Digital BW, The Print

As a follow-up: last night I printed a more "representative" image from a 1Ds 
file converted to grayscale, printed on Epson Premium Luster, again using 
"printer color management" and "color controls."  I found the print to be 
different in hue from the print mentioned im my initial post.  However, looking 
at them side by side (and next to a silver print), the print on Luster actually 
looks more "neutral" than the one on Enhanced Matte.  The Enhanced Matte 
one looks almost (lightly) selenium toned, while the one on Luster looks (in 
terms of hue) closer to the untoned silver print (on Ilford multigrade fiber 
Luster paper).  It's hard to explain, but both the 4000 print on Luster and the 
silver print have grays that are "grayer" to my eye, while the 4000 print on 
Ehnaced Matte tends toward the slight purplish tone of a lightly selenium 
toned silver print.  By way of comparison, a grayscale print on the 2200 using 
the Epson driver in my perception tends much more strongly toward purple or 
green than either of these prints from the 4000.  I have not yet been able to 
make any serious conclusions on metamerism on this print, as it's yet another 
seriously overcast day here...

If someone with a color measurement tool thingy would like me to mail them 
the prints from the 4000 for some objective data, I'd be happy to.  Next up for 
me is to compare both of these prints from the 4000 to prints of the same 
images on my 2200 using ImagePrint.

(by the way, I image that I will ultimately give in and buy ImagePrint for the 
9600, as 9600 grayscale prints look the same to me as 2200 grayscale prints.  
I would get ImagePrint for the 9600, rather than the 4000, because then I'd 
have the ability to print larger neutral grayscale files.  But I would be limited to 
Matte papers, since I'm set up for matte black ink in the 9600 and don't like the 
idea of eating the cost of switching inks.  On the other hand, I can't think of a 
B&W print I've made recently that I would have preferred with a glossy/luster 
paper, particularly given the depth of blacks on Ultrasmooth)

> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "chipcarterdc" 
> <chipcarterdc@h...> wrote:
> > I'd like to ask that anyone who has a 4000 print a B&W image with 
> a "normal" 
> > range of tonal values and check for neutrality and metamerism.  I 
> ask this b/c I 
> > have a 4000 and have printed one B&W image that to me looks neutral 
> and 
> > (more surprisingly) seems to show little to no color shifting when 
> viewed in 
> > different light.  The print was a grayscale RGB file (converted 
> using the 
> > Convert to B&W Pro plug-in) on Epson Enhanced Matte, printed at 
> 1440dpi, 
> > using "printer color management" in the Photoshop driver and "color 
> controls" 
> > in the Epson driver.  However, the image I printed was not really 
> > representative of a normal B&W, in my opinion -- it's a backlit 
> image of a tree 
> > against the sky, so it had lots of stark blacks and white whites, 
> with just a bit of 
> > midtone values and gradation in the sky.  So, I'll be printing 
> another image as 
> > a better test (like something with a wide range of tonal values -- 
> a landscape 
> > of street shot).  I'd like others to post their experiences w. B&W 
> on the 4000 as 
> > well -- I find it hard to believe that B&W has been significantly 
> improved 
> > unless there were serious tweaks to the driver that I don't know 
> about, and am 
> > assuming, as I mentioned above, that the nature of this particular 
> image is 
> > why there was little metamerism.  (Or perhaps Enhanced Matte shows 
> less 
> > color shifting for some reason?  I'll try the next print on a 
> different paper).