[Eric Brody Participant Posts: 60]

Print Storage Solution

on: April 13, 2024 at 12:12 pm

It might sound heretical to some, but I store my prints, way too many, in the original paper boxes in plastic bags. I go through a lot of paper and have lots of boxes. The paper comes in each box in a plastic bag. I save the bags and use them to protect the prints from whatever evil the cardboard box might do during prolonged storage. I then use a labeler to denote the dates of the prints in a given box. I then stack them in my closet storage area. On each print I make, I note the file number, date shot, paper type, additional info such as QTR settings, and the date it was printed. There’s no additional cost since I’m just reusing the boxes in which the paper was purchased.

If I want to see if I have a print of a given image, I look it up in my Lightroom catalog, and then go to the date/month of the box it is in. I then shuffle through the prints to see if I have  that particular print.

It is not as elegant as archival boxes but it allows me to find older prints easily.

Given the probability (zero) that my archived prints will be requested by MOMA upon my passing, it seems like a workable solution.

My descendants will likely just have a big bonfire :-).

 

[Eric Brody Participant Posts: 60]

Re: Epson P900 Paper Feeding Problems

Reply #1 on: April 9, 2024 at 11:43 am

Wow, Mark. I just read your review of the 5370, twice. It is your usual superb, thorough, helpful work.

I’m sure many of us will find it wonderfully helpful.

For me, it confirmed my decision to get one as soon as my current P900 inks are done or as soon as my P900 (refurb) seriously misbehaves.

Thanks so much. I’m sure I speak for many who find your printer and paper reviews critically useful in our endless quest for photographic perfection.

Eric

[Eric Brody Participant Posts: 60]

Re: P900 makes scary sounds

Reply #2 on: January 18, 2024 at 4:11 pm

My P900 makes some horrible sharp clunking noises as well; it’s a refurb after my initial one (which made the same noises) had horrendous paper feeding problems after six months of use. My refurb is working well even with the noises at the six month mark. The noises are different but occur with both the front feed and the rear (top) feed. The prints are just fine.

I, too, am anxiously awaiting review of the new 5370. Keith Cooper at Northlight Images currently has one and is in the process of reviewing it. Keith says it’s basically the P5000 body with the P900 heads. If he gives it a thumbs up and especially if Mark Segal also gives it a good review, then I’ll figure out how to pay for it and get its 117lb body into my studio. The next question will be how to dispose of the refurbished P900. At this point, I’m not at all sure how I’d sell it. I’m not in a position to guarantee it but would feel terrible if I sold it and it had serious problems a few months in.

I’ve read of a number of folks who’ve gotten replacements from Epson. Even the Epson techs with whom I spoke during the P900 replacement process admit that it’s not the best made printer, compared to the 3880 I foolishly sold to get away from the black ink switching. I’d love to know how many they’ve had to replace but am sure that’s proprietary information.

[Eric Brody Participant Posts: 60]

Re: Thoughts on Capture One and Lightroom

Reply #3 on: November 19, 2023 at 9:21 pm

If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Likewise, if it sounds too horrible to be true, it probably isn’t.

I do not know Mr Donovan but honestly have a hard time understanding how two well regarded RAW processors can produce such different results with the same file, (notwithstanding Mark’s excellent questions). Like Mark, I do not shoot at ISO 10,000, but use 6,400 and occasionally 12,800 and have found that the LR Classic denoise function does an excellent job. Many years ago I tried out C1 and it just did not work out for me though it seems to work well for many others.

My issue is the inflammatory tone of the OP’s initial comments…”The photos looked like they were shot in a sandstorm!  So much noise!  For my documentary work, I shoot in the ISO 6400 – 10,000 range.  Lightroom’s image quality at high ISO is SO BAD!!!” It is hard to read such a comment without challenge. I do not work for Adobe, but have used Lightroom Classic and Photoshop for a long, long time and have found Lightroom to be both a superb RAW processor, especially with the advent of the new masking tools, and world class cataloging tool.

This is not meant as an ad hominem attack but rather as a simple plea to be reasonable and non-inflammatory. In the internet world, extreme comments may garner clicks but do not advance our knowledge. I have learned a lot from Mark and Andrew over the years, and appreciate their comments.

 

[Eric Brody Participant Posts: 60]

Re: Experience with Mac Studio Display

Reply #4 on: October 27, 2023 at 12:04 pm

Thanks for your response, Andrew. I appreciate your expertise.

Were my beloved PA271W to “die” tomorrow, what currently available 27″ monitor might you recommend?

Thanks.

Eric

[Eric Brody Participant Posts: 60]

Re: Should I or Shouldn’t I Update Mac OS

Reply #5 on: October 15, 2023 at 8:04 pm

I HATE printing with Ventura on my P900. As others have documented, it seems to forget various settings repeatedly. I print with Roy Harrington’s Print Tool or Photoshop and have headaches with both. Why oh why did I leave Monterey? It now takes me twice as long to print since I have to double check everything to be certain Ventura did not forget my settings. It’s absolutely infuriating.

