B&W Digital Print Quality Tips

[Noisegate]

I have always been frustrated with the overall look of my matte B&W prints. On screen, they look perfect. Go to print, and I end up with lifeless, dull prints. My monitor is calibrated, I've read the book (Jeff Schewe), my printers (Epson 3880 for color, Epson 3880 PiezoPro for B&W) are up to snuff, and I have done extensive paper testing to the point of wallpapering my entire house with the same test photo! Still, I am never happy.

I understand matte prints will appear less contrasty and I know for a fact, that my blacks are black so I suspect my problem lies in the mid's and/or highlights. That said, does anyone have any tips on how to "brighten" the contrast without losing highlight details? Or better yet, does anyone wish to share their workflow when it comes to printing B&W prints?

As a side note, I am not technically savvy in that I don't have densitometers and other measuring devices laying around. I understand general principles but get lost in the science of some of this stuff - So, please take this into account.

 

[Pieter12]

You might want to try (if you haven't already) a bright white paper, such as Hahnemuhle Fine Art Bright White or Canson Baryta (a stain finish, maybe not what you're after).

 

[Noisegate]

I haven't tried the Hahnemuhle Fine Art Bright White and will look into that one. I currently use Canson Plantine for a more satin/glossy finish and love it. I feel it is much easier to get a print to "pop" on papers that have a sheen to it. My current subject matter, however, really needs a more "softer" look that matte paper has to offer. "Softer" good. "Dull" bad. So what is the trick with matte? I have seen gorgeous prints done on various matte papers and I just can't seem to make the transition.

 

[Alan9940]

What paper do you print on? Back when I printed exclusively on matte paper, I used Epson Velvet and was very happy with the results. Don't know much about PiezoPro, other than the chatter I hear about it on the interwebs. Since you said your house is littered with test prints, am I correct in assuming that some of this is do to calibration runs in PiezoPro? If the Cone software is not working out for you, you might want to check out Richard Boutwell's products at bwmastery.com. If you want to skip all the DIY stuff and possibly print some of the best B&W prints you've ever seen, check out ImagePrint Black; not cheap, but worth every penny IMO.

 

[removedacct1]

I haven't tried the Hahnemuhle Fine Art Bright White and will look into that one. I currently use Canson Plantine for a more satin/glossy finish and love it. I feel it is much easier to get a print to "pop" on papers that have a sheen to it. My current subject matter, however, really needs a more "softer" look that matte paper has to offer. "Softer" good. "Dull" bad. So what is the trick with matte? I have seen gorgeous prints done on various matte papers and I just can't seem to make the transition.

I print most of my work on Canson Rag Photographique and find it is anything but dull and lifeless. In fact, I prefer it over Platine.

 

[fgorga]

I have been using an Epson 3880-based Piezography Pro system for about six months and a matte-only Epson 1430 with Pizeography warm neutral inks for a few years.

With the Piezo Pro system, I print on a number of papers for which the Piezography folks provide curves... my 'go to' matte paper is Moab Entrada Natural which gives very nice results.

I also print on a number of hot pressed watercolor papers and printmaking papers that are not specifically coated for inkjet printing with both Piezography systems. This works nicely for the right image but the resulting prints will never be as sharp as prints made on paper meant for inkjet printing. It is just the nature of the beast. The same is true for matte vs. luster inkjet papers... a print on matte paper will never be quite as sharp as one on glossier paper.

I have found that one needs to specifically process files one wants to print on matte paper; trying to print one file on both a matte paper and even a luster paper is not ideal. Specifically, one needs to increase the mid-tone contrast for matte paper compared to luster paper. The same is true for sharpening. A print sharpened enough for matte paper is most often over sharpened for luster paper.

Lastly, I have found it best to stick with papers for which Piezography curves are available. (I have not delved deep enough into the system to make my own curves.) However, when this is not possible (as with the non-inkjet 'art' papers I use) both the ink limit and gamma sliders in the Advanced Adjustments section of QTR become important tools in fine tuning results.

 

[Noisegate]

What paper do you print on? Back when I printed exclusively on matte paper, I used Epson Velvet and was very happy with the results. Don't know much about PiezoPro, other than the chatter I hear about it on the interwebs. Since you said your house is littered with test prints, am I correct in assuming that some of this is do to calibration runs in PiezoPro? If the Cone software is not working out for you, you might want to check out Richard Boutwell's products at bwmastery.com. If you want to skip all the DIY stuff and possibly print some of the best B&W prints you've ever seen, check out ImagePrint Black; not cheap, but worth every penny IMO.

My excessive print collection is compliments of trial and error. I don't have any calibration equipment (other than my eyes) for print making and so I am at the mercy of standard curves provided by Cone. I just now took a quick look at BWmastery.com and will spend much more time at that website. Thank you so much for providing the link.

 

[Noisegate]

I have been using an Epson 3880-based Piezography Pro system for about six months and a matte-only Epson 1430 with Pizeography warm neutral inks for a few years.

