Digital BW, The Print

Firstly can we please not turn this into another Nanoo Nanoo session?  Thanks!  :-)

I thought I'd share some initial testing I have done with these inks while we wait for 
longevity information.  The testing I've done thus far is really only around gamut and ink 
densities.  Now that I have profiles up and running I'm looking forward to printing 
additional, more interesting, images.  All this is very preliminary as I loaded up my 2100 
printer yesterday.  Rather than post a big blurb here with too many numbers, I have typed 
up my results and included the ICC profiles in a folder which can be downloaded here:

http://homepage.mac.com/stevekale/stevekale2/FileSharing37.html

(Hopefully Gretag will recognise that it's not my intent to share the profiles per se but 
rather to post them so that people can make gamut comparisons.)

A couple of brief comments.  The inks are not a pancea for all the issues inkjet faces 
today.  They behave very very well on some papers and "normally" on others, as the results 
I've posted show (and Shilesh has posted prior to me).  Their gamut on my 2100 performs 
better than my 4800 with K3 (MIS Eboni rather than Epson MK) in some areas but not in 
others.  (I can't show a direct apples to apples comparison because the Nanochromes do 
not have an LLK and I am not prepared to load them into my 4800 just yet.  I'd like to see 
longevity tests before considering that.)  You can make your own gamut comparisons with 
Colorsync Utility.  The black ink performs very well on HPR308 with a dMax of 1.96.  The 
same ink achieves a dMax of 2.32 on EPSG.   (Note, you'll see I picked up the wrong 
column for EPSG in the text of the pdf - I'll fix it when I can.)  Even if only this black ink 
performs well in longevity tests it would be an interesting consideration for all the x800 
series printer owners.  We'll have to wait and see.  There are some problems though in 
using an ink which very quickly hits its density peak with the Epson driver with its ink 
limits and linearization calibrated for completely different inks.  I'd be interested in 
feedback on this issue once people have had the chance to look at the tests I've done.

I look forward to any feedback on the tests I've done to date.

Cheers

Steve

I meant to add that I've posted this on the Wide Format forum as well.  Some
of the comments below pertain to earlier discussions on that forum.
Nonetheless this stuff may be of interest to some here who are not members
there.

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 18:44:09 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Initial Nanochrome Testing
> 
> Firstly can we please not turn this into another Nanoo Nanoo session?  Thanks!
> :-)
> 
> I thought I'd share some initial testing I have done with these inks while we
> wait for 
> longevity information.  The testing I've done thus far is really only around
> gamut and ink 
> densities.  Now that I have profiles up and running I'm looking forward to
> printing 
> additional, more interesting, images.  All this is very preliminary as I
> loaded up my 2100
> printer yesterday.  Rather than post a big blurb here with too many numbers, I
> have typed 
> up my results and included the ICC profiles in a folder which can be
> downloaded here:
> 
> http://homepage.mac.com/stevekale/stevekale2/FileSharing37.html
> 
> (Hopefully Gretag will recognise that it's not my intent to share the profiles
> per se but 
> rather to post them so that people can make gamut comparisons.)
> 
> A couple of brief comments.  The inks are not a pancea for all the issues
> inkjet faces 
> today.  They behave very very well on some papers and "normally" on others, as
> the results 
> I've posted show (and Shilesh has posted prior to me).  Their gamut on my 2100
> performs 
> better than my 4800 with K3 (MIS Eboni rather than Epson MK) in some areas but
> not in 
> others.  (I can't show a direct apples to apples comparison because the
> Nanochromes do 
> not have an LLK and I am not prepared to load them into my 4800 just yet.  I'd
> like to see 
> longevity tests before considering that.)  You can make your own gamut
> comparisons with 
> Colorsync Utility.  The black ink performs very well on HPR308 with a dMax of
> 1.96.  The 
> same ink achieves a dMax of 2.32 on EPSG.   (Note, you'll see I picked up the
> wrong 
> column for EPSG in the text of the pdf - I'll fix it when I can.)  Even if
> only this black ink
> performs well in longevity tests it would be an interesting consideration for
> all the x800 
> series printer owners.  We'll have to wait and see.  There are some problems
> though in 
> using an ink which very quickly hits its density peak with the Epson driver
> with its ink 
> limits and linearization calibrated for completely different inks.  I'd be
> interested in 
> feedback on this issue once people have had the chance to look at the tests
> I've done.
> 
> I look forward to any feedback on the tests I've done to date.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Steve

Have you checked resistance to water yet? Especially with something 
like a plain copy/fax/printer paper, but also with either the EEM or 
Hahnemuhle that you used for testing.

