[Watson]

I am an old school film user who finally gave in and switched to digital. I used to do all my own darkroom work. I was usually pleased with my results even if it might take me half a day sometimes to get a print the way I wanted. The point is that with patience and excellent stock I always felt that I could get the most out of my negatives when printing (or my slides using the Cibiachrome process). The problem is I do not feel that current printers give anywhere near the same ability to produce quality prints from digital as was previously available in the darkroom for film. I believe that the images I get with my K5iis are every bit as good as my old film cameras and maybe better. I just can't get a printer that gives me prints that match the quality of the images.
I currently use the Epson R2000 photo printer which is supposed to be good. It is but there is still a significant falloff from the images on my computer to the print. I have had many prints done professionally by a few labs with not much better results.

It may be that printing technology has not kept pace with the development of cameras. If this is so maybe we should stop worrying about whether the camera is FF or APSC and how many megapixels it has and start bugging the printer manufacturers to get going. Any thoughts or is there a better printer I should be investing in?

[Adam]

The Canon Pixma Pro is a pretty good deal:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-price-watch/220750-great-deal-canon-pixma-pro100.html

[Watson]

The Canon Pixma Pro is a pretty good deal:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-price-watch/220750-great-deal-canon-pixma-pro100.html

Just read some reviews of the Pixma. Looks good but I also see some better Epson printers than mine as well. If anyone has any hands on experience with any of these I would appreciate comments. I hate buying on spec.

[Miguel]

Any thoughts or is there a better printer I should be investing in?

I think I disagree with you in general, but I would like you to better articulate what you mean by prints not matching the quality of the images. As someone with darkroom experience I'm sure you understand saturation, gamut, paper texture, contrast, and color accuracy. Which of these and other factors are you having issues with? Color management practices are highly important for a digital workflow; what do you think are the weak links in your workflow?

Your printer is considered quite good, especially when printing on glossy paper and in color. I spent many years printing from my own color and B&W darkroom, but I don't think a lot of my experience there directly has benefited my digital-sourced printing efforts over the past thrteen years. Indirectly sure, but the processes and tools are quite different. Plus my health is better being away from those chemicals. My septic system is healthier too. Having two friends and peers develop Parkinson's (symptoms at least) from decades of darkroom dwelling, I'm thankful for digital output.

M

[Watson]

I think I disagree with you in general, but I would like you to better articulate what you mean by prints not matching the quality of the images. As someone with darkroom experience I'm sure you understand saturation, gamut, paper texture, contrast, and color accuracy. Which of these and other factors are you having issues with? Color management practices are highly important for a digital workflow; what do you think are the weak links in your workflow?

Your printer is considered quite good, especially when printing on glossy paper and in color. I spent many years printing from my own color and B&W darkroom, but I don't think a lot of my experience there directly has benefited my digital-sourced printing efforts over the past thrteen years. Indirectly sure, but the processes and tools are quite different. Plus my health is better being away from those chemicals. My septic system is healthier too. Having two friends and peers develop Parkinson's (symptoms at least) from decades of darkroom dwelling, I'm thankful for digital output.

M

I could not agree with Miguel more. I am way too old to be standing over chemicals anymore, not to mention fumbling around in the dark with trays, tongs and drums. I love being able to just use software to adjust my Raw images and then print. I also agree that darkroom work does not really help with understanding the processes of printing digital images. I believe I have a lot to learn yet and it may well be that my prints will improve as I do. The problem is I can be very happy with the image after I have processed it but when I print, the result is never as sharp (resolution) nor is the colour rendition ever as good.

[Miguel]

the result is never as sharp (resolution) nor is the colour rendition ever as good

This leads me to question your post processing and color management practices.

One consistent and striking difference between film-based development I've seen is that sharpness and expectations of sharpness are far greater with digital. What does your sharpening workflow entail? Color rendition can be subjective, but a quality, hardware-calibrated monitor is necessary for serious output in my book.

Whatcha got an what do you do?

M

[Watson]

This leads me to question your post processing and color management practices.

One consistent and striking difference between film-based development I've seen is that sharpness and expectations of sharpness are far greater with digital. What does your sharpening workflow entail? Color rendition can be subjective, but a quality, hardware-calibrated monitor is necessary for serious output in my book.

Whatcha got an what do you do?

M

I do all my processing on Aperture on a Macbook Pro. I sometimes use Lightroom as well but usually just Aperature. I don't have to do much with the images actually, except adjust the sharpness sometimes in the raw adjustment drop down, sometimes boost the definition and rarely the saturation of the colours or vibrancy. I almost always adjust the brightness and contrast as well as highlights and shadows. On the printer I have dome a preset with the highest dps (slowest printing) and use high gloss pro paper.

