Printers or panels

[cunim]

I have owned a variety of printers over the years but, I am embarrassed to say, I made little use of them. No one wants my prints (story of my life) and, in fact, I just sent my Epson P800 to the recyclers because the head was clogged from sitting too long. Epson no longer makes replacement heads for that printer so I am left with a decision as to whether a new printer is needed. Maybe not.

Like all of us older types, I used to print because that was the only alternative to slides or large format contacts. Since the digital age dawned, my use of printing changed into a way of viewing large images at high resolution. Sure, I can pixel peep on my 37" desktop monitor, but that doesn't replace viewing larger images from some distance. That brings me to the 8K televisions. I am thinking of getting the biggest OLED I can find, wall mounting it, and cycling my images through it., I have the greatest respect for the printer's art in photography but, really, respecting it does not mean I need it. It would be different if anyone bought my prints but, for my own use, I like what luminescent displays do for image viewing.

I am sure lot of you have had experience with this type of thing. How did it work out for you?

 

[tenmangu81]

I don't print a lot (about 40 to 50 A3+ per year) but I think looking at prints is quite different from viewing a screen. Paper is physical, you can handle it, look at it under different angles or lights, etc... Actually, I belong to a small group of photographers who meet every 3 to 4 months to show their prints and discuss them. About 12 to 15 each time (portfolio). Then, when I am back, I store my images into archive boxes for my posterity
But otherwise, I display my pictures onto my 24" calibrated monitor for my family and friends, sometimes, when I am proud of one of my images. Scarcely, then !

 

[MGrayson]

I have owned a variety of printers over the years but, I am embarrassed to say, I made little use of them. No one wants my prints (story of my life) and, in fact, I just sent my Epson P800 to the recyclers because the head was clogged from sitting too long. Epson no longer makes replacement heads for that printer so I am left with a decision as to whether a new printer is needed. Maybe not.

Like all of us older types, I used to print because that was the only alternative to slides or large format contacts. Since the digital age dawned, my use of printing changed into a way of viewing large images at high resolution. Sure, I can pixel peep on my 37" desktop monitor, but that doesn't replace viewing larger images from some distance. That brings me to the 8K televisions. I am thinking of getting the biggest OLED I can find, wall mounting it, and cycling my images through it., I have the greatest respect for the printer's art in photography but, really, respecting it does not mean I need it. It would be different if anyone bought my prints but, for my own use, I like what luminescent displays do for image viewing.

I am sure lot of you have had experience with this type of thing. How did it work out for you?

I print, although wall space is more or less gone. But I saw a large panel at a friend's house that looked like a frame, and I really thought it was displaying a (very nice) work of abstract art until the image changed. His own images (Antarctic wildlife) looked very good. In short, I think it's completely worth a try.

 

[John_McMaster]

You can really only do portrait or landscape layout, I would not expect the image to look that good if the long side is across the TV short side...

john

 

[anyone]

Wah, you could have asked about getting your printer back to life! There are a few workarounds for cleaning it.

I print at home using SC-P600. I have a couple of Halbe magnetic frames and change the images regularly. In addition, I have a magnetic board where I hang my images. The very best images I get printed in Diasec from a supplier that is working for big art museums in Germany. It‘s a very nice process to work together with professionals to get exactly the result you imagined.

Edit/ on topic: at least a classy looking screen is ‚The Frame‘ from Samsung.

 

[MGrayson]

You can really only do portrait or landscape layout, I would not expect the image to look that good if the long side is across the TV short side...

john

Two screens

 

[P. Chong]

I will ask then. I have a Canon 24” printer, I think it is the iPF6300. Fabulous printer. But years of not being used, the printer powers up but displays several error codes. I contacted the local dealer, and it’s quite expensive just to have it checked. Would appreciate tips and workarounds.

Wah, you could have asked about getting your printer back to life! There are a few workarounds for cleaning it.

I print at home using SC-P600. I have a couple of Halbe magnetic frames and change the images regularly. In addition, I have a magnetic board where I hang my images. The very best images I get printed in Diasec from a supplier that is working for big art museums in Germany. It‘s a very nice process to work together with professionals to get exactly the result you imagined.

Edit/ on topic: at least a classy looking screen is ‚The Frame‘ from Samsung.

