Professional Web Applications Themes

Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier - Photography

Pat Chaney writes:   I archive all my images in Adobe RGB 1998, and then I just convert them to sRGB when preparing a file specifically for printing on a Frontier. I archive in Adobe because it has a larger gamut. You can print on a Frontier in Adobe (which it assumes to be sRGB) and the difference isn't that great, except that saturation and contrast come out lower on the print. -- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly....

  1. #21

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    Pat Chaney writes:
     

    I archive all my images in Adobe RGB 1998, and then I just convert them
    to sRGB when preparing a file specifically for printing on a Frontier.
    I archive in Adobe because it has a larger gamut. You can print on a
    Frontier in Adobe (which it assumes to be sRGB) and the difference isn't
    that great, except that saturation and contrast come out lower on the
    print.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
    Mxsmanic Guest

  2. #22

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier


    "Pat Chaney" <com> wrote in message
    news:BB4234B5.3775F%com... 
    >
    > I'm currently using Adobe (1998). Would it be better to use sRGB[/ref]
    throughout, 

    I'd say, convert the output file (either to sRGB, the frontier's native
    color space, or a dedicated profile for the machine as it is at that
    moment). This will allow you to keep a larger colorspace to edit in.
    Another reason is that you'll need to sharpen at the final output
    resolution, after all other changes to the file, anyway. Might as well take
    the step to convert to a narrower colorspace then.
     
    plenty 

    It's confusing at the beginning, try to read a lot, then experiment by only
    changing one factor at a time.

    Just remember, input devices (should) have their own profile, you usually
    work in a different (relatively wide gamut) working space, and each output
    device has its own profile. Leaving one element of the chain uncalibrated,
    might invalidate most of the chain's outcome.

    Bart


    Bart Guest

  3. #23

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    What is the final output resolution for the Fuji Frontier?

    "Bart van der Wolf" <nl> writes:
     
    Rusty Guest

  4. #24

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier


    "Rusty Wright" <Berkeley.EDU> wrote in message
    news:Berkeley.EDU... 

    Everybody I asked, confirms 300 ppi.
    I guess a test might help to determine if it's true.

    Bart


    Bart Guest

  5. #25

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    On 22/7/03 2:08 am, "Mxsmanic" <com> wrote:
     

    I currently have the 10D and Photoshop set to Adobe 1998. Are you saying it
    would be better to convert the output file (for a frontier) to sRGB to
    maintain the contrast and saturation? Wouldn't this change them anyway?


    Pat
    --
    Photos at:
    http://www.shuttercity.com/ShowGallery.cfm?Format=Cell&AcctID=1251

    Pat Guest

  6. #26

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    On 22/7/03 12:40 pm, "Bart van der Wolf" <nl> wrote:
     

    Ah, this partly answers the question I just asked. Maybe I should have read
    this post first.
     

    Yes, I always sharpen last. I assume that changing the colour space can be
    done after this though.

    Which raises another point! - I'm currently looking at Nik Sharpener Pro as
    an alternative to the unsharp mask in PS. The demo version seems to be very
    effective, but does anyone know whether I would need the 'complete' version
    or the 'inkjet' version for output to a device like a Frontier? There is
    quite a difference in price.
     

    By calibrated, do you mean defining a colour space at each stage or using a
    device such as a spyder to calibrate the monitor? I was half thinking about
    getting one but I'm not yet convinced it would be a good use of money.


    Pat
    --
    Photos at:
    http://www.shuttercity.com/ShowGallery.cfm?Format=Cell&AcctID=1251

    Pat Guest

  7. #27

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

     

    I could not possibly disagree more.

    Just because you see an image a certain way on your monitor at home is
    no guarantee that it will be printed that way on a Fuji Frontier. The
    only way to achieve this is if your home monitor is properly
    calibrated to the Frontier, which is not easy.

    I tried in vain to do this with Ritz Camera and found it to be a very
    frustrating experience. Especially given that the closest Frontier to
    me is 45 minutes away!

    I am still in the process of evaluating the Epson 2200. It's a good
    printer that gives outstanding results. I heard some people mention
    that they get better results with paper with a matte-finish, but so
    far I've had extremely good results with semi-gloss.

    Now, all this being said, it's a matter of cost and consideration.
    The Epson was $700 and I just purchased the Monaco calibration bundle
    for $400, so you can see the price I'm paying for this.

    I see this as an investment. My cost per photo is much cheaper this
    way and when I take into account I no longer drive 45 minutes there
    and back, it is well worth it.

    Jim
    Jim Guest

  8. #28

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    What is a Monaco calibration bundle, and how do you use it? Thanks in
    advance.

