Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Advanced B&W Printing?  (Read 1637 times)

Mousecop

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 77
Advanced B&W Printing?
« on: February 13, 2018, 02:11:15 PM »

Hey folks, after working in digital B&W for a few years, I'm starting to think it's time to up my printing game. I'm generally satisfied with my results so far, but want to really take it up a notch.

I'm currently using, and plan to stick with....
• Canon Pro-1000
• Using the standard inks
• Ilford Galerie Prestige, mostly Gold Fiber Silk, also Prestige Smooth Pearl
• Predominantly working in Lightrooom
• I also have access to Photoshop
• Prints max out at 17" x 22", and at this time that works fine for me
• Images are usually between 200ppi and 300ppi
• Most images are shot at or close to base ISO

One is whether I'd be better off using a different RAW developer / image editor. I do prefer to stick to LR (as it works well for me, I'm accustomed to the interface, and it has years of catalog data) but am open to trying something else.

That could mean a different primary application, or using something else as an adjunct to LR (e.g. using separate software for NR or sharpening).

The second is, presumably, with output. I don't use a RIP, and I assume this will make a noticeable improvement. Any recommendations on a RIP (particularly one that works well with the Pro 1000) would be great.

I'm also curious as to whether using a RIP would make more or less difference than, say, switching from LR to C1.

The third is, whether I'm missing anything.  8) Thanks....
Logged

jrsforums

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1063
Re: Advanced B&W Printing?
« Reply #1 on: February 13, 2018, 06:25:25 PM »

Consider using Qimage Ultimate. Or Qimage One, if on Mac.
Logged
John

aaronchan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 532
Re: Advanced B&W Printing?
« Reply #2 on: February 13, 2018, 06:40:12 PM »

Qimage won’t get you anywhere but easier to print or maybe a more simple way to sharpen your image.
With today’s driver, it is not necessary to use a RIP to print any image. (Qimage is more like a layout software rather than a real RIP).
What you need is a good profile to get the right tone and color.
Otherwise, you could also try their black and white mode with the Canon print studio, that should get you a very good result as well.

Aaron


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

BartvanderWolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
Re: Advanced B&W Printing?
« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2018, 07:17:39 PM »

Qimage won’t get you anywhere but easier to print or maybe a more simple way to sharpen your image.

Hi Aaron,

I beg to differ.

Easier, yes. But Qimage offers much more than that, and e.g. its nesting capability is very cool, and very useful. There are lots of benefits that it offers without bugging the user, so most of these benefits tend to get less attention. Dithering to improve smooth gradients, and anti-aliasing for downsampled images and proprietary algorithms for upsampling come to mind. Some of them may, or may not yet, be implemented in the Qimage One product version (for both Mac OS and Windows OS versions), but the Qimage Ultimate version for the Windows OS already has them. The halo-free Smart output sharpening (which is finely user adjustable) is a workflow and quality benefit not found in most other printing solutions.

Quote
With today’s driver, it is not necessary to use a RIP to print any image. (Qimage is more like a layout software rather than a real RIP).

Correct, with regards to the RIP part, although it's automatic high quality resizing to the native printer driver resolution is heaven and an expensive dedicated RIP might (or might not) squeeze a little bit of additional quality out of a printer/medium combo if it can control dithering and ink amount. Did I already mention cost ...?

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

aaronchan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 532
Re: Advanced B&W Printing?
« Reply #4 on: February 13, 2018, 09:41:32 PM »

Hi Aaron,

I beg to differ.

Easier, yes. But Qimage offers much more than that, and e.g. its nesting capability is very cool, and very useful. There are lots of benefits that it offers without bugging the user, so most of these benefits tend to get less attention. Dithering to improve smooth gradients, and anti-aliasing for downsampled images and proprietary algorithms for upsampling come to mind. Some of them may, or may not yet, be implemented in the Qimage One product version (for both Mac OS and Windows OS versions), but the Qimage Ultimate version for the Windows OS already has them. The halo-free Smart output sharpening (which is finely user adjustable) is a workflow and quality benefit not found in most other printing solutions.


Cheers,
Bart

Yes, you are correct.
I should say that in the first place. I have used QU for almost 10 years as it saved me a lot of times when I do actual jobs for my clients.
My consumption is more like "if" an single image has been upsize/downsize in any image editor already.
One thing I'm not sure is since QU uses the printer's driver, I'm don't think it has anything to do with the dithering when it prints the final image onto the paper. Please advise me if I'm incorrect.

Aaron

patjoja

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 137
Re: Advanced B&W Printing?
« Reply #5 on: February 13, 2018, 11:43:21 PM »

Hey folks, after working in digital B&W for a few years, I'm starting to think it's time to up my printing game. I'm generally satisfied with my results so far, but want to really take it up a notch.

