Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: Waker on August 16, 2019, 10:49:36 am
-
Wondering if anyone has a solution for making single piece XXL prints - something around the 84 or 96" print width (x120-140" or so)
I know no machine existed last time I looked, but maybe I missed a development?
'Grand Format' latex printers certainly exist with huge widths, but none are designed for fine art repro, or use pigment inks. I think some might support 1200/1440 ppi output options, but nobody wants to run that slow speed, and it's not a pigment inkset, anyways.
Flatbeds, like Swiss-Q and HP, are also around, but the few who have them have not really found the materials. Best I know of is Laumont in NYC with their Swiss Q printing onto 84" (x120") Matte Art paper, or direct to white coated DiBond.
Really wish Canon or Epson would release an 84" version of their printers - they are such major global companies that they could entice mills to coat 84"+ rolls in a few basic options - one PK, one MK, one OBA free Cotton Natural White.
Thanks
Walker
-
I am liking sublimation onto textiles for very large prints. Preferably backlit. Very light and manageable. Unbeatable colour and acutance on the right media, with good profiles and transferred rather than direct printed. Not a home print situation though. Current printer width is up to 5m (don't know what that is in inches but it is quite a lot).
-
I am liking sublimation onto textiles for very large prints. Preferably backlit. Very light and manageable. Unbeatable colour and acutance on the right media, with good profiles and transferred rather than direct printed. Not a home print situation though. Current printer width is up to 5m (don't know what that is in inches but it is quite a lot).
Thanks Alistair,
Can you provide a link to view the outputs of such a printing option?
and what would the 'right media' be for good photo resolution - coated linen?
I guess these are used to make the giant backdrops for theater, and/or advertising primarily?
-
I thought I had replied to this before but here is the gist of it.
Yes, they are essentially an advertising and shop fitting signage product. But they are getting so good that they have a place in the fine art market for the right image (IMHO!). Just search on "SEG" or "silicon edged graphics" and you will get lots of hits. Not sure where on the planet you are but here is one in San Diego: https://www.beautifuldisplays.com/silicone_edge_graphics.cfm
Your printer will recommend a textile but they are always synthetic textiles made from petroleum-based polymers. The sublimation process uses heat and pressure to turn the dyes to a gas and bind to the petroleum molecules. Make sure to use a transfer based process. The print is reverse-printed to a special paper. Then this is brought together with the textile under heat and pressure to transfer the dye to the textile. This gives better resolution and more textiles choices than printing direct to the textile. Direct print is fine for flags etc. which are not viewed at close distances and seldom contain fine detail. We sublimate in a strong vacuum which further restricts unwanted dye migration and results in a very sharp image. Ideally your printer will run an 8 colour inkset. Although being a dye, the colour gamut of even CMYK is already very good compared with pigments.
Best
Alistair
-
Thanks Alistair,
Very interesting information, well outside of the normal knowledge base here.
I hope you are right that it is good enough for fine art (resolution, color) providing people are open minded.
Will take someone brave to shift the needle though!
best,
Walker
(I'm East Coast/ N.Y. )
-
"Not sure where on the planet you are?"
It was a subtle/not so subtle tip to fill out your profile.
-
"Not sure where on the planet you are?"
It was a subtle/not so subtle tip to fill out your profile.
Thanks Dan, but it's not by accident.
Many of us have learned over the past few years (Facebook, trolls, 'data scraping', doxing, online stalking, i.d. theft, etc) you do not give websites any more information than you absolutely need to.
-
I am the exact opposite. My address phone number all in plain view.
Anyone wanting to do business, attend a workshop or just wanting to say hello and chat printing is welcome.
Now if the intentions are not good that is another story.
PS:
I am certainly from a different generation and being raised in the 50's and 60's we have a totally different outlook on many things going on today.
Being intimidated by someone knowing my address is never going to happen.
-
Take a look at this article (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/15/technology/personaltech/i-shared-my-phone-number-i-learned-i-shouldnt-have.html) from just last week.
Happy you feel differently. Whatever works for you.
This is getting off topic, so I'll refrain from further comments, except to say... Thank you.
-
Waker's reference is to the NYTimes where you have to give private details to read about how private details can be misused. Irony?