    In article <com>, Jim Dalton
    <net> writes 


    Nobody
    nobody Guest

  9. #29

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    Pat Chaney writes:
     

    No difference that I'm aware of, and I've tried it both ways.
     

    It has a couple of modes. In one mode, it scales the image to fill the
    printable area of the paper, cutting off a bit around the edges of the
    image to do so. In another mode, it ensures that the entire image
    appears on the paper, even if that leaves unprinted borders on some
    sides. In a third mode, it prints the image exactly as defined, i.e., a
    300-ppi image of 600x600 pixels is printed on paper as an image
    measuring 2 inches on a side. I prefer this third mode for my prints.
    I don't know what it is called in English versions of the Frontier
    driver software, but in the French version, it's called "mÍme taille"
    ("same size").

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
    Mxsmanic Guest

  10. #30

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    Pat Chaney writes:
     

    If you want the same contrast and saturation you see on your monitor,
    yes.

    However, the difference isn't huge, and you might actually prefer the
    results when leaving it as Adobe RGB, so you might want to try test
    prints of both.
     

    The Frontier software ignores the colorspace specified in the file. It
    assumes that all files are sRGB.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
    Mxsmanic Guest

  11. #31

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    Rusty Wright writes:
     

    Nominally it is 300 ppi, but I think it can be set to 200 ppi
    optionally, and perhaps to other values. If your input image specifies
    a different resolution, the Frontier software interpolates.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
    Mxsmanic Guest

  12. #32

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    Bart van der Wolf writes:
     

    I've done tests. Mysteriously, pattern of 1-pixel lines at 300 ppi did
    not resolve; instead, it showed regular artifacts, as if it had been
    interpolated. But I don't know if it actually _was_ interpolated, or
    whether this was just fuzziness inherent in the printing process.

    Unfortunately, nobody at the labs seems to know, either, nor can I find
    any Fuji doentation to clear things up. It's amazing how clueless
    the owners and operators of these machines are when it comes to the
    actual digital technology on which they depend.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
    Mxsmanic Guest

  13. #33

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    cfr.usf. edu (Toivo Voll) writes:
     

    Dye subs are great. But they are finicky software- and hardware-wise,
    and the consumables are expensive, as you note, and there just aren't
    that many around. But my old Alps printer (which I still have, sitting
    on a shelf unused) beat my current ink-jet printer quite handily. Good
    dye sub looks just like a Frontier or other wet print, mainly because it
    uses nearly identical methods to print the image.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
    Mxsmanic Guest

  14. #34

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    Jim Dalton writes:
     

    The results I get match more closely than any other workflow I've ever
    used.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.
    Mxsmanic Guest

  15. #35

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    From my research, I get the impression that trying to match ones monitor to
    a specific printer would be a futile waste of time (which it sounds like
    it's been in your case based on your post), and doing so would have the
    effect of only allowing you to produce accurate matching prints on that one
    specific printer. As soon as you want to print on another, your in trouble.
    If I understand color management accurately (no guarantee), one should put
    everything else aside and start with properly calibrating the monitor to a
    specific standard, and not a print. After the monitor is calibrated, leave
    it alone, and work on properly profiling the other devices in your workflow.
    The monitor is the first and foremost important thing to calibrate properly.
    Not doing so makes everything else a waste of time. If your monitor is set
    up correctly, and you have a >good< profile for your printer, it should be
    easy to get the printer to print exactly what appears on the screen.

    For what it's worth (as an example), I got an 11x14 test print done last
    year that turned out horrible due to user (me) error. I had a good profile
    for the printer being used, and was using the soft proofing feature in PS7,
    but forgot to convert the file I was sending in to the printers color space
    first. Because it was in my working space (Adobe RGB) and not the printers
    space, and the fact that the printer in question ignores color profiles, the
    print naturally came back looking horrible. I double checked by soft
    proofing the image and turning on "preserve color numbers" which I learned
    has the effect of showing on screen what the final print will look like if
    one doesn't convert the image to the printers color space first. Sure
    enough, my ugly print was a perfect match for what I saw on my (properly
    calibrated, at least as good as Adobe Gamma gets) monitor. In a more recent
    endeavour trying out a Noritsu machine (similar to Frontier) I used one of
    the free profiles on Dry Creek (which I know shouldn't be used since their
    not generic, I plan on getting proper ones made soon) and this time
    remembered to convert to the printers color space first. Thanks to properly
    using soft proofing in PS7 to create an output file I was happy with, and
    then converting the colors before printing, I ended up with an amazing print
    that really blew me away. Talk about colors! I've owned an Epson Photo 700
    in the past, but this Noritsu print was way beyond that for color and
    quality. And it matched my screen perfectly too. I can't wait to try more
    images with my new EOS 10D now that I understand proper color management,
    and am looking forward to buying my own hardware for doing my monitor right
    (probably the Eye One, I hear Spyder+OptiCal has a serious calculation bug).

