Digital BW, The Print

In my mind your work flow is messed up. First were they RAW ? you speak no
where if your develop process? Noise reduction should be the first thing you
do. Processing an image and then doing NR is pushing bad pixels all over and
then trying to make detail happen. IS the NR in LR the best? perhaps not. Is
the sharpening in LR the best or enough given the file? probably not. Not
all files will go through the workflow that many guru/evangelist for Adobe
are talking about and look spectacular. 
 
When was the last time you checked your printer for output? All the lines,
and nozzle checks print out sharp for that paper? 
 
Eric Neilsen
Eric Neilsen Photography
4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9
Dallas, TX 75226
 
www.ericneilsenphotography.com
skype me with ejprinter
www.ericneilsenphotography.com/forum1
Let's Talk Photography
 
  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
flambeauriver
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 12:43 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Expectation vs. Reality
 
  
I have had a Canon ipF5000 printer for several years. I like its output just
fine, including B/W. Last week I saw a good price on Ilford Galerie Gold
Fibre Silk at B&H in the ANSI C (17"x22") size. It occurred to me I had
never printed that large and it seemed a waste to have a printer capable of
producing prints of that size and not using it. So I bought the paper and
printed out some of my favorite B/W and color photos. 

These were taken with an APS-C camera with a good zoom lens. No tripod, but
a shutter speed near 1/1000 and f/8. ISO 800 or less. 

The color photos are beautiful, and so are the B/W. But being the 'artist',
I kept looking at them with a very critical eye and as always wondered
"Could these be better?" (I have often wondered at myself when I view photos
taken years earlier and squirreled away because they weren't good enough
then, yet viewing them with some temporal distance wondering what I found
wrong with them since they now look wonderful?)

The B/W were processed with Nik Siver Efex Pro v2. I didn't use much
adjustment. Then they were completed -- sharpening and noise reduction and
printing-- in Lightroom 3.4. Putting my eye about 3" away from the print
they looked mushy, like an older point and shoot digital with way too much
noise reduction. But from viewing distance my partner thinks they are
spectacular.

Should I expect better detail on close examination at this large size? I
realize there are plenty of variables here, but the basic one is ANSI C
simply too large for an APS-C camera, even if tripod mounted, prime lens at
best aperture, minimal processing, etc.

I have in the past examined a number of Ansel Adams and Edward Weston large
prints from very close up and they were SHARP. I realize they were taken
with perhaps an 8"x10" and there is no way a small format will compete at
that close examination. I do have both 645 and 6x7 cameras from my film days
and wonder--if I want to print at that size, should I return to film and try
scanning?

Have I answered my own question? I'd really appreciate your thoughts and
comments.

Dan



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]