What papers and printers would you choose?

GP Merfeld said:

BKKSW ....

I use the Epson 1280 and love it! If you should go that route,
there is a set of excellent and free ICC media profiles for it at:

http://computer-darkroom.co.uk/

(Use the profiles listed for the "1290").

Click to expand...

I agree about those free profiles. I am considering using the Generations 5 archival ink, though, so will have to invest in some profiles for that. I find the HWM profile works quite well with about all matte papers I have tried also.

Diane--Diane B http://www.pbase.com/picnic/galleriesB/W lover, but color is seducing me

Jack -

I agree the S9000 has gotten rave reviews and really draws my interest.. However, as of right now there isn't anywhere near the inks and profiles available for it as there is the 1280.. Support counts, and if the support was equal for both I'd be getting the S9000.

Thanks about the house.. It will be just 16 days shy of two years when it's finished since the fire destroyed it..

Take care

BKKSW

jyamuy said:

BKKSW, I am also planning to upgrade my old Epson 980 in the
hopefully not far future. I was thinking about the new Canon
S9000. It is too expensive for me now, but may be in a few months
the price comes down. I haven't used it but they claim it is very
good, economical (1 cartridge per color), and extremely fast.
Check it out. (And this is no joke.) Congratulations for the new
house. Take care,

Jack.

Click to expand...

Trent -

Thanks for all the tips and the recommendations. I suspect the differences between the 1440 and 2880 is a few more layers of ink. I remember reading that the main improvements and reasoning behind HP's Photoret II and III is not so much the DPI (although it was certainly there) but the amount of "layers" the printer laid on the finished product, which supposedly added more "dimension" to the final print. I'm not sure if this is the case there, but it might explain why they 'look' the same, but with some pics there's a difference.. Certain pics might simply benefit more from additional layers..

BKKSW

TrentMcD said:

The differences I see are very subtle and aren't really in the
detail: at 1440 it resolves detail better than my E-10. The
differences are in the colors. But that's not really true, because
side by side the colors look the same, they just seem stand out
more at 2880. The difference is closer to doing fine adjustment
with levels in PS, that's why I say it is the dynamic range that is
better. The other reason I say dynamic range is that I noticed the
biggest difference with Black and White.

I once asked here if anyone else saw a difference and several
people said they did but it wasn't great enough to justify the
extra time/ink to print. The reviews I've read said about the same
thing: there is a difference, but you have to decide if it's worth
it.

To me it depends on the image. I usually print one 2880 for every
thirty 1440 that I print.

One note - I shoot exclusively in raw and keep all of my images at
16 bits. Could this be the difference? I notice the difference in
prints of 8 bit versus 16 bit. Maybe it takes the 2880 to resolve
the subtle differences of 16 bit color.

DMillier said:

I have an 890 and a 1270 (european names). I can tell no difference
between 1440 and 2880 on premium glossy and contrary to what trent
has found, all the reviews I've seen say basically there is no
discernable difference to the naked eye.

Trent, what are you doing to get the higher quality?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Hi Bob -

I've stored the site in my "favourites" list.. Thank you very much..

BKKSW

Bob Gilmore said:

Hi:

For frames try these two sites...I have purchased from both and the
stuff has been good:
http://www.pictureframes.com
http://www.americanframe.com

Bob
--
Bob G.
http://www.pbase.com/gilbob

Click to expand...

Eileen -

I agree about the C-80.. In fact with the current $30.00 rebate, your only paying $50.00 for the entire printer with FULL cartridges, which is cheaper than if you just bought the cartridges.. I've recommended this printer to several friends with 2-3 megapixel point and shoots, and they're all very happy.. In fact, I tried one just for the heck with some 10mb scans, and they were excellent.. It doesn't support borderless printing though.. sigh.. Just think, it's cheaper to stock 3-4 C-80 printer, than it is to stock 3-4 sets of cartridges..

Thanks for the hints on the paper.. I use the archival now for prints I give to family and friends, but I want something very special and tasteful since I'll be decorating my home with the prints, mounted and framed of course..

Thanks

BKKSW

Bonnie Schilf said:

As for canvas for ink jets try going to http://www.calumetphoto.com and go
to canvas injet paper they have alot of choices there.
Hope this helps

Click to expand...

Bonnie -

Thank you. I have bookmarked the site and will go through all the sites I've collected fromo this thread soon..

