Digital BW, The Print

I received the "Pillar and Staircase" 4x5 print from Clayton Jones in 
the mail a few days ago. Two words:

Awe-some.   :-)


Granted, a scan from a 4x5 negative (I have shot some 4x5, so I have 
a sense of the amount of detail included in the negative), but I 
cannot believe how "small" and "precise" the dots are rendered. I am 
particularly struck by the detail in the highlight on the pew end at 
the bottom of the image, and as well by the detail in the marble 
columns (seams and the subtle gradient differences in the stone).

For giggles, I used the Portfolio Black cartridge from my Piezography 
set-up and printed a BO 5x7 from a large (2720 dpi) 35mm scan on my 
1160 (1440dpi) using some Photo Rag. Good results, but the "dots" are 
obvious, compared to his.

Is the dot size purely a function of ink, paper, and printer DPI 
only? 

Or does the scan density, or other Photoshop/Print Driver parameters 
effect it as well (e.g. because I have a lower density scan, my dots 
are rendered slightly larger than they might have been)?


Just wondering if I should be thinking of investing in a printer with 
a higher dpi (2880), or a better scanner (than the 2720 dpi), or both.

Bill

The 1160 is a good printer, I used one with an MIS FS-N set for a
while printing using Randall curves way back when.  But when tried BO
it paled, IMO, in comparison to what was achieved with BO with my 870
or 2200.  I believe the 1160 dot size is a bit larger than later
printers.

Richard

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 03:10:38 -0000, w1pa <w1pa@...> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I received the "Pillar and Staircase" 4x5 print from Clayton Jones in 
> the mail a few days ago. Two words:
> 
> Awe-some.   :-)
> 
> 
> Granted, a scan from a 4x5 negative (I have shot some 4x5, so I have 
> a sense of the amount of detail included in the negative), but I 
> cannot believe how "small" and "precise" the dots are rendered. I am 
> particularly struck by the detail in the highlight on the pew end at 
> the bottom of the image, and as well by the detail in the marble 
> columns (seams and the subtle gradient differences in the stone).
> 
> For giggles, I used the Portfolio Black cartridge from my Piezography 
> set-up and printed a BO 5x7 from a large (2720 dpi) 35mm scan on my 
> 1160 (1440dpi) using some Photo Rag. Good results, but the "dots" are 
> obvious, compared to his.
> 
> Is the dot size purely a function of ink, paper, and printer DPI 
> only? 
> 
> Or does the scan density, or other Photoshop/Print Driver parameters 
> effect it as well (e.g. because I have a lower density scan, my dots 
> are rendered slightly larger than they might have been)?
> 
> 
> Just wondering if I should be thinking of investing in a printer with 
> a higher dpi (2880), or a better scanner (than the 2720 dpi), or both.
> 
> Bill
> 
>

The higher dpi will be good, however if you find a paper that can 
help hide the dots, then you might be OK. Canvas is always good for 
this. Checking the specs, you probably should spen too much time 
looking for a paper that will make it look good, and think of a way 
to buy one of the 2880x1440 printers. If you want black only, you 
might also think about the R800/1800 with the smaller droplet size, 
this should give improved resolution, but you would want to test it 
on all the papers you might use before shelling out the money.

The R800 driver does not allow you to do black only, and I believe the 
R1800 is set up the same way. The i-photo.com website has some tests 
prints of the R1800 B&W, and frankly, they aren't great.
QTR might support those ptinters by the time the R1800 is available; 
I'm hoping to do a two ink B&W setup, with all those other ink 
positions for toning, glop, whatever. Paul is also planning to support 
it as well, so that should give us some good B&W solutions for that 
printer.

Steve Karafyllakis

> If you want black only, you 
> might also think about the R800/1800 with the smaller droplet size, 
> this should give improved resolution, but you would want to test it 
> on all the papers you might use before shelling out the money.