+- Portrait Pro Forums (https://forum.portraitprofessional.com)
+-- Forum: Community (https://forum.portraitprofessional.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: General chit chat (https://forum.portraitprofessional.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Printer or Printer Ink (/showthread.php?tid=1741)
RE: Printer or Printer Ink - photoprofx - 02-21-2012
(02-21-2012, 02:32 AM)williamting Wrote:There are gray cards for RAW and Jpeg photos depending on what file format you are shooting. Me, I shoot almost exclusivly in RAW, move it to Canon Cameara RAW in Lightroom process it then move it to PS if I need to use it for a component in compositing.(02-20-2012, 07:43 PM)photoprofx Wrote: White balance usually is set in the camera. NOW, that being said shooting on Full Auto is on setting on my camera that I never use and I mean never! IF you want to get perfect white balance EVERY time you can use a 18% gray card, available online for a few bucks.
The other alternative is, if you are using PS or Lightroom then get the white balance eye dropper and look for a light patch of gray in the photo, that will put you in the ballpark. Warm it up a little if you
want some great ideas and want to look at photographers from all over the planet check out 500PX.com. this latter suggestion shows you some of the most creative uses of the camera you will ever see AND it gives you, most of the time, the camera settings.
Photography is an expensive hobby, sorry it just is, and you need to get the knowlege to leverage the equipment you buy. It is NOT in the owners manuel.
White balance is the VERY first step in any processing of ANY photo to get it right, from there you can do most anything.
Good Luck
PhotoProFX
Thanks for your pointers. Surely I will pay them a visit. I am learning new thing everyday!
In certain situation, I am using manual mode to shoot all my picture. I can't leave important assignment to the auto mode.
Do you agree if I say that a gray card is a gray card? They are all made (almost) equal and there is no point to pay more for a perceived advantage (due to brand or whatever).
Photography is an extremely expensive hobby. I found that out when I was only 14 years old!
In manuel I use this for studio photography only... set the shutter to 125th/sec ISO at 100, I use a 70 - 200 F2.8 L for my portraits because it does wonderful things for the subject. The sweet spot for the glass is around f5 to f9. (Sekonic Metering)
I think the most important thing, besides good white balance, is the rule of thirds because it gives you room for excellent composition. The light is... well before anything you have to have light and good studio strobes are pretty much necessary to accomplish what you need to get accomplished from an artistic point of view.
By the way, jumping back to gray cards, when you are in RAW processing, say in Bridge or Lightroom, the gray card is a very nice thing to have invested in because you can batch process your photos using a single frame to set your white balance for all the photos you select at once. Then it is a matter of processing the photos from there and saving the versions or snapshots to a photo drive.
PhotoProFx
RE: Printer or Printer Ink - williamting - 02-21-2012
PhotoProFx, Thanks! Comparing notes, you are now giving me motivation to go for a 70-200mm lens. With this type of lens, I need quite a big studio, especially if I want to shoot group. You are right that this type of lens does wonderful things. I am using a 200mm for some modelling and even family shots which were done in the open space. The only disadvantage is that I need to shout!
Not sure whether these few pictures taken with 200mm is worth your viewing: http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.3058614098383.141756.1054318642&type=1&l=21cfb75081
RE: Printer or Printer Ink - Slynky - 02-21-2012
(02-21-2012, 03:43 PM)williamting Wrote: PhotoProFx, Thanks! Comparing notes, you are now giving me motivation to go for a 70-200mm lens. With this type of lens, I need quite a big studio, especially if I want to shoot group. You are right that this type of lens does wonderful things. I am using a 200mm for some modelling and even family shots which were done in the open space. The only disadvantage is that I need to shout!
Not sure whether these few pictures taken with 200mm is worth your viewing: http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.3058614098383.141756.1054318642&type=1&l=21cfb75081
Some nice shots of some very beautiful females. The lens does some pretty good results with bokeh.
