Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: marcmccalmont on March 07, 2008, 02:57:34 pm
-
I was in Honolulu the other day and walked into a Peter Lik gallery. The prints were so vibrant they looked back lit. The sales person said it was due to a proprietary paper developed by Fuji that was Mylar and chrome? Does any one have a clue what this paper is? It was a bit over the top and not "fine art" printing but it was fun and I'd like to play with something like it.
Marc
-
its probably a film printing paper/technique rather than inkjet.
-
its probably a film printing paper/technique rather than inkjet.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179863\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Do you know of an inkjet paper (iPF5000) that would have the same effect?
Marc
-
not got a clue
-
I was in Honolulu the other day and walked into a Peter Lik gallery. The prints were so vibrant they looked back lit. The sales person said it was due to a proprietary paper developed by Fuji that was Mylar and chrome? Does any one have a clue what this paper is? It was a bit over the top and not "fine art" printing but it was fun and I'd like to play with something like it.
Marc
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=179851\")
It could have been the Pop-Up banner material, PET (Mylar) base of 190 Micron and a near pearl sheen, gray opaque backside. Usable on the pigment wide formats of the three manufacturers. 24" and 36" wide rolls. Cat nr. 989301 989301 No experience with it but it is in the Fuji sample book.
Ernst Dinkla
try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
-
It could have been the Pop-Up banner material, PET (Mylar) base of 190 Micron and a near pearl sheen, gray opaque backside. Usable on the pigment wide formats of the three manufacturers. 24" and 36" wide rolls. Cat nr. 989301 989301 No experience with it but it is in the Fuji sample book.
Ernst Dinkla
try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/ (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179884\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks
Ill look it up
Marc
-
I was in Honolulu the other day and walked into a Peter Lik gallery. The prints were so vibrant they looked back lit. The sales person said it was due to a proprietary paper developed by Fuji that was Mylar and chrome? Does any one have a clue what this paper is? It was a bit over the top and not "fine art" printing but it was fun and I'd like to play with something like it.
Marc
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=179851\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It could have been a fuji paper called Metallic Pearl. It has mica particles embedded in it. It has a super glossy finish and the highlights look slightly pearlescent. It's for lightjet type printers only. I sometimes get lab prints on it for certain images with really saturated colors.
-
I ordered some inkpress white gloss film to see if it will give me the same effect
Marc
-
So, did it? I'm curious about this surface.
-
I'm pretty sure it's Fujiflex, an R41 process so you can get it done anywhere. Peter used to use hand printed and contrast masked Ilfochrome but swapped to Flex a couple of years back.
The backlit effect is simply good gallery display, something at which Peter excels. The paper reflects 12V dichroics very well, put a couple of spots on the print against a dark wall and hey presto - backlit. I had people looking behind the prints in my gallery to see if there was a light there - true I swear.
AFAIK, no magic material, just good images, good printing and good display. I use the same material myself - if you want to try it send some files to Created For Life near Sydney, Australia. Their printing is as good as it gets.
CFL (http://www.createdforlife.com)
-
Oh, one other thing - there is no inkjet process to match Flex. It just cannot be done with ink on paper, no matter now glossy.
Guess what, traditional wet process silver gelatin materials still do some things inkjets cannot!
-
Oh, one other thing - there is no inkjet process to match Flex. It just cannot be done with ink on paper, no matter now glossy.
Guess what, traditional wet process silver gelatin materials still do some things inkjets cannot!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206587\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
If you listen to the BBC interview on his web site the printing technique is described in reverent, almost breathless terms. As it transpires his prints are made using special chrystals embedded in the paper. These modern marvels are apparently called silver halide. Anyone heard of it?
Man, this guy is a marketing genius. He is already turning over $20m and is aiming for $50m-$60m.
-
Booksmart Studio (http://site.booksmartstudio.com) is offering coated aluminum sheets for inkjet printing. Don't know how prints on aluminum will look like ... but maybe it's worth a try. Of course, you'll need a printer that has a straight media feeding path.
