On 30 Nov 2004 at 19:54, Kenneth Waller wrote: > Rob, > not sure what D-Lab 2 is but I've lately been doing a two step sharpening > with unsharp mask, (an initial sharpening when I set white point/black point > and > a final sharpening when I set the final print size.) more or less following > the > same procedure laid out at http://www.naturescapes.net/122004/tg1204.htm and > the > results are better than I've achieved in several years of printing with my > Epsons using a one step sharpening.
Hi Kenneth, The d-lab.2 is an Agfa digital mini-lab capable of producing up to 12x18" prints on regular photographic paper from digital image files. http://www.agfa.co.uk/minilab/minilab_info.html Thanks for posting the link, it's a decent artical but I'm not sure what you mean by two step? In my full digital workflow I'm currently sharpening the image in the RAW convertor for the best compromise between edge artifacts and edge contrast and minimising bloom artifacts, which varies considerably between images. Then once in PS I do a very acute sharpen using a USM action which has a very small radius. I'm pretty happy at this point however I feel that there is likely an optimum degree of sharpening for any output resolution using this particular printer. So that was really the basis for my query. Cheers On 30 Nov 2004 at 16:58, Bruce Dayton wrote: > Hello Rob, > > My local lab uses D-Lab 2 and D-Lab 3 printers. I haven't noticed any > particular softness with printing to them. When I print locally, the > software used to print does seem to make some difference - quite > commonly I print with QImage and it rezes up and sharpens the image > before sending to the driver. It is common for my prints from the HP > 7960 to look sharper than the D-Lab. > > Now I am going to have to do a little experimenting. I'll let you > know of my findings. One thing I do recall is that the D-Lab prints > at 400 dpi rather than the common 300 dpi of the Frontiers. Hi Bruce, Good point, I don't have a clue which application they actually print from, I know the results from Q-image and PS vary somewhat from what I've seen on the web. I think I'll likely put together a composite image using the same crop sharpened using various methods and just see how it prints? I look forward to your report when you get a chance to run some experiments. Cheers, On 30 Nov 2004 at 18:57, William Robb wrote: > You will need to work with the lab on this one. > The degree of sharpening is user defined, and can be altered to suit > the market. Yes I realise this now, so each new printing service will likely have to be assessed individually regardless of their lab type :-( > Inkjet printers are inherently sharper than digital to photo paper > printers. Interesting, I know sublimates are usually pretty bad WRT acutance and I can appreicate that the individual ink droplets on ink jet prints don't spread on the right paper so are likely perceived as more acute. But the d-lab print was softer than I've seen from traditional photo prints. More testing to do. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