I’m a slow adopter of anything new regarding operating systems and for good reason. I’ll never understand those who immediately upgrade without knowing what problems may lie ahead. I’ve not even considered Sonoma and do not plan to for the foreseeable future unless someone can show me how it will IMPROVE my workflow rather than trash it as Ventura did.

Fortunately my photography is a hobby; I have no deadlines to meet but still prefer to have a smooth experience.

Thanks for listening to me rant,

Eric

[Eric Brody Participant Posts: 60]

Re: Film, I Just Don’t Get It

Reply #6 on: September 16, 2023 at 2:27 pm

I don’t get it either. I spent 40 years doing analog darkroom photography and now, with digital techniques, I am happier with my images than I ever was in the analog darkroom.

I’ll state up front that each of us should do what we wish. As my mentor Charlie Cramer says, “It’s art, there are no wrong answers.” If darkroom work makes you happy, and you’re not taking time and money away from more important things like family, and children, go for it. But…

I think the reason people scan their negatives is that so few people make prints. Unless scanned, there’s not much one can do with a negative except print it and as we all know, very few people print anymore, especially in the darkroom. Once scanned, the image can be easily shared on social media. I am one of those, along with Kevin, who believes it’s not a photograph unless it’s on paper. I print a couple of times every week. I spend as much or more time with a file as I ever did with a negative and now, almost always get a lovely print in one or two tries. In the darkroom, it took many, many tries and then… what does one do with the “almost” prints. I still have boxes of them.

Our paper choices for inkjet pigment prints are almost overwhelming. I confess to “wasting” paper just to see how a photo will look on a couple of different papers. It’s just so much fun now and I can stop any time to have dinner, run an errand, whatever. When I mixed a gallon of developer, stop, and fix, I felt compelled to use it, which meant a commitment of many hours. It all took so much time. Ironically now that I am a retired bum, I do seem to have lots of time for my photography but feel it is better spent making photographs and processing them on the computer than waiting for images to come up in the developer, placing them in the stop bath and then waiting for them to fix sufficiently so that I might turn on the light to try to view a wet print with eyes that have been in the dark for a while.

We are in a golden age in so many ways; we should all enjoy it however it makes us happy.

[Eric Brody Participant Posts: 60]

Re: Will an Apple Studio M2 be noticeably faster than my iMac 2020 I9/64GB/4TB?

Reply #7 on: July 16, 2023 at 10:52 am

Thanks for doing that Mike. It’s quite interesting.

As I continue to think about a computer upgrade, I quake in fear over an OS upgrade, potential collateral damage. I just read the frustrations of “up” grading to Ventura in the thread on the Epson Printers forum by George Stark. I wonder if the time saved by speed will be destroyed by issues of software. Having settings supposedly saved not really being saved is a least a hassle and runs the risk of wasted time, paper, and ink. I know many people have a problem with Lloyd Chambers view of the world, and he can be a bit volatile, but if one simple looks at what he finds, usually way over my head, he has had major problems with Ventura as well.

The topic of “timely” upgrades has been discussed extensively here and elsewhere. I’ve tended to stay at least one OS behind, currently on Monterey on all my machines. I cannot recall when a new OS offered me anything easily observable as an advantage and I’ve been using Mac’s since April 1984.  I am not computer professional with a need to stay current.

For all these reasons, I’ve decided to sit tight with my current 2020 iMac (which was not inexpensive and whose value is not currently high).

Thanks for all the comments.

Eric

[Eric Brody Participant Posts: 60]

Re: Will an Apple Studio M2 be noticeably faster than my iMac 2020 I9/64GB/4TB?

Reply #8 on: July 14, 2023 at 8:49 pm

Thanks to Christopher and Mike. I do not do video at all and Christopher’s advice to wait is probably good. In response to Mike, most things zip along pretty well and as a retired amateur, I’m not usually in a hurry. I’ve tried saving Photoshop files to an SSD in the past and at least in my hands it’s not much faster though it’s been a while since I did that experiment.

I’ll take a look at the videos and see how things look from that perspective.

Timing these purchases is challenging. The new pretty things always look sooo good, and fast.

Best to all,

Eric

 

[Eric Brody Participant Posts: 60]

Re: Epson P900 Paper Feeding Problems

Reply #9 on: July 9, 2023 at 1:13 pm

Hi Mark and all the other helpful folks on this forum. Here’s an update on my paper feed problems with the Epson SC-P900 as of early July 2023.