Regard

BKKSW

Leslie -

Your probably right! In 25 years we'll probably have holocameras that interact with us, and plasma LCD's will be cheap enough they will be the "paper" of the future, changing photographs every so often..

In fact, I had purchased a small frame that hooked up to a phone line. It was a Mother's day present. I paid for a service that would download new pics, and take away others, during the middle of the night. The frame would "call" the master site at preset times and do whatever updates I had.. My Mother received great joy from this simple frame in her last days, as I'd send pictures of where and what I've been doing, girl friends I dated, elephants I rode, rain forests I trekked, etc..

After her funeral I went to her apartment to retrieve it, with plans to give it to my Father who is in his last days, and alas, it was gone.. Someone nicked it.. They probably have no idea how it works, etc, and they can never use it since the internal serial number cannot be registered without my permission.. It's only been less than a month, but I'm wondering do I wait till I get an email from whoever nicked it asking permission to register it, or do I download some prison photos, and a slide that says "thief", or a sign that says this is the property of BKKSW, so if they do have it plugged into a phone line they'd be in for a surprise.

To be honest my HP 1220C is fantastic for prints, but HP doesn't have the inks available for archival prints or profile support either..

Sorry for rambling, thanks for your suggestions..

BKKSW

Hello Angelo -

62 pound paper? Now I'm real curious.. I've bookmarked the site and will visit it soon with the others which have been recommended..

Thank you for your help.

BKKSW>

Angelo Daluisio said:

Hello,

....my two cents worth. First off, a great source for paper is
redriverpaper.com. They have an excellent asortment at reasonable
prices. Buy their sample pack and you'll get two sheets of
everything they carry. Make prints and then decide. I love their
62 lb. Ultra Pro Satin and Gloss combined with my HP1100, I get
great results. As far as how long a print will last? My thoughts
are this...I shot film for over 30 years and have never had a color
photograph that I was able to replace or reprint went it went flat.
This is because the negatives don't hold up well enough to be
re-printed. But on the other hand digital images on media stoarge
last for a long, long time (indefinitly ?) and can always be
reprinted years and years down the road and with technology being
what it is, I'd rather reprint years from now using the better
technologies than worry now how long a
a print made today,will last. Who knows, maybe my tastes will
change and I will reprint because of that.

--
Angelo

Click to expand...

GP -

I'm leaning that way, although the Canon S9000 has caught my attention.. For sure it will be a wide carriage, as I've always found many uses well worth the price differences for them.

Thanks for your advise..

BKKSW

GP Merfeld said:

BKKSW ....

I use the Epson 1280 and love it! If you should go that route,
there is a set of excellent and free ICC media profiles for it at:

http://computer-darkroom.co.uk/

(Use the profiles listed for the "1290").

Aloha,
GP
--
GP Merfeld
Island Preservations
http://www.pbase.com/gpmerfeld/galleries

Click to expand...

Mike -

What about profiles, have you found a source for different profiles? Any archival inks available yet? I really like this printer, but I have to look at the entire "picture" (pardon the pun) before choosing..

BKKSW

Mike Ditta said:

I'm using the S9000 for large prints and have found it be extremely
fast (under 90 seconds for an A4 borderless, and just under 3
minutes for an A3 borderless), with the output at least as good or
better then the Epson. Using Red River paper, the results are
really great, geez, I like that paper. I am also using the Weink
refill for the S9000 with comparable results when using the OEM ink.
With speed, detail and very quiet, the Canon has been one of my
better purchases.

--
Mike

Click to expand...

BKKSW said:

GP -

I'm leaning that way, although the Canon S9000 has caught my
attention.. For sure it will be a wide carriage, as I've always
found many uses well worth the price differences for them.

Click to expand...

I hear ya, BKKSW.... Now that I am playing with 13" wide paper, I just want to go bigger and wider! But, quite a price leap from here to there...

The best of luck, whichever you choose...

Aloha,
GP--GP MerfeldIsland Preservations http://www.pbase.com/gpmerfeld/galleries

Hi BKKSW

I'm not convinced that the dpi makes that much difference (not convinced that it doesn't either!).

Another possibility is the 2000P - this has 1440dpi, archival inks (like the 7000) and will do you're 13X19 - it's also very slowwww.

I use it with their archival matte paper, and the results are a little more subdued than the cheaper printers, but I really like them (the Epson watercolour paper is also great).

