Film vs. Digital or..... DIGITAL V. DIGITAL PRINTING

My wife is asking me, even as I type this (she is now stomping into

the kitchen to continue dinner), "Why is this so hard to do?"

 

We are wasting ink, that is all we are doing, and I don't want to try

it again.

 

I'm posting this under the Technique category, but I'm realizing that

there ought to be a "Completely, totally frustrated out of my mind"

category.

 

My problem is really really simple. I have some cool pictures that

came from a friend. They are digital, and they look absolutely

beautiful, on the screen, that is. My friend shoots with a Canon 20D

and some zoom thing that came with it. The photos are of him and his

family, including the cutest 9-month-old boy I've ever seen.

 

My problem is this: Is there any good way to get print-outs?

 

I have photoshop 7 and an Epson 2200, and I thought that would be

enough.

 

But I don't have $1,000 to spend on "additional" software, which, as I

have been learning, is "what you need."

 

I have a collection of profiles that appear in photoshop at various

places.

 

My wife has these "fabric" sheets that you can print digial photos on

through your inkjet printer so that she can incorporate them into her

quilting. Those sheets seem expensive for the small number that you

get for about $8 or more.

 

I also have photocopier paper, a small stack of which I grabbed from

the office. This is the stuff we are using to try out the printing.

I know it is not optimum, but I think that we ought to come close.

 

There are 10,000 things to select, unselect, choose. Print with

preview. Properties. Don't select color management. Select color

management. ICC... no color management. Do I need to buy more

software? NOTHING LOOKS RIGHT. The first few sheets (read: the first

few dollars wasted) came out looking like somebody spilled pink dye on

the sheets. I made another change.... I think it was "Photo Enhance"

whatever that means... and now they're all green.

 

I have to agree with my wife. Why is this so hard?

 

I post this improperly to the Leica forum... it is patently off topic

for this forum, but I don't DARE post it elsewhere, because... well, I

think I'm simply afraid to.

 

I know that part of my frustrations with this come from my lack of

experience/training/UNDERSTANDING. I simply don't understand. There

is somthing that I just don't get.

 

Am I alone? Have you travelled this path before? Come up with a

solution? What did you do?

It's part of the learning curve for dogital. Pay a teenager to do it. They are whizzes with photoshop and it's cheaper.

 

Alternatively, send it to a pro lab for printing. You can upload the files to them and they'll mail you the prints when done, and you save the frustration.

 

If you want to do it yourself, read Luminous Landscape. Lots of primers there.

I don't know about the paper you're using. Why not try some

Epson Enhanced Matte, or Double Sided Matte? Pretty

reasonably priced, and gives good results. If you have

something extra special, spend some more for Epson Velvet

Fine Art paper........... Also, on the 2200, select No color

management.

On this very Forum there are people who can rescue you from the abyss.<p>

 

Unfortunately I am not one of them. But I see you ... near the same spot where I've been lying for quite some time.<p>

 

[Have finally begun to get close to acceptable b & w from an inexpensive HP 7960, bought after reading <a href=http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0404/bentley.html>this column by a pro photographer</a>.]

I know $1000 seems expensive for Imageprint. But it was worth it to me. I asked around and guys I respected spoke up for it. So I bought it and never looked back.

You will have to do some working through and spend a little

paper and ink to figure out what you're doing. Anyone come out

with perfect prints their first time in the darkroom? Doubtful, and

that chemistry never was free either.

Sorry Kent, but screw that idea spending a grand for print

management software, at least until he knows what he's doing.

You can get good results on the 2200 without it. If printing b&w,

get rid of the color cast with black only printing. Besides which, I

think Tony rightfully realizes he doesn't want to spend $1000

extra for snapshots of a friend's kids.

I've always feared the same results so I use www.mpix.com

 

free upload, $4.95 shipping regardless of order size and .29 a print, your choice of paper. Professional packed, usually shipped within a day of order. No matter how much research I do into trying my own printing (I have an unused Epson R-800) sitting next to me, I still stay with the ordering online.

 

I have zero confidence in ever being able to print myself as much as I hate to admit it.

