Yahoo Groups archive
Thread
2004-08-05 by Allan Chen
All,
Does anyone have ink comsumption rates for either of these 2
printers, preferably per square foot? Just rough numbers are fine. thanks,
allan
------------------------------------
Technology Projects Manager
Academic Computing & The Office of Accessible Education
Stanford University
v - 650-996-0546
f - 650-725-46852004-08-05 by Tom Baker
I use $1. But, I think it is actually lower. I arrived at that after looking at some data from Epson ( which I can't find to send you), but which was pretty vague. It was also based on the list price of the ink carts. I'm using the 220ml. Tom Baker Allan Chen <kaiyen@...> wrote: All, Does anyone have ink comsumption rates for either of these 2 printers, preferably per square foot? Just rough numbers are fine. thanks, allan ------------------------------------ Technology Projects Manager Academic Computing & The Office of Accessible Education Stanford University v - 650-996-0546 f - 650-725-4685 Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page. Please follow these basic guidelines: - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short. - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice. - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership. - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See �Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines� in the Files section: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP. Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2004-08-05 by Allan Chen
Thanks Tom. That's actually shockingly close based on the usage statistics of another department's HP wide format printer. They're doing about 1100 feet of printing per year, and a full set of 220 ml carts from Epson should be about $1000. thanks, allan At 03:00 PM 8/5/2004, you wrote: >I use $1. But, I think it is actually lower. I arrived at that after >looking at some data from Epson ( which I can't find to send you), but >which was pretty vague. It was also based on the list price of the ink >carts. I'm using the 220ml. > >Tom Baker > >Allan Chen <kaiyen@...> wrote: >All, >Does anyone have ink comsumption rates for either of these 2 >printers, preferably per square foot? Just rough numbers are fine. thanks, >allan > >------------------------------------ >Technology Projects Manager >Academic Computing & The Office of Accessible Education >Stanford University >v - 650-996-0546 >f - 650-725-4685 > > > > >Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as >they are often being updated. > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint > >If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to >unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same >page. > >Please follow these basic guidelines: >- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep >them short. >- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. >Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the >membership without notice. >- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W >printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from >the membership. >- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and >guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner >and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section: >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ > >BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT >YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND >"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO >YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR >EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF >PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE >"OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN >ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE >OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) >UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) >STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT >YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE >PRINT YAHOO GROUP. > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > >Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as >they are often being updated. > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint > >If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to >unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same >page. > >Please follow these basic guidelines: >- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep >them short. >- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. >Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the >membership without notice. >- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W >printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from >the membership. >- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and >guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner >and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section: >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ > >BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT >YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND >"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO >YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR >EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF >PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF >THE "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE >BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE >USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) >UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) >STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT >YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE >PRINT YAHOO GROUP. > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > ------------------------------------ Technology Projects Manager Academic Computing & The Office of Accessible Education Stanford University v - 650-996-0546 f - 650-725-4685
2004-08-05 by Tom Baker