Steve,

Did you see any metamerism in the nanochrome prints?

Carl

On Jan 12, 2006, at 1:51 PM, Steve Kale wrote:

> I meant to add that I've posted this on the Wide Format forum as  
> well.  Some
> of the comments below pertain to earlier discussions on that forum.
> Nonetheless this stuff may be of interest to some here who are not  
> members
> there.
>
>
>> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
>> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 18:44:09 -0000
>> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
>> Subject: [Digital BW] Initial Nanochrome Testing
>>
>> Firstly can we please not turn this into another Nanoo Nanoo  
>> session?  Thanks!
>> :-)
>>
>> I thought I'd share some initial testing I have done with these  
>> inks while we
>> wait for
>> longevity information.  The testing I've done thus far is really  
>> only around
>> gamut and ink
>> densities.  Now that I have profiles up and running I'm looking  
>> forward to
>> printing
>> additional, more interesting, images.  All this is very  
>> preliminary as I
>> loaded up my 2100
>> printer yesterday.  Rather than post a big blurb here with too  
>> many numbers, I
>> have typed
>> up my results and included the ICC profiles in a folder which can be
>> downloaded here:
>>
>> http://homepage.mac.com/stevekale/stevekale2/FileSharing37.html
>>
>> (Hopefully Gretag will recognise that it's not my intent to share  
>> the profiles
>> per se but
>> rather to post them so that people can make gamut comparisons.)
>>
>> A couple of brief comments.  The inks are not a pancea for all the  
>> issues
>> inkjet faces
>> today.  They behave very very well on some papers and "normally"  
>> on others, as
>> the results
>> I've posted show (and Shilesh has posted prior to me).  Their  
>> gamut on my 2100
>> performs
>> better than my 4800 with K3 (MIS Eboni rather than Epson MK) in  
>> some areas but
>> not in
>> others.  (I can't show a direct apples to apples comparison  
>> because the
>> Nanochromes do
>> not have an LLK and I am not prepared to load them into my 4800  
>> just yet.  I'd
>> like to see
>> longevity tests before considering that.)  You can make your own  
>> gamut
>> comparisons with
>> Colorsync Utility.  The black ink performs very well on HPR308  
>> with a dMax of
>> 1.96.  The
>> same ink achieves a dMax of 2.32 on EPSG.   (Note, you'll see I  
>> picked up the
>> wrong
>> column for EPSG in the text of the pdf - I'll fix it when I can.)   
>> Even if
>> only this black ink
>> performs well in longevity tests it would be an interesting  
>> consideration for
>> all the x800
>> series printer owners.  We'll have to wait and see.  There are  
>> some problems
>> though in
>> using an ink which very quickly hits its density peak with the  
>> Epson driver
>> with its ink
>> limits and linearization calibrated for completely different  
>> inks.  I'd be
>> interested in
>> feedback on this issue once people have had the chance to look at  
>> the tests
>> I've done.
>>
>> I look forward to any feedback on the tests I've done to date.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Steve

OK I just ran the calibration charts I had printed under the cold tap (so
HPR, EAM and EPSG).  There is definitely run-off from the black ink and ever
so slightly the (dark) cyan. Although, nothing from the other colours this
is not good.  

(I also ran a K3/Eboni MK nozzle check pattern under water in the same
manner.  No issues with that.)

Steve

> From: Greg <dfaprinting@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 19:41:24 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Initial Nanochrome Testing
> 
> Have you checked resistance to water yet? Especially with something
> like a plain copy/fax/printer paper, but also with either the EEM or
> Hahnemuhle that you used for testing.
> 
> 
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> OK I just ran the calibration charts I had printed under the cold tap 
(so
> HPR, EAM and EPSG).  There is definitely run-off from the black ink 
and ever
> so slightly the (dark) cyan. Although, nothing from the other colours 
this
> is not good.  
> 
> (I also ran a K3/Eboni MK nozzle check pattern under water in the same
> manner.  No issues with that.)
> 
> Steve


Thanks. You might try some extra limiting with QTR to see if the run 
off was just from too much ink, which can happen even with Eboni, or 
the inks that I use. Yes, I'm trying to remain positive about these new 
inks, and give them a fair chance at life.

