Fine Art printing
Don Stauffer
Prints and paintings are much different than photographs as far as
reproductions. Good photographic prints have higher resolution and
dynamic range than other forms of fine art. These are the very things
that make them hard to reproduce. Some form of photographic
reproduction is about all that really does a good job.
On paintings and prints, however, present inkjet printers do a pretty
fair job. Paper selection here is a key. Some photo editing programs
include texture overlays that can give a canvas or antique paper
appearance even on inkjet paper, but I prefer using specialty paper
stock myself.
Fortunately, I am into genealogy, and the genealogy program I use keeps
coming out with new upgrades. Every upgrade includes a few dozen sheets
of a really neat parchment-look paper. :-) But you can buy such papers
at good computer supply stores.
--
Don Stauffer in Minneapolis
home web site- http://home1.gte.net/stauffer/
ARosenblat
>Don Stauffer <stau...@htc.honeywell.com>
wrote:>Prints and paintings are much different than photographs as far as
>reproductions. Good photographic prints have higher resolution and
>dynamic range than other forms of fine art. These are the very things
>that make them hard to reproduce. Some form of photographic
>reproduction is about all that really does a good job.
I respectfully disagree. The state of the art has improved enormously
recently. You can now make photo quality prints from 35mm slides from
Photo CDs and from printed media on high quality scanners printed on the
Epson Stylus Photo or the HP Photosmart, not to mention dye sublimation
printers. At the more advanced level, large size prints can be by labs
using the Iris printer Of course. there are size limitations in all these
media., but, subject to these limitations, the statement quoted above is
flatly wrong. AR
Don Stauffer
My comments were directed at home use. While beautiful CRT printers and
very good dye sub printers are available, their prices are out of reach
of many of us. So I do not agree that true photo quality home printing
is yet feasible. I do not consider the Epson or HP Photosmart are truly
photographic quality. I must admit they are getting close, but no cigar
yet. The halftone patterns in very light shaded areas are still
perceptible.
But, when done on good paper, the quality of digital repros of prints
and paintings is quite close to original. The lack of high dynamic range
in most originals does not stress the halftoning algorithms as much.
Stan Krute
Hi A
You wrote:
> I respectfully disagree. The state of the art has improved enormously
> recently. You can now make photo quality prints from 35mm slides from
> Photo CDs and from printed media on high quality scanners printed on the
> Epson Stylus Photo or the HP Photosmart, not to mention dye sublimation
> printers. At the more advanced level, large size prints can be by labs
> using the Iris printer Of course. there are size limitations in all these
> media., but, subject to these limitations, the statement quoted above is
> flatly wrong.
This e-conversation reminds me of similar things I've heard
over the years:
"that personal computer ($3000) is a toy. get yourself a
minicomputer ($100,000 and up)."
"that desktop publishing program ($500) is a toy. get yourself a
professional publishing system ($15,000 and up)."
Some folks will just never get it.
Stan
Wayne D Johnson
I respectfully disagree with your disagreement. When your ink jet prints
have faded into nothingness a year from now, you will not be quite so
supportive. And I doubt whether your dye-sub colors are very accurate.
Wayne Johnson
ARosenblat <arose...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19970908160...@ladder02.news.aol.com>...
> >Don Stauffer <stau...@htc.honeywell.com>
>
>
> I respectfully disagree. The state of the art has improved enormously
> recently. You can now make photo quality prints from 35mm slides from
> Photo CDs and from printed media on high quality scanners printed on the
> Epson Stylus Photo or the HP Photosmart, not to mention dye sublimation
> printers. At the more advanced level, large size prints can be by labs
> using the Iris printer Of course. there are size limitations in all
these
> media., but, subject to these limitations, the statement quoted above is
> flatly wrong. AR
>