Your favorite matte photo papers is...

[jtk]

Steve, thanks for the suggestion. And like I said, it's a judgement call.

 

As well, I'm sure the outcomes are different if one has real control over one's negatives and scanning Vs, for example, having a lab do them or beginning with a digital camera file.

[serge c]

Steve Swinehard's suggestions seem to show a more informed approach to evaluating print quality.

 

Whithout RIP, what would be the workflow to achieve optimal inking? Would you create a paper profile, do the inking test with different paper type settings in the driver, choose the best one and then create a new profile?

 

Are there links to certain test targets or to how to create them? What other suggestions do you have for evaluating inking in a non-RIP workflow? Obviously printing on different surfaces would require different approach to evaluation well.

[steve_swinehart]

"Whithout RIP, what would be the workflow to achieve optimal inking? Would you create a paper profile, do the inking test with different paper type settings in the driver, choose the best one and then create a new profile?"

 

The workflow is to get a paper profile first. Either make the profile yourself if you own a profiling system, or use the paper manufacturer's canned profile.

 

Then, get a test target and print the test target with the profile using each of the different paper types for matte paper available in the printer dialog/setup - make one print with each of the paper types. If you're using glossy paper, then of course, you print with each type of glossy, semi-gloss, and lustre paper choices.

 

Evaluate each test print and find the one with the largest range of greys in the grey scale paying particular attention to what step is solid black - no separation below a step number. In most cases, you will find one print that shows all of the grey scale steps.

 

Inspect that print for inking with a loupe. If it's still over inked, reduce the overall inking level through the printer control. If the print appears slightly under inked, increase the overall inking through the printer control.

 

Make another test print with the paper type with the inking reduced or increased and evaluate. Repeat until you have correct inking on the paper - fibers are evenly covered but not obliterated by the ink, or you don't have under inked fibers (lighter ones mixed with darker ones).

 

Record your setup for future reference. Make a test print of an image and evaluate the print for shadow detail, highlight detail, etc.

 

 

"Are there links to certain test targets or to how to create them? What other suggestions do you have for evaluating inking in a non-RIP workflow? Obviously printing on different surfaces would require different approach to evaluation well."

 

 

Go to drycreekphoto.com. Look for the "DCP-PrintEval.tif" file. It's a good place to start and will give you an idea of a test target. You can easily create your own, but if you look at the test target on that site - you'll see what you need.

[steve_swinehart]

"Steve, thanks for the suggestion. And like I said, it's a judgement call.

 

As well, I'm sure the outcomes are different if one has real control over one's negatives and scanning Vs, for example, having a lab do them or beginning with a digital camera file."

 

Yes, it's a judgement call, and one most people who are used to working in a wet darkroom have a difficult time making as it has nothing to do with color or exposure, but how the ink is laid down on the paper. You have to be sensitive to that, and either train yourself or have had training in how to evaluate ink on paper.

 

However, you can empirically test papers and find the correct inking for the paper - that is not really a judgement call, because the results are so obvious once you evaluate the tests. Once you start testing and seeing the results, you will fairly quickly pick up the mechanics of the process and start becoming aware of what constitutes correct ink application.

 

For example, on Moab Entrada, the EEM setting will cause a 20 step grey scale to block at step 3-4 - making everything below that point totally black. Subtle shadow detail in the image is obliterated.

 

The same paper printed using the Ulstra smooth fine art setting shows all 20 steps - that's no longer a judgement call - it's common sense that more separation gives better shadow detail. That translates across all colors that mix the blacks to achieve darker shades of color. You've now opened up the entire bottom end of the print through correct inking.

 

The paper inking is independent of how the image file was generated. There is only ONE correct ink level for a paper not many. There are only three states for inking: under inked, over inked, and correctly inked.

 

Once the correct ink level is established, then that's what you use for that paper regardless of the file source.

[robert_k1]

Steve, if I understand you correctly, the amount of ink laid down by an Epson printer is *primarily* controlled by the printer driver's paper selections, and *not so much* controlled by the media profiles.

 

If so, it would be nice if the Epson driver can provide a more direct and flexible ink laid down control, instead of by the limited paper selections. I wonder if this is how a RIP sw which replaces the Epson driver can work better with profiles.

[robert_k1]

Bill, I use EEM on my 2200, and would consider the Red River mattes as alternatives (when I get around to it). They provide a sample kit and profiles to go along with them. Their cost is not too different from EEM. The last bonus is that they have panoramic size sheets, which I have not found with any other suppliers. Would appreciate to hear from those who have used Red River mattes.

 

BTW, can you share your experience with using panoramic sw for your work? Thanks.

[robert_k1]

Bill and Steve, I really like your (color) images. Most of them are what I described in my following post as falling in the "sweet spot" of color space gamuts suitable for matte paper printing. Although I have not openned them in PS, I would assume that their histograms are not spread out to the extreme highlight and shadow ends, nor do I detect any high color saturations.

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Gx7Y

[serge c]

Thank you for such a detailed reply, Steve.

 

I looked at some prints with an 8x loupe. I think I know what you mean more or less about inking on fiber paper. It looks much better magnified :)...

 

I also realized that I can't apply this to "RC" papers, or whatever term is used in inkjet papers (essentially "glossy with bumps"). On that paper I just see individual dots, some more noticeable than others and obviously no fibers.

 

I know an inkjet is an inkjet and it prints in dots, but to look carefully through a loupe how they affect the paper has never occured to me.