Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Inkjet Cibachrome?  (Read 8034 times)
Ben Rubinstein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1733


« on: October 12, 2006, 08:09:33 AM »
ReplyReply

What is the inkjet equivelent of Cibachrome? i.e. a very glossy platicky type surface with the cibachrome look to it. Ilford make an R3 paper designed for digital LED printing called Ilford Hi Gloss which is really great but it isn't inkjet and to be honest I'm looking for more control over my printing.
Logged

mbridgers
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 156


« Reply #1 on: October 12, 2006, 08:45:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
What is the inkjet equivelent of Cibachrome? i.e. a very glossy platicky type surface with the cibachrome look to it. Ilford make an R3 paper designed for digital LED printing called Ilford Hi Gloss which is really great but it isn't inkjet and to be honest I'm looking for more control over my printing.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Pictorico High Gloss Film is mentioned here:
[a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t9322.html]http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/lofive....php/t9322.html[/url]
 
Pete Myers mentions it in this article:
http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsigh...i039/essay.html
Logged
jschone
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


« Reply #2 on: October 12, 2006, 04:15:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I print on Epson Premium glossy (the thinnest, low-weight version). This is mounted to:

-2-3 mm high-quality plexi. Between the photo and the plexi I use a very thin and transparent bi-adhesive. For bigger works a piece of 3 mm dibond is mounted on the back. Plexi gives a great high gloss result, with a nice dimension. Looks somehow "wet";
-Another and less expensive option is the use of a polyester lamination film on top the print (again premium glossy, because of the smoothness of the paper). Also this can be together with dibond(or gatorfoam, wood, etc.). The heavier the lamination film, the better the glossy result. Don't use regular PVC film though, polyester will give better results.

Prints are with Epson 9800 and everything is mounted with a 44" hand laminator with silicon rollers. 9800 is equipped with Imageprint phatte black, so also prints on matte paper can still be made.

All in all it seems an expensive option and extensive operation, but you have a "finished" product, ready to hang.

But, Pictorico is a very, very nice paper as well! And also comes with a price.

Jochem


Quote
Pictorico High Gloss Film is mentioned here:
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/lofive....php/t9322.html
 
Pete Myers mentions it in this article:
http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsigh...i039/essay.html
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=80091\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Brian Gilkes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 431


WWW
« Reply #3 on: October 12, 2006, 04:34:46 PM »
ReplyReply

I've tried Pictorico. With Epson K3 inks, it has surface differential. It's only available to 24" too and is expensive. Moab Kokapelli is much cheaper and comes up comparitively well. I think we have to look at gloss optimiser type solutions such as HP are offering, and I suspect Epson, will come out with too. Coating is a good but messy answer. This gives good UV and fingerprint protection too. For display a surface bonded 2mm approx. acrylic looks fantastic. This is again not cheap, but can enhance archival properties. There may be a perception in some circles that this method interferes with the integrity of the fine print on paper., which may have some effect on investment value. That would be of interest to those few artists whose work falls into that catagory. The coating, eg Print Guard or similar, or the acrylic options can also be used with papers like Crane Museo Silver Rag for a warm base or more pop with the Hahnemuhle and Innova options.
Most of these substrates used with current insets from Epson, HP or Canon will have a gamut , DMax and archival properties exceeding Cibachrome.
Cheers,
Brian
Pharos Editions
www.pharoseditions.com.au
Logged
Kenneth Sky
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 421


WWW
« Reply #4 on: October 12, 2006, 07:15:24 PM »
ReplyReply

I've been using Pictorico on my R800 which has gloss optimizer and it works very well. When you want that high gloss look it reminds me of Cibachrome but it's not a perfect match.
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #5 on: October 12, 2006, 09:48:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Why even bother thinking about Cibachrome? Cibachrome was excellent in its day, but apart from a bit of gloss differential (rapidly also becoming history) we've got much better now in just about every which way, and it keeps getting better.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
elauq
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


« Reply #6 on: October 13, 2006, 12:01:08 AM »
ReplyReply

Cibachrome prints, when displayed with good lighting and viewed within arms length or closer, show a 3-dimensional quality with a hint of metallic-like sharpness.   These qualities are most evident with proper subject matter and when the enlargement factor is small enough to retain fine detail.  

Being super glossy (obnoxiously so, some might add) is but one aspect of the Cibachrome look.
Logged
jschone
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


« Reply #7 on: October 13, 2006, 03:29:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Exactly, for this reason plexi works. It gives that extra dimension. A good lamination will also work. One more postive aspect is that you are able to achieve this with K3 inks.

Like already said, Pictorico can have gloss differential with K3. Although the paper is nice, K3 inks may noy be ideal for this paper. The new HP's and Canon might be opening doors for new glossy papers.

Jochem

Quote
Cibachrome prints, when displayed with good lighting and viewed within arms length or closer, show a 3-dimensional quality with a hint of metallic-like sharpness.   These qualities are most evident with proper subject matter and when the enlargement factor is small enough to retain fine detail. 

