Since printing is the issue, I’m concerned with output sharpening rather than capture and creative sharpening. I’ve actually had good experiences printing with Lightroom up to 17 x 22 inches (43 x 56cm), but I’m always open to approaches that are enough better to justify losing the features of Lightroom’s print module, which I find very handy (in particular, the ability to create templates very simply that include virtually all relevant software, firmware, and paper settings). Currently, the model is hardly or not at all available in Germany.Ī few more links that don’t directly answer your question, but go in that direction: Unfortunately, I no longer have an LFP printer here.Īn new Epson SC-P900 will only come on board in 2021. I have not yet seen a direct A/B comparison from others. How good this is then compared to Qimage must be seen. The days I read that Adobe is recently working with AI technology on such issues: The upscaled (and output sharpened) Qimage prints clearly looked better. However, I remember printing a few prints directly from Lightroom (upscaliny done by LR) to my then 24″ HP z3100 and then doing the same again with QImage Ultimate. When upscaling was necessary I mostly went via TIFF export to Photoshop and printed from there directly or with the QTR print tool. I’m afraid I didn’t do a hard scientific A/B comparison at the time between upscaling prints from Lightroom and Qimage Ultimate. Have you seen a comparison, or do you have an opinion about that? However, I couldn’t find any comparison of the quality of their output sharpening algorithms. I went through a description of QImage some time ago, and it didn’t seem to offer much that Lightroom doesn’t for people printing single prints. However, my question is how it compares with Lightroom.

You’ve explained why you use it with Capture One. Thanks for posting the article on QImage.

Qimage ultimate reviews