Digital BW, The Print

Been thinking about this as I wrestle with B&W options and want to get opinions from the list.
I work strictly in B&W, BUT (and this is a big but) I make brown tone prints. VERY brown!
I have several years invested into getting what I want out of color ink sets. First HP (big mistake; great inks, crappy printers), now Epson. I don't convert my images to B&W, but rather work them in RGB and then the top layer of my stack is a color layer that lays down the brown tone. It works great. If I want to remove some of the brown from the highlights, it is easy enough to add a mask to that color layer.
i have only played, very little, with ABW. It does appear to be very limited and the most brown I seem to be able to get out of it (Sepia pushed to the max) is less than I normally create with my regular approach.
Now, my thought of the day is this...
Since I would be pushing ABW to the limit of its color anyway, strictly from the standpoint of image permanence, wouldn't it be true that, give or take a couple of years, I might just as well stick with my RGB approach? In other words, making very sepia prints with ABW, I presume I would lose most of the longevity advantage of ABW and therefore, there would be little reason for me to use it.
I'd also like to hear from others about how you've dealt with the limitations you've found with ABW.

With your workflow, I don't see any advantage to using ABW.




On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 5:57 PM, davidkachel <david@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Been thinking about this as I wrestle with B&W options and want to get
> opinions from the list.
> I work strictly in B&W, BUT (and this is a big but) I make brown tone
> prints. VERY brown!
> I have several years invested into getting what I want out of color ink
> sets. First HP (big mistake; great inks, crappy printers), now Epson. I
> don't convert my images to B&W, but rather work them in RGB and then the
> top layer of my stack is a color layer that lays down the brown tone. It
> works great. If I want to remove some of the brown from the highlights, it
> is easy enough to add a mask to that color layer.
> i have only played, very little, with ABW. It does appear to be very
> limited and the most brown I seem to be able to get out of it (Sepia pushed
> to the max) is less than I normally create with my regular approach.
> Now, my thought of the day is this...
> Since I would be pushing ABW to the limit of its color anyway, strictly
> from the standpoint of image permanence, wouldn't it be true that, give or
> take a couple of years, I might just as well stick with my RGB approach? In
> other words, making very sepia prints with ABW, I presume I would lose most
> of the longevity advantage of ABW and therefore, there would be little
> reason for me to use it.
> I'd also like to hear from others about how you've dealt with the
> limitations you've found with ABW.
>
>  
>


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

davidkachel <david@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> ... I work strictly in B&W, BUT (and this is a big but) I make brown tone
> prints. VERY brown!...
>
I use MIS glossy carbon on glossy paper for my "sepia" tone prints.  They
have a Lab B of up to about 12 to 14.  The 100% carbon is going to be much
more stable than the loads of yellow and magenta you'll need from the color
set to get to that point.  Even if you go more brown than that, starting
with a warm carbon would seem to make the most sense.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com


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

From:  Paul Roark

"I use MIS glossy carbon on glossy paper for my "sepia" tone prints. They
have a Lab B of up to about 12 to 14. The 100% carbon is going to be much
more stable than the loads of yellow and magenta you'll need from the color
set to get to that point. Even if you go more brown than that, starting
with a warm carbon would seem to make the most sense."

Paul,
What does that glossy carbon ink look like on Arches HP?


David Kachel

___________________

Artist-Photographer
Fine B&W Photographs

www.davidkachel.com
david@...

Gallery:
www.reddoorfinephotographs.com
director@...

PO Box  1893
Alpine, TX 79831
(432) 386-5787




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

Actually, on Arches the MIS glossy carbon is only about one Lab B warmer
than Eboni-6.  So, it's not very dramatic.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 7:13 PM, David Kachel <david@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> From: Paul Roark
>
> "I use MIS glossy carbon on glossy paper for my "sepia" tone prints. They
> have a Lab B of up to about 12 to 14. The 100% carbon is going to be much
> more stable than the loads of yellow and magenta you'll need from the color
> set to get to that point. Even if you go more brown than that, starting
> with a warm carbon would seem to make the most sense."
>
> Paul,
> What does that glossy carbon ink look like on Arches HP?
>
> David Kachel
>
> ___________________
>
> Artist-Photographer
> Fine B&W Photographs
>
> www.davidkachel.com
> david@...
>
> Gallery:
> www.reddoorfinephotographs.com
> director@...
>
> PO Box 1893
> Alpine, TX 79831
> (432) 386-5787
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>


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

On 07/18/2013 03:34 AM, Paul Roark wrote:
> davidkachel <david@... <mailto:david%40davidkachel.com>> wrote:
>
>  > **
>  >
>  >
>  > ... I work strictly in B&W, BUT (and this is a big but) I make brown tone
>  > prints. VERY brown!...
>  >
> I use MIS glossy carbon on glossy paper for my "sepia" tone prints. They
> have a Lab B of up to about 12 to 14. The 100% carbon is going to be much
> more stable than the loads of yellow and magenta you'll need from the color
> set to get to that point. Even if you go more brown than that, starting
> with a warm carbon would seem to make the most sense.
>
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com

Paul,

Is that also the warmest pure carbon ink around? For the three brands + 
Cone + MIS?