I think the last ones I bought - 2 months ago - were $74 each. Tom Baker Allan Chen <kaiyen@...> wrote: Thanks Tom. That's actually shockingly close based on the usage statistics of another department's HP wide format printer. They're doing about 1100 feet of printing per year, and a full set of 220 ml carts from Epson should be about $1000. thanks, allan At 03:00 PM 8/5/2004, you wrote: >I use $1. But, I think it is actually lower. I arrived at that after >looking at some data from Epson ( which I can't find to send you), but >which was pretty vague. It was also based on the list price of the ink >carts. I'm using the 220ml. > >Tom Baker > >Allan Chen wrote: >All, >Does anyone have ink comsumption rates for either of these 2 >printers, preferably per square foot? Just rough numbers are fine. thanks, >allan > >------------------------------------ >Technology Projects Manager >Academic Computing & The Office of Accessible Education >Stanford University >v - 650-996-0546 >f - 650-725-4685 > > > > >Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as >they are often being updated. > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint > >If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to >unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same >page. > >Please follow these basic guidelines: >- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep >them short. >- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. >Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the >membership without notice. >- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W >printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from >the membership. >- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and >guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner >and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section: >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ > >BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT >YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND >"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO >YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR >EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF >PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE >"OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN >ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE >OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) >UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) >STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT >YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE >PRINT YAHOO GROUP. > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > >Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as >they are often being updated. > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint > >If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to >unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same >page. > >Please follow these basic guidelines: >- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep >them short. >- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. >Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the >membership without notice. >- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W >printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from >the membership. >- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and >guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner >and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section: >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ > >BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT >YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND >"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO >YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR >EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF >PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF >THE "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE >BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE >USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) >UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) >STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT >YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE >PRINT YAHOO GROUP. > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > ------------------------------------ Technology Projects Manager Academic Computing & The Office of Accessible Education Stanford University v - 650-996-0546 f - 650-725-4685 Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page. Please follow these basic guidelines: - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short. - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice. - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership. - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See �Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines� in the Files section: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP. Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2004-08-06 by Jim Goshorn
On Aug 5, 2004, at 7:07 PM, Tom Baker wrote: > I think the last ones I bought - 2 months ago - were $74 each. Where did you get them for $74? Thanks! Jim
2004-08-06 by Sören Lindqvist
Alan, Check this site for more infomation... http://www.inkjetart.com/pro/7600_9600/ink_data.html Regards Soren --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Allan Chen <kaiyen@s...> wrote: > All, > Does anyone have ink comsumption rates for either of these 2 > printers, preferably per square foot? Just rough numbers are fine. thanks,
> allan > > ------------------------------------ > Technology Projects Manager > Academic Computing & The Office of Accessible Education > Stanford University > v - 650-996-0546 > f - 650-725-4685
2004-08-06 by Tom Baker
I just rechecked the invoice. They were $77. I buy from Professional Marketing Services, Inc. in Phoenix. I purchased my printer from them, and I but almost all of my paper through them. I don't know if that affects the price I am paying for the ink. But, I'm quite happy with the overall cost of supplies through them. www.promarketinc.com or 480-940-5488 I deal with Maggie most of the time. Hope this helps. Tom Baker Jim Goshorn <jgoshorn@...> wrote: On Aug 5, 2004, at 7:07 PM, Tom Baker wrote: > I think the last ones I bought - 2 months ago - were $74 each. Where did you get them for $74? Thanks! Jim Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page. Please follow these basic guidelines: - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short. - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice. - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership. - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See �Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines� in the Files section: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP. Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2004-08-10 by Allan Chen
>Hello all,
We all know the general rules of thumb about minimum recommended
resolution for printing to X size (whether that rule of thumb says 200,
250, 300 dpi is irrelevant). However, once you start getting into, say,
36" wide prints and larger, it seems those numbers go out the window. It's
almost impossible to get, say, 250dpi across that large of a print. But
the assumption is that viewers wouldn't stand nearly as close to the print,
so the sharpness still holds up.
So...what exactly are the suggested minimums for such large
prints? At 36" wide, let's say, would 100dpi be enough? 75? More? Less?
We're thinking of putting in an Epson 9600 here at the school I
work for, and I'm trying to figure out a starting point for the various
print tests I'll be doing.
