Re: scanning negs vs slides now: inkjet vs photo prints

["Ernst Dinkla" <E.Dinkla@xxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "gary" <gsellani@accesscom.com>
To: <scan@leben.com>
Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 8:42 AM
Subject: RE: scanning negs vs slides now: inkjet vs photo prints


> I have a Epson 1200. I'll just sit it out a year or two then
upgrade, but
> there are basic problems inherent with inkjets that I'm not
sure will ever
> be overcome.
>
> 1) Darks areas get lots of ink, and you can see the loss of
detail in the
> dark parts of the print. [Wet dark rocks are really tough to
do. They don't
> look wet like you get in a real photograph.]
>
> 2) You can often see patterns in light areas such as sky.
>
> Print a few gradients and the inkjet deficiencies are pretty
obvious. On a
> photo, you need to look for the defects, but really it doesn't
take much
> effort.
>
> I'm still hoping for a dye-sub breakthrough, but not holding my
breath. I'd
> be happy for a cheap film printer then just make prints.

The 1200 is notorious for laying down too much ink. With all
printers it is good to get a custom profile made but it certainly
is wise for the 1200. Also select a paper setting that gives less
ink and base the custom profile on that. Better even: make the
1200 into a B&W printer with appropriate profiles and inks and
get a 1280 or 1290 for colour prints with a custom profile.

You have asked for sample prints, maybe it is better to send some
prints you've done to Rafe for example. Or get a common target
from the net and exchange the print with one another.

Ernst




-
Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate
subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.