightroom wasn't accomplished overnight neither is printing. Actually I think printing will be easier than what you might think it is.

This place is also a great resource of information.

Don
 

Bill Caulfeild-Browne

Well-known member
I always print my own images, just as I used to do all my own darkroom work. It's all about control!

The most important ingredient IMHO is a first class profiling system. I use Eye 1 for my display and for making paper profiles.

Although I use C1 for Raw processing, I prefer to print from PS where I can use Pixel Genius's sharpening algorithms and Canon's 16 bit plug-in. (I use a Canon Image Prograf printer.)

But even then, there is art involved! For large, complex images I will make a small version first as a proof and then cook the final version to taste.

I remember what a thrill it was to watch an image appear in the developing tray in my darkroom days. Now I experience the same anticipation watching the paper emerge from the printer!
 

Vincent Goetz

Subscriber Member
I would suggest that anyone doing their own printing take a long look at Colorbyte software, Imageprint. I just sold my Epson 7900, and will be downsizing my printer, but that software is excellent.
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
You might also take a look at Qimage. I used it briefly a couple years ago and just came back to it a short while ago and really like it. Ken has used Qimage for many years then again he's the only person I know that has 4-large format printers.
 

photo570

Member
I would suggest that anyone doing their own printing take a long look at Colorbyte software, Imageprint. I just sold my Epson 7900, and will be downsizing my printer, but that software is excellent.
I second this, Colourbyte Imageprint (sorry I refuse to spell colour wrong) is one of the best purchases I have ever made. I spent a lot of money on other rips that were just plain hard work and Image print was a revelation. I have not printed from Photoshop in years.

Kind regards,
Jason.
 
You might also take a look at Qimage. I used it briefly a couple years ago and just came back to it a short while ago and really like it. Ken has used Qimage for many years then again he's the only person I know that has 4-large format printers.
Just a heads up, but Qimage is (currently) only on PC, if you have a Mac then there aren't really any alternatives other than using a virtual machine.

Of course, I don't do any large-scale batch printing anymore, but when I did QI was a life-saver.

I second this, Colourbyte Imageprint (sorry I refuse to spell colour wrong) is one of the best purchases I have ever made. I spent a lot of money on other rips that were just plain hard work and Image print was a revelation. I have not printed from Photoshop in years.
I've heard many good things about it, but just can't get over the price for 44" printers... maybe someday. (I also refuse to spell Kolor wrong :B)
 

torger

Active member
To me it seems like if you want the best quality you either need to spend a lot of time with your own pigment ink printer and paper of choice, or you order digital C prints.

I as an amateur still print too small volume to justify owning a high end ink printer, and then I find C print to be a very good alternative. These are huge machines fully automated, they don't need much love or care from the operators to get good consistent results. The disadvantage is that you have only look to play with, the glossy photographic look. You can't print on semigloss, canvas, etc. If you're not owning your own printer I think it's quite good though, it becomes too complex to manage different looks when you have a roundtrip time of a day or two for your prints.

What I do when I make a print is that I compare to a previous TIFF-file I have left from an old print which has similar color and look to the new one I'm doing, so I get a sense of how contrasty the file should be etc to get the look I want. Then I order post-card-sized prints, with the full image, and some details of target size to test that sharpening works out properly. Then I do adjustments, and order a second post-card-sized print. Usually after that I'm good and can print full-size. In rare cases colors are difficult to get just right (even with everything calibrated, the print can give a different feel to a color), and then I order several small prints with different minor guessed color adjustments, so I can pick out the good one afterwards.

It's not a very fast process in terms of round-trip times to the printing lab, but otherwise it works fine, ie when I'm done I feel I have a high end result. At least as high end as I'm capable of.

I have ordered inkjet prints too, but I've had quality issues (poorly maintained printer), and it's a much steeper learning process to get to know how the particular ink and paper behaves, so it's difficult to reach "as good as it can get" with that, while for C-prints it's certainly doable.
 

stngoldberg

Well-known member
As I have stated before on this forum IMHO a very important component of Photography as an art form is to produce the image on paper.
Printing images is an art form in itself; I often find that the image that my camera produces differs from the image that I want to express.
Because of technical reasons that are too complex to recite here, the image almost always looks different on paper than it does on a screen.
I find that having a printer at my disposal (in my case it is an Epson 7880) is an important component of the final product
Stanley
 

kdphotography

Well-known member
.... I find C print to be a very good alternative. These are huge machines fully automated, they don't need much love or care from the operators to get good consistent results. ...
From what I've seen, these "wet lab" machines do require a bit more than a modicum of maintenance, attention, or calibration to keep operating and producing a high volume of prints with consistent quality. In that regard, it is no different than a fine art inkjet printer, just with different workflow and pre-printing dance maneuvers. I've also seen varying results depending on who is the lab tech/operator on the machine. Some don't know much and leave everything "automated," while others don't mind getting into the print a bit more and making small adjustments in attempts to improve the print. What makes it "easier" is that someone else is doing the work (or headache depending on how you look at it) for you.

I actually enjoy the process, including juggling the different printing workflows for color prints on my 9900 and preparing B&W prints on my K7 piezography printer. There's something to be said about the satisfaction of watching that final print come out of the printer that you made from start to finish.

:)
 

Don Libby

Well-known member
I remember the first print I ever developed in a wet darkroom; it was a black and white. There's a certain thrill of watching the image you took then processed as it came to life. Fast-forward to today's digital darkroom and I still feel the same thrill. As in the older wet darkroom the sense of accomplishment and "thrill" still occurs as the first print image is coming off the printer.

Printing yourself is expensive especially if you don't do it that much. Then again farming the image out to a lab can become expensive (I can't speak from actual experience as I've never done it). The lab costs (I think) can be thought of the time needed to actual get the print back, shipping the image to you or if the lab is local the cost of getting it. And then the cost of the print itself. The main problem I have with farming an image to a lab is that I took all this time to perfect the image; capturing it, processing it using a calibrated monitor and then I'm going to send the file to a third-person to have it printed? Just seems like I'm loosing the control I wanted to have in the first place.

I like to have total control over what I print. There's times that I'm uncertain what media I want to print on and in a matter of minutes and printing several test strips I can see which works the best and proceed which that media. If I farmed it out to a lab I wouldn't have that much control. Likewise I tend to tweak the settings a bit by adding a touch more ink and drying time to the image. I guess I could request that of a lab however will a lab tech have the same sense of ownership as the person who captured the image and took the time to process it? One of the major reasons for shooting RAW is the amount of control I have; otherwise you might as well just shoot Jpeg and take it to Wal-Mart.

The above argument is very subjective and works only for those who print a lot. By a lot I mean several times a week or per month. I used to print for others however all that did was help defray the cost of the machine and cause more work for myself. If you have a person or lab that does fine work and the tech knows and cares about what their doing then stick with them. Otherwise if you want that extra bit of control and don't mind a learning curve then think about printing yourself.

:)
 
Top