Two Thumbs up for the Epson 3800

I’m amazed — I’ve owned my Epson 3800 printer for over two years now, and tonight was the very first time that I needed to replace an ink cartridge.  Light light black ran out first, but it will soon be followed by light black and light magenta.  As you see in the status window below, the other colors still have a long way to go.  Epson suggests that the cartridges should be used up within a year of opening them, but I do not print that often, so it took me quite a bit longer to even get to this point.  And — no problems yet! 

Epson 3800: No Dried Nozzles Yet

Just a short note for those still fearing head clogs and drying out of the print nozzles. Apparently these were real problems with older printers, but starting with the 3800 Pro, Epson claims a better and more resistant design. I guess I’ll have to agree…

I just I made a print on my 3800 after about 10 weeks of inactivity and the print came out technically perfect. OK, the printer made “head-cleaning noises” for about two minutes before starting to print, but it was all automatic, and as soon as it said it was ready to print, it was indeed ready to print.

I’m trying to make a 30×40 cm print out of this image. I’ve done three test prints so far (on smaller paper), and I’m still amazed at how much easier it is to see flaws on paper than on screen. I’m quite satisfied with the last test print, so if tomorrow morning I don’t see any further flaws, I’ll go for the final print.

Wanna Become a Better Photographer?

The quick answer is: turn your images into prints!

In October 2007 I came this close to buying a Canon 5D and a 24-105/4 IS lens. I was tempted by the full-frame sensor, image-stabilized lens, great zoom range, lower image noise and the additional 4,6 megapixels. But while a new camera is nice, it wouldn’t have changed my photography in a fundamental way.

So I bought an Epson 3800 printer instead. The reason was very simple — I was having trouble getting good prints with reliable colors and reliable borders on a variety of papers. And to be honest, I probably also needed a new toy.

Little did I know how that printer would change my photography! Now wait, you’d say — a printer is an end-device, it cannot turn a crappy image into a great one! Well, you are right (even though the printer manufacturers would like us to believe otherwise), but I mean this. Using a printer means printing an image. But which image? So the first thing was to look at my images critically and select the better ones. But once I had those, I didn’t just print them. No, you don’t just send a good image to the printer — you edit it and make it excellent. Then you print it.

And then came revelation number one. When you hold a print in your hands you see so many faults that you didn’t see on screen, you rush back to Photoshop and correct them. Repeat this a few times and you realize that you need to learn more about sharpening. So you do and you print again. The results looks so gorgeous, you are in awe. So you rush to the store and buy some frames. You frame the prints and hang them on the walls and it’s a great feeling. That’s revelation number two.

But a few days later you want another great print to go with the first one, so you take the camera and hurry outside. All of a sudden it’s not about pixel peeping any more, it’s about covering your walls with great prints. Revelation number four.

And the final revelation? In the eyes of your friends you are no longer the nerd with the camera, you are a photographer.

Good luck!

100 Years Henri Cartier-Bresson

I was on a business trip in Ludwigshafen and Mannheim this week, and I noticed a poster for a an exhibition of Henri Cartier-Bresson’s early work in the Kunsthalle Mannheim. I was leaving today, so I canceled my last meeting and went to see the exhibit instead.

It is dedicated to the 100^th anniversary of the birth of Henri Cartier-Bresson (1908 — 2004), and it shows 79 prints from the early 1930′s. Wow, talk about getting back to the roots of photography — one camera, one lens, black-and-white film and absolutely no cropping of the negatives! What a contrast to today’s fancy bodies, fast zoom lenses and super pumped-up colors in Photoshop… (Which of course is symptomatic of weak images needing a digital trick in order to grab attention.)

If you have some interest in photography, you’ve probably already seen some of the images that I saw today, but I saw original prints with size 30 x 45 cm and not the usual small reproductions in books or on the Internet. Of course not all images were equally strong (my favorites are 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7), but HCB was indeed a master of composition and already at the age of 24 had a great feel for “the decisive moment.”

But he accomplished yet another feat — what he saw in the viewfinder was the final image — his prints always show 100% of the negative. To me this sounds utterly incredible, as I always shoot with some extra space around the desired image and I crop my images to many different aspect ratios, whatever fits the subject best.

Anyhow, the exhibit is very inspiring and definitely worth seeing. If you are in the area any time until June 8, go for it!

