Digital BW, The Print

Hi --
This my first post to the group.  I have spent a fair bit of time 
looking through previous posts and 'files', as well as relevant QTR 
and UT2 website files, help files, etc.

I have done B&W gelatin-silver printing for about 40 years, using 
Zone system for the last 20 or so.  I used to use Ilfobrome, 
Gallerie, Seagull, and Dektol.  Now I use a Windows XP Pro, a 1280 
with Epson inks, profiled in PhotoCal 2.6 for color, unprofiled for 
G2.2 sisngle black printing, and a Spyder monitor profile on a CRT 
monitor.  Have been almost happy with single tone Epson black, except 
for the nasty dither pattern in the high values.  Tried the 
ImagePrint RIP demo, but still had metamerism,(faint magenta) 
although the dither is much less obtrusive.  Don't want to spend the 
bucks for an obsolescent printer with dongle and still have 
metamerism.

Sprang for UT2 inks, which i used up (well, there's a bunch of Eboni 
left over) in a day of experimenting and printing.  When viewing the 
21 patch file, from 90% to 50% seems pretty compressed, as do the 
patches on a printout. I only have a transmission densitometer, so I 
couldn't measure them.  My UT2 prints certainly do not have the 
contrast in the shadows that i could achieve with single black, or 
with ImagePrint.  Reducing the ink limit and gamma in QTRgui didn't 
really solve the problem, since the blacks got weaker without the 
shadow contrast problem being solved.

I tried Epson HW Matte, Archival Matte, and Arches Hot press 
watercolor.  I tried setting paper type (and presumably ink deposit) 
to Photo Paper, Matte Heavyweight, and Photo Quality Glossy Film 
(which was the best).  I tried printing both with QTR and using 
Paul's curves in Photoshop.  (eventually had to reinstall my 1280 
driver due to software nastiness/printer hang)  I played a bit with 
Gama setting using the Epson driver to print at 1.8 or 2.2.  I tried 
carbon, neutral, and cool curves in photoshop.

For some images Carbon looks nice, but still the low densities are 
pretty muddy and flat looking by my standards, using UT2 inks, when 
the gray mode print looks good on the screen, and has printed fine 
using other ink/apps.  I was able to make new files that printed 
better, by making the print look 'too light' in G2.2 mode on the 
screen, before RGB/curves were applied.

I tried making a PS Working Space custom file to change the gray 
scale image on screen, but even with 'preview' checked i can not get 
the image to update on the screen in real time.  PS seems to be set 
up to have reflection density values entered numerically, although i 
can move the curve.

Before i order any more MIS inks, i am interested to know whether 
people have had to change their images to adapt to UT2 inks, as one 
would, say, to a new paper/developer combination, or have they been 
able, using stock Ruark curves, to get 'good' prints, matching the 
G2.2 monitor image of the unmanipulated files that have printed well 
in the past.

At this point i am tempted to wait for the new Epson printer 
announced in Japan, which supposedly prints tritone blacks.  
Basically I want a good Dmax and invisible dither in the lightest 
tones below paper white.  I think the stock Epson black ink looks ok, 
although the UT2 colors are ok with me too.

So far UT2 'caliberation' has been more expensive and time consuming 
than it would have been for wet printing with a new combination ;-)  
Kinda frustrating that at this point in digital printing we still 
don't have a conveniently achievable WYSIWYG method to print high 
quality B&W.  I am perfectly willing to believe this is entirely due 
to user error and inexperience on my part, since so many others seem 
to be happy with their results.  I'd love to hear what I am doing 
wrong.


Ted

Hello Ted,

How do you set up your soft proofing? That's the only way to get 
WYSIWYG. Roy Harrington has posted in one of his messages a LAB 
Grayscale work space, and that is what I use for both the work space 
and proofing space. My print and monitor images match, allowing for 
dry down to be just a tad lighter than when it comes off the printer. 
Try this and see if it works. Make sure your monitor is calibrated. I 
use Gray Gamma 1.8 and 5000K to allow me a longer tonal range in the 
lower Zones and viewing under an Ott-Lite.

