Durable/No Planned Obsolescence Printer Recommendation for making Digital Negatives

[DigitalHybrid]

Hi everyone!
First post here! I joined because I was told this was one of the two best forums for finding information on Palladium Printing, Digital Negatives and a whole lots of other stuff I am interested in!

My name is Aurore and I'm a young gal from europe who has studied marketing before making a switch to photography! I shoot mostly fashion, all digitally on my D810, do extensive retouching work and my growing specialty is composites.

I recently decided I wanted to do some art projects and decided on Palladium Prints. However I found it very difficult to find information on how to produce the best possible black and white digital negatives to do these Palladium prints, as a photoshop girl you can imagine I am a bit of a control freak and want to be able to reproduce in the final print what I see on the screen, that is the same ammount of contrast, gradients and dynamic range. Hopefully someone can point me in the right direction.

I do not own a printer yet so I will have to buy one. I will likely never, ever print anything other than digital negatives on it so I am not sure what I should be looking for. I had a look at various printers, mostly reading about Epson being the best but looking at the 3880 and a few others I noticed that amongst the high praises there were also warnings that these printers had a planned obsolescence and would fail after 2-3 years!!! This is why I am hoping to find some advice here in regards to printers. I want to buy one that will last me decades and will always have ink available. Surely such a product fitting my needs must exist? I can't really justify spending 2000 bucks for a disposable printer that costs more to repair than to replace...

Any advice?

Thanks so much!


- A.

[bill t.]

This is not the answer you seek.

All printers have planned obsolescence due to the choices of materials and design which are based on a cost-benefit analysis that most manufacturers Like Canon and Epson have gotten pretty much right by now.

Unfortunately, the fundamental printer and ink technologies themselves have an inherent obsolescence in that they are still evolving fast and will continue to do so in the near future.  There is no high-end printer that is immune to Progress.

Most medium to high end consumer printers available today can create astonishingly good and smooth output at their finest setting, and my best advice is get a good printer today and toss it when the printer itself or the technology behind it can you give significantly better results.  Or until it breaks.

My gut feeling is that most printers can produce output without artifacts that would show when used as negatives with classic processes, with perhaps the exception of smooth silver prints when examined closely, assuming good practice on the part of the operator.  The main issue with those who compalin about transferring a "digital look" comes from the inability of many practitioners to keep their Photoshop Phingers off the negative image, as was required with analog film.  That's just the way it is.  Perhaps in the next century the printer one buys as a young person will serve one for a lifetime, as film cameras once did.

[DigitalHybrid]

Thank you Bill! Are there no printers renowned for their exceptional build quality and durability? Surely the remaining professional photo labs must have access to gear that is made to last a long time. If within such ranges a product could be found that doesn't cost tens of thousands then perhaps it may be a good solution.

With Lighting Equipment for instance you have various choices when it comes to this: If you want a product that can be cheaply and easily repaired you go with Elinchrom, if you want one that can take a physical beating and keep on working you choose Profoto, if you want the components to still be working in 50 years you choose Broncolor. Each have their strength and weaknesses. With DSLR Cameras Pentax is the one known for durability and weather sealing...etc...

The problem is that some printers are manufactured to fail after a set period even if they have had light use. This may sound like a crazy conspiracy theory but from reading many reviews it seems to be true. There were many people that commented that the Epson R3000 failed on them after two years of light use, while others had it fail after two years of very heavy use. The fact that they all seemed to fail after about two years makes me wonder if as is the case with washing machine, a software component acts as a sort of timer to make an issue arise?

[Wayne Fox]

I think your expectation of printers is not realistic, to make such a printer that would last decades would also increase it’s cost by 10 fold or more, and now you are just making a machine that will be obsolesce from technology  Inkjet technology is evolving much slower now, but it is still improving, and any improvements may also improve the ability to make a high quality digital negative for making palladium prints.  As far as “planned” failure, not sure how an engineer could even do that, and in fact light use of inkjet printers is harder on them than regular or even heavy use, so your example isn’t surprising at all.

