Digital BW, The Print

Helen,

If you want to overspray a print you gave already made using a single 
ink channel, the best bet is to use QTR.

Here is how you do it:

(1) You have to create an RGB untagged TIFF file of the size you want 
overprinted.

(2) Fill the entire image with a solid color. The choice of color to 
fill depends on which channel you have loaded your Tipkote. Below I 
list the RGB color values for the LM channel for Topkote.

(3) Save the image as a TIFF, untagged.

(4) Open QTR

(5) Select "calibration" in the options drop-down menu

(6) It will open a default calibration image, so you go 
to "image", "select image" to open your file.

(7) Print, and viola!

You have the option of selecting ink (Topkote coverage in 5% 
increments.

Good luck and let us know how it works out.

Shilesh

Below are the RGB numbers for LM:

The numbers R=251 and B=255 remains the same for all %. The number G 
is listed

5% = 242
10% = 230
15% = 217
20% = 204
25% = 191
30% = 179
35% = 166
40% = 153
45% = 140
50% = 128
55% = 115
60% = 102
65% = 89
70% = 77
75% = 64
80% = 51
85% = 38
90% = 26
95% = 13
100% = 0




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@...m, "helen_bach2003" 
<helenbach@h...> wrote:
>
> I've just started some tests with Krystal Topkote in a 2200. I'm
> overcoating on a second pass at the moment, and testing it on prints
> made using the standard UC-PK/2200 inks and my K3/2200 inks. 
> 
> Because my first tests are quick and dirty, I happen to have the
> Topkote in the LM slot. If I decide to continue using Topkote I 
might
> move it to the Y slot. I did my first overcoating using IJC/OPM but 
I
> had problems with OPM behaving strangely when only the LM slot was
> used in the profile (I've never had that problem before) and OPM is
> slow in comparison to the Epson driver in High Speed. So I decide to
> use the Epson driver.
> 
> To get just the LM ink from the Epson driver, I used an untagged 
tiff
> file and printed that without any colour management. I tried a 
number
> of combinations and, not surprisingly, came up with 255, 126, 255 as
> the nearest to only LM ink as far as I could tell. 
> 
> Any comments or advice? Has anyone else tried this stuff? I've yet 
to
> get down to evaluating all the tests I've carried out so far, but my
> first impressions are good, especially on glossy paper with the UC 
inks.
> 
> Thanks,
> Helen
>