VERY large prints

[DeesSqueeze]

I would like advice or suggestions on how to make a 96" x 96" color print. I checked the archives (HUGE archives, aren't they?) , but found nothing that jumped out at me. Thanks in advance.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Commonly, photo and digital papers are only coated 42" or 52" wide (I believe that latter one is right, but my mind is slipping a gear today). These coatings have 2" of selvedge at the sides giving a total widht of 40" or 50" in a possible dimension of a print, so 40 x 80 for example, would be the largest print from conventional materials.

The best alternative is to coat your own.

PE

 

[big_ben_blue]

Another alternative would be making two half prints, and then laminating them to a common back support.
Most if not all of the ultra large printing is done with supersized digital printers today. The studio I work for, had a few similar sized prints done on canvas (by a place in Toronto) and then stretched it over the back support (could be anything from traditional woodframes to foamboard-over-frame type of solutions). The results were nothing short of stunning.

 

[pentaxuser]

For someone who has just said that he used to be a photographer and I am inferring from this, isn't back into the swing of things, you've certainly decided to jump into the deep end by going straight to colour and 8ft by 8 ft. prints!

Just out of curiosity what kind of picture did you have in mind to print at this size and how were you planning to do it? Have you a very well equipped darkroom that has stood idle for sometime?

Sorry, it's just that I have never seen a newcomer in his second post take such a leap.

pentaxuser

 

[DeesSqueeze]

Coating my own paper would be the preferred way to go. And we are pursuing that route for our B&W prints. I encountered several of your posts in other threads which lead me to believe that color emulsions are not within reach of a small shop. If I am wrong, please jump in. Among our projects is at least one image which requires a large color print. But the B&W path is filled with delightful possibilities.

Commonly, photo and digital papers are only coated 42" or 52" wide (I believe that latter one is right, but my mind is slipping a gear today). These coatings have 2" of selvedge at the sides giving a total widht of 40" or 50" in a possible dimension of a print, so 40 x 80 for example, would be the largest print from conventional materials.

The best alternative is to coat your own.

PE

 

[DeesSqueeze]

I haven't picked up a camera for years. However, my wife has. And her work has been supported by some notable people, including the Curator of Modern Art and Photography at the Winnipeg Art Gallery, among others.

I have sort of fallen into editing because she can't edit her own work. The color picture I want to print 96"x96" is an abstract in orange. After I become a subscriber, I'll post some of her work.

I am seeking information on how to do the printing, because I don't have chops to do it on my own.

There are several images that she has taken which would benefit from being printed large. And while I am a newcomer to the forum, I've had a long history working with DP's on film and televisions shoots... nothing technical, but, as the writer, they sort of had to talk to me, and that's always a good thing.

So, I guess I am taking this on because I can. And who better to help me than a community like this?

For someone who has just said that he used to be a photographer and I am inferring from this, isn't back into the swing of things, you've certainly decided to jump into the deep end by going straight to colour and 8ft by 8 ft. prints!

Just out of curiosity what kind of picture did you have in mind to print at this size and how were you planning to do it? Have you a very well equipped darkroom that has stood idle for sometime?

Sorry, it's just that I have never seen a newcomer in his second post take such a leap.

pentaxuser

 

[DeesSqueeze]

I had considered this approach. My concern was in matching and aligning the prints. Did you have any problems/concerns? How did the final product look? What backing would you recommend, given that this will be a paper print?

Another alternative would be making two half prints, and then laminating them to a common back support.

 

[mark]

I tried doing two half images once on 11x14 paper just to do it for an image of 22x24. Lineing up the two halfs was pretty easy but the seam down the middle stopped me from going further.

I will be watching this thread closely. Sounds like an interesting project.

 

[big_ben_blue]

I had considered this approach. My concern was in matching and aligning the prints. Did you have any problems/concerns? How did the final product look? What backing would you recommend, given that this will be a paper print?

Good question. My experience has been primarely with the print on canvas route rather than paper. For paper, I would probably consider something like masonite or foamboard on a wood frame. If the background support is going to be in pieces too (ie 2 shets of 4x8 foamcore), the line between the two sheets has to be smoothened out or it will show up later through the print. We ended up cutting a small v-groove and filled it with a white compound (looked like some sort of drywall patching).
Mounting such large prints can be challenging to say the least. There are all sorts of issue, ranging from air bubbles and dust to problems with the adhesives. We did days of preliminary testing on small scrap pieces. I can't quite remember which adhesive we ended up using (one of the multitude of aerosol based glues). Some glues didn't have enough holding power, some dried too quickly, others were leaving jelly like globs. You have to work FAST with a well oiled team. We started by aligning the print dry and temporaely securing it in place. Then one person started to spread the glue in a section, while the other held the print up and then gently pressing the print to the glued section (gloves and soft rollers are a must). When progressing the mounting through all sections of the print, don't press the print to the very end of the glued sections as it could cause unsighty lines showing through the print.
In the end and after endless frustrations, everything turned out fine. Would I ever do it again myself? NO WAY!!! Best left to specialized people. You may want to try to contact Edward Burtinsky (the fellow who does these large scale images of industrial landscapes). Many of his prints are 40x50 (mixture of traditional prints and inkjet prints).

EDIT: the texture of the canvas had some pleasant side effects. For one it hides minor mounting errors, and secondly viewers won't mind the slighly fuzzy lower "sharpness"/resolution (I'm hunting for the right word here) of such huge prints (when compared to the razor like sharpness of smaller prints (the matter of expectation I presume).

 

[Photo Engineer]

Color prints are possible in the home lab by using Dye Transfer, or by making your own multilayer, but that is so difficult I discourage your trying it.

