Yeah, I figured we had a little failure to communicate. My bad. Very
specifically, I'm referring to glossy. And for Brian's sake, for only the
images which this kind of image abuse Cibachrome is strong at. Overall, Bob
is quite right. In color printing the current crop of printers is jaw
dropping good.
I do believe, though, that with the same amount of image manipulation and
control options as found in a digital workflow, a Cibachrome output would
still be superior. That, however, would imply a tedhnology not generally
available today. Therefore, it's a moot point. The real trumps the
theoretical every time.
AG
On Thursday, February 23, 2012, Bob Whitmire wrote:
> I never wear veils. <g>
>
> I wandered across the interface of wet color and inkjet color and have
> watched as inkjet surpassed wet. Maybe there are a few applications or
> situations where wet works better, but I haven't come across them. When I
> look back at prints made on a Fuji light jet vs. What I can make of the
> same image now with any of my Epsons, there's really no comparison.
>
> Though it should be noted that I mostly print on matte paper, with an
> occasional foray onto luster, specifically Moab's new exhibition luster.
> That's righteous stuff.
>
> --Bob
>
>
> On Feb 22, 2012, at 8:56 PM, Ken Norton wrote:
>
> > Good grief. I didn't slip enough caveats in there? My veiled
> > references to those who got it figured out definitely included you. :)
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
--
Ken Norton
ken@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.zone-10.com
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|