thanks,
allan
------------------------------------
Technology Projects Manager
Academic Computing & The Office of Accessible Education
Stanford University
v - 650-996-0546
f - 650-725-46852004-08-10 by hogarth
If you want to make big prints, start with big negatives. There's no problem at all making prints that size from 4x5 negatives at the 360dpi output resolution the 9600 driver wants. If you insist on making big prints from small negatives, you'll have to do some testing to determine what you can live with in output resolution. Unless there is a barrier between the viewer and the print that prevents them from getting close, most people will walk right up to a print they find interesting. If that's the situation, I suspect that you'll want to use as much as you can get, and that asking for a minimum is asking the wrong question. But, testing will tell. On Tue, 2004-08-10 at 18:21, Allan Chen wrote: > >Hello all, > > We all know the general rules of thumb about minimum recommended > resolution for printing to X size (whether that rule of thumb says 200, > 250, 300 dpi is irrelevant). However, once you start getting into, say, > 36" wide prints and larger, it seems those numbers go out the window. It's > almost impossible to get, say, 250dpi across that large of a print. But > the assumption is that viewers wouldn't stand nearly as close to the print, > so the sharpness still holds up. > So...what exactly are the suggested minimums for such large > prints? At 36" wide, let's say, would 100dpi be enough? 75? More? Less? > > We're thinking of putting in an Epson 9600 here at the school I > work for, and I'm trying to figure out a starting point for the various > print tests I'll be doing. > thanks, > allan > > > ------------------------------------ > Technology Projects Manager > Academic Computing & The Office of Accessible Education > Stanford University > v - 650-996-0546 > f - 650-725-4685 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2004-08-10 by Allan Chen
Good point. I should've been clearer. Since this is a service we'll be offering in our general technology/media library, rather than as part of, say, the art school, we are trying to be realistic about the range of input files we'll be seeing. Yes, I'm sure we'll see at least some students bringing in scans of 4x5 negatives that will be more than enough resolution for the printer. But we'll also probably see some starting with medium format negatives and maybe even 35mm ones. Obviously the 35mm ones aren't going to get out to 36" at 360dpi, but could almost get there at 180dpi (assuming 400dpi input files...which is actually bigger than the ones we can get now with our current scanner). The medium format negative could get at least within shooting range. Our situation is such that, while it is not unreasonable to expect most of our students to understand the need for resolution, the bottom line is that we're not going to see a lot of LF negatives. anyway. I'll do some testing with both my 35mm and MF scans. Will see what happens... allan At 03:58 PM 8/10/2004, you wrote: >If you want to make big prints, start with big negatives. There's no >problem at all making prints that size from 4x5 negatives at the 360dpi >output resolution the 9600 driver wants. > >If you insist on making big prints from small negatives, you'll have to >do some testing to determine what you can live with in output >resolution. Unless there is a barrier between the viewer and the print >that prevents them from getting close, most people will walk right up to >a print they find interesting. If that's the situation, I suspect that >you'll want to use as much as you can get, and that asking for a minimum >is asking the wrong question. > >But, testing will tell. > >On Tue, 2004-08-10 at 18:21, Allan Chen wrote: > > > >Hello all, > > > > We all know the general rules of thumb about minimum recommended > > resolution for printing to X size (whether that rule of thumb says 200, > > 250, 300 dpi is irrelevant). However, once you start getting into, say, > > 36" wide prints and larger, it seems those numbers go out the > window. It's > > almost impossible to get, say, 250dpi across that large of a print. But > > the assumption is that viewers wouldn't stand nearly as close to the > print, > > so the sharpness still holds up. > > So...what exactly are the suggested minimums for such large > > prints? At 36" wide, let's say, would 100dpi be enough? 75? More? Less? > > > > We're thinking of putting in an Epson 9600 here at the school I > > work for, and I'm trying to figure out a starting point for the various > > print tests I'll be doing. > > thanks, > > allan > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Technology Projects Manager > > Academic Computing & The Office of Accessible Education > > Stanford University > > v - 650-996-0546 > > f - 650-725-4685 > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > >Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as >they are often being updated. > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint > >If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to >unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same >page. > >Please follow these basic guidelines: >- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep >them short. >- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. >Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the >membership without notice. >- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W >printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from >the membership. >- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and >guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner >and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section: >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ > >BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT >YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND >"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO >YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR >EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF >PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF >THE "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE >BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE >USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) >UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) >STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT >YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE >PRINT YAHOO GROUP. > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > ------------------------------------ Technology Projects Manager Academic Computing & The Office of Accessible Education Stanford University v - 650-996-0546 f - 650-725-4685
2004-08-11 by slalred
Hi, Jonathan Sachs, author of Picture Window, offers a freeware scanning resolution calculator at: http://www.dl-c.com/Temp/downloads/ScanCalc/Default.htm the parameters include viewing distance. Steve Alred --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Allan Chen <kaiyen@s...> wrote: > > >Hello all, > > We all know the general rules of thumb about minimum recommended > resolution for printing to X size (whether that rule of thumb says 200, > 250, 300 dpi is irrelevant). However, once you start getting into, say, > 36" wide prints and larger, it seems those numbers go out the window. It's > almost impossible to get, say, 250dpi across that large of a print. But > the assumption is that viewers wouldn't stand nearly as close to the print, > so the sharpness still holds up. > So...what exactly are the suggested minimums for such large > prints? At 36" wide, let's say, would 100dpi be enough? 75? More? Less? > > We're thinking of putting in an Epson 9600 here at the school I > work for, and I'm trying to figure out a starting point for the various
> print tests I'll be doing. > thanks, > allan > > > ------------------------------------ > Technology Projects Manager > Academic Computing & The Office of Accessible Education > Stanford University > v - 650-996-0546 > f - 650-725-4685
2004-08-11 by ohzemenoh
howdy take a look at genuine fractals. http://www.lizardtech.com/solutions/gf/ i've used this for digital files as well as scanned negs. it works really well while keeping file sizes to a minimum. the new version supports 16bit, too. cheers, zwk --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Allan Chen <kaiyen@s...> wrote:
> > >Hello all, > > We all know the general rules of thumb about minimum recommended > resolution for printing to X size (whether that rule of thumb says 200, > 250, 300 dpi is irrelevant). However, once you start getting into, say, > 36" wide prints and larger, it seems those numbers go out the window. It's > almost impossible to get, say, 250dpi across that large of a print. But > the assumption is that viewers wouldn't stand nearly as close to the print, > so the sharpness still holds up. > So...what exactly are the suggested minimums for such large > prints? At 36" wide, let's say, would 100dpi be enough? 75? More? Less? > > We're thinking of putting in an Epson 9600 here at the school I > work for, and I'm trying to figure out a starting point for the various > print tests I'll be doing. > thanks, > allan > > > ------------------------------------ > Technology Projects Manager > Academic Computing & The Office of Accessible Education > Stanford University > v - 650-996-0546 > f - 650-725-4685
2004-08-11 by William John Smith
I just had two prints 22" x 32" printed out on a 7600 from 35 mm b&w negatives at 360 dpi. From a normal viewing distance they look as good as a 8.5 x 11. The file size was 87 meg. Scanned at 4000 dpi. A 36" image at 360 dpi would be around 110 meg. I don't see a problem with going that big if you are careful and using the right equipment, Leica glass in my case. cheers, William On Aug 10, 2004, at 6:22 PM, DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com wrote: > Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 16:37:07 -0700 > From: Allan Chen <kaiyen@...> > Subject: Re: Resolution requirements for _BIG_ prints > > Good point. I should've been clearer. Since this is a service we'll > be > offering in our general technology/media library, rather than as part > of, > say, the art school, we are trying to be realistic about the range of > input > files we'll be seeing. Yes, I'm sure we'll see at least some students > bringing in scans of 4x5 negatives that will be more than enough > resolution > for the printer. But we'll also probably see some starting with medium > format negatives and maybe even 35mm ones. > > Obviously the 35mm ones aren't going to get out to 36" at 360dpi, but > could > almost get there at 180dpi (assuming 400dpi input files...which is > actually > bigger than the ones we can get now with our current scanner). The > medium > format negative could get at least within shooting range. > > Our situation is such that, while it is not unreasonable to expect > most of > our students to understand the need for resolution, the bottom line is > that > we're not going to see a lot of LF negatives. > > anyway. I'll do some testing with both my 35mm and MF scans. Will see > what happens... > allan [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2004-08-11 by Sam McCandless
