Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/11/09

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] The Slippery Slope
From: robertmeier at usjet.net (Robert Meier)
Date: Wed Nov 9 10:49:50 2005
References: <BF979D3B.80ED%bdcolen@comcast.net><00b501c5e556$0a5d1df0$0400a8c0@robertbxucevjs> <a2f8f4470511091009r1f28a65at89865d7d53a109fa@mail.gmail.com>

Daniel,

Interesting experiences.   I have been printing in my own darkrooms since I 
was 10 and, I guess, I just have grown to like it.  That's over 50 years 
ago.   A few years ago I got very excited about digital and bought first an 
HP 7960 for B&W prints.   It produces very nice prints, but I wasn't 
satisfied with them.   So I got an Epson C86 and put the MIS inks in it and 
printed on Hahnem?hle Photo Rag paper -- very nice, and archival, but it 
didn't look much like an airdried fiberbase print.  I also put MIS inks in 
my Epson 1280 (which I have used for 3 years now for large color prints, 
which I am quite happy with) and printed on Ilford Pearl paper.   I like 
that result too, but again, it doesn't look like an FB print, which is what 
I want.   So, my experience has been very specific.   I like what I get in 
the darkroom, and I haven't been able to get that from any of the printers I 
have tried.   I also find that I can make wet prints faster and for less 
money, but that is beside the point.   Your experience is, obviously, 
different.   My experience may change tomorrow if I try and like the 
Permajet Portrait Classic you recommend.

Bob




> On 11/9/05, Robert Meier <robertmeier@usjet.net> wrote:
>> BD,
>>
>> Better means, of course, prints that I prefer.   They are subjectively
>> better.
>
> You're lucky, Bob. Back in the 70'ies and 80'ies I prided myself on
> being a good printer.
>
> I set up a darkroom, a standing darkroom in a bombshelter, a few years
> ago. For the life of me I cannot produce a print that I think is
> better than what I can print through Photoshop on a $40 Epson printer
> (C86 with carbon inks). So I gave up. The boys use the darkroom now
> for their poker nights.
>
> I probably could, with a lot of effort, make a print that is as good,
> in my eyes, as the digital prints, but the time involved is not worth
> it. I print scads of prints all the time. I love to have stacks of
> prints under the couch, on the night stand, strewn around to browse
> through and study. I'm my worse critic.
>
> It just would not be practical, for me, to do that in a wet darkroom.
> I'm too sociable. I like being with people.
>
> But I can admire the excellent prints that others do in the darkroom.
> I see it every time on the LUG print-exchange group.
>
>> I am interested in how they look to
>> me, and glossy fiberbase prints, airdried, have a look that I just love, 
>> and
>> I have never produced, nor seen, an inkjet print that has anything like 
>> that
>> look.
>
> Bob, Permajet Portrait Classic can go a long way towards matching
> those fiberbased prints.
>
> Daniel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 



Replies: Reply from dlridings at gmail.com (Daniel Ridings) ([Leica] The Slippery Slope)
In reply to: Message from bdcolen at comcast.net (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] The Slippery Slope)
Message from robertmeier at usjet.net (Robert Meier) ([Leica] The Slippery Slope)
Message from dlridings at gmail.com (Daniel Ridings) ([Leica] The Slippery Slope)