Hi Tony,

 

The primary issue that most folks run into when beginning to print digitally is the matching of what's on the screen to what comes out on the paper. There is no real issue with printing out of Photoshop other than getting the profiles for each of your mediums (screen and printer) coordinated. The best tool for this job is one of the ColorCal units from Colorvision or Monaco. The prices have dropped considerably since I invested in mine several years ago, but I haven't checked them recently. If you are serious about printing I would highly recommend investing in one.

 

This will allow you to calibrate your screen first. Then open a test image that is supplied to be printed on your printer on your chosen grade of paper (I prefer Espon Enhanced Matte if its going under glass). This image is then scanned on a flatbed and used to create a printer profile thus matching your screen to your output device. you then select these newly created profiles in the printing process.

 

Short of this you can use the Adobe Gamma app supplied with Photoshop and profiles for your printer with Enhanced Matte or Glossy Photo paper that have been created to match those papers. If you are using an Epson printer its driver will provide a correct paper profile for you to use with their branded papers.

 

I've found the information on this site <http://www.computer-darkroom.com/ps9_print/ps9_print_1.htm> to be very useful in the PS color management process. I hope it proves helpful to you as well.

Ray - Within a week of arrival I'd gotten the Imageprint so I never learned how to get a good print without it. I think you're right about Tony already saying he didn't relish spending an additional $1000 for software. Especially not for a neighbor's snapshots, no matter how good they are.

Link works if you remove the offending ">" at the end, fyi.

Sorry about that link. This is the page for Colour Management in PS7.

 

<http://www.computer-darkroom.com/ps7_colour/ps7_1.htm>

 

BTW you won't see the results your looking for on plain paper. Epson Matte is great stuff.

 

...and all the best for the New Year.

Thanks Bill. I'll make a note of that. I can never remember how to properly post links on various sites when I need to, so i've always just put them in brackets figuring people could cut & paste them into their browser.

"I also have photocopier paper, a small stack of which I grabbed from the office. This is the stuff we are using to try out the printing. I know it is not optimum, but I think that we ought to come close."

 

Wrong! Not close at all. Paper and ink is EVERYTHING in inkjet printing. The ink will spread in photocopier paper (or even cheap inkjet paper), spoiling the colors and detail. If you want to print photos, you need good paper. Pick up on the quilt stuff after you learn what to do.

 

What profiles? Print profiles are designed for a specific printer, specific paper, specific inkset (e.g., Epson) and specific printer settings (e.g., 1440 or 2880). You will only find Epson profiles for photo quality paper, like Premium Luster, Enhanced Matter, etc.

 

Secondly, you need to learn how to apply these profiles. You seem to have a few buzz words, but no indication that you understand them. Where to start?

 

You need to establish a working color space in Photoshop. I recommend Adobe RGB (1998), but you can get by with sRGB. These look like profiles, but are device-independent standards which say what color a given set of numbers should represent. Do not use a printer profile as the color space, even if Photoshop lets you do it.

 

Go the the Epson web site (or Ilford, Hannemuhle, etc) and download profiles for their photo paper and the 2200. These profiles are "correction" factors which distort the image being sent to the printer to offset the distortions the printer introduces. The profile goes in the Photoshop print dialog box so that "Photoshop determines the color".

 

Then you need to turn off the things the printer driver tries to do to "fix" the color. In the Epson 2200 driver, select "Use CSM" and "No Color Adjustments". Let Photoshop handle the color end of things. While you are there, set the print resolution (1440 or 2880), and uncheck all the boxes just below that box (hi-speed, etc). The paper "types" you see in the pull-down box are not profiles. They are sets of settings for the boxes you just set yourself. You can save them as "My Settings" or something equally creative, and make them the default (that's another lesson).

 

Pink prints are often caused by double-profiling (ergo - use Adobe RGB in Photoshop and the profile in the print dialog). Blurry, faded colors are all you will get when you use the wrong paper altogether, or cheap inkjet paper.

