Digital BW, The Print

>>>
>>
>> actually duotones use the very same printing method offset presses
> use
>> for 1 to 8 or whatever inks used, cmyk mixes or special inks, or
> spot
>> colors, or whatever... just that you choose what two or more
> precise
>> inks,
>
> Not in Photoshop, you don't.

I'm perfectly aware of that. I didn't say that it was in Photoshop. You 
choose the inks you are asking the press to use, you use photoshop to 
try and emulate what that approach will offer by choosing say a pantone 
or build that closely resembles the inks choosen.


> Photoshop has no direct control
> over the ink.   The driver does that.

the imagesetter,  plate maker, the press man.


> Furthermore you're not
> creating a true screen when you print with an inkjet printer.

that was my point Peter, that we aren't using duotones to emulate what 
a press does.  That we ARE using them to create a tone, a way to tone, 
that's it.  Who cares what we use, or what it's called, if it gives 
results we are happy with, or at least a beginning.




>
>> screenings and angles of same are not only for
>> duotone printing.
>
> But duotone printing does require screens and angles.  Else
> it's a simulation of duotone.

That's what I was saying.  Just that your words left the impression 
duotone alone used screens and angles, I was trying to point out that 
that was what offset press runs do in general, not just related to 
multitones.

by the way, I would say the whole of photoshop is a simulation of a 
print, whether it's cmyk, multitone or inkjet, lightjet, film 
recorder... simulation until real.

>
> Lately I've see a rise in popularity of inkjet "lithography".
> Lithography is another printing technique that has a specific
> meaning.    When you simulate it in inkjet it's not lithography.

but where would the offset world be without the invention of 
lithography, and at the time of it's invention it too was damned as a 
lowly way to create 'real art'...  I don't see the need to over analyze 
all of this, we create, we use what we have in ways that we want, so be 
it. Simulation or not, copy or a variation of old techniques or not, if 
it's from your heart, if you like it, if it moves you... go for it, if 
it sells, hey... that's cool. Same holds in my opinion for the ongoing 
and boring discussions of what is art, or is it a 'real' photo. Too 
much talk, not enough creating.

how about using an inkjet to etch stone...why not, they can use it to 
create human tissue, or circuit boards...

is it the labels that bother you?  to me it's just another form of 
evolution. It'll all level off and who cares what they call it.  well 
hang on, inkjet humans, evolution, how cool is this.
Carolyn