Digital BW, The Print

> I strongly recommend this workflow.  
> 
> I am converting my personal work to it, and *all* of my older 
curves and
> workflows appear to be easily modified to take advantages of this.  
Being
> able to linearize the system easily for ink and paper batch 
differences, not
> to mention for brand new papers, having the monitor match the print 
without
> the need for a custom dot gain curve, and printing from a grayscale 
file
> without an RGB conversion and application of a curve all make for a 
superior
> workflow.
> 
> What I've found is that the old curves that have flat spots in them 
need to
> be modified by having the flat spots converted into barely-sloped 
curves.
> All that I've tried so far then work.
> 
> Of course, the current system will not profile the tones for the
> variable-tone inksets, but usually the problems people have are 
issues of
> linearization.  


Paul,

I could not get connected to the link above detailing the workflow. 
So I went : http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/Monotone_Curves.htm

While I'm all ready to trust your words I can't figure out the 
superiority of avc vs QTR (except direct printing from PS). 

Itinerative spoting of corrections on an acv to get a linear output 
seems to me a much tougher challenge than QTR-linearize at first 
glance. Softproofing is also very straightfoprward with QTR-ICC and I 
just need to send the Tif file to the soft for what I find a perfect 
matching print.

I mean no offence at all saying this, I just can't realise how you 
find the acv workflow superior while I suspect there's a good 
reasoning behing it that I'm missing. Cant you direct me to another 
paper of yours, another link...anything I'll be reading with great 
interest. Thanks.

Olivier