What I do think (know) is that if you're going to put these prints on your wall, you'd be better using archival inks (i.e. 2000p or 7000). In my experience the inks from the other printers change colour really fast if they're in bright light - only slightly, but then, you don't want them changing at all do you?

hope this helps
kind regards
jono

BKKSW said:

Hello -

So far it seems everyone agrees decorating with my own pics isn't
such a bad idea and I got some great ideas in that thread, I hope
they keep coming..

Now.. Since my home will be brand new and I'm trying to make it
nice, it seems like a good excuse to replace my HP 1220C printer
(I've no complaints, I just want the best output I can get) with a
new photo printer which can use archival inks and produces
excellent results.. I'm eying either the Epson P7000 (only 720dpi)
or the 1280.. The P7000 with it's inks and the right papers can
make prints that they say last for over 100 years.. The 1280 with
the right papers I think only last 25 years, but then it's
2880dpi.. Can anyone tell me from experience if the differences in
DPI will make a noticable difference up to 16x24"? Does anyone
have experience with these two printers, or know of a better
printer (in a reasonable price range) for this intended purpose?
It must be able to do larger prints, at least 13x19's..

And.. has anyone really great results with any sort of canvas or
linen papers and ink combinations? Would you recommend any other
papers for presentation purposes?

Any really good on-line frame shops?

Till now, my HP 1220c has met my requirements of producing gift
prints for family members and office work, but I've had no real
need to print my own photos.. Now I have a great reason to spend
the money and I'm going to take advantage of it..

I know this is a lot of information to ask in one msg, so thanks in
advance..

BKKSW

Click to expand...

--Jono Slack http://www.slack.co.uk

Jono Slack said:

Hi BKKSW
I'm not convinced that the dpi makes that much difference (not
convinced that it doesn't either!).

Click to expand...

Me either.. I've been scouring the internet for reports and comparisons concerning DPI..

Jono Slack said:

Another possibility is the 2000P - this has 1440dpi, archival inks
(like the 7000) and will do you're 13X19 - it's also very slowwww.

I use it with their archival matte paper, and the results are a
little more subdued than the cheaper printers, but I really like
them (the Epson watercolour paper is also great).

Click to expand...

I'll look into this paper, it's been recommended several times in this thread.. There must be something to it.

Jono Slack said:

What I do think (know) is that if you're going to put these prints
on your wall, you'd be better using archival inks (i.e. 2000p or
7000). In my experience the inks from the other printers change
colour really fast if they're in bright light - only slightly, but
then, you don't want them changing at all do you?

Click to expand...

Nope, hopefully they won't change at all. Of course this will require frames with UV treated glass, etc.. My home has skylights all over and large windows, I love light, but I don't want it to be the undoing of my prints....

Thanks for the input..

BKKSW

Jono Slack said:

hope this helps
kind regards
jono

BKKSW said:

Hello -

So far it seems everyone agrees decorating with my own pics isn't
such a bad idea and I got some great ideas in that thread, I hope
they keep coming..

Now.. Since my home will be brand new and I'm trying to make it
nice, it seems like a good excuse to replace my HP 1220C printer
(I've no complaints, I just want the best output I can get) with a
new photo printer which can use archival inks and produces
excellent results.. I'm eying either the Epson P7000 (only 720dpi)
or the 1280.. The P7000 with it's inks and the right papers can
make prints that they say last for over 100 years.. The 1280 with
the right papers I think only last 25 years, but then it's
2880dpi.. Can anyone tell me from experience if the differences in
DPI will make a noticable difference up to 16x24"? Does anyone
have experience with these two printers, or know of a better
printer (in a reasonable price range) for this intended purpose?
It must be able to do larger prints, at least 13x19's..

And.. has anyone really great results with any sort of canvas or
linen papers and ink combinations? Would you recommend any other
papers for presentation purposes?

Any really good on-line frame shops?

Till now, my HP 1220c has met my requirements of producing gift
prints for family members and office work, but I've had no real
need to print my own photos.. Now I have a great reason to spend
the money and I'm going to take advantage of it..

I know this is a lot of information to ask in one msg, so thanks in
advance..

BKKSW

Click to expand...

--
Jono Slack
http://www.slack.co.uk

Click to expand...

The 1280 is the undisputed king of desktop photo printing. It is the printer of choice for pro photogs who do their own printing. Print quality is better than anything out there, including the 2000P.

Just one testimony: at WPPI in Vegas, one of the speakers, Don Emmerich - "Digital Don" as he is known, held a seminar on inkjet printing. He is a professional portrait/wedding photographer and does his own desktop printing. He is also the tech editor of a major photo magazine (I dont remember which one.) As the tech editor, he gets to use and test all new photographic technology that comes to market. He has used/tested everything out there and will not use anything other than the 1280 for professional work.

His photos are incredible, he knows computers, printers, and Photoshop. By "know", I mean KNOWS. This is one of his jobs - to know. His word and my experience (I have an Epson 777, 1280, and HP Photosmart 1100. The $50 777 prints better than the $300 HP.) are good enough for me.

As for ink, his suggestion is to not skimp - use the Epson inks. They are the best for the printer, so dont use anything else. He's coming from a professional posittion and selling prints 1280 prints for many hundreds of dollars. He can afford to use more expensive inks because he is getting that back in the print price. For an amatuer, maybe 3rd party inks work okay. I dont know. I use Epson.

As for paper, he suggest always using the brand name paper. Epson made the paper to work with their printer and ink. Who know the combination better than them? Again, other papers might work, but trust the manufacturer. The best "photographic" paper is the Epson Premium LUSTRE Photo Paper. It has a high gloss "E" surface. Next best would be Premium Glossy, then Glossy, then just plain Photo Quality. There is also the Matte Heavyweight which is really good if you want a matte finish.

I use the Lustre, Matte, and Glossy. They are all great all have their purposes. Lustre and Matte for sales, Glossy for everything else. The Photo Quality Ink Jet Paper is great for things that aren't photo prints but you want the best photo quality in a normal thickness paper. This stuff is great, and relatively cheap. The Glossy Photo Paper is sold at Costco - 100 sheets for $19.99. The same paper goes for as much as $12.95 for 20 sheets elsewhere (Staples).

Just may 120 cents,

GageFX

BKKSW said:

Jono Slack said:

Hi BKKSW
I'm not convinced that the dpi makes that much difference (not
convinced that it doesn't either!).

Click to expand...

Me either.. I've been scouring the internet for reports and
comparisons concerning DPI..

Click to expand...

I have noticed a big difference between 1440 and 2880. I had been printing at 1440 becuase I thought there wouldnt be much difference. I then did a full range test to see prints at all (many) ppi and dpi and 2880 was much better. If you just look at the 1440, it looks great and you cant imagine it being better, but put it next to a 2880 and you will see the difference. Also in the test (I have to find my printouts and notes... wont be easy), 150 ppi printed out just as well as 300 ppi. I made prints up to 20x24 (8x10 crops on the 1280) and the lower res pics actually looked better than upresing to 300 ppi.

As to the rest about archival and Matte paper and the 2000P - you worry too much. (Yes, I realize longevity is an issue, but the 1280 and Lustre is rated at 25+ years and looks better than 2000P and Matte. My mom has a photographic (chemical print) portrait on her wall of my brother and I from about 25 years ago. It has never been in direct sunlight and it has been considerably faded for the past 10 years. 1280 and Lustre will last just fine.

GageFX

jyamuy said:

BKKSW, I am also planning to upgrade my old Epson 980 in the
hopefully not far future. I was thinking about the new Canon
S9000. It is too expensive for me now, but may be in a few months
the price comes down. I haven't used it but they claim it is very
good, economical (1 cartridge per color), and extremely fast.
Check it out. (And this is no joke.) Congratulations for the new
house. Take care,

Click to expand...

But how much do those cartridges cost EACH? I have never had a color cartridge drain drastically unevenly. I'm finding $12-15 for individual inks for Canon (not necessarily S9000) so that's about $60 for all the colors or $40-50 for the Epson color cartridge. If my cyan drained with my magenta full, I would see a problem, but when my printer claims it's time for a new cartridge, I has less than 10% of all colors - that's no problem.

GageFX

TrentMcD said:

One note - I shoot exclusively in raw and keep all of my images at
16 bits. Could this be the difference? I notice the difference in
prints of 8 bit versus 16 bit. Maybe it takes the 2880 to resolve
the subtle differences of 16 bit color.

Click to expand...

I dont think that has anything to do with it. I shoot 90% JPG and I noticed a difference too (1280). When I did my test, I would show a person the 1440 and they thought it looked perfect - no flaws. Then the 1440 side by side with the 2880 and there was a clear difference.

