PSW EST: 1972

* PhotoSnowdonia Workshops *

and the

Zone 8 Photographic Society EST: 1977

PRESIDENT: Bruce Alexander Carter, FZPS . . . . FIRST & PAST PRESIDENT: Kenneth A Nelson, Hon.FZPS

 

INFORMATION

ARTICLES

For all enquiries

Updated: Monday 22 May, 2006 21:37 (Webpage updated but not content)

CONVENTIONAL & DIGITAL IMAGING TECHNIQUES

(NOTE: This has been extensively updated and available to members, with a wide range of other technical information leaflets, on the Members Only Forum. Articles will not be updated any more on this website, so updated versions will only be available to members. However, it is left for visitors as the principles remain valid)

NOTE: New printers have been introduced since this was written but the principles remain the same

Our recommendation (still at March 2006) is to get the Epson 1160 A3+ printer - while you can or failing that, the 1290! Later printers, like the Canons for example, use all the colours for printing B+W images - which brings into question image stability matters

The following is as written "at the time" and updated several times. Per above, principles remain the same but fully updated information is now only available to members of the Zone 8 Photographic Society on their Members-Only FORUM

 

We have been using for the past couple of years, very successfully, the Epson 1200 Inkjet Printer, which has the variable-dot technology not only for the colour inks but importantly - for B+W workers - also for the Black Ink too. Hooray! It is possible, at last, to achieve remarkably smooth gradation using only the black cartridge and our latest work to A3+ size compares to conventionally produced - in the darkroom - photographic B+W prints.

We have gained, over the past 28 years of workshops, an enviable reputation for our teaching methods and our own work to the highest  archival fine-print standards, so those who know we can be relied on for information will understand the significance of stating that equivalent B+W prints can be achieved to match our own high standards.

From our preliminary tests (NOTE: now a few years ago), the best results had been made on the latest Epson Photo Paper (which replaces the former thin Photo Glossy Paper which could yellow in colour fairly quickly); this new material has a "soft gloss" reminiscent of high quality conventional photographic printing papers and the slightly warm colour of its base is very suitable, with the standard Epson black ink, of producing an image that resembles a good selenium toned print, with that nice warm-black image tone with a hint of purple-brown too. However, it is our belief that this material will not produce archival quality as the plasticizers react in time with the inks.

We now use watercolour and cartridge papers, including Bristol Board. Hot-pressed are smooth, Cold-pressed are more textural in their surface, Black ink prints, via the Epson 1200, resemble prints made via the Platinum process using these quality materials.(For our latest recommendations on papers to use, see the article on Inks & Media - link in left column) More is posted for members on the ZPS Forum.

We have no connection with Epson as a Company and get no favours from them in any way. If you want to visit Epson's site for specifications of printers, etc. just click on this link: http://www.epson.co.uk/ OR http://www.epson.com

Over the years - way before digital imaging was even a gleam in some robot's eye (perhaps we should have said some extremely wealthy robot's eye!) - we had conventional photographic techniques. Lots of lovely sloshing about of smelly solutions, stains on the carpet and clothing and a new meaning to the term "after shave" or "deodorant". Yes folks, you could always tell a REAL photographer, whether downwind or not!

The fascination of cameras and lenses and all those lovely things that could be put on the font of optics, either properly or with the aid of such items as Blu Tack - or chewing gum in earlier years, of course - meant that anyone could dream of becoming a real photographer - Cor! Camera clubs appeared and became hotbeds for discussing the latest virtues of equipment and how wonderfully the lenses performed. Mostly these discussions were generated by people who had no idea of what to use them for, in terms of image production. Many, many camera buffs who "knew everything" (?*!?) about cameras knew precisely nothing about making good pictures. There were but few who really delved deeply into technical quality topics in order to use those techniques to further their image creation ideas.

The same has applied over the years and it does seem strange that the vast majority of self-proclaimed photographic enthusiasts, even after over 160 years of photography, are still unable to guarantee the highest quality, preferring to muddle along, trying new films and new processes in the hope that they will light on a miracle cure for their distress! The truth is, the means to produce high quality images has been there since the beginning. Suffice to say that it took the likes of Ansel Adams and Minor White to bring before the masses the means to fine quality, via their books and images.

Of course, they were not the only photographers of note and thankfully, the world of photography has embraced quality conscious photographers interested in many different forms of expressing themselves through the medium of photography. However, though the means was there to produce fine work - after all, great photographers only used the same cameras, lenses, films, enlargers, developers and papers available to everyone else - they just took the trouble to find out how to use them to effect. Most people who bemoan being able to produce quality work cannot be actually bothered to make a little effort to get their technique right, based on information available from many sources.

Conventional Fine-Print Monochrome Prints, to archival standards, still have an important place in Photography, with a capital "P", of course! The fibre-based images can have an extraordinary life span of many hundreds of years, if properly cared for and superb examples will become as valuable as images using other art forms. Whether fibre-based enlarging papers will continue to be available for a long time is probably conjecture. Certainly, for many years, there will always be a niche for perhaps specialist producers, when all the major players have perhaps deserted us for richer pastures - and the same could apply to conventional films, though it is perhaps more likely, in time, we will all be forced into using colour or at least chromogenic films for monochrome work, because the main outlet for B+W films has almost vanished, now the Press and Educational Establishments are virtually all using colour negative emulsions, simply converting into monochrome images as required. OoooErrr!

Additionally, when such revered agencies like Reuters convert lock, stock and barrel to Digital Cameras, as has happened recently, "The End Is Nigh". Oh, Calamity! So for the keen, conventionally inclined worker, let's hope some small firms can see their way to fulfilling the needs and indeed demands of perhaps a reduced but still lucrative specialist market for B+W films and papers.