At 4:37 PM -0700 8/10/04, Allan Chen wrote: >I'll do some testing with both my 35mm and MF scans. Will see what happens... I'll be very interested to hear what happens, Allan, and to peruse the Sachs calculator Steve posted in the meantime. My intuition is that the most promising step to try below 240 scanner samples per printed inch is 180 "spi". If that takes too much RAM or something, I'd try 144 and then 120. But, at least with one of the best digital cameras, I think you might get away with 90 samples per printed inch for some very large images. Printing at 720 or 1440 dpi I assume. Each of those dpi's is a whole number multiple of all these spi's, and each of these spi's is divisible by three. But I don't know that either spec matters, much less that both do, jointly. -- Sam
2004-08-11 by cjphoto1
I have a Kodak 645DCS digital back that produces 47meg tiffs. It creates a 13.5"x13.5" print at 300dpi. I have interpolated up to 40x40 at 250DPI and printed them on my 9600 (286meg file)and they are very sharp. I have even printed them at 60x60 (with 2 passes) without further sampling, which results in a resolution of 166 dpi. The image is still very sharp, even up close. I have seen very large prints by well known photographers at the Met and Modern in NYC, and my prints are arguably as sharp if not sharper. good luck. --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, William John Smith <william@g...> wrote: > I just had two prints 22" x 32" printed out on a 7600 from 35 mm b&w > negatives > at 360 dpi. From a normal viewing distance they look as good as a 8.5 > x 11. > The file size was 87 meg. Scanned at 4000 dpi. > A 36" image at 360 dpi would be around 110 meg. I don't see a problem > with > going that big if you are careful and using the right equipment, Leica > glass in my case. > > cheers, > William > > > On Aug 10, 2004, at 6:22 PM, > DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com wrote: > > > Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 16:37:07 -0700 > > From: Allan Chen <kaiyen@s...> > > Subject: Re: Resolution requirements for _BIG_ prints > > > > Good point. I should've been clearer. Since this is a service we'll > > be > > offering in our general technology/media library, rather than as part > > of, > > say, the art school, we are trying to be realistic about the range of > > input > > files we'll be seeing. Yes, I'm sure we'll see at least some students > > bringing in scans of 4x5 negatives that will be more than enough > > resolution > > for the printer. But we'll also probably see some starting with medium > > format negatives and maybe even 35mm ones. > > > > Obviously the 35mm ones aren't going to get out to 36" at 360dpi, but > > could > > almost get there at 180dpi (assuming 400dpi input files...which is > > actually > > bigger than the ones we can get now with our current scanner). The > > medium > > format negative could get at least within shooting range. > > > > Our situation is such that, while it is not unreasonable to expect > > most of > > our students to understand the need for resolution, the bottom line is > > that > > we're not going to see a lot of LF negatives. > > > > anyway. I'll do some testing with both my 35mm and MF scans. Will see
> > what happens... > > allan > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2004-08-11 by Tyler Boley
It's not all about file size. I've made several 35x46 quad prints from scanned 35mm negs, and they look fine. If you made a silver print that big it would have the same image qualities, probably a bit softer from the enlarging lens. They were from drum scans at 4000dpi, with a 6 micron aperture. THis doesn't make all the large of a file from 35mm, but in fact it's sampling as much or more detail than the film can resolve (depending on the film), so a bigger file doesn't really have more information. For big prints it becomes a matter of scaling up, possibly sharpening a hair at print size (only for grain definition, not image), some methods work better than others, and may be image dependant to a degree. I understand Qimage is very good at it, but PC only. Tyler
2004-08-11 by Ross Borgida
Best bet is to scan at the optical resolution..For example, the optical resolution on an Epson 3200 scanner is 1600 dpi..not 3200 dpi. Also, you will need a big hard drive for storage and a lot of memory..i think the rule is 3 times the amount of memory than the actual size of the scanned file. That way, you can print from the biggest size necessary and smaller with the same file. Good luck! Ross William John Smith <william@...> wrote: I just had two prints 22" x 32" printed out on a 7600 from 35 mm b&w negatives at 360 dpi. From a normal viewing distance they look as good as a 8.5 x 11. The file size was 87 meg. Scanned at 4000 dpi. A 36" image at 360 dpi would be around 110 meg. I don't see a problem with going that big if you are careful and using the right equipment, Leica glass in my case. cheers, William On Aug 10, 2004, at 6:22 PM, DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com wrote: > Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2004 16:37:07 -0700 > From: Allan Chen <kaiyen@...