 

Finally, do some homework. Buy a book on using Photoshop, managing color, and all that. I suggest "Adobe Photoshop CS2 for Photographers" by Martin Evening. He wrote a book for version 7, and you might find one on Amazon.com. Better yet, pop for the CS2 upgrade - it's cheaper than hair replacement in your current state of mind. (Who would post a "digital" question in the Leica forum?)

Tony: I am laughing as I post this. It is off topic, but so much of this has been discussed and answered here due to the co-operative knowledge of this group. I too have an Epson 2200 and Photo-shop CS. I got good prints right off the bat, and then LOUSY ones. A couple of the ink cartridges in my 2200 had gone bad and along with them my current crop of prints. With digital printing size and exposure have no bearing on each other. Use 4x6 or similar for test prints until you are satisfied. I am using Epson Premium Glossy 4x6 available at Comp USA near Dimond Center. I found out that getting prints made elsewhere is cheaper than printing yourself. Others can tell you more about how to get them printed elsewhwere. Costco, Photowright and others in town can do this for a pittance. Good luck and please pardon my chuckles.

 

Mark J.

Tony, it can be as hard or as simple as you let it become. I am a rank amateur whose eyes glaze over at the thought of mathematics or physics, yet my first attempts at making prints on my HP Photosmart produced brilliant prints of excellent quality right out of the box. An introductory edition of Photoshop is provided with the printer, and you can even make prints directly from the printer, without the computer! Just insert your memory card into the slot on the printer and select the photo on the built in screen. You can also crop your pictures directly on the printer screen! On the off chance that this is the source of your problem, know that the HP printer requires the paper to be loaded into the printer with the image (glossy) side DOWN!

If you fail to do this, you will have a jolly mess. I say this in case other printers must be loaded likewise. The difference between plain paper and photo quality paper is IMMENSE. You really can't evaluate your results using office paper. Finally, I don't have to tell you that it's extremely important to peruse and comprehend all instructional material provided befcore you proceed. Give it another go, you'll be just fine. Best regards and Happy New Year, Bill

If they're b&w, I vote for the simplest solution of all: black-only printing. I love the BO

prints I get on my 2200 with the Epson inks and factory-preset profiles.

 

Nothing fancy, nothing expensive, nothing aftermarket: I just select "Black" when I go to

Print and that's it. My friends love the results, and I'm impressed too.

Moderators, please move this to the correct forum, regardless how chicken Tony is.

 

Email me Tony, I'll give you my phone # and I can tell you about my set up (2200 and 2400)

and how it works.

And Tony, if all else fails you can ask Brad...LOL

I don't know Tony.... I had some pictures I took at work of a customers new delivery truck I sold him. I used my two year old Fuji Fine Pics digital at 2 Megabites (the top setting). Today I took a few minutes to print a picture. First I downloaded them to my Dell with windows XP for home. I didn't even bother to go to Photoshop, I just opened Picasa 2 and opened up the file in My Pictures and c r o p p e d the picture by a third...then printed an 8 1/2 x 11 on my Epson 1280 in nice vivid color.....nice enough to frame....no noise or bad colors. Not the quality of my 35mm Summilux ASPH but good enough for the purpose.<div></div>

Many thanks for your responses. My wife is looking over my shoulder, nodding her head as she reads your advice. I a bit ago discovered that she had even visited the mpix.com site after snooping in on this thread (I was sipping a Single Malt Scotch -- away from the computer!). She will soon be better at this stuff than me.

 

I didn't realize the bit about the colors spreading out and running together creating a mess on office paper. I knew it wouldn't be a good print, but I thought the colors would at least be reasonable.

 

I am amazed at myself for not having thought to print on 4x6 at first to finalize the color before shifting to the larger, ink-drinking size. Cool! (I should buy you a cup of coffee since we're local.)

 

I also didn't realize not to use a printer profile as the color space, even if Photoshop lets you do it. It's the part about "...if Photoshop lets you do it." that I don't understand. I thought that if Photoshop would let me do something there would at some time be a reason to do it.

 

Profiles have always confused me. I don't really understand how they're used. To me a profile is a set of settings that a piece of software remembers, like the configuration of a program. So the next time I use that program I can "choose" that profile to bring back my settings and presto I'm off and running.