As far as information, I assume you have used a search engine, but it sounds like the biggest challenge (and maybe the most rewarding) will be mastering the art of making that negative.  LuLa has an article on that process here if you didn’t see it.

Hopefully someone with some experience will see this and chime in , but for making a digital negative for this process an alternate inkjet such as Cones Piezography inks may offer a much higher quality negative with better tones that can take advantage of the palladiums dynamic range.  For those you could buy a used printer and save a little.

[DigitalHybrid]

Thank you Wayne! So if I understand you correctly this expensive component in these printers, the "print head", fails because of infrequent use? So does that mean I should do a "maintenance" print every once in a while and I should be OK?

Thank you for that link, lots of info there!

I looked at the Piezography website but I am a bit confused as to what exactly it is and how it works, do you need special software for this? Maybe my confusion comes from not being a native speaker of english.

[Mark Lindquist]

Really, you might want to consider farming your work out to a respected printer.  There is a steep learning curve and a lot of frustration doing it yourself, learning about and maintaining a large format printer.

You could just find someone who specializes in making negatives, and have them do so with your art.  Let them pay for the planned obsolescence and you go your merry way making art.

You didn't mention where you are in Europe, but if you're anywhere near the Netherlands, Ernst Dinkla is an excellent printer and might be able to make negatives for you.  He occasionally frequents this forum.  Just do a search on him, either here or on Google.

BTW - here is some info on making digital images:
http://www.botzilla.com/blog/archives/000544.html

Also, don't know if you have seen this book on making digital negatives by Ron Reeder:

http://www.ronreeder.com/a-new-book-on-qtr

-Mark

EDIT:  I see Wayne's link includes a link to Ron Reeder's book

[Farmer]

The notion that pro level printers are designed to fail after a specific time is ridiculous.  They are built, as has been mentioned, to a cost/benefit level and may fail after a certain period.  Some people get longer lives out of them, some less, but none of them have a timer or a counter that renders them useless.  They may insist on some components being replaced because they've reached a rated life, but that's not the same.

[disneytoy]

I just got a new 9890 for $2999. That came with 990ml of ink. I got a 350ml replacement ink set (3150ml) for $1240. Plus paper. So you need to think of the printer eventually as expendable.  I'd much rather get a really sweet printer like the 9890 for $3k than $10k. Hopefully this printer will last a few years and I'll go through several thosands of $$$ in ink and paper.

[aaronchan]

There are 2 printers you can get

1 - HP Designjet Z3200ps which is kind of expensive, it's around $3500USD
This printer has a very special curve where you can download it online and produce very nice digital negative.
Watch this video to learn a bit more about the process - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8HroH1Leio

2 - Epson x880/x980/x990
For this printer, you will need to buy the ink from another shop www.inkjetmall.com
They sell Piezo Digital Negative ink and you can use Quadtone Rip to produce very good digital negative.

I'm not an expert in platinum/palladium printing, but according to my knowledge, it is more likely about UV exposure.
So the ink must be able to block UV.

aaron

[Frans Rutten]

You might have a look at Dave Smith's youtube channel:

https://www.youtube.com/user/macgabhan

He shares his experience on, among other things, palladium printing.
Also, have a look at his blog:

http://djsp.eu/blog/

When I contacted him about another subject, he was very responsive.
I assume you will be making contact prints? Then the printer format might be a matter to consider.
As far as I know, most processes are UV-sensitive. You need consider this in preparing your negatives.
Different inks give different results, however, it is possible to calibrate your workflow.
There are workshops to help you on your way (I took one, but haven't come round to putting it into practice).
Have fun!

Frans Rutten

[disneytoy]

I did digital negs years ago. You don't need all gray scale inks. Infact I remember printing out a color cube, then printing on Cyanotype and Palladium. Each color some in purple tones absorb UV light differently. You may end up with a flat looking negative from greens to purples but prints amazing. A true monochrome digital negative may not exhibit the4 same UV blocking you may think.