> > Subject: Re: Resolution requirements for _BIG_ prints > > Good point. I should've been clearer. Since this is a service we'll > be > offering in our general technology/media library, rather than as part > of, > say, the art school, we are trying to be realistic about the range of > input > files we'll be seeing. Yes, I'm sure we'll see at least some students > bringing in scans of 4x5 negatives that will be more than enough > resolution > for the printer. But we'll also probably see some starting with medium > format negatives and maybe even 35mm ones. > > Obviously the 35mm ones aren't going to get out to 36" at 360dpi, but > could > almost get there at 180dpi (assuming 400dpi input files...which is > actually > bigger than the ones we can get now with our current scanner). The > medium > format negative could get at least within shooting range. > > Our situation is such that, while it is not unreasonable to expect > most of > our students to understand the need for resolution, the bottom line is > that > we're not going to see a lot of LF negatives. > > anyway. I'll do some testing with both my 35mm and MF scans. Will see > what happens... > allan [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they are often being updated. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page. Please follow these basic guidelines: - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short. - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without notice. - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the membership. - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See �Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines� in the Files section: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE �OWNER� AND �MODERATORS� OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP. Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT --------------------------------- Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2004-08-11 by sandersnyc
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Ross Borgida <borgida@y...> wrote: > Best bet is to scan at the optical resolution..For example, the optical resolution on an Epson 3200 scanner is 1600 dpi..not 3200 dpi. Ross, your post raises several issues, one of which had not occurred to me. Issue: you want to print a file to a 7600 but the image dpi, when resized to the desired print size, is less than 360. From what has gone before, here and on the EpsonWideFormat group, I understand that the 7600 will want to print from a file at 360 dpi. There are two obvious ways to output the file at 360 dpi. One is to upres the file in Photoshop and send it to the printer as a 360 dpi file. The other is to send the file to the printer at whatever dpi it is after resizing, and let the 7600 driver upres the image to 360 dpi. Your post made me realize there is a third way: Increase the scanner's resolution beyond its optical resolution. If the scanner's optical resolution is 3200, but the driver allows scans at 6400, then one could scan at 6400 dpi, resize the image for printing in Photoshop, and have plenty of pixels to throw out, so you are downsampling to 360 dpi. The conventional wisdom is not to scan beyond the scanner's optical resolution. Why? Might it not offer a better way to meet the resolution requirements for big prints on the 7600/9600 than upres'ing in Photoshop, or leaving it to the printer driver? Of the three solutions, which works best? Two more points: Ross, you say the Epson 3200's optical resolution is 1600 dpi. I use the 3200 for 90 percent of my scans (a Microtek 120tf does the rest) and I've seen nothing in the Epson literature that suggests that the optical resolution is anything but 3200 dpi. Can you point me in the direction of something that supports your claim? Second: Several have suggested Genuine Fractals as a way to upres smaller files for printing. My experience with GF is that it does no better than Photoshop in this regard, and the commercial imagers with whom I've spoken (such as Reed Photo, www.reedphoto.com) claim that in fact GF is inferior to PS. And it's slow. I don't consider it a useful solution to this problem. Sanders McNew
2004-08-11 by Allan Chen
Thanks everyone for the input and advice. Especially for that ScanCalc tool - it's quite helpful since it really does account for viewing distance. I'm curious as to the formula(e) being used, though. Here's what I'm thinking I'll try: 35mm frames scanned on my Nikon IV (pushing it a bit at 2900 dpi, but according to the ScanCalc program I should be able to get all the way out to 65"x44" at a 3' viewing distance. We'll see how accurate that is...) 120 frames scanned on an Epson 3200, at 1600dpi and 3200 dpi. both formats drum scanned (assuming work will pay for that service for me to test). I will try both negatives and slides, just for the heck of it. I'll use Qimage for all the printing and interpolation, since I'm familiar with it. The only question is how much RAM will be enough for all these scenarios. I have no doubt we can get at least 1GB in there, but I'd like to get 2GB or even more. thanks again, allan ------------------ Technology Projects Manager Academic Computing & The Office of Accessible Education Stanford University v - 650-996-0546 f - 650-725-4685
2004-08-11 by Ernst Dinkla
Ross Borgida wrote: > Best bet is to scan at the optical resolution..For example, the optical resolution on an Epson 3200 scanner is 1600 dpi..not 3200 dpi. Also, you will need a big hard drive for storage and a lot of memory..i think the rule is 3 times the amount of memory than the actual size of the scanned file. > > That way, you can print from the biggest size necessary and smaller with the same file. > > Good luck! > Ross The true 1600 PPI resolution of the Epson 3200 may only be available when you actually scan at 3200. Scanning at 1600 PPI will often result in a lower true resolution because the scanner software skips steps while scanning. That means a faster scan but not the true 1600 PPI resolution possible on the 3200. A trick to get a better true resolution is by using an odd PPI setting like 1605 PPI. The scanner then scans at 3200 and downsamples to 1605 PPI. Ernst