U of S | Mailing List Archive | alt-photo-process-l | RE: Banding on Pictorico with Epson 2200

RE: Banding on Pictorico with Epson 2200

Thanks for the input.  One of the most irksome memories I have from my
inkjet days is that when you just HAD to produce a negative, there was no
way you could persuade a stubborn printer to cooperate, even "a little".
Chemical methods certainly have their disadvantages, but there is never that
ON or OFF issue that one has with a printer.  This is often the case when
one compares digital and analog.  Analog fails "in degrees", ie., one can
get results that range from good to bad.  Digital, being either ON of OFF
either works, or fuhgetaboudit.

-----Original Message-----
From: Camden Hardy [mailto:camden@hardyphotography.net]
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 11:01 AM
To: alt-photo-process-l@usask.ca
Subject: RE: Banding on Pictorico with Epson 2200


> Fairly Global?  Several weeks?  About given up?

I'd like to clarify that the venetian blind problem, despite showing up in
most printers, is still fairly unusual in practice (depending, of course,
on the artist's personal aesthetic).

The banding really only occurs (from what I've seen, at least) in very
smooth highlight gradations.  It doesn't show up in every image.  In my
case, I've _never_ had a problem with it in my images...even those printed
on a printer that exhibits the banding (printing a gradient is a good way
to tell whether your printer does this).

Mark Nelson's got some examples of images that had the banding issues,
although I can't find any of them on his website.  Perhaps he'll share...?

> So what is the real skinny?  Are these printers still a hassle to use?  To
> tell you the truth, Camden, the odds you speak of are not reassuring:  Two
> of your three 2200s band?  You're lucky in that you have more than one to
> choose from.  Is the prevailing thought concerning inkjet negatives still
> that struggling with the printer is just "part of the territory"?

The real skinny, in my opinion, is that this banding is nothing more than
a small hiccup in the progress of digital negatives, and is in no way a
reason not to give them a try.  I have had absolutely wonderful
experiences with these Epson printers, and wouldn't give digital negs up.

I wouldn't go so far as to say that struggling with the printer is part of
the territory.  Like any other workflow, inkjet negatives are not without
problems.  Based on what I'm seeing, each generation of printer is getting
better and better.  The 2200s are great, the 4000s are better in my
opinion, although they're pretty rough with Pictorico, and the prints I've
seen that came from the R2400 and R1800 are phenominal.

I hope this cleared some things up.  The last thing I want to do is scare
anyone away from the workflow I've come to love.  :)

Camden Hardy