[Jim Kasson]

I recently decided I wanted to do some art projects and decided on Palladium Prints. However I found it very difficult to find information on how to produce the best possible black and white digital negatives to do these Palladium prints, as a photoshop girl you can imagine I am a bit of a control freak and want to be able to reproduce in the final print what I see on the screen, that is the same ammount of contrast, gradients and dynamic range. Hopefully someone can point me in the right direction.

I do not own a printer yet so I will have to buy one. I will likely never, ever print anything other than digital negatives on it so I am not sure what I should be looking for. I had a look at various printers, mostly reading about Epson being the best but looking at the 3880 and a few others I noticed that amongst the high praises there were also warnings that these printers had a planned obsolescence and would fail after 2-3 years!!! This is why I am hoping to find some advice here in regards to printers. I want to buy one that will last me decades and will always have ink available. Surely such a product fitting my needs must exist? I can't really justify spending 2000 bucks for a disposable printer that costs more to repair than to replace...

Many digital printer, especially from Epson, work best if you print a lot. That doesn't sound like the way you'll be using the printer. The Epson 3800 is a workhorse printer that doesn't need to be used all the time. Small carts, but you're not going to be usign that much ink. It's been superseded by the 3880, so used ones aren't expensive. Find a good one any buy it. You can easily make 16x21 inch negs on 17x22 inch stock (sorry for the English units).

Then, and you're not gonna like this, you want to buy a vacuum frame. Yeah, I know, you can do without, but, trust me, it helps a lot.

Calibration is laborious, but straightforward. Don't shortchange it. It needs to be done right, or you'll be sending expensive Pa to the dump way too much.

Good luck!

Jim

[deanwork]

Aaron is on to something.

There was a guy who used to work for Hp who shared info on his methodology for making digital negatives with the Z3200. Hp sponsored this and they should have promoted it but of course they never do.

I emailed with him a few times and he really had it down. He left HP a few years ago. Aaron's links tell you what you want to know. If you wanted a printer and inkset that does everything, this might be the way to go. Used 24" Z3200s are around

I'm personally not really into this though I have done some if it with a few methods in years past.

Recently though I made some negatives for a client who was printing on silver printing out paper and we made some quite nice negatives for contact printing on it with my Z3100. I was surprised at how well they worked and I wasn't using this more sophisticated toned file approach available for the Z3200. 

Back about 10 years ago we even made some very nice negatives on the Pictorico OPH film with an old Epson 2200 printer and Burkholders curves. These were used for platinum and I thought quite successful for the students I was teaching.

Jon Cone has taken this to another level with his inkset and easy work flow designed especially for this film. It uses the inexpensive QTR software and he has the curves already made for you. If you really want to get into this for a lot of work I think his system is the way to go. Printing a 2880 on an Epson you are going to get the best resolution with his inks and also the best gradients. They will work well with all alternative process emulsions as well as silver. I had thought about setting that up for making Platinum prints but after using the Piezography K7 Carbon inks for so long I now have platinum printers coming to me wanting to know how that is done so they can switch over. The sharpness is better as well as the dmax. And it is a hell of a lot cheaper and easier than platinum. The permanence is also insanely great.

john

There are 2 printers you can get

1 - HP Designjet Z3200ps which is kind of expensive, it's around $3500USD
This printer has a very special curve where you can download it online and produce very nice digital negative.
Watch this video to learn a bit more about the process - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8HroH1Leio

2 - Epson x880/x980/x990
For this printer, you will need to buy the ink from another shop www.inkjetmall.com
They sell Piezo Digital Negative ink and you can use Quadtone Rip to produce very good digital negative.

I'm not an expert in platinum/palladium printing, but according to my knowledge, it is more likely about UV exposure.
So the ink must be able to block UV.

aaron

[disneytoy]

I agree. I've done Platinum, Palladium, Cyanotype, Gum Dichromate, Carbon, etc. There is too much inconsistency and cost. What can be done in the digital arena with an amazing array of papers surpasses the Alt Photo ways.

