Project 52 - Print

[Shadowman]

This webinar might be of interest to some, it is for Canson inkjet papers. I happen to have a package of various styles and would like to get more information on the qualities and printer settings recommended. I will say that the ICC profiles offered don't match my printer and seem to be written for former OS so will have to see if they are beneficial to the printing process.

http://www.canson-infinity.com/en/e-academy

[Manfred M]

I've done some testing and have more or less decided on a consistent formatting for my prints. I'm going to stick with two paper sizes and as I live in North America, ANSI paper sizes (Imperial measure) are the norm. I'm going to stick with 8-1/2" x 11" prints (more or less A4 size) as a standard approach and will go with 22" x 17" (more or less A2 size) paper for my best pieces.

I've decided to print them with 1-1/8" (28.6mm) borders and this is going to be appropriate if I decide to frame any of these shots. If I print borderless, I lose about 1/8" of the print as a bleed area, so this allows me to have all of the image I envisaged being printed. If I decide to dry mount them on a board, they will be easy enough to trim to size.

I've also decided that I am going to print a description, including the date taken and my name on these on the front face, near the bottom of the image. As I lose a bit off the bottom, I need to offset this information about 1/4" in to ensure that it prints properly. I've set up a template that lets me position the image on the frame. I define two sides and the top of the image and allow the bottom to end up where it is to give me at least the 1-1/8" area for mounting plus a space to print the information.

A screen capture with the guidelines is:

Flickr

[Manfred M]

This webinar might be of interest to some, it is for Canson inkjet papers. I happen to have a package of various styles and would like to get more information on the qualities and printer settings recommended. I will say that the ICC profiles offered don't match my printer and seem to be written for former OS so will have to see if they are beneficial to the printing process.

http://www.canson-infinity.com/en/e-academy

The problem is not OS related as the ICC profiles are not dependent on any OS you are using.

You had written that you are using third-party inks and this is almost certainly the issue. The paper profiles are created for OEM inks only, so if you are using third party inks, then you need to get a custom profile.

[Shadowman]

The problem is not OS related as the ICC profiles are not dependent on any OS you are using.

You had written that you are using third-party inks and this is almost certainly the issue. The paper profiles are created for OEM inks only, so if you are using third party inks, then you need to get a custom profile.

Manfred,

I expect the third party ink issue to go away soon as I've already ordered a new printer, my current printer (hp 7960) was first released in 2005 and hp stopped manufacturing the OEM cartridges around 2014. Most of the recent cartridges I purchased had 2011 dates and I believe their shelf life was only 2 years, some of the cartridges appear to have the original label and some have generic labels.

[Shadowman]

Expecting delivery of my new printer tomorrow, Epson P5000; and have been looking into ideas on print capture for posting to the forum. I've tried natural light, flash, preset WB and like the results for far but thinking continuous artificial light might be the best way to go. Comments on setup, any limitations we want to put on post processing?

[Manfred M]

Expecting delivery of my new printer tomorrow, Epson P5000; and have been looking into ideas on print capture for posting to the forum. I've tried natural light, flash, preset WB and like the results for far but thinking continuous artificial light might be the best way to go. Comments on setup, any limitations we want to put on post processing?

John - All I intend to do is to display the final prepped image that I have prepared for print here, much like what I show in #42. After all that work is done, putting a piece of paper in the printer and actually printing the image will be quite trivial.

I might on a bi-monthly or quarterly basis lay the prints out on a table and show a shot of the images I printed in that period. It would be more trouble than its worth to photograph me printing each individual image.

[Shadowman]

John - All I intend to do is to display the final prepped image that I have prepared for print here, much like what I show in #42. After all that work is done, putting a piece of paper in the printer and actually printing the image will be quite trivial.

I might on a bi-monthly or quarterly basis lay the prints out on a table and show a shot of the images I printed in that period. It would be more trouble than its worth to photograph me printing each individual image.

Hi Manfred,

I was thinking that I would place the image on an easel.

[skitterbug]

So I do have a question (surprise - lol) How are prints supposed to be displayed? Are they matted and then framed with something protective (glass?) over the print?

[Manfred M]

So I do have a question (surprise - lol) How are prints supposed to be displayed? Are they matted and then framed with something protective (glass?) over the print?

It depends on the look you are after.

I've gone with both the traditional matted and framed prints as well as ones that are dry-mounted (borderless) on MDF (medium-density fibreboard). The matted prints give a more formal look and the dry-mounted ones tend to look a lot more casual. With matted prints, I have a mat cutter and will cut my own mats; often I will use two or more mat boards to build up the mats with a contrast coloured interior mat. Matting and framing tend to be more expensive than the dry mount solution (I go to Costco to have this work done).

With framing, there are two approaches as well. Standard off the shelf frames are less expensive than custom made ones, so I will print (and mat) based on commercially available frame sizes. Frame materials to vary; wood and metal being the most common choices. Again, high end wood will give your image a much more formal look than cheaper wood or metal. I will tend to use glass in smaller prints, but will use acrylic plastic for larger ones because the weight of the glass (glass in heavy). I tend to stay away from non-reflective glass as that requires the image to be in contact with the glass surface, otherwise the contrast drops right off.

If one goes to more exotic materials, like canvas prints, these are often stretched and wrapped around a frame and the image itself extends around the sides of the support. Again, these tend to be more casual looking and are often reserved for larger pieces.

[skitterbug]

Hi Manfred - I have had a few of Mr. Bullfrog's photos printed because I enjoy seeing him. Grandkids' photos as well. <LOL>

When I could get the material from our local lumber company, I made my frames but for some odd reason the lumber company discontinued carrying the framing material. Making frames from scratch is a task I haven't delved into. I don't have a router for one thing.

For those that I did finish, I completed the framing using acrylic for protection of the print and purchased mats to fit. I always wondered whether it was proper to put anything over a print for protection. And you've cleared up that question too.

Thank you for covering the topic so thoroughly.

[Manfred M]

I always wondered whether it was proper to put anything over a print for protection. And you've cleared up that question too.

The "protection" does two things for you (and this applies to the coating that is applied to dry mounted prints as well). Not only does it protect the image from physical damage , but the cover protects the image from UV damage as well as from damage due to air-borne contaminants. I've read some estimates that suggest that these measures double the life of the print.

[Shadowman]

Alright, day three of using the new printer, finally getting the hang of things; getting used to handling papers and getting image correctly positioned. Had issues with prints coming out darker than what is viewable on my monitor. I use Colormunki to calibrate my monitor, using Epson paper and profiles are set. I've followed various experts advice on allowing Elements to manage colors, turned off Auto Color Correction, my images were set to ProPhotoshop sRGB throughout the editing process, did a few prints using PSD files but usually only print TIFF's. My color settings were originally set to "Allow Optimization for Printing" which uses Adobe RGB, and my prints were coming out too dark (right image).

I switched to allow printer to manage color and got the output of middle image, then added Auto Color Correction and got image on left. Is this typical setup and issues most get doing their own printing, one print guru, Matt Kloskowski said that most labs do auto color correction as most clients images are edited on too bright monitors, and he (Matt) typically adjusts brightness by 25% to compensate.



The only thing I did to this image is add a bit of sharpening and did a slight crop. Might look a bit dark but I can see details in the hair on the first two images, hardly any on the right hand side image.

[Manfred M]

What brightness setting are you using on your computer screen? I find I have to run mind at 100 candela / square meter to get the prints looking right. I also have a work area with light levels at 40 lux.

[Shadowman]

What brightness setting are you using on your computer screen? I find I have to run mind at 100 candela / square meter to get the prints looking right. I also have a work area with light levels at 40 lux.

Mine is set at 120 candela, mine automatically adjusts for changes in light.

[rudi]

Alright, day three of using the new printer, finally getting the hang of things; getting used to handling papers and getting image correctly positioned. Had issues with prints coming out darker than what is viewable on my monitor. I use Colormunki to calibrate my monitor, using Epson paper and profiles are set. I've followed various experts advice on allowing Elements to manage colors, turned off Auto Color Correction, my images were set to ProPhotoshop sRGB throughout the editing process, did a few prints using PSD files but usually only print TIFF's. My color settings were originally set to "Allow Optimization for Printing" which uses Adobe RGB, and my prints were coming out too dark (right image).

I switched to allow printer to manage color and got the output of middle image, then added Auto Color Correction and got image on left. Is this typical setup and issues most get doing their own printing, one print guru, Matt Kloskowski said that most labs do auto color correction as most clients images are edited on too bright monitors, and he (Matt) typically adjusts brightness by 25% to compensate.



The only thing I did to this image is add a bit of sharpening and did a slight crop. Might look a bit dark but I can see details in the hair on the first two images, hardly any on the right hand side image.