Large dye transfers can be made as described above, just like any other method.

Kodak used to custom cut 40x80 sheets or larger of color paper. You might try them.

Good luck to you.

PE

 

[Mick Fagan]

We used to get 72" wide rolls of colour paper from Kodak. I believe only two places in the world had that facility. Mainland USA and Germany, not sure if it was in Stuttgart.

This was 15 years ago when I left the lab. I know that 5 years later they were still processing 6' wide paper. Different story these days, I suppose.

B&W roll paper was available from Ilford, 48" wide.

I have done s/s B&W full length portraits in my own darkroom using house guttering to hold the baths, and two people to see-saw the paper. Adhere it to 10mm foam core and then cut out with a sharp blade, bingo, one has an instant 2D person.

Fun stuff!

Mick.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Mick; Rochester only coated 42" paper widths. The Colorado, Canadian, Mexican and Brazilian plants were designed differently, and IDK what they could coat. They did build the wide coater in Rochester for film. It could coat paper, but was never used for production paper runs. In any event, that wide coater was not 72". I would like to find out where you got it.

As for 'mating' two smaller prints to make one large print, we used to do that to make maps in the military. These were called mosaics and were made by cutting the edges in an irregular curving pattern and then 'feathering' the support of the print to go on the top and the bottom. This was done by scraping the support away with a razor blade. Then the bottom print was mounted firmly to a mat board. After that, the top print was mounted in register with the bottom print, but the feathered portion was simply glued in place.

The thinned support and irregular edge removed most any lines at normal viewing distance. Most people thought it was made from a single sheet of paper.

PE

 

[DeesSqueeze]

PE, thanks. That sound practical. I might give it a try with a couple smaller test runs, see how it pans out.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Mick is right

Kodak did make wide roll paper for colour print and backlight duratrans. One of the materials was cut exactly to 72inch and the other was a 1 1/2 larger.
Most enlarging mural labs in NA used this paper, Contimat made a large processor for this material.
Today it is apparently not available as all the digital exposing units are of a 50inch platform.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Guys;

I don't doubt it, especially duratrans which is a film base. Paper, coated that wide is a different beast. Imagine a wet sheet of RC, at 72" width with 2" undercut rollers driving it. It bends in the center. Film does not. So, high speed production of wide film is much easier than the same on paper. The thing is, that wide paper production must have been a rare event.

There are other technical reasons why paper is seldom coated beyond certain widths in production. The head end of film and paper machines are different, as are the coating hoppers. This is not a minor difference, but a major difference in design to work properly for film or paper. I know that they can be interchanged, but not without difficulty in getting the best results.

So, I'm sure they could do the 72" duratrans given the wide machine, but I'll bet that the paper was a rarity in that width and was coated quite slowly and had a lot of rejected product. Also, IDK where the machine was located. I don't remember one that wide at Kodak Park in Rochester.

PE

 

[Bob Carnie]

Knowing that you worked for Kodak , I would think your ability to find where the paper was coated would be easy.
What Mick and I are saying is that we used it, thousands of rolls dura and colour print, were produced for the wide machine , actually when this product was introduced it created all sorts of mounting application problems as all the mount materials were geared for 50inch.
The 72 inch Kodak paper was not an oddity in fact it had a wonderful run and produced a lot of very large mural shows.
BGM Colour Labs in Toronto where I worked in the mid 80's started in 1981 with this paper and discontinued the product in 2004.
They are still using the large processor today for lambda prints.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Bob; As stated above... "I don't doubt it". When I was there it was not being done due to problems as I mentioned, and I have never looked into it. I will.

PE

 

[filmnut]

The largest single width of colour paper made I beleive, is the 72" on a 100 foot roll, that Kodak used to supply. They may still make this material, but I doubt it, as they have been discontinuing many of the lower production products for some time. Even so, this is not large enough for your purpose.
The comment in an earlier thread about two panels spliced together would be the best bet. The very large inkjet style printers I've seen don't have paricularly good quality, but a Durst Lambda (lasers exposing onto photo paper) printer gives very good quality, and the two pieces can be spliced together and mounted. The seam is not invisible, but when done well, is not very noticable. The substrate has to be made up also, as I know of no one that supplies material that large.
If you are interested in more info, PM me, as this is what I do for a living.
Keith

 

[jd callow]

Duggal (Thanks to EddyM for the correct spelling) in NYNY will do 72" lambda prints. Otherwise you'll need to go with one of the large format inkjet printers. many years ago Meteor Photo in the detroit area would do very large (at least 72") traditional RA4 or B/W prints.

A couple years ago I had a client ask me for a quote on a 6'x6' print. After much calling and I believe a RFI here on APUG Duggal was the only place I found.

 

[Photo Engineer]

I have verifed that 72" paper is made only at the Colorado plant. Rochester makes film up to 54", but does not normally coat paper that wide here. The widest paper normally made here is 42".

IDK if they still supply paper in the 72" uncut size though.

This is courtesy of friends at EK. Thanks to them for a quick assist here.

PE

 

[eddym]

Dugans(sp?) in NYNY will do 72" lambda prints. .

You're close:
http://www.duggal.com/

 

[jd callow]

Thanks Eddy!

 

[Petzi]

IDK if they still supply paper in the 72" uncut size though.

The Océ Lightjet is available in a version for that size, I have seen it at the recent Photokina, and the folks at the booth told me that the paper is available from Kodak. The Lightjet was shown at the Hostert booth. Hostert is a German firm that makes paper processors for that size.

I have never heard of a Durst Lambda for that paper width, but the Lambda has the advantage that it can make a continuous print of roll size, while the Lightjet can only expose large sheets at a time.