With the Piezo Pro system, I print on a number of papers for which the Piezography folks provide curves... my 'go to' matte paper is Moab Entrada Natural which gives very nice results.

I also print on a number of hot pressed watercolor papers and printmaking papers that are not specifically coated for inkjet printing with both Piezography systems. This works nicely for the right image but the resulting prints will never be as sharp as prints made on paper meant for inkjet printing. It is just the nature of the beast. The same is true for matte vs. luster inkjet papers... a print on matte paper will never be quite as sharp as one on glossier paper.

I have found that one needs to specifically process files one wants to print on matte paper; trying to print one file on both a matte paper and even a luster paper is not ideal. Specifically, one needs to increase the mid-tone contrast for matte paper compared to luster paper. The same is true for sharpening. A print sharpened enough for matte paper is most often over sharpened for luster paper.

Lastly, I have found it best to stick with papers for which Piezography curves are available. (I have not delved deep enough into the system to make my own curves.) However, when this is not possible (as with the non-inkjet 'art' papers I use) both the ink limit and gamma sliders in the Advanced Adjustments section of QTR become important tools in fine tuning results.

Hi Frank, thank you for the information....specifically the tip on mid-tone contrast and sharpening. I've always made separate "print" files to customize and tweak the photos for printing and over the last few days realized exactly what you have mentioned above - in that individual files must be made for each paper type....I'm going to need another hard drive! I have not dabbled with the Advanced Adjustments section so it's good to know that will come in handy for non-profiled papers. That said, I'm way shy of the experience/knowledge needed to go beyond standard papers/profiles.

 

[grat]

Apologies if this is a silly question, but I assume you're going through the whole colorspace / soft-proofing process to match your computer's color space to the printer/paper?

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Try to print BW in the darkroom. I still do. Every time I print from my Epson C88+, I'm so fascinated. Matte, gloss. Doesn't matter. Way more B/W than darkroom grey.

 

[Noisegate]

Apologies if this is a silly question, but I assume you're going through the whole colorspace / soft-proofing process to match your computer's color space to the printer/paper?

I calibrate my monitor and do utilize the soft-proofing process to some extent. In all honesty, as 99.9% of my stuff is monochrome, I don't pay too much attention to colorspace...other than ensuring the colorspace is the same throughout the process chain.

 

[Noisegate]

Try to print BW in the darkroom. I still do. Every time I print from my Epson C88+, I'm so fascinated. Matte, gloss. Doesn't matter. Way more B/W than darkroom grey.

I also have a darkroom (well, it's in the closet right now collecting dust). Trying to get the perfect print was just as elusive with the added annoyance of having to stand on your feet, in the dark, with wet hands and the smell of fixer lingering in your nose. The trashcan filled up just the same! Perhaps I am too picky. My hubby took out his partially broken Kiev 88 film camera, took a picture of a meadow, scanned it, complete with dust specs, oil spots and God knows what else, tossed the file into the print queue after making a few adjustments and called it a day! Much to my dismay, the print was astonishing good! I wanted to punch him! I didn't. Instead, I reflecting on some earlier advice I received on this forum. I now believe part of my problem is that I am too emotionally attached to the image. After taking a couple days off, I looked at the wall of test prints and I honestly can't tell the difference in some of them. What was I thinking? What was I trying to improve upon? Who knows at this point.

The good news is I have discovered a false disdain. I never used paper with Optical Brighteners. But, as was suggested here, I tried some Epson Hot Press Bright (poor man's version of Hahnmulhe photo rag bright?) and absolutely loved it! This was the first time a matte paper has even come close to how I visualized the physical print. Another lesson learned....can't worry about the future.

 

[fgorga]

Try to print BW in the darkroom. I still do. Every time I print from my Epson C88+, I'm so fascinated. Matte, gloss. Doesn't matter. Way more B/W than darkroom grey.

With all due respect, this response is nonsensical.

It is pretty much the same as if someone asked a question about watercolor painting and you said try oil painting. Both give you a painting but they are completely different media.

The original question was how to make a better inkjet print. Inkjet prints are a completely different medium than silver gelatin prints. One is not a replacement for the other and just like watercolor and oil paint, one is not better than the other, they are just different and can only be equated on the most superficial level.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

With all due respect, this response is nonsensical.

It is pretty much the same as if someone asked a question about watercolor painting and you said try oil painting. Both give you a painting but they are completely different media.

The original question was how to make a better inkjet print. Inkjet prints are a completely different medium than silver gelatin prints. One is not a replacement for the other and just like watercolor and oil paint, one is not better than the other, they are just different and can only be equated on the most superficial level.

Do you have sense of humour or ever read something more indirect than manual?

OK. For you and only. All I was saying to OP, darkroom prints are never b/w and was trying to make him thinking different than "I have to buy only expensive stuff". I even provided INKJET b/w prints pictures from cheap INKJET printer I have and use.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

.....

I'm not expert in piezo either. Nor I have deep pockets for it. But using Epson paper for inkjet prints was the key.
Somewhere in those papers specifications they have parameter which tells how white paper is. But from my expirince Epson paper for prints must have "Premium" word in the title.

I also use available space in house to do darkroom prints. A my wife wants to cut it off asap. Meanwhile I went to exhibitions showing so called b/w darkroom prints to see what wrong I'm doing. Nothing. I don't know why it is called b/w film photography, while it is just a gobbles of grey .

 

[wiltw]

I have always been frustrated with the overall look of my matte B&W prints. On screen, they look perfect. Go to print, and I end up with lifeless, dull prints. My monitor is calibrated, I've read the book (Jeff Schewe), my printers (Epson 3880 for color, Epson 3880 PiezoPro for B&W) are up to snuff, and I have done extensive paper testing to the point of wallpapering my entire house with the same test photo! Still, I am never happy.

I understand matte prints will appear less contrasty and I know for a fact, that my blacks are black so I suspect my problem lies in the mid's and/or highlights. That said, does anyone have any tips on how to "brighten" the contrast without losing highlight details? Or better yet, does anyone wish to share their workflow when it comes to printing B&W prints?

As a side note, I am not technically savvy in that I don't have densitometers and other measuring devices laying around. I understand general principles but get lost in the science of some of this stuff - So, please take this into account.

I am not a B&W digital image maker. But I have decades in film. Inherently digital is a Linear 'curve' sensitometrically, while film is an S-curve. Have you tried to postprocess with application of an S-shaped tone curve? Not so much 'middle' gray tones.

 

[Jim Jones]

I agree. Capture the digital image with 16 bits to permit quality curve adjustment.

 

[Noisegate]

I'm not expert in piezo either. Nor I have deep pockets for it. But using Epson paper for inkjet prints was the key.
Somewhere in those papers specifications they have parameter which tells how white paper is. But from my expirince Epson paper for prints must have "Premium" word in the title.

I also use available space in house to do darkroom prints. A my wife wants to cut it off asap. Meanwhile I went to exhibitions showing so called b/w darkroom prints to see what wrong I'm doing. Nothing. I don't know why it is called b/w film photography, while it is just a gobbles of grey .

Metaphorically speaking, they should call it "Grey" photography as there is nothing "black and white" about it! Science mixed with art equals fuzzy formulas.

 

[Noisegate]

I am not a B&W digital image maker. But I have decades in film. Inherently digital is a Linear 'curve' sensitometrically, while film is an S-curve. Have you tried to postprocess with application of an S-shaped tone curve? Not so much 'middle' gray tones.

I always add a bit of an S curve...sometimes too much! I think part of my problem was with the paper - it made my prints more "mushy." I'm still waiting for a box of Epson Hot Press Bright to be delivered to confirm this once and for all.

 

[Noisegate]

I agree. Capture the digital image with 16 bits to permit quality curve adjustment.

16 bit all the way!

 

[Rlibersky]

Are you happy with the results "Epson Hot Press Bright" paper?

 

[ced]

Perhaps you need to see that you are getting the DMax as you want to see it coming off the printer, if that passes then you need to see if the whites (with details) are what you want to see, if that is okay then it is down to controlling the midtone.
The paper that you are using may just not be giving you what you expect.

 

[Noisegate]

Are you happy with the results "Epson Hot Press Bright" paper?

Take my opinion with a grain of salt as my experience with matte papers is limited to the few I have tested, but of the ones I tried, I liked Epson Hot Press Bright the best. It was the overall best in terms of maximum contrast for my style. I believe it does have some Optical Brighteners which puts off some people but since there are no museum curators knocking on my door, I don't worry about that too much these days.

 

[jeffreyg]

Have you tried printing the B&W's with the printer you use for color? I don't generally do color but shoot film and scan tthe negatives. I only have one 3880 so I print with the Epson inks on Hahnemuhle and Moab papers. I also use the eyeball techniques. While it may sound weird to those who like the "science of digital" I get excellent results. Here's what I do: scan (2 1/4 or 4x5) with SilverFast Studio 8, open in PhotoShop, convert to gray scale, edit, copy and make a new file, convert the original to RGB, change the copy to duotone and use a tritone* that gives me a warm slightly more contrasty image, convert that to RGB and copy, on the original make another layer and paste the tritoned image and modify that layer to taste.select all layers and copy merged (in case you want to go back to tweak). It gives me a slightly warm black VERY close to Ilford multigrade fiber paper from my wet darkroom and a great result on matte and glossy rag Hahnemuhle and Moab Juniper.

It sounds like work but *save the tritone setting and it's mainly copying and pasting.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

http://www.sculptureandphotography.com/

 

[guangong]

This may be a foolish question, but could the undesired outcome be due to shortcomings of the negative? I ask because no one has asked about the negative.
I also get the impression that some are interested in high contrast pics, and do not like midtomes.
I am not trolling, but truly interested in the role of the negative. Should one be shooting differently with film if printing digitally rather than with enlarger?