"C.H.Ling" wrote:
>
> Based on my limited experience in digital imaging and some limited recent
> research on digital camera, below is MHO:
>
> A/ Best home scan (4000dpi)+inkjet print vs custom lab printing (for large
> output).
>
> - good custom print will have better resolution.
That's the fault of the missing quality of most scanner.
> - inkjet will be easier to control in terms of color and contrast, usually
> better than traditional print.
Traditional print material will provide better colour, is longer
lasting, is more robust.
Control is no issue with digital printers, affordable with digital
mini labs of Agfa, Fuji and Konica (up to 30cmx40cm) and excellent
high quality large size prints (at high price) in colour and B&W with
Durst Lambda.
The 2,4mx7,2m giant size B&W prints of the "New York Vertical"
exhibition were printed with Durst Lambda on Agfa Multicontrast paper.
> - cost of custom lab print will be higher unless you make the print
> yourself.
Using the service of an digital mini lab will be cheaper than custom
lab and printing at home.
> B/ Best home scan+inkjet vs one hour lab (4x6 inch print)
>
> - one hour lab have much better resolution,
Depends on how much care the operator of the device invests.
> - color of inkjet will be much better
Colour control of consumer desktop printer is a difficult and
sometimes impossible task. The decisive printer driver are made not
for the critical photographer but to please the "Disney colour" loving
computer user.
I tried to calibrate an thermo sublimation dye printer. Calibration
always looked good, but every print had to be tweaked and reprint for
so so results. I decided that I don't want to waist my time and money
with such stuff.
Prints from digital mini lab were an initial success.
> as one hour lab usually make very
> disappointing color/contrast adjustment.
No problem if you make this adjustments at home and just provides the
mini lab with digital data.
> - cost of one hour lab is much cheaper
An issue for the less quality conscious.
> but for inkjet you will only select
> the best to print,
Add the multiple test prints.
> not like one hour lab you will have whole roll processed
> and printed.
All mini labs I know do developing only and reprints.
> C/ Archival property of inkjet print is a common argue item, check Wilhelm
> Imaging Resource to see how things going:
I know from actual _existing_ prints and from the _experiance_ of
other user that Inkjet is not the most reliable printing media.
> In brief, the current Epson 870 with Epson Matte paper can last up to 24-26
> years and HP 4-5 years, they are all common available. Some special pigment
> ink can last for over 100 years, much better than current traditional photo
> paper.
I _know_ that B&W lasts longer than 100 years and I _know_ that colour
prints can last decades.
I _have_seen_ Inkjet prints fading within days.
"Special inks" not used in available consumer goods are just of
academic interest.
Epson has _promised_ to produce "long-lasting" inks which developed an
colour cast within days.
Vaporware:
> There is no reason that they are only design for industrial purpose
> (except some UV ink), I expected they will be available to normal consumer
> within a few years.
...
> but if resolution reach 5Kx3K it will be roughly equal to the best
> color slide currently available.
...
> Within one to two
> years 6M pixels SLR DC will be available at perhaps under $3K. There may be
> also some high end P&S DC with this resolution at a much lower price.
>
> - On the other hand low cost DC will be available at below $200.
...
I wont hold my breath until electronic industries vapourware
materialize. Until then I stuck to the available stuff. For my
_personal_ needs conventional cameras are far superior to anything
"digital" industry offers now.
Inferior digital cameras:
> Kodak high end DC (DCS620? can't remember the model
> number) at ISO3200, although resolution is low (2M pixel?)
...
The 10000DM, 5000EUR ~5000US$ N*k*n has an lower resolution than
consumer cameras and worse colour rendering than most but the very
worst CMOS models of them.
> - Also, after seeing the results from some Canon D30 users and
> Imaging-resource, it seems that CMOS image sensor has very big
> improvement, not necessary inferior to CCD, see it yourself.
I know from the owner of an D30 and tests in the computer magazine
"c't" that there is an "noise issue" with this camera and image
quality degrades fast with higher sensitivities.
> - Image capture rate, E-10
Maximum sensitivity: 400ASA
>...is around 1.2s between shoots
Slooow
> and shutter time
> lag of under 100ms.
Normal cameras can do that or better for decades.
> Not too bad and next generation will be better.
Vapourware
> E100RS
> can shoot at 15fps
F1RS could do that decades ago, at higher resolution for much more
images.
"Robot" cameras and some special high speed cameras can do this since
the first half of the (last) century.
> although resolution is low (1.5M pixels) but who know
Inferior
> when will this happen to 6M pixel DC?
Vapourware
> E/ Printing cost - besides do it with your own inkjet or dye-sub printer,
Which is _very_ costly.
> The Fuji Frontier processing machine is now very common in Hong Kong, some
> lab here offer US$0.1 per 4x6 print (whole 35mm roll with extra film
> developing charge of ~$2.5).
An operator of such a machine managed to print my slides not only out
of focus, but with an ugly green tint while generously cropping the
image.
> Basically it can also accept electronic file
> (on disk, CF or SM) but of course price are a bit higher at this moment.
The costs for printing slides are not much cheaper than digital data,
but one avoids unsharp, random colour contrast and brightness, along
with reducing the risk of damaging the valuable originals.
> - For color and contrast control, digital is the best, there is no question.
> See how many time you were not satisfy with the print from one hour lab
Agreed as long as you have no control offer the device (or an capable
operator).
> and
> how much better you can get from your own inkjet printer.
Not really better, but definitely more expensive.
> Custom lab
> printing is another issue, but it cost more money and time.
For really _big_ prints an alternative and for that application an
good price performance relation.
Happy new year
Richard
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|