[mkihne]

Jon Cone has taken this to another level with his inkset and easy work flow designed especially for this film. It uses the inexpensive QTR software and he has the curves already made for you. If you really want to get into this for a lot of work I think his system is the way to go. Printing a 2880 on an Epson you are going to get the best resolution with his inks and also the best gradients. They will work well with all alternative process emulsions as well as silver. I had thought about setting that up for making Platinum prints but after using the Piezography K7 Carbon inks for so long I now have platinum printers coming to me wanting to know how that is done so they can switch over. The sharpness is better as well as the dmax. And it is a hell of a lot cheaper and easier than platinum. The permanence is also insanely great.

john
______________________________
Thisx100

Google piezography for Jon cone's site and check out the materials and recommended printers on the inkjet mall site linked above.

[Robcat]

Hi everyone!
I recently decided I wanted to do some art projects and decided on Palladium Prints. However I found it very difficult to find information on how to produce the best possible black and white digital negatives to do these Palladium prints, as a photoshop girl you can imagine I am a bit of a control freak and want to be able to reproduce in the final print what I see on the screen, that is the same ammount of contrast, gradients and dynamic range. Hopefully someone can point me in the right direction.
- A.

Hi Aurore,
The other replies that mention the HP 3200 process are on the right track. HP used to have a .pdf available on how to do it. Here's a quote someone posted from the HP info:  “The process described here was performed with the goal of creating feasible negatives for monochrome and color alternative process such as platinum/palladium, carbon, cyanotype, gum, carbro, multicolor carbon, and tri-color gum” and then “From a technical point of view, what is inside this preset is a green ink separation that has been linearized in terms of ultraviolet light opacity. The advantage of having this linearization is that when printing a linear ramp of green ink values with this paper preset, the result will be a negative with a near-linear response in any alternative process based on UV light. In certain cases, some calibration may provide additional improvements. However, the tools needed to perform this calibration are part of the standard printer software and hardware." [[original article http://www.dimagemaker.com/2010/08/14/hp-supports-platinum-printing-and-other-alternative-processes/

As you can see, the trick is to get an inkjet transparency that lets UV (not visible light) through in a linear way. As the other articles referred to by posters indicate, this is quite a challenge because you can't tell by looking at the transparency as you can for standard silver printing.
I've looked around for the original info from HP but the links just go to a general page on the HP site so they may not have it up anymore. Whatever you do, you're going to either need to get an HP3200 and the preset they created (which I recall reading worked extremely well) or you're going to have to duplicate the work that Moyo did using another printer and inkset.

To be contrarian, I went to a show at MOMA several years ago and they had side by side comparisons of 2 wonderful images taken on B&W negatives. There were 3 prints of each, a silver halide one, an inkjet one and a platinum one. To my amazement, here was no obvious "magic" to the platinum print. They all looked good, probably because they began with a technically excellent negative and were printed by someone who knew what they were doing. I will be so bold as to suggest that you invest the same amount of time, focus and energy in becoming a master of digital imaging and printing as you would to master the platinum process. If you spend that many hours/days/weeks learning to control tonality in the digital environment, you will get the look you want.

[deanwork]

Platinum has that subtle metallic look to it if you are holding it in your hand. Once it is behind glass in an exhibition I really think the Piezogrpahy K7 carbon inkjet print is better, better black point, better sharpness, and light values that go on forever like platinum /palladium and you don't have to work from a large negative. And of course the ability to make identical prints in editions is easy.

In the past platinum was considered the most permanent monochrome print in existence. This is primarily because platinum does't tarnish like silver gelatin when exposed to air. ( I have perfectly produced silver prints on non oba Agfa paper from the late 70s and some of them are already starting to tarnish in the shadow areas around the edges). These days you have other options that are a LOT easier to control. Maybe you can get more money for a platinum print, depends on the photographer I guess.

john