With some trepidation, I called Epson Support and requested a refurbished printer. The process was actually quite smooth. Since they were sending me the refurb one before receiving the old one, they asked for my credit card and placed a hold. The printer arrived a couple of days later, on June 19 via Fedex. I opened and set up the refurb, packed the faulty one in the box and took it to the local Fedex office. A few days later it arrived at Epson and the credit card hold was removed. Impressively, it arrived with TWO full sets of inks, a significant part of one was used in the initialization process but I’ve still got a full set!

I’ve been using it sporadically since I’ve had a health issue but it seems to print as it should. Recently it sat for a week while I was ill and it printed a perfect nozzle check on startup. I’ve used thin papers, Epson Premium Luster and Canson Rag Photographique 220 as well as thicker papers, such as Canson Edition Etching, which at 18.9 mil/48 mm is at the upper limit for the rear feed and it worked. Time will tell if it’s a “permanent” fix, but for now, I’m pleased. The original P900 worked well for 8 months before deciding to misbehave. For what it’s worth, I used my Epson 3880 for 13 years with minimal problems. I’m doing my best to be an optimist.

[Eric Brody Participant Posts: 60]

Re: Epson P900 Paper Feeding Problems

Reply #10 on: June 9, 2023 at 6:23 pm

As my dear departed aunt used to say, this sounds like the old soap opera “As the Stomach Turns.” Today I took my laptop, boxes of Canson Platine, Moab Entrada 190, and Canson Rag to the local store where I purchased the printer. My thought was to connect my laptop to their demo P900 and see if I could reproduce my paper feeding problem. Long story short, Canson Platine, a 0.40mm paper did feed on their printer!

I then returned home and called Epson Technical Support, who had been helpful in the past. This time not so much. My first call was to a fellow who seemed not to understand the problem at all. Actually, after about 15 minutes of trying to get him to understand, I was disconnected (maybe he hung up in disgust)! I waited a bit and called back. The second fellow was better, he did seem to understand but kept telling me that the warranty did not cover non-Epson media. I thought this was quite ludicrous and politely told him so. After a bit of back and forth he said the next step was to replace the printer but since it was more than 30 days old, it would be with a refurbished model and he really did not think it was likely to help (????). At this point I was so disgusted, I decided to give up for now to preserve my limited sanity. I can get Platine to feed if I gently push on the top of the paper as it tries to load, sometimes. After I think a bit more, I’ll try to decide if I want to take a chance on a refurbished model and call them back if I do.

Thanks to all, and especially to Mark for your patience with this annoying problem with a six month old printer that cost over US$1,000.

[Eric Brody Participant Posts: 60]

Re: Epson P900 Paper Feeding Problems

Reply #11 on: June 5, 2023 at 5:42 pm

Sorry to be a pest but I’ve still got problems with feeding paper through the rear (top) feed in my Epson SC-P900.
While I am now able to get the front feed to work, I am still unable to feed many papers through the rear (top) feed. I re-read Mark’s excellent review and it appears to indicate that essentially all the papers I use SHOULD work with the rear feed. Here’s a quote from his review…

“Top Paper Feed: Epson calls it the “Rear Feed”, but it’s actually on top, so I call it the Top
Feed – yes at the rear of the top of the printer, but don’t go looking for a paper feed in the
rear of the printer unless using the roll holder. Contrary to the ambiguity in the manual, we
should load all Epson fine art papers less than 0.5mm other through the top sheet feeder.
(Cold Press Natural and Legacy Textured should be loaded through the front feed.) Gently
drop the paper between the gray guides, letting it hit bottom (Figure 8) and slide the gray
guides to the edge of the paper. My experience indicates it is very reliable.
Do not use the front feed for fine art papers less then 0.50mm thick – every time I tried it
pushed them up to the top feeder where they jam on the mechanism, wrecking the sheet.
The manual is unclear about this, but I’m being very clear, just so you’ll know. Use the top
feed for all papers less than 0.50mm.”

ALL the papers I use are less than 0.5mm thick except Entrada 300 (0.57 mm). I looked them up on the B&H website and…

Epson Velvet fine art 0.48 mm (this media type is used for Canson Rag, Edition Etching, and Arches 88)
Epson Premium Luster 0.25 mm (feeds through the rear feed!)
Canson Rag 0.47
Canson Edition Etching 0.48 mm
Canson Arches 88 0.48 mm
Canson Platine 0.40 mm
Moab Juniper Rag 0.41 mm
Moab Entrada 300 0.57mm (the only paper > 0.50 mm)
Moab Entrada 190 0.39 mm (this actually feeds through the rear feed)

This problem arose a month or so ago, when I wrote my first post to this thread. Before that all the papers seemed to work on the rear feed.

While the front feed does work, it’s quite a bit slower than simply popping a piece of paper in the rear feed. And, Mark’s review actually says NOT to use these papers in the front feed.

Does this all mean I still have a problem with my printer?
Do I need to call Epson AGAIN?

Thanks, as always for any help.

Eric Brody

[Author]

Posts