Printing from Leica Monochrom?

[pippy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 11/11/2023 at 5:52 AM, elmars said:

...there are only a few papers that are suitable for book printing. They must not be too heavy (max. approx. 220 g)......Suitable papers are available from Hahnemühle (Photo Rag Book and Album) and Innova (Smooth Cotton High White IFA 05)...

Thank you for these recommendations, elmars. I'm not familiar with the Hahnemühle Photo Rag Book which you mention so out of interest could you comment on how the surface-quality of the paper - specifically in terms of detail retention - compares with that of the regular 308 / 500 stock? Is it, really, just the same but simply in a lighter weight?

Thanks in advance!

Philip.

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, pippy said:

Thank you for these recommendations, elmars. I'm not familiar with the Hahnemühle Photo Rag Book which you mention so out of interest could you comment on how the surface-quality of the paper - specifically in terms of detail retention - compares with that of the regular 308 / 500 stock? Is it, really, just the same but simply in a lighter weight?

Thanks in advance!

Philip.

For one thing, it’s coated on both sides. Descriptions and data sheets…

https://www.hahnemuehle.com/en/search-results.html?tx_kesearch_pi1[sword]=photo rag satin&cHash=528755f3fd857cd9bd9ac4ec1f59ae1c
 

Jeff

 

 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[elmars]

vor 6 Stunden schrieb pippy:

Thank you for these recommendations, elmars. I'm not familiar with the Hahnemühle Photo Rag Book which you mention so out of interest could you comment on how the surface-quality of the paper - specifically in terms of detail retention - compares with that of the regular 308 / 500 stock? Is it, really, just the same but simply in a lighter weight?

Thanks in advance!

Philip.

All Photo Rag papers (including Book and Album) are matt fine art papers with a fairly smooth surface. I like that. The Innova paper is also a matt paper, but has a slightly rougher surface and feels a bit thicker and stiffer, even though both are equally heavy. Which surface you like is a matter of taste.

All Hahnemühle papers that are called Photo Rag and don't have an additive (like bright white) have the same coating as far as I know. The image effect is therefore identical. The tonality, especially the shadows, is fantastic. I noticed this again recently when I printed photos from the M11 Monochrom. A much nicer experience than on the screen.

[Stuart Richardson]

As Elmar said, most of the Photo Rag papers are similar, but not all. Photo Rag is just Hahnemühle code for cotton. But Photo Rag book and album, photo rag 180 and photo rag 308 are all quite close to each other. Photo Rag Bright White and Ultrasmooth are both whiter papers (bright white unsurprisingly being the brightest).

I have yet to find a good photo black paper for bookmaking, but I find that the Japanese papers are better for bookmaking than the Western ones, as the fibers they use are lower density and the hand of the paper is much nicer. They are also available in lower weights that feel more like a traditional book. I mostly use Awagami for this. Below is a book I made of my MFA work Awagami. Apologies if you have seen it already, I posted it in another thread a month or two ago. I will say, however, that I think these inkjet made books are generally more suitable as one offs or very small edition art books. There is substantial ink transfer if you have a lot of handling, and the printing surface is not as durable as offset or digital presses. Also, the materials costs are daunting. For the book below, I think it was at least 100 euros in paper, and that was several years ago. It would be more now. My Hahnemuhle papers are up at least 40% or so in the last few years.

 

[elmars]

Great work Stuart!

Can You tell what paper You used exactly? Is it structured? How did You bind the book?

vor 17 Stunden schrieb Stuart Richardson:

There is substantial ink transfer if you have a lot of handling, and the printing surface is not as durable as offset or digital presses.

I would not be too afraid about this. Yes, there is ink abrasion, but only with careless use with too much friction between the sheets. My experience is that people who look at books with such beautiful paper have respect and are very careful.

[pippy]

19 hours ago, elmars said:

...Can You tell what paper You used exactly? Is it structured? How did You bind the book?...

I, too, would be interested to know which paper was used for the book. Beautiful work, Stuart!

As far as the binding is concerned I think it has been crafted using the Japanese 'Stab Binding' method (but could well be mistaken).

Philip.

 

[Bryan B. Sherrod]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Choosing a photo printer for 5x7, 8x10, or 11x14 prints? Epson P900 is great, yet consider printers catering to black & white tonality for your M10M shots. Look for features enhancing monochrome quality. With a $1,500 budget, prioritize your preference—rich black and white portraits akin to medium format film shots. As a hobbyist aiming for quality family/travel photos, seek printers delivering the desired richness and tonal depth for your envisioned prints. Happy printing!

[jaapv]

I find that the Epson XP 15000 delivers excellent B&W results using Canson Baryta  Photographique. Not as featured as more professional models but the results are comparable at a very affordable price and minimal footprint on your desk. 

