Home printing

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Now I've got a question. One thing I love about my i9900 is that when I print out an image that looks noisy on my monitor (I'm talking noisy), it looks smooth as butter, and yet still sharp when I print. Do the epsons have noise reduction like this?

[LuisV]

To answer the question yes. They have noise reduction in the drivers. It's under the advanced settings and under Photo Enhancement. I deal with (2200 and 7800) and both drivers have it but it's not something I would rely on regardless of the brand.

Noise reduction implies a reduction of sharpness. There are no two ways about it. You cannot have one without giving up the other. So if you apply noise reduction you are reducing sharpness. Especially if you deal with a global style approach that in-camera or driver based (printer/scanner) noise reduction performs.

Some noise reduction routines/techniques can apply selective reduction using masks or "analyze" images and apply different NR in varying amounts. These are far better methods. Even then, you are losing some detail but it's much better controlled. If you have a good sharp image to start with and control noise reduction you can get fantastic results.

Why all this to answer the question? Well it's just that I'd think you'd be happier if you relied on a good noise reduction in your workflow rather than letting a catch all system deal with it. It might give you good results but I think when you compare it to another method you might end up happier.

[TX_Gulf_Coast]

I am With LuisV on this...noise reduction always affects the sharpness. I do not use the "canned" Epson driver to print however. I use a RIP that far out performs the Epson drivers in several ways. Therefore, when I have to use noise reduction, (and I only use Noise Ninja) I can control just how much or little noise reduction that is applied...the driver doesn't do it for me.

I can get images as sharp or as soft as I prefer. Media plays a part in the sharpness of the final print also. I have printed on everything from high gloss media to textured fine art and canvas and the final images are fantastic. I have even Printed on Metal with the Epson 7800's. (Very Cool!)

Epson isn't the only printer out there, but they are the leader in the field for the moment. Canon and HP have stepped up to the plate now, introducing archival inks that have much better life than the previous dyed based inks they used prior. They will have to continue to improve, and fast, because Epson has been using this technology and ink long before the others. That is the main reason I use Epson, tried and true...Canon and HP have only recently introduced archival inks and therefore, have to prove their product.

The future should hold great things in this area. Technology is improving rapidly.

[GK PHOTO]

Epson holds it down no comp at all, Cannon may have the cameras but Epson deff has the printers.

[LuisV]

Epson holds it down no comp at all, Cannon may have the cameras but Epson deff has the printers.

Canon does not have the cameras..... beg to differ there......

[TX_Gulf_Coast]

Canon does not have the cameras..... beg to differ there......

Is still all a matter of opinion. BUT...Try taking a Nikon out to a dungeon dark football stadium and crank up that ISO to 1600 & 3200; your images will be FULL of noise. Canon on the other hand, no problem. I use both 1600 and 3200 in sports and weddings with little of no noise problem.

One of the main reason for switching from Nikon after 20+ years. Not to mention that Nikon seems to be stuck on the 1.5 Crop sensor. Bottom line thou...use what works. Nikon fell behind in the digital race a while back. I will say this much thou, Canon's CPS seems to be better than Nikons NPS version. I have had to send in bodies for cleaning and service and I get them back within 3-5 days regularly and they do exceptional work. I used to have to fight NPS just to get the to fix it right.