-- 
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst Dinkla

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2012: 500+ inkjet media paper white spectral plots.

Ernst Dinkla <e.dinkla@...> wrote:

> **
>  ...
> > ... MIS glossy carbon on glossy paper for my "sepia" tone prints. They
> > have a Lab B of up to about 12 to 14. ...
>
> Is that also the warmest pure carbon ink around? For the three brands +
> Cone + MIS?
>
>
The MIS glossy carbon (for example, K4-PK, LK, and LLK, all 100% carbon) on
matte paper seems to have the same tones as the Cone Carbon Sepia on matte
paper.  These carbons appear to be the warmest we have available.  On
coated papers they hit about Lab B = 8 at their peaks in the midtone
values.   I don't know if Jon has a glossy 100% carbon.  The MIS carbon is
considerably warmer on glossy paper and less warm on un-coated paper.  The
Epson and HP "gray" inks appear to be blends of carbon plus color inks used
to cool the carbon.

I have used the MIS carbons on Museo Silver Rag for "sepia tone" prints.
 Silver Rag, not having any OBAs, seemed like the most appropriate paper at
the time.

The OEM MKs also appear to be warm carbons that might be starting points
for warm matte inksets, but I don't see much point in doing that.  Eboni is
the oddball carbon in that it's less warm than the others.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com


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

On 07/18/2013 05:32 PM, Paul Roark wrote:
> Ernst Dinkla <e.dinkla@...
> <mailto:e.dinkla%40onsneteindhoven.nl>> wrote:
>
>  > **
>  > ...
>  > > ... MIS glossy carbon on glossy paper for my "sepia" tone prints. They
>  > > have a Lab B of up to about 12 to 14. ...
>  >
>  > Is that also the warmest pure carbon ink around? For the three brands +
>  > Cone + MIS?
>  >
>  >
> The MIS glossy carbon (for example, K4-PK, LK, and LLK, all 100% carbon) on
> matte paper seems to have the same tones as the Cone Carbon Sepia on matte
> paper. These carbons appear to be the warmest we have available. On
> coated papers they hit about Lab B = 8 at their peaks in the midtone
> values. I don't know if Jon has a glossy 100% carbon. The MIS carbon is
> considerably warmer on glossy paper and less warm on un-coated paper. The
> Epson and HP "gray" inks appear to be blends of carbon plus color inks used
> to cool the carbon.
>
> I have used the MIS carbons on Museo Silver Rag for "sepia tone" prints.
> Silver Rag, not having any OBAs, seemed like the most appropriate paper at
> the time.
>
> The OEM MKs also appear to be warm carbons that might be starting points
> for warm matte inksets, but I don't see much point in doing that. Eboni is
> the oddball carbon in that it's less warm than the others.
>
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com

So an Eboni MK + a 3-4 dilutions HP Vivera PK +  a 3-4 dilutions MIS 
glossy carbon and a range of slightly cool, dead neutral and quite warm, 
matte + glossy papers would be a great combination for one printer. QTR 
to drive it


-- 
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst Dinkla

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2012: 500+ inkjet media paper white spectral plots.

Ernst,

...
>
> So an Eboni MK + a 3-4 dilutions HP Vivera PK + a 3-4 dilutions MIS
> glossy carbon and a range of slightly cool, dead neutral and quite warm,
> matte + glossy papers would be a great combination for one printer. QTR
> to drive it
>
>
> Yes.  For matte and glossy, sepia to neutral, this  is all it takes.  The
separate LM and LC allow one to profile a broader range of hues, but at the
expense of complexity.

The UT14 inkset was basically this approach, but, of course, using MIS's
pigments for the cool end also.