I guess this is a shoot where a club or attendees were all permitted to shoot the models?
RE: Printer or Printer Ink - photoprofx - 02-22-2012
(02-21-2012, 03:43 PM)williamting Wrote: PhotoProFx, Thanks! Comparing notes, you are now giving me motivation to go for a 70-200mm lens. With this type of lens, I need quite a big studio, especially if I want to shoot group. You are right that this type of lens does wonderful things. I am using a 200mm for some modelling and even family shots which were done in the open space. The only disadvantage is that I need to shout!
Not sure whether these few pictures taken with 200mm is worth your viewing: http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.3058614098383.141756.1054318642&type=1&l=21cfb75081
I need to give you a bit of direction here... the 70-200 MM F2.8l.. this is not cheap glass, around $2,500 new. You can buy used (Adorama or B&H) at a much lower price, make sure it is VERY good conditin with a hood. Both are great places because they know how to take care of a photographer new or grizzled and they both have stellar reputations.
Now, the group shot is better managed by wide angle glass you don't need to back off to the otherside of the parking lot to get a good photo of a group. If you are shooting a pano you can stitch them together and make a very nice pano.
When using the 70-200.. rack out to 185mm for the best head shots. If you are doing full body then pull back to fill the frame. In my experience 15 feet or so is good. The stand on a stool to get a good angle on the subject to make it very interesting.
You want good glass for wide angle try a something in the 18 - 55 range F2.8L (by no means do you have to use L glass - luxury ) you can use F4.5 for decient results for family. If you intend to go to a higher level then the cost will get significant.
Just letting you know.
PhotoProFX
RE: Printer or Printer Ink - williamting - 02-22-2012
Slynk, yes, they are a local Nikon fan club meet and they invited a few pretty girls along. I touch them up using PP.
Photoprofx, Adorama is good. I bought from them before. They are reliable also.
Thanks for your pointers. What do you think of 85mm lens for portrait?
As a matter of fact, I am planning to buy a small folding ladder. I think this will help a great deal especially in group photo.
I am currently using a 24-70mm lens almost exclusively. But at times, I think I find the lens a little insufficient.
Thanks for your insight.
RE: Printer or Printer Ink - KevinD103 - 02-24-2012
(02-08-2012, 05:11 PM)Bobb42 Wrote: I have 2 Epson Photo Printers and recently have seen the same results. The quality that was there 6 months ago is no longer good. I took some photos to WalMart for printing and they were of exceptional quality and color. I have contacted the manufacturer, but so far nothing has changed.
I don't have much to add regarding the Walmart type photo printing. It's a crap shoot as to quality. If you want top notch prints then a specialty processor can be found through your local camera/photography store, they tend to take pride in their recommendations.
By printing your own you can control the quality/price balance and come very close to what the pro shops produce and yet reduce your cost. williamting is right on target with his summation of the photo process....printer, ink, & paper being the just the tail end. I've owned over thirty printers over the last 18 years and the newest batch of high end inkjets are as good as they get. HP, Canon, and Epson all make outstanding printers for the photo market although they are not all the same quality as far as reliability and economy.
HP can produce some of the best prints. The drawbacks are poor reliability and expensive ink (I traded printers with HP about five times before I gave up, every one had a different problem due to either poor quality parts or defective software). HP software is, in my opinion, little better than a virus and is very difficult to remove.
Canons top end printers have probably the best print quality and decent reliability. Ink can get expensive though the result is worth the extra cost. Their software is good and shouldn't give you problems.
I am currently using an Epson 1400 that is set up for bulk printing, not really something that you would consider for top end photo prints. It will do a decent job, just not the best. I borrow a friends Epson Stylus Photo R3000 occasionally and am considering upgrading to this model, the prints are outstanding.
The point that williamting made regarding paper quality is very important. Give Red River Paper a try regardless of the printer you use. For $12 you can get their Photographer's Choice Sample Kit that will give you a clear idea of what papers will meet your needs. It will make a huge difference!
RE: Printer or Printer Ink - Slynky - 02-24-2012
I'm probably quoting stuff here that is just made up by the OEM manufacturers BUT...
I thought, for example, one needed to use Canon paper with a Canon printer to gain the longivity they advertise. The detailed report I read indicates that Canon makes a paper that works best with their printers and that it permits ink to "soak" into certain layers of the coating (coatings have a few different layers making them up). This soaking into the proper layer is what makes the print last for many years (as well as yields the best vibrancy, etc.). I thought it is unwise to just use any paper manufacturer...
RE: Printer or Printer Ink - KevinD103 - 02-24-2012
(02-24-2012, 02:36 PM)Slynky Wrote: I'm probably quoting stuff here that is just made up by the OEM manufacturers BUT...
I thought, for example, one needed to use Canon paper with a Canon printer to gain the longivity they advertise. The detailed report I read indicates that Canon makes a paper that works best with their printers and that it permits ink to "soak" into certain layers of the coating (coatings have a few different layers making them up). This soaking into the proper layer is what makes the print last for many years (as well as yields the best vibrancy, etc.). I thought it is unwise to just use any paper manufacturer...
Indeed the manufacturer has a vested interest in you buying only their recommended product and will tell you that you will get best results with their recommendation and that the warranty might be void if you use other. Not always true, especially in the area of economy.
If you purchase OEM ink by the cartridge and price it out by the gallon you will pay about $5000 to $8000 per gallon. Aftermarket inks will cost in the $100-300 range per gallon. Are the OEM inks good? Yes. Are the aftermarket inks good? It varies, they can, however, be as good as OEM.
Paper is in a similar situation. Very good papers can be obtained from aftermarket suppliers that are as good/better than OEM. Again the price can be much lower with aftermarket.
The dirty little secret is that printer manufactures make their money from selling ink and paper, not from the printer itself. Some time ago Xerox gave away a laser printer for free, all you had to do is agree to purchase a quantity of toner from them over a time period. The printer was free, the toner amounted to about $3500. Not such a good deal after all.
Regarding longevity; keep in mind that all estimates of fade resistance are based on accelerated testing. That is they use severe lighting and chemical methods to induce the ink to fade, all in a relatively short period of time. A paper/ink combo might have a rating of 100 years, however, the actual time it was tested is actually measured in months. Actual time for a lasting print is, at best, as guess. The big enemy of inkjet printing is UV light and it is well known that quality pigment ink resists UV much better than dye based ink. Having a multi color ink printer (8 or more colors) will often give you the option of clear-coating your print that will greatly help the fade resistance. Printer manufacturers do not have the market cornered on quality paper, shop around!
RE: Printer or Printer Ink - Slynky - 02-24-2012
(02-24-2012, 07:45 PM)KevinD103 Wrote:(02-24-2012, 02:36 PM)Slynky Wrote: I'm probably quoting stuff here that is just made up by the OEM manufacturers BUT...
I thought, for example, one needed to use Canon paper with a Canon printer to gain the longivity they advertise. The detailed report I read indicates that Canon makes a paper that works best with their printers and that it permits ink to "soak" into certain layers of the coating (coatings have a few different layers making them up). This soaking into the proper layer is what makes the print last for many years (as well as yields the best vibrancy, etc.). I thought it is unwise to just use any paper manufacturer...
Indeed the manufacturer has a vested interest in you buying only their recommended product and will tell you that you will get best results with their recommendation and that the warranty might be void if you use other. Not always true, especially in the area of economy.
If you purchase OEM ink by the cartridge and price it out by the gallon you will pay about $5000 to $8000 per gallon. Aftermarket inks will cost in the $100-300 range per gallon. Are the OEM inks good? Yes. Are the aftermarket inks good? It varies, they can, however, be as good as OEM.
I knew/know it's expensive but have never computed it. On the other hand, I would have to express some mild disbelief that aftermarket ink can be 50 times cheaper than OEM ink. That seem astonishing. It's like saying a cartridge of CYAN from OEM that costs $20 will only costs me 40 cents from aftermarket. (using your initital figures of $5,000 per gallon versus $100 per gallon).
(02-24-2012, 07:45 PM)KevinD103 Wrote: Paper is in a similar situation. Very good papers can be obtained from aftermarket suppliers that are as good/better than OEM. Again the price can be much lower with aftermarket.
(02-24-2012, 07:45 PM)KevinD103 Wrote: The dirty little secret is that printer manufactures make their money from selling ink and paper, not from the printer itself. Some time ago Xerox gave away a laser printer for free, all you had to do is agree to purchase a quantity of toner from them over a time period. The printer was free, the toner amounted to about $3500. Not such a good deal after all.
This I knew. Some say it follows the "give the razor away for free and charge for the blades" marketing plan.
(02-24-2012, 07:45 PM)KevinD103 Wrote: Regarding longevity; keep in mind that all estimates of fade resistance are based on accelerated testing. That is they use severe lighting and chemical methods to induce the ink to fade, all in a relatively short period of time. A paper/ink combo might have a rating of 100 years, however, the actual time it was tested is actually measured in months. Actual time for a lasting print is, at best, as guess. The big enemy of inkjet printing is UV light and it is well known that quality pigment ink resists UV much better than dye based ink. Having a multi color ink printer (8 or more colors) will often give you the option of clear-coating your print that will greatly help the fade resistance. Printer manufacturers do not have the market cornered on quality paper, shop around!
And this I knew. However, rather than wait till I'm dead to see how long something will last, we take what we can. Do I believe 130 years out of the latest Canon proclamations? No. But I will assume I can at least believe I will get 50 years.
And I package all my prints in bags (from clearbags.com) with a label on it that suggests to them that the print will have the best longevity if places under glass and on a wall that does not receive direct sunlight.
RE: Printer or Printer Ink - photoprofx - 02-25-2012
(02-24-2012, 11:25 PM)Slynky Wrote:(02-24-2012, 07:45 PM)KevinD103 Wrote:(02-24-2012, 02:36 PM)Slynky Wrote: I'm probably quoting stuff here that is just made up by the OEM manufacturers BUT...
I thought, for example, one needed to use Canon paper with a Canon printer to gain the longivity they advertise. The detailed report I read indicates that Canon makes a paper that works best with their printers and that it permits ink to "soak" into certain layers of the coating (coatings have a few different layers making them up). This soaking into the proper layer is what makes the print last for many years (as well as yields the best vibrancy, etc.). I thought it is unwise to just use any paper manufacturer...
Indeed the manufacturer has a vested interest in you buying only their recommended product and will tell you that you will get best results with their recommendation and that the warranty might be void if you use other. Not always true, especially in the area of economy.
If you purchase OEM ink by the cartridge and price it out by the gallon you will pay about $5000 to $8000 per gallon. Aftermarket inks will cost in the $100-300 range per gallon. Are the OEM inks good? Yes. Are the aftermarket inks good? It varies, they can, however, be as good as OEM.
I knew/know it's expensive but have never computed it. On the other hand, I would have to express some mild disbelief that aftermarket ink can be 50 times cheaper than OEM ink. That seem astonishing. It's like saying a cartridge of CYAN from OEM that costs $20 will only costs me 40 cents from aftermarket. (using your initital figures of $5,000 per gallon versus $100 per gallon).
(02-24-2012, 07:45 PM)KevinD103 Wrote: Paper is in a similar situation. Very good papers can be obtained from aftermarket suppliers that are as good/better than OEM. Again the price can be much lower with aftermarket.
(02-24-2012, 07:45 PM)KevinD103 Wrote: The dirty little secret is that printer manufactures make their money from selling ink and paper, not from the printer itself. Some time ago Xerox gave away a laser printer for free, all you had to do is agree to purchase a quantity of toner from them over a time period. The printer was free, the toner amounted to about $3500. Not such a good deal after all.