-
Waker's reference is to the NYTimes where you have to give private details to read about how private details can be misused. Irony?
That is simply not true.
NYT allows you to read the linked article (and up to 5 articles) for free every month. If you've already read 5, then, you have to wait. Or subscribe. Or you can use private browsing to circumvent on some browsers.
Yes, if you wish to subscribe to the digital edition you have to provide your email, duh. And of course, your address if you wish to subscribe to have the print edition/newspaper delivered to your door. Duh, again.
But then why let facts get in the way of a funny line!
-
Just reverting to large prints, I should add that large metal prints are also possible. Not as large as SEG of course but still large by most standards and still, IMHO, the best quality of all (for the right image). Chromaluxe make panels up to 2400mm x 1200mm and they actually tile very nicely if you need to go larger than that. But even at that size, a lot of pixels are needed to create the resolution to take full advantage of the media. Other manufacturers may make larger panels too but 2400mm is our largest rigid substrate press. But if anyone knows of another manufacturer, that would still be interesting though.
-
I purchased a new Epson P8000 (44") and converted it to dye sublimation to go big.(Everyone was telling me the conversion could not be done.)
A year later and the output is stunning. Metal sales are slowly taking over canvas sales.
Now just waiting to get funds together for a larger press. The only negative with a large dye sub output is the press must match the printer size. (Or at least close)
The 64x44" press is almost 20k plus a 44" dye sub printer and ink another $4,500.
Makes the price of entry pretty steep.
For around $40k you can get the Knight Triton and press 48"x96" but it looks like that is still not large enough for you.
-
Take a look at this article (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/15/technology/personaltech/i-shared-my-phone-number-i-learned-i-shouldnt-have.html) from just last week.
Happy you feel differently. Whatever works for you.
This is getting off topic, so I'll refrain from further comments, except to say... Thank you.
I do agree 100% it is serious stuff for sure.
-
Just reverting to large prints, I should add that large metal prints are also possible. Not as large as SEG of course but still large by most standards and still, IMHO, the best quality of all (for the right image). Chromaluxe make panels up to 2400mm x 1200mm and they actually tile very nicely if you need to go larger than that. But even at that size, a lot of pixels are needed to create the resolution to take full advantage of the media. Other manufacturers may make larger panels too but 2400mm is our largest rigid substrate press. But if anyone knows of another manufacturer, that would still be interesting though.
Thanks Alistair, Chromaluxe is a nice product, but at 1200mm (just under 48") it's not big enough.
I have a 64" printer, and can make high quality all rag prints easily 60x90"
it's about going a lot bigger than that in a single unseamed piece.
SEG looks interesting, though I have to see samples to check the resolution and color.
Easy to forget the whole pipeline is required - printer, materials, mounting, vacuum press, etc. Got to line all your ducks up!
-
The artist Wolfgang Tillmans exhibits huge inkjet prints (110" x 160"). I'd love to know where he gets them done. For example:
https://www.maureenpaley.com/exhibitions/wolfgang-tillmans-6?image=1
-
The artist Wolfgang Tillmans exhibits huge inkjet prints (110" x 160"). I'd love to know where he gets them done. For example:
https://www.maureenpaley.com/exhibitions/wolfgang-tillmans-6?image=1
Seamed.
2 outputs glued together. Nicely done, but the joint is clearly visible. He doesn't care - all part of his lo-tech shtick.
Others do it better:
Jeff Wall's recent show had the most impressive seaming I've seen. You really had to look hard to find it.
Richard Misrach's at Pace Gallery pretty great too. They were mounted by Finishing Concepts, in L.A.
Seeing all the effort people are going to, I'm amazed someone in the USA or Europe hasn't re-purposed a Grand Format machine to do 100"+ pigment output onto seamless backdrop rolls. They'd clean up.
Having said that... flatbed machines are coming on strong, and I keep expecting to hear of coated DiBond in 96x120 being offered at 1200/1440dpi pigment. Hasn't happened yet though, afaik.
-
Seamed.
2 outputs glued together. Nicely done, but the joint is clearly visible. He doesn't care - all part of his lo-tech shtick.
Interesting. I didn't notice the seam — but I wasn't looking for it. You think he just uses sellotape?
The largest I've printed here in London is 72"x90" (digital c-types).