Your friend in Photography,

Johnny


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "tgos3" 
<egosfield@c...> wrote:
> 
> Hi --
> This my first post to the group.  I have spent a fair bit of time 
> looking through previous posts and 'files', as well as relevant QTR 
> and UT2 website files, help files, etc.
> 
> I have done B&W gelatin-silver printing for about 40 years, using 
> Zone system for the last 20 or so.  I used to use Ilfobrome, 
> Gallerie, Seagull, and Dektol.  Now I use a Windows XP Pro, a 1280 
> with Epson inks, profiled in PhotoCal 2.6 for color, unprofiled for 
> G2.2 sisngle black printing, and a Spyder monitor profile on a CRT 
> monitor.  Have been almost happy with single tone Epson black, 
except 
> for the nasty dither pattern in the high values.  Tried the 
> ImagePrint RIP demo, but still had metamerism,(faint magenta) 
> although the dither is much less obtrusive.  Don't want to spend 
the 
> bucks for an obsolescent printer with dongle and still have 
> metamerism.
> 
> Sprang for UT2 inks, which i used up (well, there's a bunch of 
Eboni 
> left over) in a day of experimenting and printing.  When viewing 
the 
> 21 patch file, from 90% to 50% seems pretty compressed, as do the 
> patches on a printout. I only have a transmission densitometer, so 
I 
> couldn't measure them.  My UT2 prints certainly do not have the 
> contrast in the shadows that i could achieve with single black, or 
> with ImagePrint.  Reducing the ink limit and gamma in QTRgui didn't 
> really solve the problem, since the blacks got weaker without the 
> shadow contrast problem being solved.
> 
> I tried Epson HW Matte, Archival Matte, and Arches Hot press 
> watercolor.  I tried setting paper type (and presumably ink 
deposit) 
> to Photo Paper, Matte Heavyweight, and Photo Quality Glossy Film 
> (which was the best).  I tried printing both with QTR and using 
> Paul's curves in Photoshop.  (eventually had to reinstall my 1280 
> driver due to software nastiness/printer hang)  I played a bit with 
> Gama setting using the Epson driver to print at 1.8 or 2.2.  I 
tried 
> carbon, neutral, and cool curves in photoshop.
> 
> For some images Carbon looks nice, but still the low densities are 
> pretty muddy and flat looking by my standards, using UT2 inks, when 
> the gray mode print looks good on the screen, and has printed fine 
> using other ink/apps.  I was able to make new files that printed 
> better, by making the print look 'too light' in G2.2 mode on the 
> screen, before RGB/curves were applied.
> 
> I tried making a PS Working Space custom file to change the gray 
> scale image on screen, but even with 'preview' checked i can not 
get 
> the image to update on the screen in real time.  PS seems to be set 
> up to have reflection density values entered numerically, although 
i 
> can move the curve.
> 
> Before i order any more MIS inks, i am interested to know whether 
> people have had to change their images to adapt to UT2 inks, as one 
> would, say, to a new paper/developer combination, or have they been 
> able, using stock Ruark curves, to get 'good' prints, matching the 
> G2.2 monitor image of the unmanipulated files that have printed 
well 
> in the past.
> 
> At this point i am tempted to wait for the new Epson printer 
> announced in Japan, which supposedly prints tritone blacks.  
> Basically I want a good Dmax and invisible dither in the lightest 
> tones below paper white.  I think the stock Epson black ink looks 
ok, 
> although the UT2 colors are ok with me too.
> 
> So far UT2 'caliberation' has been more expensive and time 
consuming 
> than it would have been for wet printing with a new combination ;-
)  
> Kinda frustrating that at this point in digital printing we still 
> don't have a conveniently achievable WYSIWYG method to print high 
> quality B&W.  I am perfectly willing to believe this is entirely 
due 
> to user error and inexperience on my part, since so many others 
seem 

> to be happy with their results.  I'd love to hear what I am doing 
> wrong.
> 
> 
> Ted

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Johnny Eades" 
<jeades1@s...> wrote:

> Roy Harrington has posted in one of his messages a LAB 
> Grayscale work space, and that is what I use for both the work 
space > and proofing space. 

thanks -- I'll check it out again.  I have not been using monitor 
proofing, since the monitor image of the workspace was predictably 
accurate when i was doing single black with Epson ink.  I tried to 
set one up using the instructions at Roy's site, but i could not get 
the monitor image to change until after i saved the curve, which 
meant more interations than i had patience for -- i guess i will just 
have to trudge to successs....

> use Gray Gamma 1.8 and 5000K to allow me a longer tonal range in 
the 
> lower Zones and viewing under an Ott-Lite.
I have been using 5000K and 2.2, with daylite fluorescents, since 2.2 
is the 'standard' windows monitor gamma, and it works well for my 
color printing work.  I have sometimes used 1.8 when i print at 
2800dpi.

thanks again,

ted

Ted,

For matching the monitor to the print, see
http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/Monitor-Profiling.htm .  It describes a way to
make a custom profile for the monitor.  

The density aim points to which the grayscale curves are matched is,
essentially, the Lab scale, but with the middle of the scale set to the
point "half way" (in Lab visual terms) between good matte dmax and paper
white.  The steps should appear as equal steps.  However, it is not the
typical curve that is used for color inksets.

You may be having trouble with more than just this issue.

See my information on UT2 if you haven't yet.  You may spot a setting or
workflow problem.  See http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/UT2-Readme.htm  

I'll send you some files off list that may also help.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> Ted,
> 
> For matching the monitor to the print, see
> http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/Monitor-Profiling.htm .  It describes 
a way to
> make a custom profile for the monitor.  

that's the method i tried, which will produce a custom workspace 
curve, but will not do it in realtime -- i can only see it after i 
have saved it and used it as proof space.  technically doable, but 
kinda tedious -- but of course life is short and art is long.

> The density aim points to which the grayscale curves are matched is,
> essentially, the Lab scale, but with the middle of the scale set to 
the point "half way" (in Lab visual terms) between good matte dmax 
and paper white.  The steps should appear as equal steps.  However, 
it is not the typical curve that is used for color inksets.

it looked different, like a real long toe, to me, but i guess it 
depends on what one is used to.

> See my information on UT2 if you haven't yet. 

have done, thanks

> I'll send you some files off list that may also help.

you did, thanks, and by now you have my purge file scans

I think i have two problems:  how much ink to put on the paper, while 
still getting a good Dmax, and what kind of contrast curve to use at 
the low end.  That means 1)what kind of paper type setting will give 
me the best ink density,and 2) do i need to make a 'Clayton 
type' 'back end dot gain curve' to get the low end contrast right.

So far i have gone through a whole UT2 color cart and about 10 sheets 
of 8x10 paper trying to get calibrated, and i suppose if i am willing 
to do that again i might get it nailed down. I have also managed to 
make some decent prints of some images along the way, by changing the 
original files for better low end contrast, but haven't worked out a 
consistent method yet, if there is one.

