Fujifilm Pro vs Fuji Crystal Archive paper?????

[Shutter]

Hello!

I'm not a "professional photographer" but I am striving to be. I'm taking outdoor portraits and have used a local pro printing company, SAMS and ezprints.com for printing services. The pro. printing business uses Kodak prof. paper. SAMS and ezprints uses fuji crystal archive paper but they are different in the texture and thickness (just a bit).

Just what is the advantage of getting the prints Professionally done - other than getting the "professional" stamp on the back of each print?????? I couldn't tell the difference between the professional prints and the others. I do all the processing with PS 7 and send it on as a jpeg file cropped and ready to print. I want to use something that will last for the people I've taken pictures of.

Answering this question would help me out a bunch! Thanks in advance...

Ellen

http://www.pbase.com/ellenshutter

 

[Charles Bandes]

Hi Ellen,

In terms of raw "archivalness" the Fuji Crystal Archive is probably the best photographic paper out there. I like its color rendition quite a lot also. When I do my own color darkroom work (rarer and rarer these days, sigh,) I always always use Fuji Crystal Archive, I love the stuff.

There are a bunch of reasons to go to a pro lab though -

1. A skilled operator will get better color out of these machines than someone who's just punching a timeclock.

2. Constant maintenance and vigilance is required to keep any of these machines producing consistent results. (And clean, archival prints)

3. If you have "problem" prints (weird color casts, etc) you want to have a lab operator that you can talk with about the problem - someone whose job it is to understand color, contrast, etc who's used to dealing with pros and pro concerns. (I don't think the lab folks at Walmart would get it if you said "this guy looks like he's about two points too magenta, please fix it.")

4. Prints need to be washed properly in order to maintain their archivability, I've heard anecdotes about some lower-end labs skimping on that process (but it's all third-hand and may not be true.)

5. Your clients are paying you good money for these prints, and they deserve the highest possible quality that you can give them. Even if it means you have to raise your prices by .50 or so per print I think it will be worth it to give them the very best you can.

6. Just a business philosophy, kinda like the last point - I like supporting other professionals in my industry. The same way that I'd rather buy my cameras locally rather than mail-order, I'd rather have my prints done by a local pro-lab by a person I can talk to. This way, if something goes wrong, if I'm in a jam, I have a point of contact and a relationship with my vendor.

Blah blah blah.

Sorry for the rant

--
Charles Bandes
http://www.bandesphoto.com

 

[Shutter]

Yes, that helps alot. I too want to make sure that in 5 years these people don't come back to me with the valid complaint that their prints are fading! Before I went digital, I noticed different labs printed the same negative differently (warm vs cool tones). I like that with Photoshop and a calibrated monitor, my prints have come out looking as I expected.

Thanks for your reply, these forums have been most helpful!

Ellen

Hi Ellen,

In terms of raw "archivalness" the Fuji Crystal Archive is probably
the best photographic paper out there. I like its color rendition
quite a lot also. When I do my own color darkroom work (rarer and
rarer these days, sigh,) I always always use Fuji Crystal Archive,
I love the stuff.

There are a bunch of reasons to go to a pro lab though -

1. A skilled operator will get better color out of these machines
than someone who's just punching a timeclock.

2. Constant maintenance and vigilance is required to keep any of
these machines producing consistent results. (And clean, archival
prints)

3. If you have "problem" prints (weird color casts, etc) you want
to have a lab operator that you can talk with about the problem -
someone whose job it is to understand color, contrast, etc who's
used to dealing with pros and pro concerns. (I don't think the lab
folks at Walmart would get it if you said "this guy looks like he's
about two points too magenta, please fix it.")

4. Prints need to be washed properly in order to maintain their
archivability, I've heard anecdotes about some lower-end labs
skimping on that process (but it's all third-hand and may not be
true.)

5. Your clients are paying you good money for these prints, and
they deserve the highest possible quality that you can give them.
Even if it means you have to raise your prices by .50 or so per
print I think it will be worth it to give them the very best you
can.

6. Just a business philosophy, kinda like the last point - I like
supporting other professionals in my industry. The same way that
I'd rather buy my cameras locally rather than mail-order, I'd
rather have my prints done by a local pro-lab by a person I can
talk to. This way, if something goes wrong, if I'm in a jam, I have
a point of contact and a relationship with my vendor.

Blah blah blah.

Sorry for the rant

--
Charles Bandes
http://www.bandesphoto.com