Also, I only print at 1440 for myself and only 2880 for sold prints.

GageFX

I would think the benefit is from double the print resolution. 360 is dotty, 720 is less so, 1440 is smooth and 2880 is TWICE as smooth. The thing is, 1440 is so smooth to begin with, you dont notice any problems with it.

GageFX

BKKSW said:

Thanks for all the tips and the recommendations. I suspect the
differences between the 1440 and 2880 is a few more layers of ink.
I remember reading that the main improvements and reasoning behind
HP's Photoret II and III is not so much the DPI (although it was
certainly there) but the amount of "layers" the printer laid on the
finished product, which supposedly added more "dimension" to the
final print. I'm not sure if this is the case there, but it might
explain why they 'look' the same, but with some pics there's a
difference.. Certain pics might simply benefit more from additional
layers..

Click to expand...

I have little experience with Epsons.. But when you read HP's explanation of Photoret, they say the smaller DPI allows more layers to be added.. I never did quite understand it, but the way it was explained to me by the reps at the last photoshow I attended (and we all know how knowledgable these guys are), the higher the DPI, the more layers you can use to create an image, thereby giving it more depth and realism.. I'm not sure how much there is to that, but I do know that using Photoret at any resolution on my 1220c gives much better results than not using Photoret at any resolutions..

BKKSW

gagefx said:

GageFX

Rembvrijn said:

Thanks for all the tips and the recommendations. I suspect the
differences between the 1440 and 2880 is a few more layers of ink.
I remember reading that the main improvements and reasoning behind
HP's Photoret II and III is not so much the DPI (although it was
certainly there) but the amount of "layers" the printer laid on the
finished product, which supposedly added more "dimension" to the
final print. I'm not sure if this is the case there, but it might
explain why they 'look' the same, but with some pics there's a
difference.. Certain pics might simply benefit more from additional
layers..

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

gagefx said:

Rembvrijn said:

Jono Slack said:

Hi BKKSW
I'm not convinced that the dpi makes that much difference (not
convinced that it doesn't either!).

Click to expand...

Me either.. I've been scouring the internet for reports and
comparisons concerning DPI..

Click to expand...

I have noticed a big difference between 1440 and 2880. I had been
printing at 1440 becuase I thought there wouldnt be much
difference. I then did a full range test to see prints at all
(many) ppi and dpi and 2880 was much better. If you just look at
the 1440, it looks great and you cant imagine it being better, but
put it next to a 2880 and you will see the difference. Also in the
test (I have to find my printouts and notes... wont be easy), 150
ppi printed out just as well as 300 ppi.

Click to expand...

I made prints up to 20x24

Rembvrijn said:

(8x10 crops on the 1280) and the lower res pics actually looked
better than upresing to 300 ppi.

Click to expand...

This is indeed strange.. I'm still looking for some scientific studies about these issues.. I'll let the forum know when I find some worthwhile studies.

Rembvrijn said:

As to the rest about archival and Matte paper and the 2000P - you
worry too much. (Yes, I realize longevity is an issue, but the
1280 and Lustre is rated at 25+ years and looks better than 2000P
and Matte. My mom has a photographic (chemical print) portrait on
her wall of my brother and I from about 25 years ago. It has never
been in direct sunlight and it has been considerably faded for the
past 10 years. 1280 and Lustre will last just fine.

Click to expand...

I'm sure they will, but I think Jono understood I'm looking for the BEST possible output, and that the quality of paper/linen/canvas can make the print as much as the content of the print.. And if I go to the expense of these papers and expensive frames, etc, for my interior decorating, then I want the very best inks available.. and Jono's right, so far the best inks are made for those two printers.. There must be a reason the P7000 is twice the price as the 1280.. I hope to soon figure it out, since I doubt it's only to the being able to use archival inks.. And it tops out at 720, which I don't understand..

Thanks for your input. I think there is much more to printing quality images than just DPI, inks, and papers.. I think profiles, processes, etc, enter into it in a big way.. Like I said above, I just want to find information solid enough to explain it all without a doubt for the best informed choice I can make.. These prints won't be for customers, but for me, to showcase my new home and my life to my visitors.. I just want the very best I can get..

Again, thanks for your input..

BKKSW

Rembvrijn said:

GageFX

Click to expand...