Being super glossy (obnoxiously so, some might add) is but one aspect of the Cibachrome look.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=80182\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Ben Rubinstein
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1733


« Reply #8 on: October 13, 2006, 08:49:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Thank you all, the more I read the more confused I get! It seems that if I want cibachrome lookalike prints, as well as good quality luster/matts, on top of great B&W's then I really need two different printers (one K3, one with gloss optimiser) or a large can of spray for the colour/B&W K3 (anyone know of the equivelent in the UK? they won't ship)  to solve the gloss diffrential unless I want to mess with some of the rather complicated options shown here...

I'm trying to go for an inkjet solution for both a studio's output and fine art printing, two sides of my business, it is rather complicated trying to find a machine that will print both cibachrome like colour and B&W, as well as a good (and fast)matt 6X4/12X8/18X12". I really liked the look of the Kodak papers, I'm used to the base and it would be an excellent continuity for my machine prints, however the pro paper is only in A4 and bigger. The ilford premier luster which would be another option widely supported by icc profiles and with a chemical like base, is unavailable in the UK.

Questions Questions, I have so many more than damn answers as far as inkjet is concerned!
« Last Edit: October 13, 2006, 08:59:04 AM by pom » Logged

mbridgers
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 156


« Reply #9 on: October 13, 2006, 09:27:01 AM »
ReplyReply

When I saw your shot in this thread: http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....topic=12548&hl=
I thought of a Christopher Burkett Ciba print.  I think it would look fantastic as a large print on a high-gloss media.

But then I prefer that look over any matte surface.
Logged
Gary Ferguson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 522


WWW
« Reply #10 on: October 14, 2006, 04:53:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Pom, if I want that Cibachrome look I use Pictorico (with an R2400 and an Imageprint RIP).

Alternatively you could try talking to a pro-lab (if you're UK based try Spectrum www.spectrumphoto.co.uk who offer a range of ultra high gloss options).
Logged
marcmccalmont
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1724



« Reply #11 on: October 17, 2006, 02:44:37 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't know if you have access to it, but my favorite glossy (ipF5000) is Fuji Pro. Not much available in the states but I travel to Japan a lot and it is in every store there. I wish they would market it better worldwide. I try other papers and keep coming back to the Fuji as my favorite.
Marc
Logged

Marc McCalmont
DiaAzul
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 777



WWW
« Reply #12 on: December 04, 2006, 06:18:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Thank you all, the more I read the more confused I get! It seems that if I want cibachrome lookalike prints, as well as good quality luster/matts, on top of great B&W's then I really need two different printers (one K3, one with gloss optimiser) or a large can of spray for the colour/B&W K3 (anyone know of the equivelent in the UK? they won't ship)  to solve the gloss diffrential unless I want to mess with some of the rather complicated options shown here...

I'm trying to go for an inkjet solution for both a studio's output and fine art printing, two sides of my business, it is rather complicated trying to find a machine that will print both cibachrome like colour and B&W, as well as a good (and fast)matt 6X4/12X8/18X12". I really liked the look of the Kodak papers, I'm used to the base and it would be an excellent continuity for my machine prints, however the pro paper is only in A4 and bigger. The ilford premier luster which would be another option widely supported by icc profiles and with a chemical like base, is unavailable in the UK.

Questions Questions, I have so many more than damn answers as far as inkjet is concerned!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=80218\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Trying to get a Cibachrome gloss print is something that I would also like to achieve. I am currently discussing with my local printer whether it would be possible to print on the reverse of transparent paper and then mount it on white backing. They can achieve this with their own printers, which gives a cibachrome look to the result. I am waiting to find out whether the same is possible with an Epson printer and K3 inks. Process should be simple (just need to print the image in reverse L-R mirrored as you will be printing on the back of the transparent layer). When I get an answer I will get some of the stuff and try a print or two.
Logged

David Plummer    http://photo.tanzo.org/
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #13 on: December 04, 2006, 06:55:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Alot depends on the paper, and I think it fair to say that today's inkjet technology and paper choices properly handled can produce results having qualities of gamut, vibrancy and resolution that quite visibly exceed what was achievable with Cibachrome.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
KenS
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 104


« Reply #14 on: December 04, 2006, 11:47:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hi,

I print on Epson Premium glossy (the thinnest, low-weight version). This is mounted to:

-2-3 mm high-quality plexi. Between the photo and the plexi I use a very thin and transparent bi-adhesive. For bigger works a piece of 3 mm dibond is mounted on the back. Plexi gives a great high gloss result, with a nice dimension. Looks somehow "wet";
-
Jochem
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=80135\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I printed on Cibachrome for years and have yet to find an (Epson 7800) inkjet equivalent 'paper' (including Pictorico Hi Gloss) in terms of Ciba's mirror like depth.  While I feel all other aspects of printing are superior now that I print digitally on Epson Premium Glossy I am intrigued by your remarks about mounting to plexiglass.  I currently mount to Artcare Restore board but get a slight 'orange peel' surface.