I haven't been clever enough to cut 8x10s into quarters, but i soon 
will be ;-)

ted

I'm having some of the same problems with UT2 inks that Ted is 
having although my 21step.tif file looks fine on my monitor, which 
has been calibrated with a ColorVision Spyder and PhotoCAL. 
Regardless of the state of the monitor the 21step.tif file should 
print with even separation.

I recently purchased a 1280 and UT2 inks for black and white 
printing. I tried black only printing with my 2200 and liked 
everything except the coarse dot pattern. QTR did a great job of 
making my 2200 print black and white without color casts or 
metamerism but I thought the dots were still too visible in the 
lighter values. I had high hopes for the UT2 inkset but after years 
of creating very accurate color prints I am currently very unhappy 
with the black and white results I'm getting using UT2.

After 3 days of testing here are my findings. 
Like Ted, I found the contrast very lacking in the middle and darker 
values. Printing the 21step.tif file confirms this. I have printed 
the 21step.tif file using Roark's curves, the Epson Driver (slider 
method) and QTR. The results are consistent with a little variation. 
Generally the steps between 60% and 85% show very little separation, 
the steps from 0% to 5% are too large and the three steps from 90% 
to 100% are too large. The values between 70% and 85% show almost no 
separation. I noticed that neutral prints had slightly better 
separation the carbon prints so I printed cool and sepia versions 
and found that the cool version of the 21step.tif file printed with 
much better separation and the sepia version had very uneven value 
separation with a large jump between 60% and 70%. I printed the 
21step.tif file on my 2200 using Epson UC inks and QTR and got great 
separation across the value range. Images I've printed using the 
three methods mentioned above are all lacking in contrast and 
exhibit some posterization, which is very noticeable in skin tones. 

I can't help think that there may be a problem with the UT2 inks. 
Maybe a bad batch? I hope somebody can prove me wrong because I just 
invested a lot of time and money into this system.

Jim


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "tgos3" 
<egosfield@c...> wrote:
> 
> Hi --
> This my first post to the group.  I have spent a fair bit of time 
> looking through previous posts and 'files', as well as relevant 
QTR 
> and UT2 website files, help files, etc.
> 
> I have done B&W gelatin-silver printing for about 40 years, using 
> Zone system for the last 20 or so.  I used to use Ilfobrome, 
> Gallerie, Seagull, and Dektol.  Now I use a Windows XP Pro, a 1280 
> with Epson inks, profiled in PhotoCal 2.6 for color, unprofiled 
for 
> G2.2 sisngle black printing, and a Spyder monitor profile on a CRT 
> monitor.  Have been almost happy with single tone Epson black, 
except 
> for the nasty dither pattern in the high values.  Tried the 
> ImagePrint RIP demo, but still had metamerism,(faint magenta) 
> although the dither is much less obtrusive.  Don't want to spend 
the 
> bucks for an obsolescent printer with dongle and still have 
> metamerism.
> 
> Sprang for UT2 inks, which i used up (well, there's a bunch of 
Eboni 
> left over) in a day of experimenting and printing.  When viewing 
the 
> 21 patch file, from 90% to 50% seems pretty compressed, as do the 
> patches on a printout. I only have a transmission densitometer, so 
I 
> couldn't measure them.  My UT2 prints certainly do not have the 
> contrast in the shadows that i could achieve with single black, or 
> with ImagePrint.  Reducing the ink limit and gamma in QTRgui 
didn't 
> really solve the problem, since the blacks got weaker without the 
> shadow contrast problem being solved.
> 
> I tried Epson HW Matte, Archival Matte, and Arches Hot press 
> watercolor.  I tried setting paper type (and presumably ink 
deposit) 
> to Photo Paper, Matte Heavyweight, and Photo Quality Glossy Film 
> (which was the best).  I tried printing both with QTR and using 
> Paul's curves in Photoshop.  (eventually had to reinstall my 1280 
> driver due to software nastiness/printer hang)  I played a bit 
with 
> Gama setting using the Epson driver to print at 1.8 or 2.2.  I 
tried 
> carbon, neutral, and cool curves in photoshop.
> 
> For some images Carbon looks nice, but still the low densities are 
> pretty muddy and flat looking by my standards, using UT2 inks, 
when 
> the gray mode print looks good on the screen, and has printed fine 
> using other ink/apps.  I was able to make new files that printed 
> better, by making the print look 'too light' in G2.2 mode on the 
> screen, before RGB/curves were applied.
> 
> I tried making a PS Working Space custom file to change the gray 
> scale image on screen, but even with 'preview' checked i can not 
get 
> the image to update on the screen in real time.  PS seems to be 
set 
> up to have reflection density values entered numerically, although 
i 
> can move the curve.
> 
> Before i order any more MIS inks, i am interested to know whether 
> people have had to change their images to adapt to UT2 inks, as 
one 
> would, say, to a new paper/developer combination, or have they 
been 
> able, using stock Ruark curves, to get 'good' prints, matching the 
> G2.2 monitor image of the unmanipulated files that have printed 
well 
> in the past.
> 
> At this point i am tempted to wait for the new Epson printer 
> announced in Japan, which supposedly prints tritone blacks.  
> Basically I want a good Dmax and invisible dither in the lightest 
> tones below paper white.  I think the stock Epson black ink looks 
ok, 
> although the UT2 colors are ok with me too.
> 
> So far UT2 'caliberation' has been more expensive and time 
consuming 
> than it would have been for wet printing with a new combination ;-
)  
> Kinda frustrating that at this point in digital printing we still 
> don't have a conveniently achievable WYSIWYG method to print high 
> quality B&W.  I am perfectly willing to believe this is entirely 
due 
> to user error and inexperience on my part, since so many others 
seem 

> to be happy with their results.  I'd love to hear what I am doing 
> wrong.
> 
> 
> Ted

I'll see if MIS will send me one of their UT2 carts to see what I get with
my 1280.  Ted's inks looked OK, but ... 

Usually settings or profiles tagged to the files are the problems.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 
_________________________________

-----Original Message-----
From: jimpegoda [mailto:pegoda@...] 
Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 2:00 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: UT2 probs



I'm having some of the same problems with UT2 inks that Ted is 
having although my 21step.tif file looks fine on my monitor, which 
has been calibrated with a ColorVision Spyder and PhotoCAL. 
Regardless of the state of the monitor the 21step.tif file should 
print with even separation.

I recently purchased a 1280 and UT2 inks for black and white 
printing. I tried black only printing with my 2200 and liked 
everything except the coarse dot pattern. QTR did a great job of 
making my 2200 print black and white without color casts or 
metamerism but I thought the dots were still too visible in the 
lighter values. I had high hopes for the UT2 inkset but after years 
of creating very accurate color prints I am currently very unhappy 
with the black and white results I'm getting using UT2.

After 3 days of testing here are my findings. 
Like Ted, I found the contrast very lacking in the middle and darker 
values. Printing the 21step.tif file confirms this. I have printed 
the 21step.tif file using Roark's curves, the Epson Driver (slider 
method) and QTR. The results are consistent with a little variation. 
Generally the steps between 60% and 85% show very little separation, 
the steps from 0% to 5% are too large and the three steps from 90% 
to 100% are too large. The values between 70% and 85% show almost no 
separation. I noticed that neutral prints had slightly better 
separation the carbon prints so I printed cool and sepia versions 
and found that the cool version of the 21step.tif file printed with 
much better separation and the sepia version had very uneven value 
separation with a large jump between 60% and 70%. I printed the 
21step.tif file on my 2200 using Epson UC inks and QTR and got great 
separation across the value range. Images I've printed using the 
three methods mentioned above are all lacking in contrast and 
exhibit some posterization, which is very noticeable in skin tones. 

I can't help think that there may be a problem with the UT2 inks. 
Maybe a bad batch? I hope somebody can prove me wrong because I just 
invested a lot of time and money into this system.

Jim


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "tgos3" 
<egosfield@c...> wrote:
> 
> Hi --
> This my first post to the group.  I have spent a fair bit of time 
> looking through previous posts and 'files', as well as relevant 
QTR 
> and UT2 website files, help files, etc.
> 
> I have done B&W gelatin-silver printing for about 40 years, using 
> Zone system for the last 20 or so.  I used to use Ilfobrome, 
> Gallerie, Seagull, and Dektol.  Now I use a Windows XP Pro, a 1280 
> with Epson inks, profiled in PhotoCal 2.6 for color, unprofiled 
for 
> G2.2 sisngle black printing, and a Spyder monitor profile on a CRT 
> monitor.  Have been almost happy with single tone Epson black, 
except 
> for the nasty dither pattern in the high values.  Tried the 
> ImagePrint RIP demo, but still had metamerism,(faint magenta) 
> although the dither is much less obtrusive.  Don't want to spend 
the 
> bucks for an obsolescent printer with dongle and still have 
> metamerism.
> 
> Sprang for UT2 inks, which i used up (well, there's a bunch of 
Eboni 
> left over) in a day of experimenting and printing.  When viewing 
the 
> 21 patch file, from 90% to 50% seems pretty compressed, as do the 
> patches on a printout. I only have a transmission densitometer, so 
I 
> couldn't measure them.  My UT2 prints certainly do not have the 
> contrast in the shadows that i could achieve with single black, or 
> with ImagePrint.  Reducing the ink limit and gamma in QTRgui 
didn't 
> really solve the problem, since the blacks got weaker without the 
> shadow contrast problem being solved.
> 
> I tried Epson HW Matte, Archival Matte, and Arches Hot press 
> watercolor.  I tried setting paper type (and presumably ink 
deposit) 
> to Photo Paper, Matte Heavyweight, and Photo Quality Glossy Film 
> (which was the best).  I tried printing both with QTR and using 
> Paul's curves in Photoshop.  (eventually had to reinstall my 1280 
> driver due to software nastiness/printer hang)  I played a bit 
with 
> Gama setting using the Epson driver to print at 1.8 or 2.2.  I 
tried 
> carbon, neutral, and cool curves in photoshop.
> 
> For some images Carbon looks nice, but still the low densities are 
> pretty muddy and flat looking by my standards, using UT2 inks, 
when 
> the gray mode print looks good on the screen, and has printed fine 
> using other ink/apps.  I was able to make new files that printed 
> better, by making the print look 'too light' in G2.2 mode on the 
> screen, before RGB/curves were applied.
> 
> I tried making a PS Working Space custom file to change the gray 
> scale image on screen, but even with 'preview' checked i can not 
get 
> the image to update on the screen in real time.  PS seems to be 
set 
> up to have reflection density values entered numerically, although 
i 
> can move the curve.
> 
> Before i order any more MIS inks, i am interested to know whether 
> people have had to change their images to adapt to UT2 inks, as 
one 
> would, say, to a new paper/developer combination, or have they 
been 
> able, using stock Ruark curves, to get 'good' prints, matching the 
> G2.2 monitor image of the unmanipulated files that have printed 
well 
> in the past.
> 
> At this point i am tempted to wait for the new Epson printer 
> announced in Japan, which supposedly prints tritone blacks.  
> Basically I want a good Dmax and invisible dither in the lightest 
> tones below paper white.  I think the stock Epson black ink looks 
ok, 
> although the UT2 colors are ok with me too.
> 
> So far UT2 'caliberation' has been more expensive and time 
consuming 
> than it would have been for wet printing with a new combination ;-
)  
> Kinda frustrating that at this point in digital printing we still 
> don't have a conveniently achievable WYSIWYG method to print high 
> quality B&W.  I am perfectly willing to believe this is entirely 
due 
> to user error and inexperience on my part, since so many others 
seem 
> to be happy with their results.  I'd love to hear what I am doing 
> wrong.
> 
> 
> Ted






Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as
they are often being updated.

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:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from
the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and
Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY
DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY
TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR
ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY
THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
 
Yahoo! Groups Links

PAul,

Is the Epson 10,000 seies suitable for b&w printing.

They print considerably faster that the other Epson wide-format 
printers.

But I did notice the droplet size is 25% larger (5pl vs. 4pl)

Thanks Paul,

Scott

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> I'll see if MIS will send me one of their UT2 carts to see what I 
get with
> my 1280.  Ted's inks looked OK, but ... 
> 
> Usually settings or profiles tagged to the files are the problems.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com 
> _________________________________
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jimpegoda [mailto:pegoda@c...] 
> Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 2:00 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: UT2 probs
> 
> 
> 
> I'm having some of the same problems with UT2 inks that Ted is 
> having although my 21step.tif file looks fine on my monitor, which 
> has been calibrated with a ColorVision Spyder and PhotoCAL. 
> Regardless of the state of the monitor the 21step.tif file should 
> print with even separation.
> 
> I recently purchased a 1280 and UT2 inks for black and white 
> printing. I tried black only printing with my 2200 and liked 
> everything except the coarse dot pattern. QTR did a great job of 
> making my 2200 print black and white without color casts or 
> metamerism but I thought the dots were still too visible in the 
> lighter values. I had high hopes for the UT2 inkset but after years 
> of creating very accurate color prints I am currently very unhappy 
> with the black and white results I'm getting using UT2.
> 
> After 3 days of testing here are my findings. 
> Like Ted, I found the contrast very lacking in the middle and 
darker 
> values. Printing the 21step.tif file confirms this. I have printed 
> the 21step.tif file using Roark's curves, the Epson Driver (slider 
> method) and QTR. The results are consistent with a little 
variation. 
> Generally the steps between 60% and 85% show very little 
separation, 
> the steps from 0% to 5% are too large and the three steps from 90% 
> to 100% are too large. The values between 70% and 85% show almost 
no 
> separation. I noticed that neutral prints had slightly better 
> separation the carbon prints so I printed cool and sepia versions 
> and found that the cool version of the 21step.tif file printed with 
> much better separation and the sepia version had very uneven value 
> separation with a large jump between 60% and 70%. I printed the 
> 21step.tif file on my 2200 using Epson UC inks and QTR and got 
great 
> separation across the value range. Images I've printed using the 
> three methods mentioned above are all lacking in contrast and 
> exhibit some posterization, which is very noticeable in skin tones. 
> 
> I can't help think that there may be a problem with the UT2 inks. 
> Maybe a bad batch? I hope somebody can prove me wrong because I 
just 
> invested a lot of time and money into this system.
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "tgos3" 
> <egosfield@c...> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi --
> > This my first post to the group.  I have spent a fair bit of time 
> > looking through previous posts and 'files', as well as relevant 
> QTR 
> > and UT2 website files, help files, etc.
> > 
> > I have done B&W gelatin-silver printing for about 40 years, using 
> > Zone system for the last 20 or so.  I used to use Ilfobrome, 
> > Gallerie, Seagull, and Dektol.  Now I use a Windows XP Pro, a 
1280 
> > with Epson inks, profiled in PhotoCal 2.6 for color, unprofiled 
> for 
> > G2.2 sisngle black printing, and a Spyder monitor profile on a 
CRT 
> > monitor.  Have been almost happy with single tone Epson black, 
> except 
> > for the nasty dither pattern in the high values.  Tried the 
> > ImagePrint RIP demo, but still had metamerism,(faint magenta) 
> > although the dither is much less obtrusive.  Don't want to spend 
> the 
> > bucks for an obsolescent printer with dongle and still have 
> > metamerism.
> > 
> > Sprang for UT2 inks, which i used up (well, there's a bunch of 
> Eboni 
> > left over) in a day of experimenting and printing.  When viewing 
> the 
> > 21 patch file, from 90% to 50% seems pretty compressed, as do the 
> > patches on a printout. I only have a transmission densitometer, 
so 
> I 
> > couldn't measure them.  My UT2 prints certainly do not have the 
> > contrast in the shadows that i could achieve with single black, 
or 
> > with ImagePrint.  Reducing the ink limit and gamma in QTRgui 
> didn't 
> > really solve the problem, since the blacks got weaker without the 
> > shadow contrast problem being solved.
> > 
> > I tried Epson HW Matte, Archival Matte, and Arches Hot press 
> > watercolor.  I tried setting paper type (and presumably ink 
> deposit) 
> > to Photo Paper, Matte Heavyweight, and Photo Quality Glossy Film 
> > (which was the best).  I tried printing both with QTR and using 
> > Paul's curves in Photoshop.  (eventually had to reinstall my 1280 
> > driver due to software nastiness/printer hang)  I played a bit 
> with 
> > Gama setting using the Epson driver to print at 1.8 or 2.2.  I 
> tried 
> > carbon, neutral, and cool curves in photoshop.
> > 
> > For some images Carbon looks nice, but still the low densities 
are 
> > pretty muddy and flat looking by my standards, using UT2 inks, 
> when 
> > the gray mode print looks good on the screen, and has printed 
fine 
> > using other ink/apps.  I was able to make new files that printed 
> > better, by making the print look 'too light' in G2.2 mode on the 
> > screen, before RGB/curves were applied.
> > 
> > I tried making a PS Working Space custom file to change the gray 
> > scale image on screen, but even with 'preview' checked i can not 
> get 
> > the image to update on the screen in real time.  PS seems to be 
> set 
> > up to have reflection density values entered numerically, 
although 
> i 
> > can move the curve.
> > 
> > Before i order any more MIS inks, i am interested to know whether 
> > people have had to change their images to adapt to UT2 inks, as 
> one 
> > would, say, to a new paper/developer combination, or have they 
> been 
> > able, using stock Ruark curves, to get 'good' prints, matching 
the 
> > G2.2 monitor image of the unmanipulated files that have printed 
> well 
> > in the past.
> > 
> > At this point i am tempted to wait for the new Epson printer 
> > announced in Japan, which supposedly prints tritone blacks.  
> > Basically I want a good Dmax and invisible dither in the lightest 
> > tones below paper white.  I think the stock Epson black ink looks 
> ok, 
> > although the UT2 colors are ok with me too.
> > 
> > So far UT2 'caliberation' has been more expensive and time 
> consuming 
> > than it would have been for wet printing with a new combination ;-
> )  
> > Kinda frustrating that at this point in digital printing we still 
> > don't have a conveniently achievable WYSIWYG method to print high 
> > quality B&W.  I am perfectly willing to believe this is entirely 
> due 
> > to user error and inexperience on my part, since so many others 
> seem 
> > to be happy with their results.  I'd love to hear what I am doing 
> > wrong.
> > 
> > 
> > Ted
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other 
resources as
> they are often being updated.
> 
> 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:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages 
to keep
> them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
flames.
> Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
> membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital 
B&W
> printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be 
removed from
> the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group 
Owner and
> Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files 
section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> 
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
PRINT
> YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND
> "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE 
LIABLE TO YOU
> FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR 
EXEMPLARY
> DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
> GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF 
THE  "OWNER" AND
> "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED 
OF THE
> POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE 
INABILITY
> TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED 
ACCESS TO OR
> ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR 
CONDUCT OF ANY
> THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY 
OTHER

> MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links

Scott,

I'm sure the 10,000 (or the pigment version of that series if they are
different) would be able to do B&W, but whether an existing inkset would be
appropriate is another question.  The increased dot size might make the UT7
"light" inks not quite light enough.  If that was the case, one might want a
light gray ink in the Y position instead of the sepia, for example.

The lack of a LK (I think that is the case with the 10000 series) doesn't
make much difference to B&W printing with the Epson driver.  If this turns
out to be a good place for the Glop in a RIP-controlled printer, then that
might be missed for glossy printing.

So, there are some open questions, and the printer might not have the
flexibility of the current UC printers.

Hope this helps.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

-----Original Message-----
From: scott_now_coming [mailto:scott_now_coming@...] 
Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 9:58 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: PAUL: Printer Question (WAS:[Digital BW] Re: UT2 probs)




PAul,

Is the Epson 10,000 seies suitable for b&w printing.

They print considerably faster that the other Epson wide-format 
printers.

But I did notice the droplet size is 25% larger (5pl vs. 4pl)

Thanks Paul,

Scott

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> I'll see if MIS will send me one of their UT2 carts to see what I 
get with
> my 1280.  Ted's inks looked OK, but ... 
> 
> Usually settings or profiles tagged to the files are the problems.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com 
> _________________________________
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jimpegoda [mailto:pegoda@c...] 
> Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 2:00 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: UT2 probs
> 
> 
> 
> I'm having some of the same problems with UT2 inks that Ted is 
> having although my 21step.tif file looks fine on my monitor, which 
> has been calibrated with a ColorVision Spyder and PhotoCAL. 
> Regardless of the state of the monitor the 21step.tif file should 
> print with even separation.
> 
> I recently purchased a 1280 and UT2 inks for black and white 
> printing. I tried black only printing with my 2200 and liked 
> everything except the coarse dot pattern. QTR did a great job of 
> making my 2200 print black and white without color casts or 
> metamerism but I thought the dots were still too visible in the 
> lighter values. I had high hopes for the UT2 inkset but after years 
> of creating very accurate color prints I am currently very unhappy 
> with the black and white results I'm getting using UT2.
> 
> After 3 days of testing here are my findings. 
> Like Ted, I found the contrast very lacking in the middle and 
darker 
> values. Printing the 21step.tif file confirms this. I have printed 
> the 21step.tif file using Roark's curves, the Epson Driver (slider 
> method) and QTR. The results are consistent with a little 
variation. 
> Generally the steps between 60% and 85% show very little 
separation, 
> the steps from 0% to 5% are too large and the three steps from 90% 
> to 100% are too large. The values between 70% and 85% show almost 
no 
> separation. I noticed that neutral prints had slightly better 
> separation the carbon prints so I printed cool and sepia versions 
> and found that the cool version of the 21step.tif file printed with 
> much better separation and the sepia version had very uneven value 
> separation with a large jump between 60% and 70%. I printed the 
> 21step.tif file on my 2200 using Epson UC inks and QTR and got 
great 
> separation across the value range. Images I've printed using the 
> three methods mentioned above are all lacking in contrast and 
> exhibit some posterization, which is very noticeable in skin tones. 
> 
> I can't help think that there may be a problem with the UT2 inks. 
> Maybe a bad batch? I hope somebody can prove me wrong because I 
just 
> invested a lot of time and money into this system.
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "tgos3" 
> <egosfield@c...> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi --
> > This my first post to the group.  I have spent a fair bit of time 
> > looking through previous posts and 'files', as well as relevant 
> QTR 
> > and UT2 website files, help files, etc.
> > 
> > I have done B&W gelatin-silver printing for about 40 years, using 
> > Zone system for the last 20 or so.  I used to use Ilfobrome, 
> > Gallerie, Seagull, and Dektol.  Now I use a Windows XP Pro, a 
1280 
> > with Epson inks, profiled in PhotoCal 2.6 for color, unprofiled 
> for 
> > G2.2 sisngle black printing, and a Spyder monitor profile on a 
CRT 
> > monitor.  Have been almost happy with single tone Epson black, 
> except 
> > for the nasty dither pattern in the high values.  Tried the 
> > ImagePrint RIP demo, but still had metamerism,(faint magenta) 