© Henri Cartier-Bresson/Magnum Photos

PS: It was this image that inspired HCB to take his camera and go out in the streets.

PPS: Maybe HCB had two lenses. A small number of images (for example, the one above) appear to have been taken with a wide-angle lens.

Custom Profiles for the Epson 3800

I’ve been printing on my Epson 3800 for several months now — learning how to use it optimally and producing a few nice prints. Since prints never look exactly like they look on screen, even with color proofing, I’ve gotten in the habit of first printing on small sheets of cheap paper (10×15 cm Epson Premium Glossy). I’d then look how the print differs from the image on screen and try to correct the difference on an adjustment layer. I’d play some with the lightness, contrast or saturation, and after two or three tests I’d have a print that matches the image on screen very closely. I would then make larger prints on more expensive paper (A4 or A3+ Ilford Smooth Pearl). The new adjustment layers go in a separate layer group that can be turned on or off, depending on if I am making a paper print of a JPG for viewing on screen.

But I’d noticed a strange thing. Certain bluish hues would print very well on Epson Premium Glossy, but would exhibit a subtle color shift towards green when printed on Ilford Smooth Pearl. I know that different papers have a different look, but this was something different. But what was it? If prints on Epson Smooth match the colors on screen very well, but prints on Ilford Pearl have a color shift, it must be that the standard Ilford profile does not match my printer very well. (Or is it the other way around?)

I’d already found Eric Chan’s excellent pages dedicated to the Epson 3800 and was pleased to see that he is offering to build custom profiles for $20 US for any one paper. So I printed his targets on my printer and mailed them to him. This morning I received Eric’s profiles and printed an image that previously exhibited the color shift. Guess what — it prints perfectly with Eric’s profile!

The differences between the two images are quite subtle, and both look good in their own right. But only the second one looks like it looks on my screen and like it was in real life. So thanks Eric!

Three “Charcoal Shadows” Prints

I’ve slowly gotten tired of the two current prints in my office, so yesterday I made three new ones and framed them (30 x 40 cm prints in 50 x 60 cm frames). On Monday I’ll hang the new ones in my office and the old ones at home.

This is my first printed three-of-a-kind series, so I’m quite excited.

I have an even stronger third image, but it doesn’t lend itself well to a 3:4 aspect ratio, so I had to go with this one. Since I use standard frames and mattes, I have to produce standard-sized prints… Or I need to start cutting my own mattes.

Portfolio “To Go”

I like to photograph details on and around construction sites: scrap metal, bolts and nuts, such things. And at present there is lots and lots of subject matter in Hamburg, for example in the HafenCity.

But how do I go about photographing these subjects? In this modern day and age one needs to have a hard hat, special insurance and so on to even enter the site. Then there is the question of what does this photographer want here? Is he going to cause trouble? Is he part of some regulation agency? Is he taking photographs for the competition? Or maybe for terrorist purposes?

While I do have some understanding for these worries, I really want to enter a construction site, look around, make some photos, then go on. I could try it this outside the working hours, when no one is around, but it will be unpleasant if some security guy sees me or calls the police. If I come during working hours, even if the person responsible for the site decides that I am not a threat, it’s still too much hassle to let me do my thing, so I suspect he’ll still say “no.”

So I’m thinking of printing a portfolio of my construction-site images on 10 x 15 cm paper (4 x 6″) to constantly carry around with me. Hopefully this would serve as one more assurance that I don’t have anything evil on my mind. And it just might interest the person on the other side enough to give me a chance to look around. I guess carrying some form of identification as well as a business card with a name, telephone number and a web address would help even further.

I such a “to go” portfolio can probably do wonders if one wants to photograph people on the street. I’ve never done this, but I imagine that it’s easier to convince a total stranger to let me take his or her photo if I’m able to show what kind of images I’m after and then leave my name and contact info on a small business card.

I guess one can also do it the modern way and show his or her images on the display of a portable hard-drive, but this might actually put off some people or make them even more suspicious.

Self-Assignment: Best of 2007

During the last 3-4 months I’ve been looking through my images, deleting the weak ones, rating and adding metadata to the rest. About 40 images received either 4 or 5 stars and should eventually find place in my web galleries and printed portfolios. But since editing these images and dividing them in portfolios will probably take me a year, I’ve decided to start with a smaller task.