I definitely think the bulk of the issue is the calibration charts were
printed with a 100% ink load which as I noted is way too much for this black
ink.  So I then ran the EPSG 21-step greyscale image I had printed under the
tap - the GG1.8 one.  These were printed with the Epson driver.  (The EPSG
showed the run-off the most, indicating the issue was more likely excess
ink.)  Only the 95 and 100 patches showed bleed (the 95 barely).
Interestingly, the text which should be 100% K did not show any bleed even
looking through a loupe.  With HPR, the 100 patch showed very very minor
bleed (even the 95 GG2.2 patch did not).

Of course for B&W I can run QTR and manage ink loads - although I am not
sure about toning given the cool LK and the fact that I like warm-toned
prints - but for colour I'm not sure I want to have to invest in a RIP.  I'm
hoping they, or their successors, will "behave" with the Epson driver as
well.

> From: Greg <dfaprinting@...>

> 
> 
> Thanks. You might try some extra limiting with QTR to see if the run
> off was just from too much ink, which can happen even with Eboni, or
> the inks that I use. Yes, I'm trying to remain positive about these new
> inks, and give them a fair chance at life.
> 
> 
>

The only B&W prints I have done thus far were with the Epson driver in
colour mode.  I just ran them under the tap!  I didn't really check for
metamerism just bronzing and gloss.  I was not happy with the hue of the
image on EPSG - it was definitely ever so slightly green as evidenced by the
greyscale readings.  The shift that peaks around the 30 patch (GG2.2) on HPR
in the colour-managed greyscales is also noticeable by glancing at the
greyscale printouts.  I think I really need to do some QTR curves before
commenting on B&W with regard to anything other than finish and dMax.  I
suspect a QTR controlled BO print would look very very nice for those that
like that single ink look.  I think the LK is too cold for a really smooth
K/LK only ramp.

> From: Carl Schofield <scho@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 15:09:47 -0500
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Initial Nanochrome Testing
> 
> Steve,
> 
> Did you see any metamerism in the nanochrome prints?
> 
> Carl
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> I definitely think the bulk of the issue is the calibration charts 
were
> printed with a 100% ink load which as I noted is way too much for 
this black
> ink.  So I then ran the EPSG 21-step greyscale image I had printed 
under the
> tap - the GG1.8 one.  These were printed with the Epson driver.  
(The EPSG
> showed the run-off the most, indicating the issue was more likely 
excess
> ink.)  Only the 95 and 100 patches showed bleed (the 95 barely).
> Interestingly, the text which should be 100% K did not show any 
bleed even
> looking through a loupe.  With HPR, the 100 patch showed very very 
minor
> bleed (even the 95 GG2.2 patch did not).
> 
> Of course for B&W I can run QTR and manage ink loads - although I 
am not
> sure about toning given the cool LK and the fact that I like warm-
toned
> prints - but for colour I'm not sure I want to have to invest in a 
RIP.  I'm
> hoping they, or their successors, will "behave" with the Epson 
driver as
> well.
> 
> 


Other than the expense, I think you might enjoy setting up and using 
a good RIP. For you I would suggest something that is flexible, as 
opposed to a preset "black box" type. The real expense would be the 
software for the CMYK profiles.

Steve-

1.96 Dmax for the black ink on Photo Rag sounds great.
Is this because their black ink has dye in it to
acheive such a high Dmax, or is this ink a pigment ink
with some new technology that allows it to reach this
Dmax without dye?

-John

--- Steve Kale <stevekale@...> wrote:

