When I started b&w printing on an Epson, I thought one of the advantages over the darkroom was that once its well set up, there would be no trying and experimenting and that I would have 100% predictable results. Now, a few hundreds or probably thousands of prints later I find that this is not exactly the case. On my 2100/UT7 workflow I find the following issues: 1. My output from the file + Roark curves is roughly, but never exactly what I see on my monitor. When I look at the grayscale on my flat panel the 100% to 0% steps are quite well separated, but in the uncorrected print the deep shadows (around 95% black) are not well resolved, 95% comes out totally black: So I had to make a curve that boosts the deep shadows. 2. I often find myself having to do several prints of the same photo, because the general "look" of the print is not like on the screen, see also my other message about the foliage and trees. 3. The most mysterious thing is that my output seems to vary from time to time. Sometimes I find the prints too dark compared to the screen, sometimes they are slightly too light. Finally its not that different from the darkroom, I would say gradually more predictable (maybe even by a large margin, but that is probably because my traditional darkroom skills are so poor). So, do you have a 100% WYSIWYG workflow? Thanks for your input, Bernhard
Message
How reliable/ precise is your b&w print workflow?
2004-10-15 by Bernie Ess
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.