Dye-Sub vs. Pro. Development.

DRT-Maverick

I was informed of a print process known as Dye Sublimination, I hear it's just as high quality as taking it into a professional photo development shop. I'm just wondering if you could help educate me on this, and tell me if this is accurate.

I lack all knowledge on this printing process.

ian408

The primary difference between dye-sub and inkjet is the color transfer
method. Dye-sub uses a series of films that are heated to transfer color
to the paper. Inkjet uses tiny jets to deposit ink on the page. The later
results in a pattern of ink that approximates the color very well. I say
approximate because the inks are deposited as tiny dots on the page that
vary in size depending on the color being generated. The dye-sub
will produce a greater tonal range because it can vary the amount of dye
for each point in the image.

A dye-sub printer makes a mighty fine print though depending on the size of
the image compared to the transfer film, at a much higher cost.

I think today's photo-specific ink jets do a pretty good job for most people
and per print cost is lower because you're using only the inks you need.

Ian

DRT-Maverick

Thanks! I'm still thinking of going dye-sub if it's the same quality as taking it to a professional printing lab which costs about 7 dollars per print. From the calculations I've done, when ordering the paper and ribbons online, I should be able to print each photo for an average of $2.50, which is perfectly fine for me. I want the extremely high quality for about half the price.

ian408

DRT-Maverick wrote:

Thanks! I'm still thinking of going dye-sub if it's the same quality as taking it to a professional printing lab which costs about 7 dollars per print. From the calculations I've done, when ordering the paper and ribbons online, I should be able to print each photo for an average of $2.50, which is perfectly fine for me. I want the extremely high quality for about half the price.

If I may add a piece of personal experience. We have had one or two of them in the
office and unless things have changed significantly, they are a PITA to deal with.
Consumables are expensive, they tend to STB unless you feed and care for them
regularly and they always break when you need the most. By expensive, I mean
regardless of the size you print, the cost to print is the same.

As a suggestion, have you tried one of the newer inkjets with photo-glossy film?
I've got a Canon i9900 that's pretty darn good. I know a few others have the nicer
Epson w/no complainst (it prints on roll paper).

Ian

pathfinder

ian408 wrote:

If I may add a piece of personal experience. We have had one or two of them in the
office and unless things have changed significantly, they are a PITA to deal with.
Consumables are expensive, they tend to STB unless you feed and care for them
regularly and they always break when you need the most. By expensive, I mean
regardless of the size you print, the cost to print is the same.

As a suggestion, have you tried one of the newer inkjets with photo-glossy film?
I've got a Canon i9900 that's pretty darn good. I know a few others have the nicer
Epson w/no complainst (it prints on roll paper).

Ian

DYe-Subs used to be the standard, but most pros now use ink jets for their own printing needs. The Epson R800, 1800 and 2400 are getting outstanding reviews with the K3 inks. Even for Black and White prints without a RIP!! And you can use such a great variety of papers as well with inkjets. I looked at dye-sub and bought an Epson 4000. The 4800 is even better than the 4000.

DRT-Maverick

The only problem I've seen with inkjet is that the dark colors have less gloss than the lighter colors, and it does a weird effect, it kills the gloss, and is very undesirable. The coloring is also a bit 'milky' when it comes to black.

Shay Stephens

Consider having them printed
I hate printers of all types. So I just send my work off to be printed at www.whcc.com they send back classic prints and enlargements on photo paper. I don't have to spend a lot on the prints, I don't have to fix printers, or keep any stock of materials. For me it's perfect!

ian408

Shay Stephens wrote:

I hate printers of all types. So I just send my work off to be printed at www.whcc.com they send back classic prints and enlargements on photo paper. I don't have to spend a lot on the prints, I don't have to fix printers, or keep any stock of materials. For me it's perfect!

I always knew you were a smart guy

Ian

DRT-Maverick

Shay Stephens wrote:

I hate printers of all types. So I just send my work off to be printed at www.whcc.com they send back classic prints and enlargements on photo paper. I don't have to spend a lot on the prints, I don't have to fix printers, or keep any stock of materials. For me it's perfect!

Hmm, does that play do 8x12" prints so I can avoid cropping?