Well am I really ill tempered? Or just blatantly outspoken? As far as photographic quality prints go there are two points to consider. 1. this is a photography list. 2. people keep saying their printer makes photographic quality prints.
The is nothing to say a print that is not photographic in appearance is not a good and interesting print, nor that it does not convey what the producer of the image wanted to convey. But I find the claim whether by the manufacturer or the user that consumer printers produce photographic quality prints disingenuous. If there is one that will do so I would like to know so I can think about getting one. Certainly I have never produced a print better than a C rating on my printer, but it is an older model and I would suspect many of the newer ones will get up to D. In fact I would expect most of the prints I will see will be in the C and D range and that is not bad. I will be very happy if I see one in the E range. I find this an opportunity to check out printers in the real world, used by people like you, Mike, and others on the list. It is also a chance to compile a rating list for the printers you use that will give someone in the market for a new printer an idea of what to expect of the various printers available. Certainly it will be a one dimensional rating. I expect to see some very nice prints that do not rate any higher than a C. In fact I deliberately choose ratings that are not really hierarchical other than the lowest and I only put that one in in the hopes people would not send prints in that category. Once again, I would be very pleased to find out I am wrong and that there are inexpensive printers that we can use as a part of a real digital photographic darkroom. --graywolf ------------------------------------------------- The optimist's cup is half full, The pessimist's is half empty, The wise man enjoys his drink. ----- Original Message ----- From: Mike Johnston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 1:19 AM Subject: PDML Digital Print Challenge (was Tom 's digital challenge) > Curmudgeon Rittenhouse wittily wrote: > > > A. Awful > > B. Better > > C. Cool (a vary nice print, but not photographic in appearance). > > D. Delightful (nearly photographic quality) > > E. Excellent (every bit as good as a good mini-lab print) > > F. Fantastic (as good as a custom print by an expert printer) > > > Okay, I'll play the game, but I'm not so sure of the standard of > judgement...I don't think inkjet prints look exactly like traditional > photos, but I find that a GOOD thing. They look different, and I sometimes > like the ways in which they're different. Sometimes not. > > I just sent Tom (and Shel) two small prints of images shot with the Pentax > Optio 330 and printed on my Canon S800. These are definitely "consumer" > pieces of equipment. We'll see how they "score." - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