 

[daz7]

That's quite sad that majority of people are no longer interested in prints. Visual art changed to a fast-food style mobile screen 2-second experience.
It is annoying for authors, as you spend hours to tweak colours only to have it watched on a randomised profile screen, making your hard work pointless.
Also, in my opinion, no screen can replace the feel of framed paper or cotton. But ah well, times change, and ADHD-style compulsive finger flicking replaced tangible art.

 

[Pieter 12]

I really believe a photograph is not finished until it is printed and a tangible object. Digital images on screens are ephemeral, forgettable at best.

 

[cunim]

Most of us seem to really like the physicality of prints. So do I, actually. However, after all these years of staring at magazines, books, art prints and screens, I have realized something.

The medium is not the message. It is the image that matters, not how it is displayed. That is just for me and, as I said, I understand and respect the print-centric viewpoint. Maybe I’ve become trendy in my dotage, but I actually prefer a medium that glows.

Funny, I hate e-books. Go figure.

 

[Ed Hurst]

Two screens

I'd need many different screens based on this logic . Very few of my final shots are the actual camera's aspect ratio. I crop or stitch most images to suit the composition/scene I visualised. So I'd need various different shapes of landscape and portrait screens, square screens and some very long landscape pano screens. At least I hardly ever do vertical panos, so that reduces the number of required screens from 100 to about 90 perhaps ;-)

 

[vjbelle]

I would be lost without the print.... but that's just me. If I had limited wall space I would probably be thinking along the same lines as you. The house I had built can accommodate lots of prints and even so I have run out of wall space. I just rotate. If you do decide to go the OLED panel route please report back on your experiences. I'm sure that it will require some work on your end to get the best viewing experience.

Best of luck.....

Victor B.

 

[tenmangu81]

Most of us seem to really like the physicality of prints. So do I, actually. However, after all these years of staring at magazines, books, art prints and screens, I have realized something.

The medium is not the message. It is the image that matters, not how it is displayed. That is just for me and, as I said, I understand and respect the print-centric viewpoint. Maybe I’ve become trendy in my dotage, but I actually prefer a medium that glows.

Funny, I hate e-books. Go figure.

Yes, I agree. The image matters more than the medium. But an image could look very different on a display or on paper. And sometimes, poetry, beauty, are lost when viewed on a TV screen. Colours are different, feeling is different. But I confess that most of my images are processed for viewing on screens In particular on this forum !!

 

[cunim]

If you do decide to go the OLED panel route please report back on your experiences. I'm sure that it will require some work on your end to get the best viewing experience.

Victor, I have done some experimenting. I have a 77" Sony OLED that is our primary TV. I took a bunch of images from my Zenfolio site. These are exported from big TIFFs and raws, to 3840 JPGs. My reaction was OMG. I was seeing my work in ways that I never had before.

Some positive observations.
1. The aspect ratio thing is not an issue. The large TV is not a frame. It is a wall. Think of it as a place to hang your prints of whatever size, and that is the experience that I get. In fact, you can have your display mimic the wall around it (some Samsung TVs can do this automatically) and then it really is like hanging your pictures.
2. There have been lots of studies showing that size is a key factor in determining the impact of an image. That why we print large. I can say that on a 77" TV at about 3m distance, the impact blows away any prints I have seen, other than the really big ones that are so expensive and difficult to do. I have printed wall sized images (or rather I have had them printed for me) and I think they have a similar impact to the big panel. However, I sure couldn't display very many of those massive prints at home.
3. I shoot a lot of specular materials. OLED, being a self-luminous display, does things with specular reflections that paper cannot. I have never seen metal surfaces look as real as this. They shine! This won't matter to most people, but it is huge for me. I am so tired of steel looking like satin. On the OLED, it glistens as it does in life.