-
Thanks Alistair, Chromaluxe is a nice product, but at 1200mm (just under 48") it's not big enough.
I have a 64" printer, and can make high quality all rag prints easily 60x90"
it's about going a lot bigger than that in a single unseamed piece.
SEG looks interesting, though I have to see samples to check the resolution and color.
Easy to forget the whole pipeline is required - printer, materials, mounting, vacuum press, etc. Got to line all your ducks up!
Yes indeed. For SEG, the press used is generally a rotary calender press. These can go 5m+ wide. But need a 70Kwh++ power supply and upward of $750k for a good set-up plus the real estate to house it!
-
Wondering if anyone has a solution for making single piece XXL prints - something around the 84 or 96" print width (x120-140" or so)
I know no machine existed last time I looked, but maybe I missed a development?
'Grand Format' latex printers certainly exist with huge widths, but none are designed for fine art repro, or use pigment inks. I think some might support 1200/1440 ppi output options, but nobody wants to run that slow speed, and it's not a pigment inkset, anyways.
Flatbeds, like Swiss-Q and HP, are also around, but the few who have them have not really found the materials. Best I know of is Laumont in NYC with their Swiss Q printing onto 84" (x120") Matte Art paper, or direct to white coated DiBond.
Really wish Canon or Epson would release an 84" version of their printers - they are such major global companies that they could entice mills to coat 84"+ rolls in a few basic options - one PK, one MK, one OBA free Cotton Natural White.
Thanks
Walker
Odds are, we're unlikely to see any of the wide-format printer manufacturers make a printer for art repro or archival production any time soon, unless it happens by accident (as with the old Iris printers). The fact of the matter is that it's just too small a market compared to the investment that would be involved.
It's the same reason that Epson/Canon/HP don't release wider versions of their photo printers, they'd be too expensive. To make an 84" version of those printers, the rail that the head rides on would have to be beefed up to support the wider span. The added length would mean longer cabling/tubing, which would add weight, which means a bigger drive motor, which means more vibration, which means a heavier carriage... and so on.
Basically, there are reasons a 48" photo printer costs a few thousand dollars, while an 84" wide-format printer costs a few hundred thousand, and most of them come down to engineering for scale.
-
Odds are, we're unlikely to see any of the wide-format printer manufacturers make a printer for art repro or archival production any time soon, unless it happens by accident (as with the old Iris printers). The fact of the matter is that it's just too small a market compared to the investment that would be involved.
It's the same reason that Epson/Canon/HP don't release wider versions of their photo printers, they'd be too expensive. To make an 84" version of those printers, the rail that the head rides on would have to be beefed up to support the wider span. The added length would mean longer cabling/tubing, which would add weight, which means a bigger drive motor, which means more vibration, which means a heavier carriage... and so on.
Basically, there are reasons a 48" photo printer costs a few thousand dollars, while an 84" wide-format printer costs a few hundred thousand, and most of them come down to engineering for scale.
Hmm, not sure I buy that argument.
Currently in the USA, comparing like with like: a 44" printer (P10000) is $5495 a 64" printer (P20000) is $8995. Hardly a big hike.
Even if an 84" one was $20,000 I could personally tell you 5 companies/ individuals locally who would buy one tomorrow.
The heads and hardware already exist at 64". Some longer tubing and a rail are minor costs, its more about the quantity that the development would be spread over. But the reward in getting XL printing ink and paper profits would be worth it.
All imho, of course!
-
The JHF Mars 8R from China is a 8 color UV printer that prints 5m wide.
I have seen the result, very good!
If you can find a good substrate that comes in 5m, yeah, this might be a solution.
The price for this printer is around $300k USD.......
aaron
-
Just to add a little to the original point of this post; here is a company that is doing fine art on lack lit textiles:
https://www.instagram.com/la_chrome/
Not very large but nonetheless a fair representation of the quality possible.
-
By far the biggest limiting factor in size terms comes down to paper coating lines. There just do not exist any aqueous inkjet coating lines larger than 64". Even 64" is incredibly hard to come by (as you'll find with the extremely limited selection of papers that come with that extra 4". It's an insanely expensive venture to create a larger coater, and most papers actually come from the same few mills to begin with...