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

I do all my processing on Aperture on a Macbook Pro. I sometimes use Lightroom as well but usually just Aperature. I don't have to do much with the images actually, except adjust the sharpness sometimes in the raw adjustment drop down, sometimes boost the definition and rarely the saturation of the colours or vibrancy. I almost always adjust the brightness and contrast as well as highlights and shadows. On the printer I have dome a preset with the highest dps (slowest printing) and use high gloss pro paper.

From my understanding, the newer Retina displays - while nearly full sRGB - are very difficult to calibrate properly because of their high contrast and inherent color intensity. Perhaps that is your difficulty. Of course, if it isn't a Retina display then the situation is pretty near hopeless as trying to do color work off of a cheap laptop screen is going to be totally hit and miss. Calibrating for Mac's non-standard 1.8 gamma is another challenge.

[Miguel]

I do all my processing on Aperture on a Macbook Pro. I sometimes use Lightroom as well but usually just Aperature. I don't have to do much with the images actually, except adjust the sharpness sometimes in the raw adjustment drop down, sometimes boost the definition and rarely the saturation of the colours or vibrancy. I almost always adjust the brightness and contrast as well as highlights and shadows. On the printer I have dome a preset with the highest dps (slowest printing) and use high gloss pro paper.

Thanks, for you prompt reply. I'm not surprised you are not too happy with your printer's output, but it is up to you to feed it better data.
A few thoughts:

1. Because you didn't mention anything about monitor calibration or color management, I assume you don't actively pursue this practice. This essentially leaves to chance matters of color accuracy for both evaluation and output. I'd suggest you read up on the subject, spend the money on a good IPS monitor and hardware calibration tools. This will make your printer perform to your expectations as the input will be exponentially better.

Do realize that laptops-- even a good one like yours--generally have monitors inferior due to angle of view issues.

2. Choose either Lightroom or Aperture. I cannot fathom using both. They each impose a different, though excellent, workflow.

3. Learn about digital sharpening techniques. Get Fraser & Schewe's book and practice the three-phase approach to sharpening. All RAW files require fairly significant sharpening. Your prints will look much better.

Hope this helps.

M

[Miguel]

Calibrating for Mac's non-standard 1.8 gamma is another challenge.

Macs haven't had this gamma setting by default for at least ten years.

M

[Anvh]

Like MIguel say you need to hardware calibrate your screen if you want to take this seriously.
You have no idea of the brightness and colours of the monitor are good.

If your own print and the print of the studio match quite well to eachother then the one (your screen) is the one that is not in line

As for print.
Most monitors are calibarted to 6500 kelvin but that's quite blue and you often get better matching results with 5000 to 5500 kelvin for example

Then there is also the question what kind of light you're comparing things with.
Your monitor is a "light source" while paper "reflect" the light.

This a good start, he also has printer and calibration devices reviews.
Why are my prints too dark

[adwb]

I have used epson printers for a number of years and currently have a now slightly put of date 2880. I also used cibachrome for reversal stock prints.

Providing you have your primary viewing screen correctly calibrated in the correct amount of ambient light and use custom paper/ ink profiles created for you, your colours and exposure and contrast should be on your print, as near as dam it , the same as what your we're happy with on your screen.

However the one single factor that makes a huge difference between wet prints and digital prints is sharpness. You need to sharpen a significantly large amount more than you do for a screen, in fact I would venture to suggest that if it looks over sharp on a screen then it will print out better.

Some software gives you are sharpen for print option, like lightroom, when you save , or when you print from the print module. RIP software like Qimage also does that and has a excellent sharpening system in the program as well.

I long time ago I took some test prints using 35mm film and with the same lens , digital images of the same subject with the two set up as closely as I could manage it. To get the inkjet to print the same the sharpening was the biggest factor.

Try a couple test images all printed on the same sheet but in your editing software go mad with the sharpening at various levels on each print.
I think you will be surprised and pleased with what you find.

[Rob22315]

For quick snaps at home, I use a small dye-sub - the Canon Selphy. For quality large prints, I use an on-line service like ezprints.

I calibrate my monitor on a regular basis as well.

Inkjets don't give good results IMHO.

[Watson]

For quick snaps at home, I use a small dye-sub - the Canon Selphy. For quality large prints, I use an on-line service like ezprints.

I calibrate my monitor on a regular basis as well.

Inkjets don't give good results IMHO.

I want to thank everyone who has responded to my original post. Very helpful information from all of you. Miguel's advice concerning calibration of the monitor was especially helpful. He was completely correct. I had ignored this totally. I am reading up on the subject now. I don't have any calibration hardware but I just ran the calibration setup for my Macbook monitor, and the biggest change was dropping the white point to 5500K. I have reprocessed a couple of images in Aperature based on the new profile and I followed ADWB's advice and pushed the sharpness a little further than looked right on the screen. I then hit Print. Much, much better.. Now I really want to get some good hardware to do a better calibration. Thanks again all.

[Kerrowdown]

Now I really want to get some good hardware to do a better calibration

I can recommend the x-rite i1 Display Pro, I use on my iMac without drama.

https://www.xrite.com/i1display-pro