Digital BW, The Print

How about tonality in general? Are you seeing noteworthy differences
between the nanochromes and the other inksets you mentioned?

Chris Hargens


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Staver"
<daniel@p...> wrote:
>
> I just recieved two test prints from Steve Kale printed with the
Nanochrome
> inks on Photo Rag. 
> 
> I gave him a test file, using a selection of my own images along with a
> stepwedge, then he made two prints using a custom QTR curve, with and
> without a QTR create ICC profile. 
> 
> This is by far the best blacks I have ever seen on any matte paper. They
> simply look fantastic. Deep, rich blacks with absolutely no surface
> reflections or sheen.
> 
> I printed the same print on HPR with Eboni and the MIS PRO inks
using the
> QTR UC curves, and when held next to the Nanonchrome print the Eboni
looks
> flat and lifeless. 
> 
> I measured the dmax to 2.01 with my X-Rite 810, but that's not the whole
> story. Visually the dmax, to my eye, appears as good as or better
than what
> I get with PKN and Gloss Optimizer on Epson Premium Semigloss, which
I has a
> dmax of 2.3. Intially I was surprised by this, because I was
expecting the
> appearance of the blacks to be better than Eboni, but duller than
those on a
> really good glossy print. I think the reason is the total lack of any
> distracting reflections with the Nanochromes on HPR. If I hold
glossy prints
> at even a slight angle surface sheen and reflections starts to show
up, and
> you lose any advantage you had with the extra dmax. With matte
prints there
> is none of this. Obviously measured dmax is not everything.
> 
> I really, really hope these inks turn out to be archival. This is
what I've
> always wanted my matte prints to look like, and I would hate to get
my hopes
> up like this just to discover the inks are useless.
> 
> --
> Daniel Staver
> http://daniel.staver.no
>