-- Olaf
-
I'm pretty sure it's Fujiflex, an R41 process
CFL (http://www.createdforlife.com)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206586\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
C-41 and RA-4 are the principal processing methods used in chemical processors.
Fujiflex is processed in RA-4 or equivalent chemistry, same as other Fuji and Kodak papers. What makes it unique isn't the emulsion, but the base, which is polymer. This provides its extreme high gloss surface. This surface allows light to reflect much more evenly and thus enhances saturation and d-max.
The mounting of Lik's prints is superb, without adding any texture and maintaing the high gloss. However, as has been mentioned, the way the prints are displayed has much to do with how they look in his galleries.
I have been unable to find any method to achieve the same high gloss effect using inkjet materials. Pigment inks by nature have texture, and though they can appear very high gloss, they cannot equal that of Fujiflex, or Kodaks metallic for that matter.
I have tried various laminating films as well as various coatings. A process which yields very similar and stunning prints as well is Diasec, but alas inkjet prints cannot be used for this process as well.
-
I have been unable to find any method to achieve the same high gloss effect using inkjet materials. Pigment inks by nature have texture, and though they can appear very high gloss, they cannot equal that of Fujiflex, or Kodaks metallic for that matter.
I have tried various laminating films as well as various coatings. A process which yields very similar and stunning prints as well is Diasec, but alas inkjet prints cannot be used for this process as well.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206748\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Why bother? I don't know why people go to so much trouble in trying to emulate the iIfochrome or Fujiflex 'look' on inkjet. It's never going to work since the processes and materials are so different.
More importantly, Fujiflex is not even an expensive product, my Fujiflex prints cost me the same, or less, than on inkjet. It's brilliant paper and you don't have to pay the earth for it - what's not to like with that?
-
Why bother? I don't know why people go to so much trouble in trying to emulate the iIfochrome or Fujiflex 'look' on inkjet. It's never going to work since the processes and materials are so different.
More importantly, Fujiflex is not even an expensive product, my Fujiflex prints cost me the same, or less, than on inkjet. It's brilliant paper and you don't have to pay the earth for it - what's not to like with that?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=206799\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Just like printing my own stuff - can't handle sending files off to a lab anymore. I often experiment with different papers and finishes, and often have played with ways to get higher gloss with inkjet. No obsession with the look of Lik's prints ... he didn't invent the look. It's a great look, but so are many others.
Just passing on information based on my own experiences.
-
Use this:
Inkpress White gloss Film. Looks backlit.
-
it is for inkjet too. Or try the Booksmart Fine Art Metals, reflects back at you like shiny metal would.
-
Use this:
Inkpress White gloss Film. Looks backlit.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=207076\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have tried a couple of different "films" for inkjet, and while they certainly have a unique look and indeed have a high gloss finish, they do not equal the super gloss of Fujiflex or Kodak metallic papers. I have not tried booksmart, but I would be surprised if it is much different than the other films I have tried.
If you would like to send me some, I'd be happy to check it out
-
Acutally the Booksmart Fine Art Metals are made of aluminum, you will be printing directly on the metal. It bypasses the need for metallic paper and goes directly on metal. You will get a different surface characteristic than paper or film.
-
Ilford POP and Drytac Eclipse are very similar to Fujiflex. They have a high gloss surface, Ilford has a grey backer and Drytac has a thin sheet of metal sandwiched in to keep opacity. Both can be printed on Piezo or thermal printers.
-
Hi Marc-
Where do you get Ilford POP? Couldn't find it anywhere.