Hi John,

to me, the third image has a profile mismatch. Colors are off.
With a new printer/paper I always start off printing well known test images, to objectively evaluate the printing process( profiles, paper settings....). I do reprint this test image on a regular basis to determine iff reprofiling is needed.
Iff you let photoshop manage the colours, you must turn OFF ALL colorcorrections in the printer driver.Otherwise you get doubleprofiling.

..... and my prints were coming out too dark .... .

As my teacher used to say,it is the other way around, your monitor is set too bright. I have mine set to 80 cd/m2, what works for me.

[Shadowman]

Hi John,

to me, the third image has a profile mismatch. Colors are off.
With a new printer/paper I always start off printing well known test images, to objectively evaluate the printing process( profiles, paper settings....). I do reprint this test image on a regular basis to determine iff reprofiling is needed.
Iff you let photoshop manage the colours, you must turn OFF ALL colorcorrections in the printer driver.Otherwise you get doubleprofiling.


As my teacher used to say,it is the other way around, your monitor is set too bright. I have mine set to 80 cd/m2, what works for me.

Rudi and Manfredi,

I was trying to figure out why I set mine so high, got that information from X-Rite; just saw the statement regarding dark prints. When I originally setup the profiler I was using a different printer and images were coming out fine, that plus the possibility that printer was probably set to Auto Correct might be the reasoning for different results.

https://www.xrite.com/service-suppor..._display_on_pc

[Manfred M]

John - I started off my photography in the wet darkroom and have done a lot of prints in both B&W and colour in the traditional darkroom. One thing we always did is something called a "test print". I do the same thing in the "digital darkroom" to fine tune my workflow. This is essentially what Rudi is suggesting as well.

1. Most computer screens are set too bright and the work is done in a workspace that is far to bright. CAPA (Canadian Association for Photographic Art) recommends that computer screens be set to somewhere between 80 and 120 candela / square meter and the workspace light levels should not exceed 70 lux. This is just for viewing and editing work.

2. If your prints are coming out too dark, then your screen is set too bright. You have two options; either decrease your screen brightness to a point where what you see on the screen gives you an acceptable print (which is what Rudi and I have done) or make an adjustment to the image prior to printing to brighten up the image so it looks right to you after printing.

One determines this amount of adjustment by making test prints. Once you have found the "correct" setting; write that down somewhere as it will be a constant, so long as you do not change your screen settings. If there is a change, then you will need to get back into the test prints to validate your settings. Test prints are usually smaller size and include representative areas of the image that you wish to judge, including skin tones, dark shadow areas and bright highlights.

Just as an aside, the sRGB colour space is based on an output of 80 candela / square meter.

[Shadowman]

John - I started off my photography in the wet darkroom and have done a lot of prints in both B&W and colour in the traditional darkroom. One thing we always did is something called a "test print". I do the same thing in the "digital darkroom" to fine tune my workflow. This is essentially what Rudi is suggesting as well.

1. Most computer screens are set too bright and the work is done in a workspace that is far to bright. CAPA (Canadian Association for Photographic Art) recommends that computer screens be set to somewhere between 80 and 120 candela / square meter and the workspace light levels should not exceed 70 lux. This is just for viewing and editing work.

2. If your prints are coming out too dark, then your screen is set too bright. You have two options; either decrease your screen brightness to a point where what you see on the screen gives you an acceptable print (which is what Rudi and I have done) or make an adjustment to the image prior to printing to brighten up the image so it looks right to you after printing.

One determines this amount of adjustment by making test prints. Once you have found the "correct" setting; write that down somewhere as it will be a constant, so long as you do not change your screen settings. If there is a change, then you will need to get back into the test prints to validate your settings. Test prints are usually smaller size and include representative areas of the image that you wish to judge, including skin tones, dark shadow areas and bright highlights.

Just as an aside, the sRGB colour space is based on an output of 80 candela / square meter.

Hi Manfred,

Already adjusted the monitor to 90 candela, workspace light levels cannot be controlled during the day but the Colormunki is set to adjust the monitor on an hourly basis. I did one print that looked good, small difference between the print and monitor but I believe my eyes are adjusting to the white border of the print and the grey border of my monitor.

[rudi]

in post#55 I forgot to include the link to the testimage that I use most often , here it is
http://www.outbackphoto.com/printing...049/essay.html

[Shadowman]

in post#55 I forgot to include the link to the testimage that I use most often , here it is
http://www.outbackphoto.com/printing...049/essay.html

Thanks for the link.