Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Digital to Print Output

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Digital to Print Output

    I have a customer who is needs to have a portrait redone (fairly simple remove creases and tears) but she is going to want it reprinted so she can hang it with the rest of the photos of her family.

    The picture is 11x14 and it's being scanned today.
    The questions are:

    What format would be best for it to be saved under for the best quality?

    And

    Should I recommend a photo specialty shop (Wolf Camera, Ritz, Camera Exchange, typical camera hobbyist store) or a reproduction/copying center (such as Kinko's and what have you)?

    I'm obviously not going to save this in JPEG form, I was thinking GIF, but I also want it so where it can be easiliy read by their software. Maybe the kodak standard?

    I'd print this myself, but I just don't have a high enough quality of a printer to handle it.

    It irritates me that I've been so focused on restoring digitally and saving them on disc, that I overlooked that people would probably want to hang there memories when possible.


    As usual, your words of wisdom will be greatly appreciated.

    Rick

    <goes to his corner and puts on a dunce hat>

  • #2
    Rick, From the description, if it were me, I would definately send it out to be done. The place I work with on occasion, wants everything in TIFF RGB at 250 resolution. I would look in the phone book for your area or on the net for a place which specializes in doing that type of printing of photos, and avoid any of the "quickie-general public" places. hope this is of some help, Tom ( MOO-ve over and share the hat!)

    Comment


    • #3
      You could also save it saved in several file types on one CD. Tom is right about calling around to photo places and see what they can handle. They should specify the size and file types they can handle and whether or not they can handle CDs. It's surprising how many different answers you will get. I think that's why I used to save several different file types and just let them pick what they want. Otherwise I ended up going back too many times for various problems. Also remember, you may want to have them print a small test to see if your color output will match theirs. That was one agriavating aspect of outside printing.
      DJ

      Comment


      • #4
        I don't know a thing about them, but I've seen the Kodak machines where you can put your CD in it, and it will produce a traditional print. Are they good? I have no idea, but possibly something to consider?? One thing that might concern me is how often the chemicals are changed, or just exactly what the process is. Anyone know anything about that? Just a thought.

        Ed

        Comment


        • #5
          Kodak Picture Maker

          I'm pretty sure they are Dye-Sublimation, so there's probably not the chemicals like traditional printing. I have the ALPS MD-5000 and it makes dye sub prints via a 'ribbon' cartridge similar to old fashioned typewriters. However, since the ALPS is no longer being produced, I've tried the KPM and was pretty happy with the results.

          I contacted KODAK and got their specs for burning a CD so the machine would read it.

          I can post their reply if anyone is interested.

          Comment


          • #6
            At the risk of looking like a complete idiot (which I probably am!), how stable are these prints compared to traditional silver halide prints? Also, if you wanted to post what you have, I'm sure somebody would be interested. Thanks.

            Ed

            Comment


            • #7
              I would be interested in seeing the specs from Kodak. I didn't realize that they could read a CD. I thought those machines only worked by copying a photo. I have a HP printer and when I used some new Kodak Ultima paper(which they claim will last for decades?) at my printers highest settings I was very happy with the results.I think HP is making an archival paper now but I haven't tried it yet.Their claim is 17 years.

              Comment


              • #8
                Good suggestions, it never occured to me to save it in multiple formats.

                Just like in Desktop Support, sometimes the easiest of solutions are the ones we overlook.

                I went ahead and called up a resource and was informed of a place right here in Houston that isn't too far away from where I work.

                Thanks again, everyone.

                <straightening out the duncecap>


                Rick

                Comment


                • #9
                  Paulette, I have a question. When you say they give it a 17 year stability rating, does that mean with the combination of a particular ink and paper? I thought there were claims of better longevity, but I don't remember the particulars. Also, it could be my memory -- it just ain't what it used to be.

                  Ed

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Paulette,

                    I should have mentioned in my last post that I'm pretty sure these are two different machines.

                    Ed

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Hi all. I believe most if not all digital photo systems use dye-subs. But hold on. This months issue of Photographic Processing magazine says Sony is setting its sights on the photofinising industry. They are beta testing new systems which they hope to use ink jets in.

                      Most labs using Fuji's Frontier processing systems can do a good job on digital prints. Using Fuji's Archival paper print life is around 70 years. It really depends on who is using the equipment though. Try several places until you find one you can work with. Avoid people who think they know it all. Digital is to new. We are all learning.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        That should be "Digital is too new". By the way love this site!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Dear Ed,
                          I have been using the new Kodak ultima paper recently on my HP printer(2 year old model#882 C) and am very pleased with the quality of my prints. Here's a description from Kodak's FAQ re papers :


                          "Can I expect longer lasting Inkjet Prints from my Inkjet printer when using the KODAK Ultima Picture Paper (High Gloss or Satin)?
                          You can expect a print to last over 30 years when used with KODAK Personal Picture Maker PPM200, and 20 years when produced with the latest HP and EPSON printers.


                          Why do prints last longer when they are made with the KODAK Personal Picture Maker?
                          Print life is a combination of both the paper and the ink that was used to make the print. KODAK Ultima Picture Paper produces long lasting prints on current HP and EPSON printers. However, the results are even better when you combine KODAK Ultima Picture Paper with the KODAK Personal Picture Maker 200 printer. The Kodak patented inks provide an extended print life of over 30 years when printed on KODAK Ultima Picture Paper."
                          The url for their papers is www.kodak.com/go/inkjet

                          Re the HP claim it's what they said in an ad I read in a photography magazine for their new colorfast photo paper.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Thanks for the info Paulette. They said "if used with an Epson or HP printer"? But they didn't target any specific ink. I wonder if this means the ink most commonly used? I know there are some inks that are supposed to have archival (?) qualities.

                            Ed

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Ed, I think, at least in case of Epson, the "Archival" moniker applied to the ink means that it is pigment rather than dye based. However, with the "Chemist types" always coming up with new stuff, this might not be the case with other companies inks. Tom

                              Comment

                              Loading...
                              Working...
                              X