[newtoleica]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

I find that the Epson XP 15000 delivers excellent B&W results using Canson Baryta  Photographique. Not as featured as more professional models but the results are comparable at a very affordable price and minimal footprint on your desk. 

Interesting. Decent eye-based printer at a VERY good price, but still I wonder at B&W v a pigment printer - see review by Keith Cooper here: https://www.northlight-images.co.uk/epson-xp-15000-printer-review/

[jaapv]

As it has an extra grey cartridge the print quality is very good in my eyes. I print Monochrome regularly on it. The main drawback is that there are no RIPs for it. 

[robsonj]

I have had a Canon Pro 100 for a few years, think I paid $100 for it as part of a Canon Drug Dealers sales model to sell ink. They then doubled down with some crazy deal on 13x19 Canon Photo paper, think I have about 1000 sheets of it, got it all for about $50, it was a crazy good deal. Once the OEM ink ran out, I switched to refilling myself using cheap Precision Color ink. Is it the best ink, probably not, but I can print cheaply and as often as I want (which is less frequent than I should), and I cannot tell the difference, maybe if I did I side by side I would, but not much chance of me doing that. The Pro100 has been great, if I need to run a clean cycle, my ink is cheap, and paper supply is basically endless. It also prints nice monochrom images.

I once thought I saw people converting these printers into being dedicated monochrom printers, but I must have been dreaming as I can't find anything on that conversion now.

 

https://www.precisioncolors.com/PC42.html

Edited December 29, 2023 by robsonj

[david strachan]

You've done well then Robson.

In my early computer years some 30 years or more ago  I managed to waste a lot of money and time, (over one year) and a huge amount of frustration, using after market inks and "other" papers.  They were always off colour and even some I thought right very badly discoloured or faded over time.

Now I just stick to my Epson inks for my Epson 3000, and use Epson papers almost exclusively.

Sure costs a fortune, but so did my darkroom days.  At least they are archival still looking good.

...

[soccerrick10]

I've been using the Canon Pro 1000 for a period of time now.  The prints from my M11M are breathtaking.  I have never seen prints with such definition and resolution.  I don't have complaints on the ink usage in the cleaning cycles.  When I turn the printer on, it doesn't take more than about a minute to be ready to print and the prep cycle only runs for about 30 seconds.  I've printed more than 100 black and white prints from 8x10 to 13x19 and just this week had to replace just the gray cartridge.

Remember, that is with the setup cartridges.  So, I'm not unhappy about the ink consumption.  In talking with several studios about their usage and recommendations, generally it was split 50/50 with Epson/Canon.  I did hear several say although the price is close, there is a world of difference in printer quality between the Pro 300 and Pro 1000.  Nobody recommended the 300 and said if you want to stick to a smaller printer, consider the Epsons.

One thing to keep in mind is that the Pro 1000 is a BEAST of a printer.  I don't find it noisy like some have said.  I don't find it slow like others indicated.  I don't find that it vibrates or moves back and forth while printing.  To put the size in perspective, I have it sitting on top of two, side by side, 1/2 height file cabinets that are 28" wide.  The thing to keep in mind is the front to back distance needed.  For that, I have 4 feet of length from the wall to the folded out paper receiving tray.  That tray is foldable and I keep it closed when not in use.  The printer also weighs ~100 pounds in shipping weight and ~75 pounds set up.

I've been using the Canon Professional Print and Layout software included.  It does a remarkable job while still being a little quirky at times.  In the printing workshop I attended, it was recommended that ColorByte ImagePrint software is the best.  We did get remarkable prints from it.  I downloaded their demo and side by side, the Canon wins out.  I will say, with more time, I think the ImagePrint software will be better.  I'm not convinced it's $800+ dollars better yet.  Maybe that opinion will change with more experience.  Right now I am focusing on just two papers - Canon Photo Paper Pro Luster (great for color prints, very good for black and white) and Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Ultra Smooth for anything black and white that will be framed and wall mounted (phenomenal paper).

Those are my experiences so far.  I realize I am just a neophyte.  I have lots more to learn.  But, when asked whether I would buy a printer again since many print shops can give me prints for less, my answer is always YES!  I am now able to control the entire process from camera, lenses, setting, location, subjects, editing choices and final output.  That to me is a HUGE benefit.

[Jeff S]

3 hours ago, soccerrick10 said:

I've been using the Canon Pro 1000 for a period of time now.  The prints from my M11M are breathtaking.  I have never seen prints with such definition and resolution.  I don't have complaints on the ink usage in the cleaning cycles.  When I turn the printer on, it doesn't take more than about a minute to be ready to print and the prep cycle only runs for about 30 seconds.  I've printed more than 100 black and white prints from 8x10 to 13x19 and just this week had to replace just the gray cartridge.

