Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: Mike Guilbault on April 18, 2013, 09:26:50 am
-
I printed a 30x40" image on canvas, actually two different images with the same result. I'm printing on 36" roll, through LR on an Epson 9900. The prints are coming out close to 39.5" rather than 40". In the Print module, it's showing the image size as 30x40 and the 30" is exact.
Can anyone think of why this is happening?
-
You're printing on canvas---which has more pliability than paper.
You're experiencing the George Costanza Effect (Seinfeld) ("It was the pool!") otherwise known as shrinkage. Normally, this is most noticeable after hvlp spraying or rolling the protectant over the canvas. You'll notice that like a pair of jeans, shrinkage typically occurs lengthwise.
On your 9900, make sure to designate "canvas" under fine art paper for media type on the Printer. Also check "canvas" in the printer settings on the computer. This seems to address some if not most shrinkage issues on canvas. (There is variability according to the types of canvas used; variability in shrinkage also seems to be different from printer to printer, even if the same model). There are also other tweaks that can adjust for shrinkage by percentage in photoshop. Programs like Qimage can adjust for canvas length shrinkage by a certain percentage, which is really neat, because once you determine what the approximate shrinkage is for your printer, you can simply dial in the percentage of shrinkage, and get really really close to your desired print size.
ken :)
-
Ahhh... didn't think of that. It was about 5/16ths on the uncoated canvas and 3/8ths on the coated one. I just measured a 30x20 I had printed on the 36" roll, and sure enough on the 'long side' of the roll, the 20" side of the sideways image, I lost 3/16ths.
I'm using BC's Lyve canvas and they recommend using the Watercolor Paper Radiant White setting for paper type. How will choosing canvas affect the image, or will it?
-
Maybe Epson finally got tired of all the canvas shrinking complaints, and for the canvas setting, the printer compensates? (if search for canvas shrinkage, you will see many threads on the subject) My HP Z3100 prints spot on! ;-)
-
My Z3100 prints okay, but by the time the work is coated with G2, the canvas shrinks between 1 and 2 percent, depending on the canvas roll.
Due to this problem, I typically make the work 1.5% longer than intended and this gets the final work pretty close. I’ve added a note on the order form about canvas shrinkage, which beats the heck out of a redo.
Of course due to the unpredictable shrinkage, it is impossible to order frames until the work is printed, coated and fully cured. i hate this because of the delay it adds in completing an order. >:(
-
Mike,
I use BC's Lyve and Glamour II. No problem using the Canvas setting. :)
I do think Epson has tried to the shrinkage issue with their latest printers, and it does indeed help, but there remains other variables that really need to be addressed individually.
Once you get it dialed in---shrinkage isn't much of an issue anymore.
ken
-
Make sure your profile was calibrated with the "canvas" setting however. There is a difference in the amount of ink laid down in the paper settings, WCRW and Canvas.
I have also found on my 9900 that the canvas setting won't always fix this issue, it's dependent on brand of canvas. Lyve is one I still use profiles made with a paper setting of WCRW so I have not tried it. Canvas setting works pretty good on the Crystalline canvas.
On BC's site I don't believe that they have updated their profiles to reflect the "canvas" setting as they still recommend WCRW.
As Ken pointed out, your 9900 (any Epson for that matter) will always short the Running length on a canvas print. If it's like mine it will also tend to skew the print (another issue). The other option which I use is to just add to the dimension of the print which will be the running length. On a 30 x 40, where is the running length, on the canvas and 40 the width, I would add 1/2 an inch to the print.
In coating, you also may run into the canvas drawing up a bit again mainly on the running length dimension. I tended to have this issue more often when I used Glamour II for coating. I have switched to Timeless now.
Paul Caldwell
-
Hi Mike,
Oh yes, this "shrinkage" issue has been flogged to death ever since I first started printing on canvas 5 years ago. Many and varied opinions have been posted on the source of the problem and of course possible cures as well. The first canvas I used was from Premier Art in California. I liked that canvas a lot but it became rather expensive. At that time I was printing on a 7600 and still do for some smaller images. On the Premier Art site there's a section that shows the "Paper Feed Adjustment" settings for their canvas and printer combinations. Those adjustments work perfectly with the 7600, but have almost no effect on the 9900. The PFA on the 9900 is a much finer setting and has very little effect. I've been using BC ChromWhite for a few years and on the 9900 I add 1.4% to the dimension along the travel through the printer and it's right on for every size I print. I do my initial testing on Enhanced Matte paper and use the Enhanced Matte profile and media type setting for the canvas as well. I also set the paper type on the printer to EnhMatte and the size is always exact. I use Eco Print Shield for coating and have never noticed any difference in length after three coats. Perhaps some of this info will be of help.
Gary
-
I received a new Lyve profile from BC today that runs on Canvas rather than the Watercolor Paper Radiant White setting. It was suggested that it might help. I ran out of time, but hopefully will give it a try tomorrow. At least I know what the problem is and with some of your suggestions I can work around it.
-
My 8300 will automatically calibrate the amount of feed to apply to an existing or user-defined canvas (or any media) and it's accurate to a couple millimeters at 8 feet. I seem to recall that I did a similar feed calibration on my 9880, but can't remember the details. Required some manual measurements. But it worked. Anyway, I don't buy into the "canvas is unpredictable as to length" thing at all. Has been totally consistent for me over a range of temperatures and humidities and I print a lot of canvas.
I think the "canvas" media setting probably puts down less ink than the "watercolor" setting. BC's media type for the 8300 definitely puts down too much ink for canvas, IMHO. Load BC's new and old profiles up to iccview.de and see what's going on. For 8300 users thinking about the canvas media setting, be advised that there is at least one type in the canvas section that uses both gloss and matte black inks at the same time.
Mike, you need a profiling system! So worth it if you're using multiple mediae at a professional level.
-
Tried the new profile today - now I'm within about 1/16th of an inch. A little fine-tuning and we should be good.