I'm currently using, and plan to stick with....
• Canon Pro-1000
• Using the standard inks
• Ilford Galerie Prestige, mostly Gold Fiber Silk, also Prestige Smooth Pearl
• Predominantly working in Lightrooom
• I also have access to Photoshop
• Prints max out at 17" x 22", and at this time that works fine for me
• Images are usually between 200ppi and 300ppi
• Most images are shot at or close to base ISO

One is whether I'd be better off using a different RAW developer / image editor. I do prefer to stick to LR (as it works well for me, I'm accustomed to the interface, and it has years of catalog data) but am open to trying something else.

That could mean a different primary application, or using something else as an adjunct to LR (e.g. using separate software for NR or sharpening).

The second is, presumably, with output. I don't use a RIP, and I assume this will make a noticeable improvement. Any recommendations on a RIP (particularly one that works well with the Pro 1000) would be great.

I'm also curious as to whether using a RIP would make more or less difference than, say, switching from LR to C1.

The third is, whether I'm missing anything.  8) Thanks....

You've hit on a wide range of topics in your posts.  I'm not sure I can address them all, but maybe a few.

Both Lightroom and Photoshop use the same RAW development tool, but Photoshop does have image development tools that Lightroom does not have.  I find that I use them both for different things.  If you want to keep Lightroom as your central database manager you can easily do that and send files back and forth to and from Photoshop.  I can do that with DXO Optics as well.  One of my noise reduction programs is a Photoshop plugin so that's how I access it.  Also I use Nik Silver Efex 2  as a Photoshop plugin to convert my color images to black and white. 

Regarding output, I'm starting to learn more about that at present, so maybe others can assist you more in that area.  I currently print my black and white prints with my Canon iPF6450 and Pro-1.  There are quite a few on this forum who are using custom inks in their Epson printers, but that is not an option for those of us who are using Canon printers.  From what I can tell, there are a couple of programs that allow more control of Canon printers and OEM inks.  One such program is call True Black and White by Bowhaus.  Unfortunately I don't think it's ported to the Pro-1000 yet and it only runs on Mac OS.

Maybe there are other options out there...maybe others can post about them?

Regards,

Patrick
Logged

patjoja

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 137
Re: Advanced B&W Printing?
« Reply #6 on: February 14, 2018, 10:27:28 AM »



Just as an aside and an observation, this particular forum on LULU does not seem very well attended, and it seems to be focused on using custom inks and profiles with EPSON printers.  Getting information or having discussion about other non-Epson topics doesn't seem to generate much traffic.  I think the name "Digital Black and White" is a bit of a misnomer. 

Patrick
Logged

BartvanderWolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7092
Re: Advanced B&W Printing?
« Reply #7 on: February 14, 2018, 11:30:36 AM »

One thing I'm not sure is since QU uses the printer's driver, I'm don't think it has anything to do with the dithering when it prints the final image onto the paper. Please advise me if I'm incorrect.

QU can automatically deal with two potential problems. One has to do with 16-bits/channel image input which will be converted to 8-b/ch to match the printer driver requirements, and with resizing, which both can generate posterization in smooth gradients. The printer driver's ink dithering and weaving of subsequent head-passes to produce intermediate ink colors works based on that source image data.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

deanwork

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1527
Re: Advanced B&W Printing?
« Reply #8 on: February 15, 2018, 05:15:44 PM »

Aaron is correct that QImage is not a conventional bw rip like Studio Print or even QTR or Bowhaus True Black and White in that it has no capability to make custom linearizations that can be saved for various media and so the actual quality of your icc profile ( especially if you are using color inks in the mix ) is critical. You also can not isolate and partition independent ink channels. It's not designed for that.

However as Bart describes it has great subtle control over dithering and resampling of the file in order to get the best out of data sent to a particular printer driver. And that includes smoother gradients.  I use all of the above mentioned print platforms and they are all excellent in their own ways for various inksets and applications.

I like using QImage with my HPZ printers because that printer has its own built in spectrometer for custom media linearizations, and QImage really adds a lot of dot placement and  sharpening finessing. For me it improves resampling a lot when making large prints from files that are not as large as they should be. And like he also said, it's a Big Bang for the buck.

I only use it on a pc .  I have no idea how well the new Mac version works. I think that is still a work in progress.

John





Hi Aaron,

I beg to differ.

Easier, yes. But Qimage offers much more than that, and e.g. its nesting capability is very cool, and very useful. There are lots of benefits that it offers without bugging the user, so most of these benefits tend to get less attention. Dithering to improve smooth gradients, and anti-aliasing for downsampled images and proprietary algorithms for upsampling come to mind. Some of them may, or may not yet, be implemented in the Qimage One product version (for both Mac OS and Windows OS versions), but the Qimage Ultimate version for the Windows OS already has them. The halo-free Smart output sharpening (which is finely user adjustable) is a workflow and quality benefit not found in most other printing solutions.

Correct, with regards to the RIP part, although it's automatic high quality resizing to the native printer driver resolution is heaven and an expensive dedicated RIP might (or might not) squeeze a little bit of additional quality out of a printer/medium combo if it can control dithering and ink amount. Did I already mention cost ...?

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up