I have a new beta cool MIS blend that is supposed to balance the color
pigment fade rates and also avoid the separation in the blend.  (We'll
see.)  The problem with the "one size fits all" UT14 approach was that
there were too few inks used for any particular print tone (hue).  In a 6
ink printer it's hard to do it  all.  So, for the follow-up for  the 1430,
I'm inclined to drop the Gloss Optimizer from  the Y position and require
that people switch black inks to switch between matte and glossy.  I might
also have the Y position be either cool or warm depending  on whether
neutral or  cool is the main target.  While I think that the QTR sliders
are probably the best way to control a warm-cool mix, most MIS customers
seem to use the  Epson driver.  On a hextone printer, that's  relatively
easy to manage.  Too bad we don't have drivers that can variably blend ICCs.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com


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

Paul,

Looking at the MIS web site for bulk supplies and am confused by a couple of
things about your basesŠ

First, "PAUL ROARK'S C6C BASE PREMIXED ­ FOR ARCHES WATERCOLOR PAPER"

I thought these bases were for mixing inks? Where does the watercolor paper
come into play? Is this a base designed for making inks intended to be
printed on watercolor papers (and therefore probably what I need)?

Also, the base for use with the Epson 1400. Can that also be used with the
Epson 3800, or do I have to buy one of the other bases for that printer? (I
have both printers.) If so, which one? (Bearing in mind; watercolor papers,
warmest possible prints.)

I find it interesting that most of the surfactant you use in your base
formulas is PhotoFlo. I would have thought that would be too prone to
foaming for inks and would have guessed that LFN would have worked better.
Where I needed a surfactant in some of the techniques I developed for B&W
film and paper processing, PhotoFlo gummed up the works while LFN saved the
day. Curious to know what your experiences were.

 David Kachel

___________________

Artist-Photographer
Fine B&W Photographs

www.davidkachel.com
david@...

Gallery:
www.reddoorfinephotographs.com
director@...

PO Box  1893
Alpine, TX 79831
(432) 386-5787




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

David,


  "PAUL ROARK'S C6C BASE PREMIXED ­ FOR ARCHES WATERCOLOR PAPER"
>
> I thought these bases were for mixing inks? Where does the watercolor paper
> come into play? Is this a base designed for making inks intended to be
> printed on watercolor papers (and therefore probably what I need)?
>
The additional surfactant in the C6C base helps  with respect to Arches, at
least when the 1400 is used.  I'm not sure it adds much with 3.5 pl
printers.


> Also, the base for use with the Epson 1400. Can that also be used with the
> Epson 3800,
>

Yes, I'd call the C6B the most  important base.  It works well with all
Epson  printers and most papers.

The formulas for the bases are discussed at
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Ink-Mixing.pdf .  My effort was to use, to
the extent possible, chemicals that were readily available and familiar to
darkroom practitioners.  The first base just used Photo Flo, which was OK
for the oldest, slowest printers, but the newer, faster printers put  more
 demands on the surfactant mix.  In that respect, I  think Edwal LFN is
very good and I would not omit it in any blend now.  In fact, I've  never
found any incompatibilities with the surfactants that I use in these mixes.
 So, if Arches is your target, then you might want to use the C6C even if,
in the 3880, the last surfactant is not necessary.  It won't hurt.


> or do I have to buy one of the other bases for that printer? (I
> have both printers.) If so, which one? (Bearing in mind; watercolor papers,
> warmest possible prints.)
>

Note that for the MIS glossy carbons, MIS sells a the base that is used.  I
would recommend if you use the glossy carbons you stick with the MIS base
for them.  It's  what they sometimes call the amber base.



>
> I find it interesting that most of the surfactant you use in your base
> formulas is PhotoFlo. I would have thought that would be too prone to
> foaming for inks and would have guessed that LFN would have worked better.
> Where I needed a surfactant in some of the techniques I developed for B&W
> film and paper processing, PhotoFlo gummed up the works while LFN saved the
> day. Curious to know what your experiences were.
>

Photo flo has glycol in it.  That is what "gummed up" things occasionally
in the darkroom, but it's actually an active ingredient in the  ink.  So,
using Photo Flo is not just for  the surfactant but also as an easy way to
get a small amount of glycol in the mix.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com


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

Paul,

If you need testers for this I'm all ears! I run the UT-14 / 1400 and would
love to test this new approach.

