Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
 on: January 17, 2020, 04:33:43 am 
Started by Eric Myrvaagnes - Last post by Rajan Parrikar
Eric, your tripod is taller than you?  :D

 on: January 17, 2020, 04:29:31 am 
Started by Colorado_CJ - Last post by Rajan Parrikar

 on: January 17, 2020, 04:20:19 am 
Started by Rajan Parrikar - Last post by Rajan Parrikar
Thank you, Slobodan and Eric.

 on: January 17, 2020, 03:43:40 am 
Started by PBC - Last post by drmike
IMHO the long exposition is a problem.
Not only the water but also the leaves.
I think he's probably right. I find it disconcerting that the tree is so very sharp while a large area of foreground is neither sharp nor that very creamy effect you get with very long exposures. The background seems to have similar issues for me anyway.

How zing can you give long exposure water like this?

Anyway it's probably just me so I wouldn't worry overly much.


 on: January 17, 2020, 02:40:35 am 
Started by thierrylegros396 - Last post by thierrylegros396
I forget to say it was very windy and the first photos were difficult to take because of the low light and slow exposure time.

Thank you gentlemen.


 on: January 17, 2020, 02:37:07 am 
Started by northerngal - Last post by stockjock
To me, this is a no-brainer.

The Z9+ is incredible, quiet, a work-horse, a Ferrari, and a truck - a Swiss Army Knife / Shopsmith of printers.

It does it all, fast and economically.

Amazing printer actually.  Good luck - Mark

HP DesignJet Z9+ 24-in printer review and evaluation

Hi Mark.  How does the Z9+ handle cut sheets and does each sheet need to be manually loaded or does it have any kind of automatic cut sheet feeder?

 on: January 17, 2020, 02:30:55 am 
Started by faberryman - Last post by texshooter
And you get a pen...
And you get a pen ...  And YOU get a pen ...
And you get a pen ... And you get a pen ... .And YOU get a pen.

 on: January 17, 2020, 12:36:13 am 
Started by KeithR - Last post by canyonlight2
Question for Andrew Rodney


Why do you say to install the printer drivers from Epson rather than Apple?

Many thanks,


 on: January 17, 2020, 12:24:07 am 
Started by artfellig - Last post by Dan Wells
Exhibition Fiber is REALLY bright - I haven't used any other fiber-based glossy paper that's that bright. My go-to fiber-base luster paper is Canson Platine, which I love - but it doesn't come in 5x7".

Almost all 5x7" gloss/luster papers are going to be resin-coated (which Galerie Smooth Pearl is), not a fiber-base paper like Exhibition Fiber or Platine. Think of a silver gelatin print on Oriental Seagull or Kodak Polyfiber (fiber-base), rather than the same print on cheap Polycontrast Rapid (resin-coated (RC)). I could find two exceptions (one of which comes in two versions) at B&H - there are a couple of Red River papers you can order directly from Red River. Ilford makes Gold Fiber Silk, which I've never used but many photographers swear by, in 5x7". B&H carries it, but as a special order item. Ilford also makes something called Gold Fiber Gloss - probably a glossier version of the same idea, in 5x7" - B&H has that in stock... Moab makes Juniper Baryta in 5x7" (back-ordered right now). Unless a paper says something like Fiber, Rag or Baryta in the description, it's an RC paper.

The aforementioned Red River Palo Duro Soft Gloss is a fiber-base paper, and Red River also makes something they call Baryta Fiber Gloss (I may have the name slightly wrong, but it's close). That's about it - Canson doesn't do 5x7", Hahnemuhle doesn't, Innova doesn't.

Another thing to check is whether your photo printer will feed 5x7" - many of them, especially the bigger models, won't.

 on: January 16, 2020, 11:55:22 pm 
Started by northerngal - Last post by Dan Wells
I can't comment on HP - having not used anything from them newer than a DJ 130 (interesting machine, by the way - a true desktop 24" printer). All the new ones are 3-5x as big and heavy as that old DesignJet, although also much faster and with far improved roll handling - the DJ 130 claimed to handle rolls, but it really didn't - the "roll holder" wasn't powered, and was a much closer relative of a toilet paper roller than the sophisticated roll handlers on modern printers.

Between Canon and Epson, Canon for sure for the usage you described. Canons are impressively clog-free when used intermittently. Epsons are said to be getting better, but they still prefer daily use (e.g. a busy print shop, not an artist printing her own work). Some really high-production print shops like Epson better, because Canon heads have a finite life, and a shop that prints a ton can burn out the heads in a year or two (a 5 minute job to replace that you do yourself, but a $500 part). Most photographers get much more than that out of a Canon head - I've never replaced one in one of my own Canons, and the one I did for friend, the machine was 6 years old.

Epson heads last the life of the machine - unless they get a really bad clog. If you do kill an Epson head with a clog, it's not worth replacing on a 24" printer, and the math isn't great even on a 44" printer (it's about a $2000 job that involves a service call - it might be even more expensive in Alaska) - a new 24" printer is often under $2500 with a full set of new ink and a warranty, while a new 44" is about $3500 with ink and warranty. It's only really worth it on a $10,000 60" machine.

HP heads are more or less similar to Canon, except that they take a bunch of cheaper heads instead of one expensive one - a great feature if one channel goes out.

I currently own a Canon Pro-2000, and I love it - an easy machine to use, terrific print quality. I print kind of like you do, and I've never had a problem with my Pro-2000.

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]