Printing Instax with Contrast Adjust

[EinstStein]

I want a small print digital printer for low volume printing. Something like Epson PM-400 or Canon portable dye sub printer is close to what I want. But the printer head clogging is a concern. The alternatives are Zink or Instax. It seems Instax may have a little better image quality. However, Instax has a special steep contrast curve. It looks special, but not always really desirable.

So I am thinking if Fujifilm Instax SP-3 (or SP-2, SQ10 and SQ20) can do the job, if apply some contrast counter-adjustment before printing. Ideally, it should include global contrast reduction and micro/local contrast enhancement (contrast masking). Since experiment with Instax can be expensive, I wonder if anyone has already tried that, regardless successful or not.

Anyone has experiences to share?

[MichaelKoerner]

I personally don't like the visual appearance of zink and Instax, so no personal experience.

I use a Canon Selphy CP1300 for quick, small prints - good quality, lasting for decades - and even usable with an ICC profile ;-)

[EinstStein]

I personally don't like the visual appearance of zink and Instax, so no personal experience.

I use a Canon Selphy CP1300 for quick, small prints - good quality, lasting for decades - and even usable with an ICC profile ;-)

I compared Canon CP1300 and Epson PM-400. To me, PM-400 has much more vivid and true color, it also can print out 5x7, slightly more flexible. However, both may (eventually) suffer the head clog problem. That's why I turn my eyes to the "ink-less" printer: Zink and Instax. As you've mentioned, ZINK and INTAX does not have as good IQ as Die Sub and Inkjet.

I have used Polaroid 100 (peer off type) as a quick proof when I shot Hasselblad. Besides a quick confirmation on the lighting etc., P100 is good enough for a photo collection in terms of color renditions, contrast, etc.

The Instax has a look similar to the Ilfochrome (Cibachrome) if printed from slides without silver contrast masking. With proper Silver contrast masking, the Ilfochrome looks really really vivid and 3D. So I wonder if the digital version contrast masking could help.

Silver contrast masking can compress the global contrast while enhance the micro/local contrast at the same time.  I think it is too ancient for people born in the digital photography era. The digital version post-processing tries to mimic the effect, but seems to me not quite the same yet. It could be my digital post-processing skill is bad.
 

[MichaelKoerner]

I agree on the higher gamut of Epson PM400, but this device uses inkjet technology (which can show clogged heads, as you mentioned).

Canon CP1300 and the like use thermo sublimation (is this the correct term in english?) - so no clogged heads possible :-)

That's why I chose this device for "quick-and-dirty" mobile use. While being robust and stable it delivers better outcome than zink, IMHO. BTW I assume it's prints are more durable, compared to dye inks as used in PM400 (please correct me if I was wrong about that).

Due to this thread I learned that, though Instax being a process using photographic emulsions like Polaroid, there are Instax "printing devices" (seem to use laser imaging on film).

If you were able to compare those to Canon Selphy (as both technologies should work hasslefree when used rregularly) I'd be rather interested in your results.

For higher demands regarding print quality (gamut + fine substrates + longevity...) I'd recommend using pigment inkjet printers.

[EinstStein]

Where do you get that idea Dye Sub printer is free of clog?

Clog-free is indeed my motivation looking for printers with less ideal color rendering. But I have find a lot of on-line How-to solutions to deal with or minimize DS printer clog problems. 

[MichaelKoerner]

First: Sorry if I got anything wrong - english not being my first language.

Second: In my understanding, Epson PM400 was a "small, but normal" inkjet printer using dye inks. Now, after your reply, I did a quick research. Still not sure, as I hear on this youtube video that different inks/papers could be used, but if I was wrong, please correct/forgive me.

I did not know clogging could happen technically on Selphys (happy me As this was one of my main reasons for buying it, I'd be rather disappointed if so. Until now ( I use mine very occasionally, once every some months) never had an issue. Knocking on wood.

So - if PM400 uses the same kind of technology, I'd agree that it seems to produce better prints than the Canon.

And of course, if their technology was prone to clogging, you'd better avoid both of them.

Brings us back to Instax/zink :-)

[EinstStein]

PM is inkjet, CP1300 is dye sub, they are considered different technology as far as printer technology's concern.
Either one if you use it frequently enough, I mean, really frequently, it is less likely to develop clog.

[MichaelKoerner]

Either one if you use it frequently enough, I mean, really frequently, it is less likely to develop clog.

In this point I disagree. I'm not a printer technician, but in my understanding (and experience) dye sub technology as used in Selphys is much less prone to head clogging than ink jet, as there are no liquids used in the process that could clog. AFAIK only dust/dirt on the foil could lead to problems

But I have find a lot of on-line How-to solutions to deal with or minimize DS printer clog problems

Sure you didn't mix up with dye sub printing used for textiles, mugs and the like? Those printers (like the Epson SC-F100) use inks, the dye sublimation takes place later on the final substrate.

[EinstStein]

What is the base of your opinion? Have you search DS/IJ printer clog how-to? or simply ask your local printer sellers.
Which one has less clog is irrelevant to me. They are in the same order of magnitude.