david_pichevin

This thread started quite a while ago :) Stumbled on it while trying to find a solution to this phenomenon. I'm currently trying to produce some B&W prints on the 2200 for some people who posed for me, and I am totally unsuccessful, to the point where I would be ashamed to give them the prints (and they are not even "paying" customers). I am getting great color, fine-art prints, but B&W on this printer is terrible. Actually I WISH I could get a magenta cast. That would mean that my prints look fine under daylight. It's the opposite unfortunately.

 

Right now my house is bathed in daylight and giving to customers prints where they look sickly green under daylight is unacceptable. Don't worry, tonight when you turn on the light bulbs, they'll look fine! Having to buy a RIP that costs as much as the printer in order to print decent B&W is out of the question.

 

I have tried Quadtone RIP and it's really not a solution. More like replacing one problem with another, or several (lack of contrast, banding, bronzing, and total blindness on what you are actually doing with toning).

 

I am expecting to have some custom profiles made soon and see if that diminishes the issue to an acceptable level.

I'm currently trying the Moab Entrada on my 2200 with the Moab profile (matte black) and the result is a very washed out print leaning a bit on the cyan side. I am using the provided profile and the watercolor paper setting. I probably should try the Enhanced Matte profile and see what it looks like, even if it doesn't sound like the right thing to do. I am not sure why I should get such a washed out look though, but it is also exactly what I see while soft-proofing, which probably means it's a profile thing. I print very nicely on Ilford Sommth Pearl or Epson Enhanced Matte with their respective ink and profile.

Thanks for the action. Simple enough. I just hadn't thought of the gradient.

Sorry about the missing link! Silly mistake.

 

And thanks for your take on this. I'll have to check this out tonight. I thought this board would warn me of answers to the post :)

Hello,

 

I was visiting this photographer's page (Chris Frazer) and was

wondering about the technique used in a couple of photos of his. This

gives the whole shot some kind of greenish/monochrome-ish tint, while

emphasizing pink skin tones with a lot of detail.

 

Here's a link to the portfolio and I am talking more particularly

about shot in gallery #3, the street shot with someone with his foot

on a deflated football.

 

This is a style that I have also seen on some other shots from some

other photographers, with strong and yet muted colors, and was

wondering if anybody knows if that is generally achieved in

pre-processing, using a certain kind of lighting (and no doubt the

photo is excellent to start with), or in post-processing (but this

looks really clean and natural). I have no idea if this comes from

digital or film.

 

Any idea?

I can tell you that my 20D also shows high level of noise at ISO 100/200. Visibly more than my D60 did, and more ugly. Exposing to the right, most of the time actually overexposing a shot to make sure that noise in dark areas will be minimal is a ridiculous way to get around a defect and sure to get you a lot of unusable, blown-out shots. The camera shows absolutely *no* possibility of exposure correction of the shadows which makes for a really limited dynamic range. As far as I know the picture quality has been lowered a serious notch because of that and is not up to par with a D60. I sure hope Canon is going to get out of that path soon.

 

Let consumer digicams try to cram more pixels on tiny sensors.

 

As for banding, I have seen it at ISO 200 in the shadows *without* pushing the shot one bit.

 

My Camera has been sent back to Canon and I have asked them to look at the noise issue, as I am sending it back in for back-focusing problems.