 Julie K |
Buying a Printer for B/W Photography Hello, I am a darkroom photographer who has recently decided to try digital imaging. I bought a scanner and Photoshop 6, and now need a printer that can produce darkroom-quality results. As this is my first foray into this type of photography, I want a quality printer, but something that will not break the bank (the bank in this case is anything over $300.00) I work only in b/w and my scanner has 1200 x 2400 dpi. Any advice/suggestions on buying a printer would be greatly appreciated! Thanks,
|
|
|
|
||
|
Martin Ebbesen |
Hi Julie, If you only work I B&W, I would suggest that you have a look at a laser printer, HP make great ones but also Minolta I think makes laser printers. The advantage over the inkjet printers is that the price you pay, for every page you print is smaller and you can print on any paper. Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Vincent Lowe |
Try 'Quad Black' inksets for Epson Photo printers. Replaces the coloured inks with three shades of grey. Results are stunning. I use Epson 1160 but I think this has now been discontinued. More info at www.lyson.com or www.marrutt.com Marrutt will supply a test print plus the original file on CD-ROM.
|
|
|
|
||
|
doug Nelson |
George DeWolfe is a pro who uses just such a technique. See PC Photo magazine, Dec 2000. The technique he describes will work on an Epson 890 printer ($300), if you don't go over 8 x 10. Want bigger? The printer is gonna cost you more, $500 for the Epson 1280. You may be happy printing B&W on these printers without using 3rd party inks. To do this, you print B&W using the COLOR inks. You may get an off color cast, but, you can correct that in the printer software. The special inks, though, will probably get you better images, contrastier, and a better gray scale. See www.inksupply.com for info on these inks. BTW, Julie, you'd get better results scanning off the neg. The HP S-20 film scanner, maybe discontinued, scans B&W quite well and can be had for maybe $400. If you are serious about scanning negs, a Nikon scanner in the $800 range will serve you well, especially since you don't need the advanced color settings of more expensive scanners. We'd love to see some of your work. Check out Galleries here and get one of your own.
|
|
|
|
||
|
doug Nelson |
I just saw Vincent's (see his reply above) Gallery on this site: http://www.betterphoto.com/gallery/dynoGallByMember.php?mem=13745 Stunning B&W! I think we'd both better listen to him.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Julie K |
Thanks to all who responded! Your suggestions were a big help to me; the business of buying new technology is confusing to say the least, and your comments help "clear the mud" so to speak. Once I'm up and running, I am definetly opening a Gallery on this site, as I currently enjoy all your Member Galleries. Thanks again,
|
|
|
|
||
|
Vincent Lowe |
Thanks for the compliment Doug! I intend to try for the RPS Fellowship this year with a set of monochrome inkjet prints - I'll let you know how I get on.
|
|
|
|
||
|
doug Nelson |
For an interesting opinion about digital B&W vs. chemical-and-paper, read the interview with Ralph Gibson in the Feb issue of Shutterbug magazine. He also has interesting comments about a lifetime of photography.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Vincent Lowe |
I don't think Shutterbug is available in the UK - I've looked on their Web site and it appears to be sold only in the US, and the article isn't posted on the site. Can you give us a brief run down of his conclusions?
|
|
|
|
||
|
doug Nelson |
Ralph Gibson doesn't like digital scanning and printing, but I'm not sure why. He does have a really elemental style of photography-very simple, stark compositions, often with high grain very visible. It seems that he values his exposure, developing and printing as a painter would his paint mixing and brush methods, and sees no advantage in digital. He talks about shooting for no one but himself, and abhors shooting for a market. He's an accomplished artist; I'm not, so what can I say? I'll copy and send it to you, if you'd like.
|
|
|
|
||
|
Vincent Lowe |
Thanks for the offer but I think I see where he's coming from (damn, I swore I'd never use that cliche). I can understand his 'purist' outlook but personally I've found that digital has opened up a whole new branch of photography which has presented a new set of challenges. Similarly, I supply to a couple of picture libraries and have found that some of the things on their 'wants' lists have again offered subject challenges that I wouldn't otherwise have thought of (I'm often amazed at some of the stuff they ask for, e.g. "Aircraft ejector seat, preferably being used". Yeah, right). Ralph Gibson is lucky if he is able to make a living purely from 'fine art' photography but there are not many who can, certainly on this side of the pond. But I seem to be getting away from the initial point of this thread so I'll shut up. Vince
|
|
|
|
||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||