This I knew. Some say it follows the "give the razor away for free and charge for the blades" marketing plan.
(02-24-2012, 07:45 PM)KevinD103 Wrote: Regarding longevity; keep in mind that all estimates of fade resistance are based on accelerated testing. That is they use severe lighting and chemical methods to induce the ink to fade, all in a relatively short period of time. A paper/ink combo might have a rating of 100 years, however, the actual time it was tested is actually measured in months. Actual time for a lasting print is, at best, as guess. The big enemy of inkjet printing is UV light and it is well known that quality pigment ink resists UV much better than dye based ink. Having a multi color ink printer (8 or more colors) will often give you the option of clear-coating your print that will greatly help the fade resistance. Printer manufacturers do not have the market cornered on quality paper, shop around!
And this I knew. However, rather than wait till I'm dead to see how long something will last, we take what we can. Do I believe 130 years out of the latest Canon proclamations? No. But I will assume I can at least believe I will get 50 years.
And I package all my prints in bags (from clearbags.com) with a label on it that suggests to them that the print will have the best longevity if places under glass and on a wall that does not receive direct sunlight.
Well.. okay! Once again... 'IT'S ALL ABOUT THE PAPER". Low acid.. then comes the ink.. Pigment NOT dyebased inks. Then comes the printer... As I previously stated, your run of the mill printer does a pretty darned good job of printing. You put it on paper you buy at Staples or Office Depot and you get a nice result.
Now put that same paper up on a wall in a frame with no UV protection and you get a fade job in less than a year if in light a lot. This is due to sorta good paper and dye based inks... not archival inks! You get low acid, museum quality paper that is low acid, then use pigment inks and you get a VERY long lived print.
This comes at a price, your printer is not one you pick up at Staples off the rack, it is probably ordered in from the warehouse because they don't sell a lot of them, and for good reason they are not cheap to run.
The Pro printers are not everyday printers and they are not good for printing out the credit card statement. They are turning out prints that are of a VERY high quality that last. In my case Epson R3000, while on the low end of the professional printers it still sports the K3 Chrome pigment inks the higher end 3880's up to the 9700 series use. Yeh.. the VERY same inks!
The ink is not cheap so you make sure your test prints are minimized and you don't burn through paper that may run over a dollar a page, but again you get what you pay for.
Now, I don't suggest you run out and spend a grand or more on a printer but what I DO suggest you get GOOD paper to print on. Some are in to high end super gloss for black and white, other are in to luster papers for that smooth older hollywood look or even art papers for matt finishes. What everl your flavor it's all about the paper, low acid paper because the print will last a lot longer. Anyone tells you your print will last a century is nuts! It might, but you better keep it in a dark room or in a book away from the light or in a UV protected frame to see if it will out last that baby photo of your first child when they are in their 50's.
The reason printer manufactures recommend their paper is because they sell the drivers and software WITH ICC PROFILES that fit their papers, this is the niffty screen that has the selections of what type of paper you are running through your printer...and guess what you can use someone elses paper and you most likely will not see the differenct. Saying that, this is where the differences start to happen, some printers can not accept foreigh ICC profiles, oh on the off chance you don't know what an ICC profile is: it is a software program some printers can accept that tell the printer it is not in charge, the ICC profile is because it tells the printer it is not managing things like the how thick the paper is, how to lay down the ink, what is the concentratin etc, that is a simplifed ICC profile. Paper manufactures supply their ICC profiles for free because they want the paper to give you the very best results.
You can blame the printer if you want, but your best bet, if looking for the blame game, is the paper, then the ink.
After market inks, IF manufactured in the USA will usually have and ISO specification somewhere they follow. Your Hong Kong, or Chineses inks... well that is a crap shoot.
So, if take away anything its the paper, then the ink and then your printer. You can make great prints if you just think it through.
PhotoProFX