Remember, that is with the setup cartridges.  So, I'm not unhappy about the ink consumption.  In talking with several studios about their usage and recommendations, generally it was split 50/50 with Epson/Canon.  I did hear several say although the price is close, there is a world of difference in printer quality between the Pro 300 and Pro 1000.  Nobody recommended the 300 and said if you want to stick to a smaller printer, consider the Epsons.

One thing to keep in mind is that the Pro 1000 is a BEAST of a printer.  I don't find it noisy like some have said.  I don't find it slow like others indicated.  I don't find that it vibrates or moves back and forth while printing.  To put the size in perspective, I have it sitting on top of two, side by side, 1/2 height file cabinets that are 28" wide.  The thing to keep in mind is the front to back distance needed.  For that, I have 4 feet of length from the wall to the folded out paper receiving tray.  That tray is foldable and I keep it closed when not in use.  The printer also weighs ~100 pounds in shipping weight and ~75 pounds set up.

I've been using the Canon Professional Print and Layout software included.  It does a remarkable job while still being a little quirky at times.  In the printing workshop I attended, it was recommended that ColorByte ImagePrint software is the best.  We did get remarkable prints from it.  I downloaded their demo and side by side, the Canon wins out.  I will say, with more time, I think the ImagePrint software will be better.  I'm not convinced it's $800+ dollars better yet.  Maybe that opinion will change with more experience.  Right now I am focusing on just two papers - Canon Photo Paper Pro Luster (great for color prints, very good for black and white) and Hahnemuhle Photo Rag Ultra Smooth for anything black and white that will be framed and wall mounted (phenomenal paper).

Those are my experiences so far.  I realize I am just a neophyte.  I have lots more to learn.  But, when asked whether I would buy a printer again since many print shops can give me prints for less, my answer is always YES!  I am now able to control the entire process from camera, lenses, setting, location, subjects, editing choices and final output.  That to me is a HUGE benefit.

I wouldn’t be without ImagePrint Black, whether in conjunction with Epson or Canon.  The profiles, for virtually any paper, are alone worth the price. Custom profiling gear would cost double.  Plus one gets full time soft proofing, terrific editing options, and automatically optimized printer settings, without getting into the Adobe/ Apple/Epson (or Canon) updating chain.  My prints are noticeably improved compared to other options.  

Jeff

[soccerrick10]

1 hour ago, Jeff S said:

I wouldn’t be without ImagePrint Black, whether in conjunction with Epson or Canon.  The profiles, for virtually any paper, are alone worth the price. Custom profiling gear would cost double.  Plus one gets full time soft proofing, terrific editing options, and automatically optimized printer settings, without getting into the Adobe/ Apple/Epson (or Canon) updating chain.  My prints are noticeably improved compared to other options.  

Jeff

Jeff:

Intuitively, I am sure you are correct.  I saw the results using ImagePrint Black during the workshop I attended.  The printer came with Canon's Professional Print and Layout software that gives me similar functionality with soft proofing, paper profiles, optimized printer settings and layout options to maximize paper usage.  At this point, with so much to learn, I'm trying to minimize the variables and was very surprised at the quality I was able to achieve out of the box.  I downloaded the demo version of ImagePrint Black and my initial results didn't come close to what I'm getting already.  So, for now, I'm saving the money and will address that later after I know more about the capabilities and limitations with what I have.

So, I don't disagree.  I'm just not far enough down the knowledge trail to justify it at this time.

To keep this on track of the discussion, the M11M really is impressive and I never realized how much, until I began to print my favorite images.

Rick

Edited December 30, 2023 by soccerrick10

[Jeff S]

26 minutes ago, soccerrick10 said:

Jeff:

Intuitively, I am sure you are correct.  I saw the results using ImagePrint Black during the workshop I attended.  The printer came with Canon's Professional Print and Layout software that gives me similar functionality with soft proofing, paper profiles, optimized printer settings and layout options to maximize paper usage.  At this point, with so much to learn, I'm trying to minimize the variables and was very surprised at the quality I was able to achieve out of the box.  I downloaded the demo version of ImagePrint Black and my initial results didn't come close to what I'm getting already.  So, for now, I'm saving the money and will address that later after I know more about the capabilities and limitations with what I have.

So, I don't disagree.  I'm just not far enough down the knowledge trail to justify it at this time.

To keep this on track of the discussion, the M11M really is impressive and I never realized how much, until I began to print my favorite images.

Rick

Smart to take one step at a time and to reduce variables.  There is a lot to learn about printing well.  
 

