Digital BW, The Print

Bill

 

Your seeing what I have had On My walls!!! Tyler Kudos :-) You�re the Man!!

 

cheers

 

Jim Doyle

 

Shades Of Paper

600 Deer Rd Unit 4

Cherry Hill NJ 08034

856-795-7780

www.shadesofpaper.com

 

 

   _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
BKPhoto@...
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 2:18 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Follow-up to Tyler's slithering from the cave

 

This post is for those on the list who were interested in the exchange ("the
times, they aren't a-changing") that Tyler Boley kicked-off. If you want to
read his original post, use this link:
HYPERLINK
"http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/message/810
68"http://tech.-groups.yahoo.-com/group/-DigitalBlackandW-hiteThePrint/-mess
age/81068

Tyler sent me two prints, roughly 6.5 x 9 inches on a coated matt fine art
paper (looks like PhotoRag, but don't know for sure). Same file, printed at
1440 ppi; one was printed through the OEM driver, the other through Tyler's
Rip set-up. The OEM print was made with UltraChrome K3 inks, the other with
Tyler's quadtone inks. The prints are not annotated. I had no indication
which print was made from which print workflow. Tyler simply asked me to
look at them and render an opinion.

I put both in my viewing booth. To my eyes, there really is no comparison
between the two prints. One is smoother, looks sharper, and has better image
detail. The overall impression is dramatically more three-dimensional. When
I looked at the prints using a 4x lupe, the differences were even more
dramatic. The OEM print fell apart. I passed my conclusion to Tyler and he
confirmed that the better print was made with the quadtone/Rip workflow.

I don't have a horse in this race. I'm a firm believer in choice (as I
mentioned in one of my posts on this thread) and don't feel any need to push
one approach above another. I subscribe to the notion of "appropriate" means
and I personally believe in the innate value of craftsmanship. I love well
seen, well made prints. I like this exercise because it's real world in
every important dimension related to inkjet printing: a careful worker
created and pushed the same image file through two printing workflows, each
optimized to it's practical limit, and the results were judged by eye.

In the spirit of full disclosure, I'd also mention that it didn't surprise
me to learn that the better print was made with a dedicated grayscale
inkset, processed through a calibrated and profiled Rip printing workflow.
It confirms the results we've been getting at K2 Press. I have yet to see an
OEM print driver out-perform a properly used professional Rip.

One last note of clarification. The big difference between these two prints
is the calibrated/profiled Rip printing workflow, not the inks. Apply the
same workflow to UC2 or UC3 inks, and you'll get a demonstrably better print
compared to using the OEM driver. The inks make an aesthetic difference.

Bill Kennedy
K2 Press
Author of "The Photographer'-s Guide to the Digital Darkroom"





____________-_________-_________-_________-_________-_________-_
Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security
tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web,
free AOL Mail and more.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.6/535 - Release Date: 11/15/2006



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.409 / Virus Database: 268.14.6/535 - Release Date: 11/15/2006
 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]