Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/12/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]In the past few years I've been scanning 35mm film (Minolta5400) and printing using an Epson 2200... also using MIS Carbon inks on a C84... there is no question that matte prints on the 2200 or with carbon inks have a nice quality... the prints are particularly terrific when a "pastel" sort of look is needed. Yet when I compare these prints side by side to traditional darkroom selenium toned air dried DW fiber the prints don't have the same appearance ... in many cases the inkjet prints don't have the "emotional impact" of the air dried fiber prints. I haven't been able to quite place my finger on what has been lacking (of course SWMBO says simply "the blacks aren't very dark" :-) She has been pretty much able to spot an inkjet print in an instant whether mine or in a gallery. In the past couple of weeks I've got my new Epson 4800 printer up and running. The prints are nothing short of amazing when placed side by side with a fiber print ... these prints have it. The blacks are just as black perhaps blacker (using Epson Premium Glossy or Luster). When closely viewed, these new inkjet prints look more like a fiber print than an RC print (at least to my eye). I think that is because the RC prints often have a slightly veiled appearance -- I've assumed this is because the silver is not on the very surface of the print but slightly buried in the RC. The matte inkjet prints have the appearance of a flat surface of ink i.e. lacking in depth. The glossy K3 prints (from the 2400/4800/7800/9800 series) have an entirely transparent depth akin to a fiber print. The blacks are Azo/Amidol black ... really. I'm now having a hard time justifying why I'd return to wet printing except for ? fun ?. Bring on the digital M .... Jonathan