Cautions that need more work
1. Like any monitor, TVs need calibration for realistic display. I suspect the color space and the calibration of my OLED are not as competent as those of my Multisync PA122 pro monitor. Just speculation right now.
2. Most images look stunning, gosh, gee whiz on the OLED. I am seeing details I miss in prints and loving the experience. That could be a problem in the long run. I would not call this a subtle display and there can be sense of "too much". However, I have not played with the TV ca;libration settings. They are on "Movie" mode, which is not the same as a proper calibration for viewing still images. Those settings are probably goosing contrast a bit.
3. I haven't used an LED TV for this. Those do not have the inky blacks and superb contrast ratio of OLEDs, but they may be fine. Definitely cheaper.
4. Some images look worse on the big display than they do as prints. I have not figured this one out yet. I think it has to do with smoother color transitions in the prints. Or maybe it is a size thing (see next point).
5. Not every image should be large. The built in slide show app I have zooms everything to fit. I need to find a more sophisticated app that will let me control both image size and any framing I might want to add.
6. The big one. Low resolution. With a 4K 77" TV I am blowing up what is basically a 13" print (300 dpi) to a much larger size. At 3m, that is not a problem. At anything less than that, your eyes can start noticing some crudeness in the render and at 1m it's pretty bad. The answer, of course, is a smaller 4K display, or an 8K unit. That would bring comfy viewing distance down below 2m. 'Course, an 77" 8K OLED costs about as much as a Leica summilux. I'll have to take another look at the LED TVs regarding this issue.

If I wanted to impress a bunch of casual viewers in my living room, or if I wanted to sell myself to inexperienced (with product photography) clients, I would have them view my work on the OLED. For you lot, though, the issue is more complex and the TV is clearly not suitable for everything. I suspect there is an art to be developed for panel display, just as there was an art developed for printing. I would love to see what a skilled printer and a skilled TV technician could come up with in optimising an 83"OLED panel for photography. With time, I will do the best I can, but I have neither of the requisite skills. What I would suggest to all of you is "try it". Then come back and post here.

 

[Will Deleon]

Just scored one of these on FB Marketplace for free. Works well, one semi-clogged head that I’m working on getting fully unclogged. I’ve printed my work before , but excited to print big. Finally get to use the IQ4 to its full potential.

 

[Pieter 12]

Most of us seem to really like the physicality of prints. So do I, actually. However, after all these years of staring at magazines, books, art prints and screens, I have realized something.

The medium is not the message. It is the image that matters, not how it is displayed. That is just for me and, as I said, I understand and respect the print-centric viewpoint. Maybe I’ve become trendy in my dotage, but I actually prefer a medium that glows.

Funny, I hate e-books. Go figure.

The medium may not be the message, but images do look different with reflected light vs transmitted. And the surface of the paper also comes into play, quite difficult to translate on an electronic display. Plus many photos are enhanced by being displayed as part of a series, or at least in relation to another. Doing that with monitors could prove challenging. And some prints are better in smaller sizes, inviting a more intimate viewing experience. That's a lot of different monitor sizes to have on the wall. Unless you float an 8x10" image in a sea of black on a big monitor.

 

[anyone]

I will ask then. I have a Canon 24” printer, I think it is the iPF6300. Fabulous printer. But years of not being used, the printer powers up but displays several error codes. I contacted the local dealer, and it’s quite expensive just to have it checked. Would appreciate tips and workarounds.

I don't know about the electronics side, but I shared nonetheless how I got my SC-P600 up and running again. To not clutter this thread too much, I posted it here:

Cleaning clogged printer nozzles

Hi there, following up on help I offered for cleaning clogged printer nozzles, I'd thought to open a new thread for it. A while ago, I was facing severe problems with my SC-P 600. I almost gave up, but then eventually succeeded. Now since I'm not the master technician, I mainly followed...

www.getdpi.com

 

[Don Libby]

I used to do all my own printing whether it was paper or canvas on a large format printer printing upwards to 30x60. I dabbled in metal prints and found I and others liked them better. I would send the image out to Bay Photo where I found they could print easier and, in some ways, cheaper. I made the decision not to replace my large format printer several years ago and went with Bay Photo to thin-wraps and metal prints. If you have a resale license, you'll save on taxes.

 

[vjbelle]

Victor, I have done some experimenting. I have a 77" Sony OLED that is our primary TV. I took a bunch of images from my Zenfolio site. These are exported from big TIFFs and raws, to 3840 JPGs. My reaction was OMG. I was seeing my work in ways that I never had before.

