Digital BW, The Print

I am trying to get up to speed on how folks are printing their "more than 3" B&W ink prints. I've used some Linear software together with an Epson and the results are satisfactory... but I'm looking to move it up a notch. So I'm exploring the MIS and Cone offerings. I wonder whether this Forum is firmly independent, or attached to either one of these product families? I also wonder about the two systems and can say that my inquiry into both resulted in an immediate response from Jon Cone but dead silence from MIS. Prices are hard to quantify in terms of how differences in purchase costs translate, because ink usage rates aren't necessarily going to be the same... maybe? Then there's the whole software thing... and to what extent you're "rolling your own", and I'll admit I'm a fan of off-the-shelf finished software over "open source". I'm happy to put a lot of effort into making pictures, but the computer end... less so. The computer is a tool and not a hobby of its own for me. Yes, I have my geek limits.

Wonder if folks can recommend the best or proven way to learn more. THanks!

I did some comparisons of the STS and the new Piezography UDMK a few months ago and the Cone inks are definitely better. The STS has an oily look on matte papers at higher inks limits that can cause some issues with light reflecting off it (see one of the images in the 2nd link below).

Here are some links to posts I made about the old Cone MK and the STS MK (done on a 1430) and a comparison of the Epson p800 MK, the Cone HDMK, and original epson MK on a P800 and 3880 ( i didn't load a new MK cartridge to test an STS ink I didn9;t plan on using in the larger printer to have to worry about cleaning out the lines and contaminating my "production" printer).

https://www.bwmastery.com/blog/2014/comparing-cone-piezography-shade-1-and-mis-ebony-shade-1

https://www.bwmastery.com/blog/testing-the-new-piezography-matte-black

Here is my personal take: I prefer Cone inks. For one, I think they are just better inks. Secondly, the quality control there is something I know I can trust (nobody pays me to say that). The problems with trying to order from MIS or the need to not have to buy ink by the gallon and dilute myself is more than enough to keep me from switching from Piezography inks.

As for the software, I think Piezography is a good turnkey system that works for lots of people and the newer tools and Pro ink system is more flexible than it has been, but you are still working within certain constraints. That is okay for lots of people, but for whatever reason, never really suited me.

I like to strike a balance of having the best inks and also having the ability to customize my setup for how it best suits me. I made profiles with the traditional QTR curve creation tools and methods starting about 10 years ago, but started to run into some of the limitations when making curves with more than three gray inks.

Over the course of about four years (and going through more ink and paper than I would like to think about) I developed and now sell my own tools take the best parts of QTR and the flexibility it provides and greatly increase the ease of profile creation and the smoothness of the final curves and resulting prints. I think my latest system is the bridge between the two—lots of flexibility without compromising quality like you do when using the traditional QTR methods. I've made dual quad, straight k4 to k8, or k5-k6 plus color or gray toning inks with the new system, and outside of formatting and printing the calibration images, it is mostly just a matter copy and pasting measurements.

https://www.bwmastery.com/blog/2018/new-for-2018-quadtone-profiler-pro

Hope that helps,

Richard Boutwell

http://www.richardboutwell.com/

http://www.bwmastery.com/