Thanks, Bill
Ilford POP and Drytac Eclipse are very similar to Fujiflex. They have a high gloss surface, Ilford has a grey backer and Drytac has a thin sheet of metal sandwiched in to keep opacity. Both can be printed on Piezo or thermal printers.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=207393\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
The prints are most likely Fujiflex. I printed on Fuji Supergloss for years until digital enlarging took over the market. Now I occasionally get prints on Fujiflex. Tried to emulate this with my z3100, the papers are close but the ink just sits on top and doesn't have the same gloss. Also tried on Epson printers as well. I think it's the difference between the pigment on the paper (inkjet) and dyes in the paper (Fujiflex, etc.). Don't think they will ever be the same looking.
People always ask if my Fuji Supergloss/Fujiflex images are internally lit lightboxes, the white of the paper has a pearlescence to it that just glows. I think the "paper" is a polyester base similar to Ciba/Ilfochrome papers. There are quite a few printers using this paper around the world.
On a side note, gotta hand it to Peter Lik, I've never heard of him but apparently he's the "most awarded photographer in history". They forgot to mention all the awards are from one place, the Australia Institute of Professional Photography. Don't get me wrong, it's competent work but there are 1000's of photographers shooting the same sunsets, sand dunes, etc. He belongs in the Art Wolfe, Dale Chihuly "art" circle. Maybe they should all get together and form a supergroup.
-
The prints are most likely Fujiflex. I printed on Fuji Supergloss for years until digital enlarging took over the market. Now I occasionally get prints on Fujiflex. Tried to emulate this with my z3100, the papers are close but the ink just sits on top and doesn't have the same gloss. Also tried on Epson printers as well. I think it's the difference between the pigment on the paper (inkjet) and dyes in the paper (Fujiflex, etc.). Don't think they will ever be the same looking.
People always ask if my Fuji Supergloss/Fujiflex images are internally lit lightboxes, the white of the paper has a pearlescence to it that just glows. I think the "paper" is a polyester base similar to Ciba/Ilfochrome papers. There are quite a few printers using this paper around the world.
On a side note, gotta hand it to Peter Lik, I've never heard of him but apparently he's the "most awarded photographer in history". They forgot to mention all the awards are from one place, the Australia Institute of Professional Photography. Don't get me wrong, it's competent work but there are 1000's of photographers shooting the same sunsets, sand dunes, etc. He belongs in the Art Wolfe, Dale Chihuly "art" circle. Maybe they should all get together and form a supergroup.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=207439\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I agree, I'm not sure pigment printers can ever equal the look, at least with current inkjet technologies. Close maybe, but not quite the same.
Lik's awards come from more than just Australia Institute of PP, many are from Professional Photographers of America and a couple of others. I'm not sure how he can substantiate his claim, but getting a merit from PP of A isn't that big of an accomplishment ... thousands of prints each year receive the same award. i'm guessing the Australia Institute is similar. I find it puzzling why he feels it is important to his credibility. Most landscape shooters don't even bother with those groups .. they tend to be portrait and wedding oriented. The judging process for those prints is composed of a 5 person panel, most likely none of which does any landscape work.
Have to hand it to him though, he's got a good thing going.
-
I find it puzzling why he feels it is important to his credibility. Most landscape shooters don't even bother with those groups .. they tend to be portrait and wedding oriented. The judging process for those prints is composed of a 5 person panel, most likely none of which does any landscape work.
Have to hand it to him though, he's got a good thing going.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=208159\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It's all about credentials - it sounds impressive to the buying public. Obviously it works!
-
It's all about credentials - it sounds impressive to the buying public. Obviously it works!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=208228\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I guess that's what he thinks anyway. Personally I doubt if the buying public really cares ... they are lured in by the impressive panorama prints.
Love your work, btw.
-
I guess that's what he thinks anyway. Personally I doubt if the buying public really cares ... they are lured in by the impressive panorama prints.
Love your work, btw.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=208474\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks Wayne
I think the buying public do care, not the specifics per se, but it does add to bragging rights over ownership. People aren't going to part with serious money so easily if they think the photographer is completely unrecognised by the industry.
It's probably subtle but it will have an effect on sales. Peter has excellent sales people working for him (the secret of his success?), they wouldn't bother doing it if it didn't work.