Digital BW, The Print

For forum readers, I am embarrassed to note that my listing of the photographer's name and web site in my original post were not correct.  He is Richard Bickle, and the web site is richardbicklephotography.com.
Jon,
Thank you for your reply.
It is very interesting to learn about these technical details of the Iris process.  I am inferring from your description that the Unitone and Digital Platinum were dye inks?  Otherwise it doesn't seem that the continuous tone output of the layering of the dots would work, ie. the continuous tone effect requires the translucency of dye inks and would not be possible with pigment inks.  Other than the anecdotal data on the print you have had on your wall for 19 years, is there any data on the longevity of the Unitone prints similar to the current data on pigment inks?  (Maybe you could send a Unitone print to Mark Ardenberg for his testing?)
If the prints I saw used the Unitone inks, then it sounds like that process contributes to the perceived lack of grain that even the 30 X 40 prints show.  I infer that an alternate process, particularly pigment inks, would show more grain?  I am sure that each step of Ron and his printer's process is maximized to minimize the perceived grain.
It also sounds like the paper used for these prints is probably a non-inkjet coated paper?
Would it be technically possible to produce a Unitone-like effect with the Epson dye inks overlaying each other rather than being dithered?  That would be interesting to see.
If you have seen any samples of Tyler's best B&W pigment ink prints, how would you compare the Unitone prints to them?
I look forward to your replies.
Mike Brubaker  

--- On Thu, 4/8/10, piezobw <jon@...> wrote:

From: piezobw <jon@inkjetmall.com>
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Now Current status of Iris B&W printing
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, April 8, 2010, 10:41 PM















 
 



  


    
      
      
      The printmaker in Atlanta would probably be Jamie Cook unless he sold his operation, and the process is ConeTech Unitone, something I designed about 1992. Jamie Cook was one of the first victims which I sold an IRIS 3047 printer to - and he opted to take my methodology training and buy ConeTech software that I developed to make b&w prints using color inks. I was the Development Partner for Fine Arts at the time with IRIS Graphics, Inc.



Unlike Epson ABW which develops density through three shades of black and uses color inks adjacent to black dots to make tone, the ConeTech UnitTone process is quite different and relies on a system of lookup tables to precisely place the color dots of ink under the black dots of ink rather than adjacent to them in the normal IRIS dithering process which was called matrixing.



The IRIS printer forms 31 distinctly different dot sizes comprised of between 1 and 31 droplets of ink. The 31 is theoretical but was actually obtainable via a number of lookup tables working in harmony. The basics of Unitone are to define a tone made of mixing cyan, magenta, yellow and black ink. I predefined a number of tones between warm and cool. This becomes one lookup table for the recipe of inks to make a "tone". 



You can see a picture of the possible tones created with my Unitone process using color inks here:



http://www.piezogra phy.com/PiezoPre ss/wp-content/ uploads/2010/ 03/unitone. jpg



In terms of data sent to the printer - for every density location, a certain amount of cyan, magenta, and yellow drops of ink are placed immediately under a black dot of ink and in that precise order according to the Unitone recipe. A Photoshop routine is used in conjunction with the lookup tables to prepare the file, because to fill in the spaces left by missing matrix dots of cyan, magenta and yellow, they too are produced by smaller drops of cyan, magenta and yellow hiding under black, produced from CMY image data produced in the Photoshop routine. The end result of UniTone with a strong loupe does not show the tell-tale IRIS matrix and looks virtually continuous tone - and more importantly, you can not see any ink color other than the chosen UniTone. Not a stray cyan, magenta or yellow dot. Every black dot is a UniTone dot.



I have a UniTone print hanging on my own foyer wall that I printed 19 years ago that remains very fresh to this day. The black ink acting to support greatly the more fugitive nature of the color inks. The software was in DOS - and to this day runs on very old versions of Windows by those who opt to keep my system alive. The PC is an older architecture that can support the printer interface cable. This is very archaic technology by today's standards. But at one point more than 40 printers in the USA produced Unitone prints in the mid-1990s. Most went out of business because of the proliferation of Epson printers allowing artists to no longer need the services of fine art service bureaus.



I still run one. They are exceedingly rare and the parts supply is maintained now by ITNH. They're crazy expensive to maintain. But sometimes they print black & white like no other process. I am producing Zana Briski's bug prints right now with my IRIS. Nothing else compares. I'm using UniTone for the project.



DigitalPlatinum was a quad black ink system tied in with media profiles. I believe that this is the first quad black system of inks and profiles ever designed. This one is more complex in some ways, relying on dot placement in conjunction with a variable tone process of inks. Maybe this will help the mad scientists here. Shade 1 was black, but shade 2 and shade 3 had the same density (middle gray) and were used to modulate the mid-tones into several possible tones depending upon how much of one was used in comparison to the other. One of these two inks was greenish/brownish, one colder/brownish. The forth bottle was in two options and used to influence the highlight split. It was the light gray and you would change it out depending upon the effect like how paintings are glazed. One was neutral and the other very warm.



