Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: solardarkroom.com on April 09, 2010, 12:42:00 pm
-
I just received my first print on Aluminum from Bay Photo. It's just an 8x12 Glossy and when I rendered the JPEG I chose "low" output sharpening in Lightroom 2 just to be safe. I love the look of the medium but the sharpness of this first test is lacking in the hi-frequency detail (butterfly scales and hairs) when compared to my Epson R1900 prints on GFS via Photokit Sharpener workflow.
I did find mention of using contone at 300dpi in PKS but would like to hear what others are saying about this.
Then of course is the question of best compromise for sharpening files hosted at a commercial printer's server that will be used for many different media and sizes. It strikes me that output sharpening should be applied by lab techs that are already doing color and density checks on my behalf but I suppose that's another topic...
Any comments are appreciated.
David
-
I just received my first print on Aluminum from Bay Photo. It's just an 8x12 Glossy and when I rendered the JPEG I chose "low" output sharpening in Lightroom 2 just to be safe. I love the look of the medium but the sharpness of this first test is lacking in the hi-frequency detail (butterfly scales and hairs) when compared to my Epson R1900 prints on GFS via Photokit Sharpener workflow.
I did find mention of using contone at 300dpi in PKS but would like to hear what others are saying about this.
Then of course is the question of best compromise for sharpening files hosted at a commercial printer's server that will be used for many different media and sizes. It strikes me that output sharpening should be applied by lab techs that are already doing color and density checks on my behalf but I suppose that's another topic...
Any comments are appreciated.
David
I would call/email the company and ask if it is an inkjet process(which I believe it is) or a type C(chemical)process. I'd be interested in what you find out. If it is an inkjet, then you would probably use one of the inkjet options in PKS. The contone(continuous tone) I think is for photographic prints-chemical, not inkjet.
As for lab techs applying sharpening, some do some don't. My practice is to apply my own and tell them not to.
-
I would call/email the company and ask if it is an inkjet process(which I believe it is) or a type C(chemical)process. I'd be interested in what you find out. If it is an inkjet, then you would probably use one of the inkjet options in PKS. The contone(continuous tone) I think is for photographic prints-chemical, not inkjet.
As for lab techs applying sharpening, some do some don't. My practice is to apply my own and tell them not to.
Thanks Keith. The response from support via email was that I don't need output sharpening although from the email I suspect they don't understand exactly what I'm talking about. Then I found a forum where Smug Mug's founder says contone at 300dpi is suitable for Bay Photo metal prints on aluminum. There was no mention of the three different surfaces they offer but I'll try that next. If I learn more I'll update here...
In the meantime I would argue that some form of output sharpening is most certainly advisable for aluminum prints at Bay Photo. They look really nice but the finest details are soft. I will pursue this until I get it right. The glossy surface is stunning, almost like an LCD monitor with the backlight turned down.
Thanks,
David
-
Output sharpening is, at least partially, to correct for dot gain when printing on a particular media. Could it be that there is not enough dot gain when printing on aluminum to require output sharpening?
-
Output sharpening is, at least partially, to correct for dot gain when printing on a particular media. Could it be that there is not enough dot gain when printing on aluminum to require output sharpening?
Good question. My next step is to make a glossy print of the same size using PKS for an output sharpening layer and make a comparison. I have not been as thorough as I should have comparing apples to oranges. Too bad I can't print on aluminum on my Epson R1900!
-
Works pretty good on a 3800. In fact if you could find a good used one you might want to trade away your 1900. Have printed metal on all 3 of my printers (Epson's3800,7900,9900) with some pretty good results. Had a few at the start we threw away but going pretty good now.
-
Works pretty good on a 3800. In fact if you could find a good used one you might want to trade away your 1900. Have printed metal on all 3 of my printers (Epson's3800,7900,9900) with some pretty good results. Had a few at the start we threw away but going pretty good now.
WOW! I clearly had no idea - never even imagined it would be possible. Thanks for sharing.
David