I give myself a month for building a Best of 2007 portfolio. This should be far simpler because it limits the number of images to consider and because I don’t need to look for a common theme. I think I’ll simply select the 12 best images shot in 2007, edit them and display them in a Web gallery. Because of the missing theme, the portfolio will not be that strong, but it will give me a chance to remember the highlights of the year, and it will serve as a reference next year, when I’ll hopefully make a Best of 2008.

I had to think about the number of images a bit, but I guess 12 is good: it should make a nice web gallery with 3 rows of 4 images each, and if I hold my due date, I could even print a 2008 calendar.

And now, the countdown is running!

First Framed Prints!

I’ve been writing in this blog about wanting to shift my focus away from photographic technology (camera specs and lens tests) and towards producing exciting images. Well, after about 8 years of playing around and another 2 years of being serious about photography, I reached an important milestone today — I framed two of my prints!

It might not sound like much to you, but to me it’s a big deal. Of course I could have bought a frame and put a picture in it much earlier, but I guess I was waiting for several things to came together. In the last 3 months I looked through all my images, deleted quite a few of them and rated and added metadata to the remaining ones. I calibrated and profiled my monitor and learned about color management. I slowly got the hang of image editing and sharpening, and I produced some decent images on screen. Then, instead of upgrading my camera, I bought a photo printer and started learning about printing. And lately I’ve also been shooting more concentrated than ever before.

But back to the prints. My first attempts on 10 x 15 cm and 13 x 18 cm paper looked good, so naturally I started thinking of framing the best ones. Although I can print as large as A2 (40 x 50 cm), my camera does not have enough pixels for that size and I my wall space is also limited. So I compromised on 30 x 40 cm prints in 50 x 60 cm frames. I wanted frames that can handle frequent print changes and that look good with black-and-white or color images, so after searching a bit, I settled on Nielsen C2 frosted grey aluminum frames and white passepartouts.

A 30 x 40 cm print fits nicely on A3+ paper (13″ x 19″), but before making the jump to that size, I experimented some with 15 x 20 cm prints on A4 paper (8.5″ x 11″). This makes for a thick white border, and I guess I’ll be building up my portfolios in this size and whenever I like something enough for putting it on the wall, I’ll go for the larger size.

PS: Of course I would have liked to start with three prints instead of two, but I don’t have three images with a similar topic, color scheme and quality, and damn that perfectionism — I didn’t want to wait any longer…

Working with Master Files

In the last few days I played some more with my new printer and made nice prints from this image and from the one below. And in that process I gained appreciation for master files — the most flexible format for storing an image.

A master file is usually a PSD-file that is virtually size- and media-independent. It allows you to produce web-sized JPGs or prints of any reasonable size in seconds. My master files are in 16 bits and in the ProPhoto color space. Source-sharpening and spot corrections are usually merged into the background layer and each major edit is on a separate layer. The name of each layer describes the function of the layer in a meaningful way. I haven’t done much creative sharpening, but if I did, I’d probably do it in a separate layer directly above the background layer. All changes necessary for printing also exist as layers, stored together in a layer-group named after the desired rendering intent. If I need different adjustments for different papers, I’d create separate layers (possibly in a separate layer-group).

A master file is very flexible because all major modifications are saved in separate layers. This way you can turn an edit on or off, change its parameters, increase or decrease its strength (by changing the layer’s opacity) or limit its effect (by adding a layer mask).

But in what way is a master file media-independent? Well, since it contains adjustments for different papers on different layers, with just a few clicks (by turning one layer on and another one off) you can target your image for a different paper. And if you turn all print-adjustment layers off, your image will be optimized for screen output. In fact, I save my master files with all print-adjustments turned off, so that they look optimally on screen.

OK you say, fair enough, but a master file has a fixed pixel-count. How can it be size-independent? Well, true, but the master file contains all perspective corrections, spot edits, source sharpening, etc, etc, so that if you need a file with a different pixel count, you simply resize a copy of your master file. Of course you will lose some quality, but this loss is inevitable, regardless if you are using a master file or not. The difference is that with a master file all the edits are already “inside” the resized image, so you resize, sharpen, and you are done.

The only disadvantage of master files is that they are large and require lots of RAM to work with, but somehow we are used to that nowadays…

And finally a word of caution: when you target your master file for a given size and media, be sure to save a copy and not the master file itself.