You can see a picture of a replicant of Ziatype printing that I could produce with DigitalPlatinum here:



http://www.piezogra phy.com/PiezoPre ss/wp-content/ uploads/2010/ 03/weese2- 900.jpg



The photographer is Carl Weese and the split toning imitates the printing out process which gets warmer with greater exposure. But it could also imitate many other styles of platinum printing quite different than this. I never licensed it preferring to keep it only for my studio.



Diana Michener's Solitaire exhibition at Pace McGill was DigitalPlatinum - I think I printed it in 1997. It had a much more selenium look to it and was produced on extremely delicate japanese paper. Some of the software I made to do the Ashes and Snow prints for Gregory Colbert came out of DigitalPlatinum. That took 11 inks and yet was in no way as delicate as DigitalPlatinum with 4 inks.



I really do not believe that any other inkjet process will ever replicate the beauty of the surface of this type of printing - yet it also fits into the category of something felt and perceived rather than some data that can be understood. The process of 31 sized variable dots of ink is a very powerful asset to making photographic prints on uncoated papers. But, the majority of IRIS printmakers used coated papers and Scitex software and these types of IRIS prints are more ordinary looking and perhaps lower in visual quality to Epson 7000 color prints.



Jon Cone

Piezography



--- In DigitalBlackandWhit eThePrint@ yahoogroups. com, Brubaker family <brubaker_family@ ...> wrote:

>

> I've been looking for a thread to hijack to get a discussion going about the current state of Iris B&W printing, and Tyler's and the subsequent "rants" of others look like the perfect opportunity! Â This is particularly so because I especially wanted to get Tyler's and Jon's inputs.

> My interest in this topic started for me when my wife and I were in Apalachicola, FL in early January. Â We found that photographer Ron Bickle (ronbiclephotoghrap hy.com) has a gallery on the main street of the town, and went in to get a look at his work. Â He had on display mostly B&W images from the "forgotten coast" area, and I was impressed by the quality of the prints and the emotional impact several of the prints had on me. Â If I had the budget to buy gallery B&W prints, I would have bought several of his on the spot. Â (As an aside, I noted how the larger 30X40 prints of the images had so much more visual impact than the smaller prints of the same image.)

> My favorite images were:

> Baptism at Camel Lake (New exhibits and prints Apalachicola: An American Treasure, American Treasure_17) Saturday on Spring Creek (New exhibits and prints Apalachicola: An American Treasure, American Treasure_16) September at Two Mile (ronbicklephotograp hy.com/PhotoDisp lay.cfm?ItemPict ure=SeptemberAtT woMile)

> Ron was in the gallery, and I had a chance to talk with him for a few minutes before more visitors came in.  The notes on the prints indicated that they were taken with film, not digital cameras.  I started by commenting on how much detail without grain even the 30X40 prints had, and supposed he was using large format film.  I was surprised when Ron replied that he used 35mm fine grain film and Zeiss lenses.  He noted that for technique he in particular he likes to use wide angle lenses close up.  (Reading "between the lines" I surmise that he probably uses something like a Leica M rangefinder with the Zeiss lenses.)

> He said that the smaller prints are silver gelatin, but that the large prints are Iris B&W prints done for him (both scanning and printing) by a printmaker in Atlanta, GA. Â The images on the web site don't do justice to the beauty of the prints that were on display. Â The tones are a rich (dark) chocolate and light cream and there is no apparent grain even on the 30X40 prints.

> So aside from the beauty of the prints, which I hope you will view on his web site, I hope to get a discussion going about the current state of B&W Iris printing and comparison/contrast to the B&W printers and inks discussed on this forum. Â (Jon's comments about the impermanence of technology seems especially appropriate re the Iris printers since they aren't being made any more.)

> I did some web research on B&W Iris printing and found the following:

> The original Iris printers were designed to be used for color pre-press proofs for the graphics/printing industry.

> Graham Nash and Mark Holbert (of Crosby, Stills and Nash fame) along with David Coons (software development) adapted the Iris color printer to make B&W prints using Lyson quad black dye inks.

> In 1998 Jon Cone developed a set of Digital Platinum B&W inks and a software driver for the Iris printer.

> The Iris technology went through a number of acquisitions, with Kodak ended up buying the it, but has stopped manufacturing it. Â I'm not sure what the current replacement is.

> The technology of the Iris printers is very interesting - I'll let readers look it up on the web. Â But, talk about waste ink!

> Mike Brubaker





    
     

    
    


 



  











      

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]