    Hope you enjoyed my babbling! ;-)

    "Jim Dalton" <net> wrote in message
    news:com...
     

    I could not possibly disagree more.

    Just because you see an image a certain way on your monitor at home is
    no guarantee that it will be printed that way on a Fuji Frontier. The
    only way to achieve this is if your home monitor is properly
    calibrated to the Frontier, which is not easy.

    I tried in vain to do this with Ritz Camera and found it to be a very
    frustrating experience. Especially given that the closest Frontier to
    me is 45 minutes away!

    I am still in the process of evaluating the Epson 2200. It's a good
    printer that gives outstanding results. I heard some people mention
    that they get better results with paper with a matte-finish, but so
    far I've had extremely good results with semi-gloss.


    Katie Guest

  16. #36

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    Where did you get the Spyder-Optical info? Been using Spyder-Photocal and it
    has worked very well.


    Tom

    In article <supernews.com>, NoSpam! says... 
    >
    >I could not possibly disagree more.
    >
    >Just because you see an image a certain way on your monitor at home is
    >no guarantee that it will be printed that way on a Fuji Frontier. The
    >only way to achieve this is if your home monitor is properly
    >calibrated to the Frontier, which is not easy.
    >
    >I tried in vain to do this with Ritz Camera and found it to be a very
    >frustrating experience. Especially given that the closest Frontier to
    >me is 45 minutes away!
    >
    >I am still in the process of evaluating the Epson 2200. It's a good
    >printer that gives outstanding results. I heard some people mention
    >that they get better results with paper with a matte-finish, but so
    >far I've had extremely good results with semi-gloss.
    >
    >[/ref]

    Tom Guest

  17. #37

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    http://www.monacosys.com/solutions/desktop/index.html

    Wait until next week when I post my experiences on this. The jury is
    still out and this is too good to share with everyone! LOL

    Jim
    Jim Guest

  18. #38

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    "Jim Dalton" <net> wrote in message
    news:com... 
    >
    > I could not possibly disagree more.
    >
    > Just because you see an image a certain way on your monitor at home is
    > no guarantee that it will be printed that way on a Fuji Frontier. The
    > only way to achieve this is if your home monitor is properly
    > calibrated to the Frontier, which is not easy.
    >
    > I tried in vain to do this with Ritz Camera and found it to be a very
    > frustrating experience. Especially given that the closest Frontier to
    > me is 45 minutes away!
    > Jim[/ref]

    See if there's a Frontier profile for a lab near you, if not you can get a
    free profile done at:
    http://www.drycreekphoto.com/Frontier/FrontierDatabase.htm

    I used a profile for a Wal-Mart in Reno, NV and got excellent results.
    --
    Pete Rissler
    http://web1.greatbasin.net/~rissler/


    Pete Guest

  19. #39

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    Thanks, I look forward to read your article.

    In article <com>, Jim Dalton
    <net> writes 


    Nobody
    nobody Guest

  20. #40

    Default Re: Inkjet vs. Fuji Frontier

    In article <supernews.com>, Katie Piecrust
    <NoSpam!?.?> writes 

    There is a contradiction here, most people might have more than one wife
    :-), but only one printer. Therefore it cannot be a waste of time to
    produce accurate matching prints on a specific printer, would you agree?

     

    If you do, I am green with envy!!
     

    This is also the advice I received from a digital guru. 
     

    What other devices? the next thing is the printer (vial PS), isn't it?
    Or do I show my ignorance now?
     

    Would you please elaborate on this? what would be a good profile for a
    particular printer?
     

    Please elaborate on what you mean by "exactly". The PS "bible" I bought
    seems to imply that exact matching is never possible, yet, others seem
    to think that it is. By exactly do you really mean exactly?
     

    Therefore exact matching seems possible. 
     

    Why would you do this? Are you not happy with the calibration offered by
    PS7? 


    Nobody
    nobody Guest

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. fuji frontier
    By nunuhulu@hotmail.com in forum Brainstorming Area
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: November 8th, 04:28 PM
  2. Userland Frontier Interoperability
    By Donald Nova in forum ASP.NET Web Services
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: January 26th, 04:52 PM
  3. Fuji Frontier 340 = Dark & Saturated pictures !!!
    By Shyrah in forum Adobe Photoshop Elements
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: September 29th, 08:28 PM
  4. Replies: 8
    Last Post: July 14th, 01:03 PM
  5. Fuji Frontier or Noritsu versus desktop printing
    By Chuck Snyder in forum Adobe Photoshop Elements
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: July 6th, 05:21 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139