Digital BW, The Print

Andre,


> How would the UT-FS fare when compared to the other UT inksets: just
> as good or better (in keeping with the discussion at hand)?

The UT-FS has 50% of the toner that the UT-FS-N has.  So, it would be
slightly more lightfast than a neutral print, but not quite as lightfast as
a pure carbon print.   All are, of course, very lightfast.

> Would I be correct in assuming that carbon is only one of four inks
> used with the UT-FS inkset and therefore have higher carbon content
> than the other UT inkset where 6 or 7 inks are used?

I think the final tone of the print tells you most about the relative
amounts of carbon versus color pigs.  With the UT variable-tone prints, the
idea is to start with pure carbon and then put in color pigment toner
(actually a mix or carbon and color pigments that is still predominantly
carbon) only to the extent needed to cool off the carbon to the desired
tone.  So, in the variable tone inksets, how stable they are is up to the
user.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 



> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
> <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> 
> > pigments, there will be some uncertainty.  The more carbon the
> better, but
> > for me that is only as long as it is consistent with the look I
> like.  For
> > most prints, medium warm is about as warm as I want to go, and I'm not a
> > "Tri-X" look type.  So, I need more smoothness that BO can deliver.
> >
> 
> 
>