Postscript still important for laser printers? How much RAM is enough? LexMark?

On 07/28/2010 11:49 AM, Arthur Entlich wrote:

What's the problem if you provide a good quality picture with good
exposure, good contrast, good color? If you can't get a good print
quality at once, what kind of printing will commercial labs provide?


I don;t know if you have a Costco nearby or not.

Yes, but I'm not a member and I see no photo service at costco.ca .

I became a member just
for heir color lab. They are one of the few "big box" stores who provide
color profiles and have their equipment calibrated by Dry Creek on a
fairly regular basis. In November I did a large exhibit of photographic
fine art prints

You wouldn't have some sample photographs on the net so we can see what
kind of photography you're in?

If you have agreed upon color management between you, the results should
be nearly perfect. If you are speaking about older optical methods,
there are many reasons a print could be "off", although admittedly many
are lab deficiencies. With wedding photos, pure neutral whites are often
a big issue, and that's why gray cards were invented on your side.

Gray cards, gray patches and color patches were standard tools in my
days so I have no problem understanding. I also understand the need to
calibrate the monitor. I just read about gamut, icc profiles and so on.
Here, my understanding is rather shallow. I hope the labs provide good
instructions

On
their side that's why test strips, densitometers, and calibration were
invented ;-). I've run both a one-hour style and a custom lab, and
because I demanded professional results from both, we got them. While
the one-hour had more redos simply because the equipment back then was
less sophisticated, what we turned out was as good or better than some
pro-labs in our community.

Too bad you're not in business anymore. All my problems would be solved

Don't forget the link to your pictures if you have any on the net!

On 27 Jul 2010 02:22:24 GMT, Warren Block wrote:

Tim Okergit wrote:


To use a digital camera analogy: PostScript is the big-sensor DSLR, PCL
is the 4x6mm-sensor P&S. You can do good work with either, and they
both have tradeoffs. But one is more capable and costs more.

LOL! My D SLR is a full-frame (24 mm x 36 mm) model!

The difference isn't that great, under $100. And since I use my
printer partly for business (I'm a consultant) the printer isn't an
area to be a cheapskate.

-AH

On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:42:11 -0400, Tim Okergit wrote:



I see the royalties that HP had to pay to Adobe for this rip-off as the
reason for which they decided to develop PCL for laser. For most people
PCL does exactly the same. As for me, there's absolutely no difference.

I've noticed (at least on my Samsung printer, for which I have both
Postscript and PCL "instances") that print job file sizes are much,
much smaller for Postscript than PCL.

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 18:05:59 -0400, Tim Okergit wrote:

On 07/26/2010 01:33 AM, Andrew Hamilton wrote:
On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 17:06:25 -0400, Tim wrote:

On 07/24/2010 02:44 PM, Andrew Hamilton wrote:


I had to do the same with my Canon. The difference was that my printer
was in almost perfect working order. Canon just wouldn't provide the
necessary information.

Can you understand that I'm even more ****ed at Canon than you are at
Samsung? I printed less than 5,000 sheets with my BJ-300!

Canon? Never ever again will I buy anything from this bunch of mother
****ers!

I can truly understand. I also have a multi-function Canon MP 530 and
the software that came with this printer is so bad that calling it a
POS would be high praise.

Your descriptions of withholding customer information so that they
could sell you a new printer is, well, pretty shabby. No more Canon
printers for me. (And I'm going to buy a photo printer next year, so
I can do nice prints from that full-frame D SLR!)

On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 18:32:21 -0400, Tim Okergit wrote:



This ate all profits in a cinch. This color stuff was wedding
photography. The competition was fierce and the margins low. I couldn't
afford prints at $10 and some wedding photography places had their own
labs that provided excellent quality. I had to quit.

Thanks to inexpensive, high quality digital cameras, everyone has an
"Uncle Bob" who will do the family weddings for "free." I know a few
pros who would tell their kids to find another line of work, and some
of them have bailed out. Can't make any money these days. Customers
expect perfection but won't pay for it.


I won't be doing professional photography anymore, but I know, you know?
Bad quality would send me into a tantrum I can't describe. If labs
provide bad quality, I better set up my process, losing a few sheets
doing so, and then have first quality prints every time.


If you try printing a picture whose color, exposure, contrast, focus are
wrong, there is no way if will possibly come out OK on paper. Otherwise,
what can go wrong?

As long as you have a complete color managed workflow, with a
calibrated monitor, printer, etc., you should be OK. "As long as ..."

On 27 Jul 2010 02:16:59 GMT, Warren Block wrote:


Come to think of it, the forums at dpreview.com ought to have someone
with serious photo print experience and recommendations.


Ugh. Flamer central!

On 07/28/2010 11:44 PM, Andrew Hamilton wrote:


I know a few
pros who would tell their kids to find another line of work, and some
of them have bailed out. Can't make any money these days. Customers
expect perfection but won't pay for it.

Sounds like what I've been hearing about my profession all my life, yet
I'm still here, hammering at this wall. But I'm not a pro photog - I'm a
farmer.

TJ
--
Life isn't fair. It's not meant to be.
Overcoming the disadvantages we face is what makes us strong.

On 07/28/2010 11:39 PM, Andrew Hamilton wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 14:42:11 -0400, Tim wrote:

I see the royalties that HP had to pay to Adobe for this rip-off as the
reason for which they decided to develop PCL for laser. For most people
PCL does exactly the same. As for me, there's absolutely no difference.

I've noticed (at least on my Samsung printer, for which I have both
Postscript and PCL "instances") that print job file sizes are much,
much smaller for Postscript than PCL.

I never check the size of print jobs. I suppose they're in /tmp? And
really it doesn't make much difference nowadays.

On 07/28/2010 11:44 PM, Andrew Hamilton wrote:
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 18:32:21 -0400, Tim wrote:



This ate all profits in a cinch. This color stuff was wedding
photography. The competition was fierce and the margins low. I couldn't
afford prints at $10 and some wedding photography places had their own
labs that provided excellent quality. I had to quit.

Thanks to inexpensive, high quality digital cameras

High quality digital cameras are still pretty expensive, I find.

, everyone has an
"Uncle Bob" who will do the family weddings for "free."

I know a few
pros who would tell their kids to find another line of work, and some
of them have bailed out. Can't make any money these days. Customers
expect perfection but won't pay for it.

I would rather say that many, many customers have no idea of what
perfection is. That's why uncle Bob is OK to them.

Also, nowadays, many people would rather not get involved in the process
of professional photography in order to give this special day all their
attention.

On 07/28/2010 11:41 PM, Andrew Hamilton wrote:

(And I'm going to buy a photo printer next year, so
I can do nice prints from that full-frame D SLR!)

You certainly should get nice pictures with a DSLR. As you said it's for
your job, I suppose it's exactly what you need. But I find them bulky.
That's why I believe I'll opt for a 4x3. Though a 24 - 200 mm (35mm
equivalent) zoom would be fantastic, even a 35 x 105 would be perfectly
adequate.

Because I want to carry the camera with me all the time, walking or bike
riding, I object to bulk. I'm thinking of models like the latest Sony
and Olympus.

I suppose I'll have to compromise on quality but I certainly won't bring
a full-sized DSLR with me all the time, And no camera means no picture
if anything picture worthy happens.