Many established photographers are now exploring digital imaging techniques. The very serious workers are mainly seeking to find whether their conventional production of negatives, via camera and film and darkroom processing in favourite solutions, can be married to perhaps the outputting of the negative images into positive pictures via digital printing. The answer is a definite YES! See our additional page on using the Epson 1200 (and 750). We would mention here that from our own experience, scanning a print MADE for scanning (meaning softer and full of detail compared to a conventional B+W print made for viewing) is the best way to ensure quality final prints. Scanning from 35mm film seems to produce granular end prints for monochrome, though colour seems to be OK. We believe this is due to some form of interference between the grain of the small negative and the dpi of the scanner resolution. We know from feedback that some people have blamed the Epson 1200 for such granular output yet we know this is not true - they need to scan on a good flatbed scanner, even from a D&P colour en-print, then make a print to see the printer does not in itself produce a granular end image.

As the new 1200 printer will print on A3+ Paper and it can print banner formats = almost any length by that width on suitable banner paper this could well suit most monochrome workers as it is round about the actual image area generally produced on conventional 20"x16" enlarging paper, allowing for margins for mounting under an aperture mount. Yes, I do know that some would want maybe 14 "- 15" wide but it is a perfectly usable size for most people. This can be compared to the width of printing offered by the older Epson 1520 inkjet printer, that would produce a printed width of 345mm on A2 paper, so the difference in the 323mm of the new 1200 and the older 1520 is only 22mm (approx./8").

For those photographers to whom size matters (?) remember the superb images by Edward Weston via contact prints. It is the content and quality that actually matter. Have you ever thought when looking in a book containing fine images "What a pity they aren't all ten times larger". Of course not. For most people, a frame size 20"x16" allows for sympathetic display of an image produced on paper up to 16"x12" size. So, A3 or A3+ should suit the needs of most keen photographers. If larger is desired, await the replacement of the Epson 1520 when it arrives with the new inkjet technology, same as in the latest Epson 1200.

So, our recommendation for the present time is to go for the Epson 1200 (or the 750 if A4 maximum is OK for you) for both colour and monochrome print making. (There are the later 1270 and 2000P A3+ models but basically, using black ink, the 1200 plus watercolour paper gives an excellent combination for monochrome work that will last). We use one ourselves. On-street price for the 1200 is around £295 + VAT, which seems remarkable value for money. If you definitely want wider printed width, perhaps like the 345mm of the older Epson 1520 (now down to a street price of around £370 incl. VAT but remember it does not have either the photo-quality five-ink colour cartridge nor the new micro-dot technology), you will have to await its replacement, which may not occur for several months, of course. Our opinion is that the higher quality on the Black Ink alone for monochrome printing has made the new 1200 model a direct replacement for both the Photo-Ex and the 1520.

If you are only printing colour and A3 is OK (only slightly narrower than A3+) then get an Epson Photo-Ex, now reduced to around £261 + VAT and an excellent value choice for colour as identical (apart from number of nozzles = speed of printing slightly slower than in 1200 model) to the new 1200 for colour photo quality. If wanting B+W, get the 1200 as it is superior to the Photo-Ex due the special small droplet sizes for the Black ink being equal to the colour ones in the Photo-Ex. The Photo-Ex will give very good-looking (from a distance!) B+W results using only the Black ink but they exhibit a granularity not visible when using the more refined and smaller colour ink droplets. The Photo-Ex can make good (in their own right) B+W and Duo-Tone prints, though not comparable to conventionally produced prints. An interesting material is Fabriano paper as its surface texture seems to add detail to highlights when printing B+W from the Photo-Ex using only the Black ink cartridge (which means more stable images than if using the colour inks cartridge). Use of the Quadtone Inks seems a viable alternative for B+W work with the Photo-Ex printer. Try our link, on our LINKS page, to Digital Darkroom - Singapore and click on their link to "Inks".

Our own first tests with our new Epson 1200 show similar high quality colour photo output to the Photo-Ex. However, the Black output, for keen B+W print makers, is exceptionally good. Yes, on close inspection, there is still slight (and we do emphasise slight) texturing but from normal viewing distance, the sheer quality of the image is exceptional. The quality - and we say this as dedicated fine-print makers of the highest quality archival standard B+W prints for many years - is incredibly as good as can be made in a conventional darkroom.

Provided you have the quality in the negative and conventional skills to exploit the digital alternative, it really is now possible to produce prints via this Epson 1200 that look as good as quality prints of conventional output. Presumably, the black ink should produce far more stable images than from the colour inks. Evidence to date seems to back this from our own tests. Prints stored and/or displayed in normal - rather than in a sunlit window - situations should produce long life. The most significant factor in image stability is the "paper" base. Watercolour papers (hot-pressed for smooth finish, cold-pressed for textural finish) are inert and will give long life to inks.

When "people" complain about fading colour inkjet prints, it is usually when same have been put in windows to be subject to bright lighting. Is this really relevant? Do people really do this to their conventional prints? They sure would not do it to watercolours! We are all in favour of more stability but one has to treat prints with respect. After all, most galleries have damaging spotlighting on to framed prints on display and few complain at this poor treatment of images, which can be nicely cooked whilst on show! Next time you view an exhibition make comments about the damage to exhibits by the use of strong spotlighting, which raises the temperature inside the frame! Make them think a bit! Be a little devil!

My, oh my! We do go on a bit but hopefully, our ramblings and comments will prove helpful to others! e.g. YOU? Good!

If you are not a member of the Zone 8 Photographic Society (membership details are available by sending an e-mail using the link shown) you will not have access to the free advice facility on photographic conventional, digital imaging and related computing topics nor all other membership benefits such as Newsletters, informative e-mailouts, Forum, Gallery, Meets, Technical Information Leaflets, etc!