Could you tell me what you feel the max print size that can be supported by 2 to 3 mm plexi.  (I never print larger than 24 x 32 inches).  Also, what is the brand name of the 'very thin transparent bi-adhesive' you are using.  In the past I tried to use Gudy (870?) but could not keep the bubbles and wrinkles out of larger prints (I do not have a machine to do this type of mounting, only a dry-mounting press).

Thanks in advance,
Ken
Logged
DiaAzul
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 777



WWW
« Reply #15 on: December 05, 2006, 03:55:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Alot depends on the paper, and I think it fair to say that today's inkjet technology and paper choices properly handled can produce results having qualities of gamut, vibrancy and resolution that quite visibly exceed what was achievable with Cibachrome.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=88689\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That's all true, however, the issue is getting the glossy/glassy sheen of a Cibachrome which is difficult just using paper based solutions. That is unless you can shed light on a technique that achieves the same look with just printing to paper.
Logged

David Plummer    http://photo.tanzo.org/
madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2108


« Reply #16 on: December 05, 2006, 06:10:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Note that Pictorico HGWF is different because is it made of polyester film, not paper.

Eric
Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #17 on: December 05, 2006, 08:04:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
That's all true, however, the issue is getting the glossy/glassy sheen of a Cibachrome which is difficult just using paper based solutions. That is unless you can shed light on a technique that achieves the same look with just printing to paper.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=88743\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Moab Kokopelli 250 Gloss is another option, but David, WHY would I want the "same look"? Superior technology has replaced Cibachrome. Why not just enjoy it for what it does? This is all personal and subjective of course, but I just don't see what there is about Cibachrome that isn't bettered with today's papers and techniques. To my mind anyhow, this is not in the same league as trying to re-create the look of vintage prints that were platinum, selenium or sepia toned in the "old days". But we're into matters of taste and judgment, nothing hard and fast!
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
jschone
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 86


« Reply #18 on: December 05, 2006, 11:06:16 AM »
ReplyReply

Ken,

I use a german product for this. The company is called ams-trading. In the US , you could use Seal optimount Ultra. Is supposed to be similar. I actually use a hand operated cold mount press which works well. Mounts 100cm x 250 cm (or larger if you have the space). To keep air bubbles out it is very important to keep your work area clean. I use an anti-static brush (kinetronics) during the mounting process to get rid of dust. Furthermore, to keep wrinkles out it is important that the pressure of the press is the same in every area where the rollers rest on the print.

Regarding your question of max. size, I would say that the maximum of 2-3 mm plexi without support is not more then 50x70 cm. Above that you need some support on the back. Dibond 3 mm works well. All in all the total is not more then 5 mm. On the back of the dibond you can glue aluminium profiles, so the print hangs a little (1-2 cm) from the wall. A nice effect. To glue the dibond on the back of the plexi-print, you can just use any strong cold mounting adhesive. Since the print with plexi is stable and flat you can just stick the dibond panel on the back. Hope that makes sense  ?!


Jochem

Quote
I printed on Cibachrome for years and have yet to find an (Epson 7800) inkjet equivalent 'paper' (including Pictorico Hi Gloss) in terms of Ciba's mirror like depth.  While I feel all other aspects of printing are superior now that I print digitally on Epson Premium Glossy I am intrigued by your remarks about mounting to plexiglass.  I currently mount to Artcare Restore board but get a slight 'orange peel' surface.

Could you tell me what you feel the max print size that can be supported by 2 to 3 mm plexi.  (I never print larger than 24 x 32 inches).  Also, what is the brand name of the 'very thin transparent bi-adhesive' you are using.  In the past I tried to use Gudy (870?) but could not keep the bubbles and wrinkles out of larger prints (I do not have a machine to do this type of mounting, only a dry-mounting press).

Thanks in advance,
Ken
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=88725\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
DiaAzul
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 777



WWW
« Reply #19 on: December 05, 2006, 11:41:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Moab Kokopelli 250 Gloss is another option, but David, WHY would I want the "same look"? Superior technology has replaced Cibachrome. Why not just enjoy it for what it does?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=88772\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Thanks for the paper recommendation, I shall take a look at that. To answer the why - it is not so much to recreate Cibachrome exactly but capturing certain aspects of a cibachrome print in the work that I do. Principly those are very intense colours and a very glossy sheen to the prints. If using an inkjet I can exceed the colour gamut, saturation and sheen of a cibachrome print then that is progress, however, I have yet (and that could be down to not looking in the right places) seen anything produced on an inkjet that captures what was being done on Cibachrome 20 years ago. It's only by pushing technology and process to the max do we move anything forward.
Logged

David Plummer    http://photo.tanzo.org/
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad