Digital BW, The Print

Reading the recent post on the lack of punch of the balcks of Matte 
Black ink, I'm still trying to decide whether postpone buying an Epson 
7600 and ImagePrint 5 for six months by sticking with my 1290 for color 
and 1160+Piezography for B&W. Here's a quote from Bruce Fraser:

>> You aren't going to reach the gamut of the dye-based inks with 
>> pigments. You can get close, but EAM is pretty muted. You'll get a 
>> slightly larger gamut on Epson Velvet FIne Art...

Has anyone tried Epson Velvet Fine Art? How does it compare to Photo 
Rag in terms of gamut and blacks? Any other matte paper that you think 
is particularly good for Ultrachrome inks and Matte Black.

--Mitch/Paris

Mitch, where did you see the quote from Bruce?

Thanks

Bill Morse
PhotoProspect
Cambridge, Mass.  USA

on 11/4/02 5:10 PM, Mitch Alland wrote:

> Reading the recent post on the lack of punch of the balcks of Matte
> Black ink, I'm still trying to decide whether postpone buying an Epson
> 7600 and ImagePrint 5 for six months by sticking with my 1290 for color
> and 1160+Piezography for B&W. Here's a quote from Bruce Fraser:
> 
>>> You aren't going to reach the gamut of the dye-based inks with
>>> pigments. You can get close, but EAM is pretty muted. You'll get a
>>> slightly larger gamut on Epson Velvet FIne Art...
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Mitch Alland <malland@m...> 
wrote:
> Reading the recent post on the lack of punch of the balcks of Matte 
> Black ink, I'm still trying to decide whether postpone buying an 
Epson 
> 7600 <snip>

See my post, "Killer 7600/9600 problem" before you decide. I don't 
know if it's a red herring or not so I don't want to start rumors, but 
the poster says that Epson confirms the problem with 100%k using matte 
black ink.
Jim H.

I really like the Velvet Fine Art.  I think the blacks are very 
good.   Can't compare to Photo Rag as I've never used that paper.  
Also, my black and white prints on Velvet Fine Art, using all 7 color 
inks, show no color cast and no color shift.  The only thing I 
sometimes don't like about EVFA is that the texture can be a bit too 
obtrusive in (a) large areas of light uniform tones and (b) color 
prints generally.  The texture isn't really offensive -- sometimes 
I'd just like less of it.


> 
> Has anyone tried Epson Velvet Fine Art? How does it compare to 
Photo 
> Rag in terms of gamut and blacks? Any other matte paper that you 
think 

> is particularly good for Ultrachrome inks and Matte Black.
> 
> --Mitch/Paris

anyone using Epson Velvet Fine Art for quadtones?

Is it coated? Is it Epson version of the really nice velvety Somerset Photo
Enhanced that was only made for a short while (different from the standard
photo enhanced).

EVFA is different from the Somerset Velvet for Epson, correct?

Thanks

tim a

Hi folks,

I have been working for the past three days with Paul Roark's curves 
for the mis-vm ink set on an epson 1280. I have been trying to avoid 
banding, posterizing and getting the rich black with details that I 
got with the epson inks.

I do not understand how these things work, I guess, because I still 
have posterized prints and my blacks are no where near as deep as the 
epson color ink set.

I am printing on epson heavy weight matte paper and I have tried both 
the medium warm curve and the cool curve.

Straight off the net, the cool curve gave me all of the detail but 
the print was flat. At no point did I reach a true black.

I then tried the warm tone and got the same effect. No true black anywhere.

I then tried an adjustment to the rbg channel to increase the 
contrast slightly and pulled one point on the curve from an input of 
48 to an output of 27.

The warm curve now gives me a few areas of dark dark grey, and almost 
black. It also posterized the dark greys.

Can anyone help me to get this worked out?

Matt

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

On 11/5/02 12:54 PM, "Tim Atherton" <tim@...> wrote:

> anyone using Epson Velvet Fine Art for quadtones?
> 
> Is it coated? 

Yes, with a coating similar to EAM.

> 
> EVFA is different from the Somerset Velvet for Epson, correct?

Yes EVFA is epson's own coating on Somerset Velvet paper.  Somerset Velvet
for Epson is simply Somerset Enhanced in new weight.

EVFA, like EAM, has a poorer lightfastness rating (around 60 years) compared
to Somerset Velvet for Epson (around 90 years).

I haven't used EVFA...but the blacks (with matte black) have to be better
than SVE.

The lack of decent matte blacks with anything other EAM seems to be the
fatal flaw of the new ultrachrome inks.  But maybe that was the point of the
Ultrachromes...to make everyone use Epson ink AND paper.

Robert

> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other
> resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
> page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
> them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
> resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
> 
>

I went through the posterization nightmare for some time, worked with
curves, emailed Roark, etc. I kept looking at good 21-step printouts
and  good histograms and bad prints.

I discovered that the problem was not in the print at all, but in the
scan. I was printing 4x5 through an Epson 2450, and was using Vuescan
at the time. Magnified to 100%, the monitor showed these  little
"bloches" in 90%+ here and there, plus problems in very subtle areas
of mid-tones.  What appeared to be posterization was not. Changing
settings (I think most of the problem was using "Log" choices on the
Color/BW Curve tab) helped, but changing to Silverfast solved the
whole problem of "bloches" completely.

That did not solve the "flat" print problem and the gray for black
problem, especially with comparisons to silver print of the same
image. (Or the bad chip on the MIS cartridge nightmare, clogs, etc.,
with 1280's). Observations:
1. The mediums are different, and will always look different.
2. Digital grayscale will be experimental for a while - but is
improving. The suggestions in this thread (Mediastreet black, other
work-arounds) help until something really good comes along. Roark,
Randall, et.al., are all motivated to improve the medium more than the
profit line, and VM-type workflows produce satisfactory prints at less
expense than other "solutions."
3. Accurate color management and profiling (and I mean call a profiler
and pay to get it done) setting and synchronization of scanner,
monitor, computer, printer is critical. (You can't know how to change
your course if your compass if off.)
4. The necessity of eternal fiddling with settings and curves and inks
and papers is a lot like darkroom work. Choose one ink set, choose one
paper, get the curve for the image tone that is acceptable on a good
scan image. It takes way longer and way more frustration than
expected. Once there, don't even be tempted to change it.
5. Use the settings, work your images, and print - and hope it looks
good every time you wait anxiously for the edge of the print to appear
out of the printer.


Good luck, and patience in the meantime.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Matt M <matt1729@r...> wrote:

> Hi folks,
> 
> I have been working for the past three days with Paul Roark's curves 
> for the mis-vm ink set on an epson 1280. I have been trying to avoid 
> banding, posterizing and getting the rich black with details that I 
> got with the epson inks.
>