> > although the dither is much less obtrusive.  Don't want to spend 
> the 
> > bucks for an obsolescent printer with dongle and still have 
> > metamerism.
> > 
> > Sprang for UT2 inks, which i used up (well, there's a bunch of 
> Eboni 
> > left over) in a day of experimenting and printing.  When viewing 
> the 
> > 21 patch file, from 90% to 50% seems pretty compressed, as do the 
> > patches on a printout. I only have a transmission densitometer, 
so 
> I 
> > couldn't measure them.  My UT2 prints certainly do not have the 
> > contrast in the shadows that i could achieve with single black, 
or 
> > with ImagePrint.  Reducing the ink limit and gamma in QTRgui 
> didn't 
> > really solve the problem, since the blacks got weaker without the 
> > shadow contrast problem being solved.
> > 
> > I tried Epson HW Matte, Archival Matte, and Arches Hot press 
> > watercolor.  I tried setting paper type (and presumably ink 
> deposit) 
> > to Photo Paper, Matte Heavyweight, and Photo Quality Glossy Film 
> > (which was the best).  I tried printing both with QTR and using 
> > Paul's curves in Photoshop.  (eventually had to reinstall my 1280 
> > driver due to software nastiness/printer hang)  I played a bit 
> with 
> > Gama setting using the Epson driver to print at 1.8 or 2.2.  I 
> tried 
> > carbon, neutral, and cool curves in photoshop.
> > 
> > For some images Carbon looks nice, but still the low densities 
are 
> > pretty muddy and flat looking by my standards, using UT2 inks, 
> when 
> > the gray mode print looks good on the screen, and has printed 
fine 
> > using other ink/apps.  I was able to make new files that printed 
> > better, by making the print look 'too light' in G2.2 mode on the 
> > screen, before RGB/curves were applied.
> > 
> > I tried making a PS Working Space custom file to change the gray 
> > scale image on screen, but even with 'preview' checked i can not 
> get 
> > the image to update on the screen in real time.  PS seems to be 
> set 
> > up to have reflection density values entered numerically, 
although 
> i 
> > can move the curve.
> > 
> > Before i order any more MIS inks, i am interested to know whether 
> > people have had to change their images to adapt to UT2 inks, as 
> one 
> > would, say, to a new paper/developer combination, or have they 
> been 
> > able, using stock Ruark curves, to get 'good' prints, matching 
the 
> > G2.2 monitor image of the unmanipulated files that have printed 
> well 
> > in the past.
> > 
> > At this point i am tempted to wait for the new Epson printer 
> > announced in Japan, which supposedly prints tritone blacks.  
> > Basically I want a good Dmax and invisible dither in the lightest 
> > tones below paper white.  I think the stock Epson black ink looks 
> ok, 
> > although the UT2 colors are ok with me too.
> > 
> > So far UT2 'caliberation' has been more expensive and time 
> consuming 
> > than it would have been for wet printing with a new combination ;-
> )  
> > Kinda frustrating that at this point in digital printing we still 
> > don't have a conveniently achievable WYSIWYG method to print high 
> > quality B&W.  I am perfectly willing to believe this is entirely 
> due 
> > to user error and inexperience on my part, since so many others 
> seem 
> > to be happy with their results.  I'd love to hear what I am doing 
> > wrong.
> > 
> > 
> > Ted
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other 
resources as
> they are often being updated.
> 
> 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:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages 
to keep
> them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or 
flames.
> Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
> membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital 
B&W
> printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be 
removed from
> the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group 
Owner and
> Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files 
section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
> 
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
PRINT
> YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND
> "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE 
LIABLE TO YOU
> FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR 
EXEMPLARY
> DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
> GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF 
THE  "OWNER" AND
> "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED 
OF THE
> POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE 
INABILITY
> TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED 
ACCESS TO OR
> ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR 
CONDUCT OF ANY
> THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY 
OTHER
> MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links






Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as
they are often being updated.