:)


Cheers
JF



--
http://felinik.com
http://www.facebook.com/jf.felinik <https://www.facebook.com/jf.felinik>


2013/7/18 Paul Roark <roark.paul@...>

> **
>
>
> Ernst,
>
> ...
>
> >
> > So an Eboni MK + a 3-4 dilutions HP Vivera PK + a 3-4 dilutions MIS
> > glossy carbon and a range of slightly cool, dead neutral and quite warm,
> > matte + glossy papers would be a great combination for one printer. QTR
> > to drive it
> >
> >
> > Yes. For matte and glossy, sepia to neutral, this is all it takes. The
> separate LM and LC allow one to profile a broader range of hues, but at the
> expense of complexity.
>
> The UT14 inkset was basically this approach, but, of course, using MIS's
> pigments for the cool end also.
>
> I have a new beta cool MIS blend that is supposed to balance the color
> pigment fade rates and also avoid the separation in the blend. (We'll
> see.) The problem with the "one size fits all" UT14 approach was that
> there were too few inks used for any particular print tone (hue). In a 6
> ink printer it's hard to do it all. So, for the follow-up for the 1430,
> I'm inclined to drop the Gloss Optimizer from the Y position and require
> that people switch black inks to switch between matte and glossy. I might
> also have the Y position be either cool or warm depending on whether
> neutral or cool is the main target. While I think that the QTR sliders
> are probably the best way to control a warm-cool mix, most MIS customers
> seem to use the Epson driver. On a hextone printer, that's relatively
> easy to manage. Too bad we don't have drivers that can variably blend ICCs.
>
>
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>  
>


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

On 07/18/2013 11:41 PM, Paul Roark wrote:

>  > So an Eboni MK + a 3-4 dilutions HP Vivera PK + a 3-4 dilutions MIS
>  > glossy carbon and a range of slightly cool, dead neutral and quite warm,
>  > matte + glossy papers would be a great combination for one printer. QTR
>  > to drive it
>  >
>  >
>  > Yes. For matte and glossy, sepia to neutral, this is all it takes. The
> separate LM and LC allow one to profile a broader range of hues, but at the
> expense of complexity.


Thank you Paul.

In a search to see what is available in Europe in warm carbon inks I cut 
an empty Epson 3880 LLK cart open (could not pull ink out with a 
syringe) and got 15 ML from the opened ink pouch. On a near neutral 
glossy paper (Epson Proofing White SemiMatte) the brushed on LLK had a 
more yellow base than being warm compared to the diluted MIS Eboni and 
HP MK brush strokes next to it.
The LLK and I guess the Epson PK diluted used straight is not creating a 
nice ink color in my opinion. Is that your observation too?

The Eboni ink I still had is 5 years old so may not be representing 
today's Eboni but I noticed that there is little difference with the HP 
MK visually, from tungsten light to daylight. The HP measured slightly 
warmer (here and  in Aardenburg measurements) but I do not see that 
difference to Eboni. I will stick to HP MK for MK plain.

On your lament on blending ICCs:

You can not blend ICC (B&W) printer profiles in Qimage but at least give 
several nested images on one print page different printer profiles 
(and/or different rendering choices).

With the Kodak Custom Color Tools in XP + PS2  it should be possible to 
create blended ICC profiles I think. Might not work with the embedded 
curves though. Say 1 or 3 steps in between warm and neutral. KCCT is not 
installed anymore here but I could do that. Still not a continuous 
blending range like possible with QTR.

-- 
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst Dinkla

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2012: 500+ inkjet media paper white spectral plots.

Ernst,


> ...
> The [Epson] LLK and I guess the Epson PK diluted used straight is not
> creating a
> nice ink color in my opinion. Is that your observation too?
>

Yes.  They appear to be blended carbon + color to make a somewhat more
neutral gray ink than the MIS 100% carbon PK, LK, and LLK.  It has been a
while since I looked at them, but my memory was that the Lab A was too low,
and they just were not warm enough to hit the semi-sepia tone that the MIS
carbons reach on glossy paper.



>
> The Eboni ink I still had is 5 years old so may not be representing
> today's Eboni but I noticed that there is little difference with the HP
> MK visually, from tungsten light to daylight.
>


Eboni does not appear to have changed.

I think if the inks were in diluted form and not at 100% you would see more
of a difference between the HP MK and the Eboni.  I looked at the OEM MKs
early on and all of them were warmer than Eboni.  It's not a huge
difference, but every Lab B unit more neutral matters.  I might add that I
had a question about these the other day and found an old bottle of diluted
(with my generic base formula) Epson MK.  It had been sitting in the
darkroom for years.  Out of curiousity, I poured it through a fine mesh
filter to see if there were obvious problems.  It looked as if it was fine.
 I'd say the generic base could probably be safely used to dilute the Epson
MK to make a somewhat warmer version of Eboni/Carbon-6 (for Epson
printers).  I didn't have any similar old test bottle of diluted HP MK.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com


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