Some positive observations.
1. The aspect ratio thing is not an issue. The large TV is not a frame. It is a wall. Think of it as a place to hang your prints of whatever size, and that is the experience that I get. In fact, you can have your display mimic the wall around it (some Samsung TVs can do this automatically) and then it really is like hanging your pictures.
2. There have been lots of studies showing that size is a key factor in determining the impact of an image. That why we print large. I can say that on a 77" TV at about 3m distance, the impact blows away any prints I have seen, other than the really big ones that are so expensive and difficult to do. I have printed wall sized images (or rather I have had them printed for me) and I think they have a similar impact to the big panel. However, I sure couldn't display very many of those massive prints at home.
3. I shoot a lot of specular materials. OLED, being a self-luminous display, does things with specular reflections that paper cannot. I have never seen metal surfaces look as real as this. They shine! This won't matter to most people, but it is huge for me. I am so tired of steel looking like satin. On the OLED, it glistens as it does in life.

Cautions that need more work
1. Like any monitor, TVs need calibration for realistic display. I suspect the color space and the calibration of my OLED are not as competent as those of my Multisync PA122 pro monitor. Just speculation right now.
2. Most images look stunning, gosh, gee whiz on the OLED. I am seeing details I miss in prints and loving the experience. That could be a problem in the long run. I would not call this a subtle display and there can be sense of "too much". However, I have not played with the TV ca;libration settings. They are on "Movie" mode, which is not the same as a proper calibration for viewing still images. Those settings are probably goosing contrast a bit.
3. I haven't used an LED TV for this. Those do not have the inky blacks and superb contrast ratio of OLEDs, but they may be fine. Definitely cheaper.
4. Some images look worse on the big display than they do as prints. I have not figured this one out yet. I think it has to do with smoother color transitions in the prints. Or maybe it is a size thing (see next point).
5. Not every image should be large. The built in slide show app I have zooms everything to fit. I need to find a more sophisticated app that will let me control both image size and any framing I might want to add.
6. The big one. Low resolution. With a 4K 77" TV I am blowing up what is basically a 13" print (300 dpi) to a much larger size. At 3m, that is not a problem. At anything less than that, your eyes can start noticing some crudeness in the render and at 1m it's pretty bad. The answer, of course, is a smaller 4K display, or an 8K unit. That would bring comfy viewing distance down below 2m. 'Course, an 77" 8K OLED costs about as much as a Leica summilux. I'll have to take another look at the LED TVs regarding this issue.

If I wanted to impress a bunch of casual viewers in my living room, or if I wanted to sell myself to inexperienced (with product photography) clients, I would have them view my work on the OLED. For you lot, though, the issue is more complex and the TV is clearly not suitable for everything. I suspect there is an art to be developed for panel display, just as there was an art developed for printing. I would love to see what a skilled printer and a skilled TV technician could come up with in optimising an 83"OLED panel for photography. With time, I will do the best I can, but I have neither of the requisite skills. What I would suggest to all of you is "try it". Then come back and post here.

Peter..... you have covered a lot of stuff and thanks... A 77" panel requires a dedicated space and would be extremely beneficial in a smaller environment. I have no idea how large your home is but for personal viewing 'and' for occasional 'friends' viewing your approach seems quite doable. I guess my concerns would be that the ever changing panel is very different than the static wall hung print that never changes unless replaced.

The shortcomings of anything less than 8K seems to be apparent but the cost as compared to projection is really minimal. To come close to what you want to achieve would cost in excess of 50K in the projection world if even that amount would cover it. I only mention this because I explored projection as an alternative to panels a few years ago and was just alarmed by the unbelievable cost.

To transgress a little even with my seemingly unlimited wall space I have employed easels that can accommodate 2 40 inch prints top to bottom because of lack of lighted wall space. Anyone that comes over doesn't seem to mind as they all put their glasses on and get within 2 inches of the print to check the detail. They're going to do the same with your panel! You may as well get the best you can.....

I really believe you are entering into another learning curve that should be somewhat exciting if I can lean on the positive side.

Keep us all posted but if it were me and I were you I would actually rent a small heated space where I could print to my hearts content and maybe see if some gallery would like a print or two but really I could care less. It's just the experience of seeing a great print coming out of a 44 inch printer that is really exhilarating and very satisfying even if there isn't enough wall space.

My Best to you.....

Victor B.