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:
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames.
Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
membership without notice.
- Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W
printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from
the membership.
- By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and
Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files section:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/

BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER" AND
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU
FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY
DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  "OWNER" AND
"MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY
TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR
ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY
THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER
MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
 
Yahoo! Groups Links

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jimpegoda" 
<pegoda@c...> wrote:
> 
> I'm having some of the same problems with UT2 inks that Ted is 
> having although my 21step.tif file looks fine on my monitor,

Using Dot Gain 30% makes my (profiled like yours) monitor better 
match my printed 21 step tablet.
 
> Generally the steps between 60% and 85% show very little 
separation, 
> the steps from 0% to 5% are too large and the three steps from 90% 
> to 100% are too large. The values between 70% and 85% show almost 
no 
> separation. 

similar to my experience

>
> and found that the cool version of the 21step.tif file printed with 
> much better separation 

exactly my experience, and cool actually looks neutral
while neutral looks v. slightly warm to me

> exhibit some posterization, which is very noticeable in skin tones. 
i don't get posterization, but i do get rasterization of the dither 
in the highest values using QTR/Gui/8bit tiffs, which is not apparent 
in 16 bit versions printed with PS color management and Roark curves.
Head alignment has been checked and verified.

Using the 'purge' file Paul kindly sent me, i printed files which 
showed some of the inks a bit darker and browner than his scans of 
his own output, but they didn't seem tremendously off value to either 
of us.

I still can't find a paper value that reliably prints Eboni dark 
enough as grayscale/single black, and the dither pattern is too 
obtrusive for me to persist.  I have double printed to get good 
densities in the shadows when single black printing.

Aside from issues of permanence, Eboni as single black is no better 
than Epson for me, but i might keep trying with UT2 if i can lick the 
bad low value contrast.

Using Dot Gain 30% on monitor, RGB/Roark EEM neutral, heavyweight 
matte paper, printer set at heavyweight matte paper, No Color 
Management, and Best Photo (presumably 1440, since the latest 1280 
driver does not (!!?) specify numerical choices -- boo hiss) I can 
get a print that matches the screen reasonably well.

It still has too low contrast in the lowest values (around 70% down) 
and looks kind of dull.  I may have goosed the 'Zone ii-iii' values 
too much trying to increase the dark contrast, but it was the best i 
could do.

Still haven't made a custom visual workspace, or tried 'Color 
Controls' with a print space that differs from the source space.

ted

Thank you Ted and Paul for you feedback. Would it be possible to 
email me that purge pattern scan so I can check it against mine. I 
realize the colors may not be perfect because of monitor differences.

> Using the 'purge' file Paul kindly sent me, i printed files which 
> showed some of the inks a bit darker and browner than his scans of 
> his own output, but they didn't seem tremendously off value to 
either 
> of us.

> I still can't find a paper value that reliably prints Eboni dark 
> enough as grayscale/single black, and the dither pattern is too 
> obtrusive for me to persist.  I have double printed to get good 
> densities in the shadows when single black printing.


I've had good BO printing results with my 2200 at 2880dpi and the UC 
matte black ink on EEM and Velvet Fine Art Paper. The 2200's dither 
pattern is less visible than the 1280's and the black is a bit 
warmer. The dither pattern is still too visible for me though.



> It still has too low contrast in the lowest values (around 70% 
down) and looks kind of dull.  I may have goosed the 'Zone ii-iii' 
values too much trying to increase the dark contrast, but it was the 
best i could do. Still haven't made a custom visual workspace, or 
tried 'Color Controls' with a print space that differs from the 
source space.
> 

I've been printing using QTR, Epson Driver Sliders and Paul's Curves 
and although each method's output varies the significant lack of 
dark contrast is apparent in each. For years I've had great results 
making color prints with the 1280 and 2200 using PS color management 
and soft proofing...can't wait to get this UT2 thing figured out. 
Wish you the best of luck Ted on your Digital B&W adventure

Jim

Paul Roark wrote:
> Scott,
> 
> I'm sure the 10,000 (or the pigment version of that series if they are
> different) would be able to do B&W, but whether an existing inkset would be
> appropriate is another question.  The increased dot size might make the UT7
> "light" inks not quite light enough.  If that was the case, one might want a
> light gray ink in the Y position instead of the sepia, for example.
> 
> The lack of a LK (I think that is the case with the 10000 series) doesn't
> make much difference to B&W printing with the Epson driver.  If this turns
> out to be a good place for the Glop in a RIP-controlled printer, then that
> might be missed for glossy printing.
> 
> So, there are some open questions, and the printer might not have the
> flexibility of the current UC printers.


The 10000CF droplet size is close to the 9600 droplet size and 
both printers have variable droplet sizes. I don't think you 
have to be afraid that the highlights show the dot size with 
any quad inkset, the BO with 8 pass printing of the 10000 is 
already quite acceptable.

The 9000 and 7000 have a much larger (2x) and fixed droplet size.

With color inks in a 10000 CF you will have the same trouble 
to keep neutrality as it is with the 9000 etc models, the  LK 
isn't there to help.

Ernst