That said, as I often mention, having a ‘good eye’ and judgment is the most important part of photography IMO, whether shooting, editing or printing. Tools and techniques can be learned; the hard part is deciding when, where and to what degree to apply them. Small changes can make all the difference as to whether a print is very good, or really ‘sings’. Display lighting can be critical and framing materials can introduce even more important variables (glass types can work for or against paper surfaces, etc). 
 

I’ve been printing since the 80’s with film and darkroom, in many formats, and later with multiple digital bodies.  There’s always something new to learn.  Some of my best prints have come with relatively modest gear. And the best gear (lately M10M, M10-R and SL2) certainly doesn’t ensure stellar results. As always.

Good workshops/teachers can often help broaden your perspective and provide feedback, as you’ve recently found.  There are also many good books and video resources that might assist.  The Digital Post Processing section of the forum includes many related discussions.  Enjoy your print journey.

Jeff

[Photojournoguy]

On 12/30/2023 at 4:10 PM, Jeff S said:

Smart to take one step at a time and to reduce variables.  There is a lot to learn about printing well.  
 

That said, as I often mention, having a ‘good eye’ and judgment is the most important part of photography IMO, whether shooting, editing or printing. Tools and techniques can be learned; the hard part is deciding when, where and to what degree to apply them. Small changes can make all the difference as to whether a print is very good, or really ‘sings’. Display lighting can be critical and framing materials can introduce even more important variables (glass types can work for or against paper surfaces, etc). 
 

I’ve been printing since the 80’s with film and darkroom, in many formats, and later with multiple digital bodies.  There’s always something new to learn.  Some of my best prints have come with relatively modest gear. And the best gear (lately M10M, M10-R and SL2) certainly doesn’t ensure stellar results. As always.

Good workshops/teachers can often help broaden your perspective and provide feedback, as you’ve recently found.  There are also many good books and video resources that might assist.  The Digital Post Processing section of the forum includes many related discussions.  Enjoy your print journey.

Jeff

For framing glass, what are your thoughts on something like the TruVue 70 that is tint-free, water white and supposed to appear invisible?

https://tru-vue.com/solution/ultravue-uv70-glass/

I get that paper choice depends on the image to bring it to life most effectively, but do you choose framing glass for its effect on a specific print? Using the above all the time I’d say would remove that variable while also ensuring top fidelity of the image editing, printing and paper choice as intended by the artist.

Compared to paper choice, I can’t imagine a case where you’d want a certain glass’ character applying a certain tone to the final print.

This is coming from someone who doesn’t (yet) have printing or framing experience, so curious as to your very well traveled perspective here.

[Jeff S]

6 minutes ago, Photojournoguy said:

For framing glass, what are your thoughts on something like the TruVue 70 that is tint-free, water white and supposed to appear invisible?

https://tru-vue.com/solution/ultravue-uv70-glass/

I get that paper choice depends on the image to bring it to life most effectively, but do you choose framing glass for its effect on a specific print? Using the above all the time I’d say would remove that variable while also ensuring top fidelity of the image editing, printing and paper choice as intended by the artist.

Compared to paper choice, I can’t imagine a case where you’d want a certain glass’ character applying a certain tone to the final print.

This is coming from someone who doesn’t (yet) have printing or framing experience, so curious as to your very well traveled perspective here.

Depends on many variables, including paper choice (glass can negate certain paper and print finishes/textures), display lighting (many options), etc. Just like the darkroom drydown effect (silver print tones differ from wet vs dry print), and display lighting, where subtle changes can enhance or remove intended tonalities.  I stock a few glass types, reserving museum glass for ultimate exhibition quality.

Jeff

[Photojournoguy]

2 hours ago, Jeff S said:

Depends on many variables, including paper choice (glass can negate certain paper and print finishes/textures), display lighting (many options), etc. Just like the darkroom drydown effect (silver print tones differ from wet vs dry print), and display lighting, where subtle changes can enhance or remove intended tonalities.  I stock a few glass types, reserving museum glass for ultimate exhibition quality.

Jeff

This one though is meant to be invisible and not impact the viewing of the print at all compared to anything else out there (so not affected by finishes, textures, display lighting, etc). With exception of museum archival and those longevity attributes, the invisibility factor of that and the above seems to favor framing of ANY print as it wouldn’t enhance or remove intended tonalities, but rather letting the print present itself in the manner as intended.

Disregarding associated costs with using only the above or museum glass for example, do you see any reason to use anything BUT these glass qualities that don’t influence the viewing of the print at all?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Jeff S]

Cost is the primary factor for me, although I buy museum glass in bulk at the wholesale level to reduce costs enormously. But I’ll still use somewhat lesser quality glass when not critical. Display lighting conditions remain critical even when using museum glass.  Others have different needs and preferences, including when shipping framed photos.

Jeff