 

So does my screen profile and printer profile talk to one another somehow, or does one profile connect the two devices? And I take it that both devices need to be set to the same "color space"? If so, that makes some sense to me.

 

All good info, and I am grateful for it all. My New Year's Resolution will be to learn how to print digitally, stop being an enraged idiot, and to stop worrying so much.

Tony, profile your screen. a $49 profiler worked wonders for me.

Tony,

 

I know that the Leica forum is the epitome of "conspicuous consumption" but I would never spend over $150 for any type of software. Hell, I got MS Office for $15 through being a Boeing employee.

 

I would consider Paint Shop Pro, which if offerred as a special can be well under $100. After that, you are getting into diminishing returns, unless you can justify business writeoffs.

 

My primary suggestionis to take a copy of the photo you are interested in (on compact flash or some other popular card) and take it to a shop that sells printers and image softwre, and challenge the guy to make a decent print from it, demonstrating to you how it is done. PSP has a one-button photo enhance feature that is adequate for most photos. Let the catcalls begin.

"My wife has these "fabric" sheets that you can print digial photos on through your inkjet printer so that she can incorporate them into her quilting. Those sheets seem expensive for the small number that you get for about $8 or more."

 

Are these from Epson with explicit approval for use on the 2200? No? Toss them in the trash. (Or at least do not try to use them with the 2200.)

 

"I also have photocopier paper, a small stack of which I grabbed from the office. This is the stuff we are using to try out the printing. I know it is not optimum, but I think that we ought to come close."

 

Are you printing photos or tax returns? If the former, do not use photocopier paper and expect good results. If the latter, the 2200 will do fine with the paper.

 

Sorry to be rude, but your first and biggest problem out of the gate is trying to use the wrong media for the job, and I can't believe the first few posts missed this. And I'm honestly kind of surprised that you're expecting good results. That you posted this in the Leica forum sugests you have some familiarity with photography. When you have 35mm film printed do you ask for photocopier paper?

 

Use *Epson genuine photo paper approved for use in the 2200.* Once you get printing nailed down for that, you can try some of the better 3rd party photo papers *designed for use in the Epson 2200.* Otherwise, stay away from media, even if it says "photo ink jet paper" or "for photo ink jets." Generally speaking, ink jets and their papers are designed together and one brand will not work equally well in another brand's printer. Even within brands some papers will not work on certain printers because of differences in printer ink sets. I don't care how many times a box protests that it's compatible with all photo ink jets, if it's not from Epson for the 2200 or from a higher end 3rd party manufacturer designed for the 2200, forget it.

 

Once you have the right paper, printing should be relatively easy. An Epson printer, on default settings out of the box, will print sRGB digital camera files correctly. Assuming your friend's image was shot with the right AWB and therefore has minimal color casts to begin with, it should print color balanced on any Epson out of the box. If you want to manipulate his image on your screen, then you must have your monitor calibrated to your printer so that what you see is what you get. Otherwise you'll be "correcting" the image for color casts that do not exist in the image itself, but in your monitor.

 

There are a lot of options in both Photoshop and in Epson's printer driver, and they can be useful for professionals trying to achieve specific things in their workflows. But my biggest complaint is that they're not hidden behind warning dialogs because typically people mess things up more than help things by playing with them. They print, their print does not match their screen (a *monitor* issue), and then they start playing with the wrong settings on the wrong device. Again: pretty much any Epson printer, out of the box, will print sRGB digital camera files correctly (i.e. print matches original camera file with 99%+ accuracy, and will also match prints from photo lab equipment such as the Fuji Frontier) with default settings. And the right paper.

 

As for calibrating your monitor: you can generally get away with printing a known good test target on your Epson with default printer settings and then manually getting your monitor to match it as best as possible in appearance using the brightness, contrast, and RGB controls. Spending the money on a hardware calibration tool will get you closer to perfect, but if it gets you 99% there, doing it manually will get you 97-98% of the way there, which is good enough for most work.

And try some fixed/washed RC paper, works well for water based inks and is cheaper than 'real' inkjet paper.