Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Phil Bard" <phil@p...> 
wrote:
The approach is 
> also lacking in intuitiveness, which I happen to value highly.  I 
want 
> to be able to see the image I'm printing in a more verifiable 
form 
> onscreen. 


This whole Piezo/MIS thing is a tough cookie. For me, like Phil, I 
was just thrown for a loop when I actually did the whole 
applying-the-Roark-curve process. I am just so accustomed to 
using a gut-level approach when preparing and toning an image; 
when I applied the curve, and I saw the monitor image go Jimi 
Hendrix green and yellow, I didn't know what to think. At that 
point, it became so apparent that this was purely math at work 
here; the monitor image meant nothing. But that then eliminates 
gut-level intuition -- how then do you attack/alter an image if that 
first test print comes out too grey, or too contrasty, or solarized? It 
was as if I had been working in English, and then somehow I 
was required to start working in Russian all of a sudden; I was 
out of my element.

(This is in no way criticizing Paul's curves approach. He honestly 
has my vote for Workaround Solution of The Year, by devising 
this method. I'm just shocked that he's done as well as he has. 
But this way of working is just way over my head).

It also made me wonder if you really DO need SIX different grey 
tones to produce a good print. It's almost like they're too close; 
and it might make it difficult to isolate one tone from another, if 
you were trying to make adjustments in the print. Maybe four inks 
is just fine?...

It was odd when the first test prints from the hextones popped 
out of my 7000. How do you gauge what is good? How do you 
say, "There's too much dark grey ink here, and not enough light 
grey ink there"? Again, maybe with time, you'd develop a method 
of working, but for me, it was very unsettling.

On the other hand, with Piezo, where everything is done for you 
automatically, there IS comfort in the plugnplay-ness of it all. 
There's probably just as much math going on under-the-hood as 
with Paul's curves, but when you don't see it actually displayed 
on the monitor, it doesn't seem to mess with you as much. 
Sometimes, ignorance IS bliss, especially if you're on deadline, 
and you just need to produce prints. To remove the "tinker factor" 
can be a good thing.

Again, I'm a photographer, not a software engineer, or a chemist, 
or a printmaker. At some point, you've gotta cut to the chase and 
just get some prints made. Sometimes, I think it can be better to 
have some of this math going on behind the scenes, where 
you're not tempted to go in and get involved with it. That's why I 
like the Piezo approach, if I was gonna work with quads.

But I've gone back to the MIS color dyes for my work. I'm much 
more comfortable doing my toning with colors inks; if it's too 
magenta, just pull out magenta, etc. It's straightforward and easy 
to implement. Given, I'm still got the crossover enemy out there, 
ready to rear its head, but with a good profile, and not too much 
Saturation in the RGB image, it can be controlled.

Mark Tucker, http://marktucker.com