Otherwise, it would be relatively trivial to convert any larger "solvent" inkjet printer into aqueous-- they pretty much all use epson heads anyway. Just get a 77" or 104" Mimaki, Mutoh, or other printer and load it with aqueous inks instead of solvent based ones.
The only company I know of that produces a paper larger than 64" is Innova, and they only make an uncoated (like, ultrasmooth matte) paper which can be special ordered up to 96".
Otherwise, you're in vinyl world, hence the push towards reverse printing on plexi with UV curable....
-
By far the biggest limiting factor in size terms comes down to paper coating lines. There just do not exist any aqueous inkjet coating lines larger than 64". Even 64" is incredibly hard to come by (as you'll find with the extremely limited selection of papers that come with that extra 4". It's an insanely expensive venture to create a larger coater, and most papers actually come from the same few mills to begin with...
Otherwise, it would be relatively trivial to convert any larger "solvent" inkjet printer into aqueous-- they pretty much all use epson heads anyway. Just get a 77" or 104" Mimaki, Mutoh, or other printer and load it with aqueous inks instead of solvent based ones.
The only company I know of that produces a paper larger than 64" is Innova, and they only make an uncoated (like, ultrasmooth matte) paper which can be special ordered up to 96".
Otherwise, you're in vinyl world, hence the push towards reverse printing on plexi with UV curable....
All correct .... only Epson heads are not that common anymore in the wide formats for the sign or interior market. There are up to ten inkjet head manufacturers busy in that market segment. Konica Minolta, Ricoh, Seiko (mother company of Epson but has its own heads), FujiFilm (former Spectra heads etc), Xerox, Kyocera, Toshiba. Xaar. Canon + Océ and HP use their own heads mainly but purchase heads of the other list for certain models.
I guess Sihl and Felix Schoeller are capable of producing wider heavy papers + coating them. It probably has more to do with who can buy 10 tons of the stuff in one order. Most of the wider rolls are made on Foudriniers anyway as cylinder mould machines that wide are rare. Lana has a hybrid paper making machine (cylinder/flat sieve) that is more than 2 meter wide, one of the few. Foudriniers can be 10 meter wide.
Edit: It looks like Felix Schoeller can coat up to 2 meter wide, info of 2012. Done with the Coater 6, claimed to be the biggest in the world. For art printing FS has paper qualities available that go up to 310 gr/m².
https://www.felix-schoeller.com/fileadmin/mediathek/documents/Felix_Schoeller_in_International_Contact_07_2013_English.pdf
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
March 2017 update, 750+ inkjet media white spectral plots
-
By far the biggest limiting factor in size terms comes down to paper coating lines. There just do not exist any aqueous inkjet coating lines larger than 64". Even 64" is incredibly hard to come by (as you'll find with the extremely limited selection of papers that come with that extra 4". It's an insanely expensive venture to create a larger coater, and most papers actually come from the same few mills to begin with...
Otherwise, it would be relatively trivial to convert any larger "solvent" inkjet printer into aqueous-- they pretty much all use epson heads anyway. Just get a 77" or 104" Mimaki, Mutoh, or other printer and load it with aqueous inks instead of solvent based ones.
The only company I know of that produces a paper larger than 64" is Innova, and they only make an uncoated (like, ultrasmooth matte) paper which can be special ordered up to 96".
Otherwise, you're in vinyl world, hence the push towards reverse printing on plexi with UV curable....
Yes, good points on the availability of paper wider than 1600mm.
Regarding wider printers, as discussed earlier in the thread, prices jump significantly above 1900mm.
-
Artproof advertises up to 2x5m Latex prints for fine art.
https://mailchi.mp/5347696ee6ba/artproof-news-winter-3618653 (https://mailchi.mp/5347696ee6ba/artproof-news-winter-3618653)
-
Artproof advertises up to 2x5m Latex prints for fine art.
https://mailchi.mp/5347696ee6ba/artproof-news-winter-3618653 (https://mailchi.mp/5347696ee6ba/artproof-news-winter-3618653)
Wow, their material handling facility is impressive. 5mx2m piece of perspex with diasec! But I am not so happy with the printing technology. Six colour latex at 12pl would be small gamut and not so good at detail rendering.