Digital BW, The Print

I have no problem profiling it in the default setting and that is what I
use.  I think Ed was using a 2400.  Either way I have no issues with the
default and have enough observations in the profile so I'm happy.


> From: Steve Gledhill <stephengledhill@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 20:34:03 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: ABW users:  which ABW setting do you use?
> 
> Steve,
> 
> My recollection is that in the past you've advocated using the ABW
> default "darker" setting.  Have you changed your mind, and if so -
> why?  Or has something else changed - or is my memory at fault?!
> 
> Steve Gledhill
> http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk/
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@...> wrote:
>> 
>> Profiling a linear device will be better so I'd use either the Norm
> or Light
>> setting (both for printing the test chart for profiling and on an
> on-going
>> basis) and create an ICC profile using that data.
>> 
>> 
>>> From: edrudolpho <erudolph@...>
>>> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>>> Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:51:26 -0000
>>> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>>> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: ABW users:  which ABW setting do you use?
>>> 
>>> One other note, maybe of interest.  After printing 21-step wedges
> for the Dark
>>> and for the 
>>> Norm and for the Light settings, and examining the Measure Tool
> text files,
>>> the Norm and 
>>> Light ABW settings gave very linear L values.  The Dark setting
> gave L values
>>> with marked 
>>> drop off in the last three steps.
>>> 
>>> Ed