Digital BW, The Print

How to display large prints --  24x36 inches (60x90cm) and as large  
as 40x60 inches (1x1.5m) -- has been a perennial  problem. I mean  
that for prints this large I don't like to use a mat and frame under  
glass.

Until now I've been printing on an Epson 7600 printer using Epson  
Premium Semi-Matte paper and have had the prints (cold) laminated  
with a glossy laminate. This was necessary to eliminate bronzing and  
gloss differential and to make the blacks deeper and richer, as the  
K2 inks of the x6xx series of printers still had dull blacks that had  
a "veiled" look -- a look that made me uncomfortable trying to sell  
an un-laminated print. But lamination also served to protect the  
print, and allowed display and framing without glass, as the  
lamination protected the print and allowed cleaning it with a soft,  
damp cloth.

My most recent series of 58 24x36 inch prints that I'm preparing for  
an  exhibition are printed on Semi-Matte with a 1/2 inch-wide white  
border and are laminated and mounted on 2mm-thick black acrylic  
panels, which gives a nice black edge to the prints: for this  
particular series I like exhibiting the prints in this way, as I  
don't want these prints too look like precious objects -- and this  
also has the advantage that the buyer can display the print as is or  
frame it any way he wants to.

Now the plot thickens: I've recently replaced my 7600 printer with a  
9800, and for glossy-type papers I find the new K3 inks to be a great  
improvement. Using the ImagePrint v6.1 RIP I find that now my prints  
on Semi-Matte paper have no bronzing, no gloss differential and the  
blacks no longer have the dull, veiled look: I can now sell these  
prints without lamination. (And, if I don't laminate, perhaps I  
should start using Epson Luster paper as suggested in the quote from  
Bill Atkinson below).

Now that I don't need to laminate to solve problems like bronzing and  
inadequate blacks I suddenly realize that the issues of how to  
display large silver halide prints. For example, if I print on Crane  
Museo Silver Rag I wouldn't laminate, and  would have to figure out  
how the prints should be displayed, just like I would with very large  
silver halide prints.

One way to display large prints is to have them face-mounted on  
acrylic using a clear double-sided adhesive like Diasec for silver  
halide prints and Seal Optimount for digital prints. This may be the  
solution that looks the best as prints that are face-mounted on, say,  
1/4 inch-thick acrylic have great depth and have the look of wet  
prints straight out of the lab. But face-mounting is very costly: for  
a 24x36 inch print the cost is about $200+ (priced in Washington and  
Paris) and I hate the thought of the spending this amount of money  
for 58 prints; for 40x60 inch prints the cost is huge. And, anyway,  
where I live (Bangkok) there is no lab doing face-mounting on acrylic.

I suppose that another solution is to spray the prints with something  
like PrintShield of PrintGuard; but spraying a 40x60 inch print with  
three coats doesn't seem like a practical proposition. And, again,  
these sprays are not available in Bangkok.

A third solution would be to sell the prints as is and let the buyer  
worry about how he frames the prints; but that still leaves the issue  
of how to display these large prints at an exhibition.

So all this makes the original solution of laminating the prints look  
like the most practical one. But if I'm going to continue laminating  
the prints then I might as well stick to using the Epson Semi-Matte  
paper which is relatively inexpensive and gives great results with  
lamination, producing prints with deep, rich, satisfying blacks and  
good depth.

Any thoughts or suggestions? But remember we're talking about really  
large prints, not 12x18 prints and smaller.

--Mitch/Potomac. MD

And here's the quote from Bill Atkinson:
  I keep testing fine art papers because I like the texture and feel  
of a nice heavyweight matte paper, and I have seen some  attractive  
work by other artists printed on matte papers.  However, I have not  
yet found any art paper that can come close to  the depth and clarity  
that I get from photo papers.  The best black I can get with most  
matte papers is L=23 instead of L=3.4 This makes a huge and  
unacceptable degradation of image quality.  When I make the exact  
same print on both papers and  place framed prints side-by-side on  
easels, I and my friends always end up choosing the print made on  
photo paper.   Once the textured edges are covered with a mat, and  
the rest of the image is framed with plexiglass, all that is left of  
the  art paper print is a huge drop in clarity, saturation, depth,  
and detail.  Even pastel orchid prints look better on photo paper.    
I am still waiting for someone to make a rag paper that will deliver  
the depth, clarity, and and tonal range of luster.   It would be nice  
if this paper could use the photo black ink so I didn't have to  
compromise the reliability and repeatability  of my printer by  
switching back and forth between different inks.

I use Epson Premium Luster Photo Paper (250), mostly in 36 inch  
rolls. I used to use Epson Premium Semimatte Photo Paper (250)  
because I prefer its smoother surface. I switched to Premium Luster  
because with the 9800 the luster gives deeper blacks and richer  
colors. On premium luster, the best black I could get with the 9600  
was L=10.2, but with the 9800 I now get L=3.4 This makes a  
significant difference in the overall clarity and tonal range of the  
print. When I place a 9800 print next to a 9600 print, the 9600 print  
looks "smoked" in the shadows by comparison. When Epson Premium  
Luster is used with the 9800's advanced black and white mode the  
results are gorgeous. I am always experimenting with different  
papers, but the Epson Premium Luster still gives me the best results.

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