> Firstly can we please not turn this into another
> Nanoo Nanoo session?  Thanks!  :-)
> 
> I thought I'd share some initial testing I have done
> with these inks while we wait for 
> longevity information.  The testing I've done thus
> far is really only around gamut and ink 
> densities.  Now that I have profiles up and running
> I'm looking forward to printing 
> additional, more interesting, images.  All this is
> very preliminary as I loaded up my 2100 
> printer yesterday.  Rather than post a big blurb
> here with too many numbers, I have typed 
> up my results and included the ICC profiles in a
> folder which can be downloaded here:
> 
>
http://homepage.mac.com/stevekale/stevekale2/FileSharing37.html
> 
> (Hopefully Gretag will recognise that it's not my
> intent to share the profiles per se but 
> rather to post them so that people can make gamut
> comparisons.)
> 
> A couple of brief comments.  The inks are not a
> pancea for all the issues inkjet faces 
> today.  They behave very very well on some papers
> and "normally" on others, as the results 
> I've posted show (and Shilesh has posted prior to
> me).  Their gamut on my 2100 performs 
> better than my 4800 with K3 (MIS Eboni rather than
> Epson MK) in some areas but not in 
> others.  (I can't show a direct apples to apples
> comparison because the Nanochromes do 
> not have an LLK and I am not prepared to load them
> into my 4800 just yet.  I'd like to see 
> longevity tests before considering that.)  You can
> make your own gamut comparisons with 
> Colorsync Utility.  The black ink performs very well
> on HPR308 with a dMax of 1.96.  The 
> same ink achieves a dMax of 2.32 on EPSG.   (Note,
> you'll see I picked up the wrong 
> column for EPSG in the text of the pdf - I'll fix it
> when I can.)  Even if only this black ink 
> performs well in longevity tests it would be an
> interesting consideration for all the x800 
> series printer owners.  We'll have to wait and see. 
> There are some problems though in 
> using an ink which very quickly hits its density
> peak with the Epson driver with its ink 
> limits and linearization calibrated for completely
> different inks.  I'd be interested in 
> feedback on this issue once people have had the
> chance to look at the tests I've done.
> 
> I look forward to any feedback on the tests I've
> done to date.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

Yes your last sentence is the killer - especially since I passed on the 50%
discount day and my $400 voucher expired 4 days afterwards.  As for
enjoyment, I must say I did relish printing all these test charts and stuff
and working with the 2100 again.  The 4800 and Adv B&W is simply too easy...
;-)

> From: Greg <dfaprinting@...>
 
> 
> 
> Other than the expense, I think you might enjoy setting up and using
> a good RIP. For you I would suggest something that is flexible, as
> opposed to a preset "black box" type. The real expense would be the
> software for the CMYK profiles.

I think one would classify this as a "dye" ink although the border between
dye and pigment is getting blurred and there have been advances in dye
longevity.  We once debated here, and I don't think we at all resolved the
issue, the question as to at what point does a pigment become a dye.  I'm
not a chemist but I would like to know a little bit more about this sort of
thing in lay terms.  I suspect we are likely to hear more and more of
dye/pigment hybrids in the future once the marketing issue is dealt with.
There have even been murmurings that Epson introduced a dye component to the
K3 inks.  I'm happy to have a play with the inks while we wait for longevity
tests because I think there is definitely something to the merging of the
two ink types - or in other words, I am not prepared to be prejudiced based
on "classification".

L* 9.8 (density 1.96) on HPR does look very, very nice and is a big jump
over Epson MK or MIS Eboni.  There's not much, if anything, to be gained
beyond an L* of 5 and I would trade the difference between 10 and 5 to get
the matte look of cotton paper (if only it were more scratch proof...).  The
key question of course is longevity.  I have no idea on this but don't
expect this to be as good as the K2 Ultrachromes but then it's also only the
first iteration.  We shall have to wait and see.  It would be a very good
thing if this ink shows the potential of what's to come.

> From: John Custodio <custodiojohn@...>

> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Initial Nanochrome Testing
> 
> Steve-
> 
> 1.96 Dmax for the black ink on Photo Rag sounds great.
> Is this because their black ink has dye in it to
> acheive such a high Dmax, or is this ink a pigment ink
> with some new technology that allows it to reach this
> Dmax without dye?
> 
> -John
>

I meant to say "I did NOT relish"  -  perhaps quite a Freudian slip  :-)

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 10:10:02 +0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Conversation: [Digital BW] Initial Nanochrome Testing
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Initial Nanochrome Testing
> 
> Yes your last sentence is the killer - especially since I passed on the 50%
> discount day and my $400 voucher expired 4 days afterwards.  As for
> enjoyment, I must say I did relish printing all these test charts and stuff
> and working with the 2100 again.  The 4800 and Adv B&W is simply too easy...
> ;-)
> 
> 
>> From: Greg <dfaprinting@...>
>  
>> 
>> 
>> Other than the expense, I think you might enjoy setting up and using
>> a good RIP. For you I would suggest something that is flexible, as
>> opposed to a preset "black box" type. The real expense would be the
>> software for the CMYK profiles.
>

L* 9.8 (density 1.96) on HPR does look very, very nice and is a big jump
over Epson MK or MIS Eboni. There's not much, if anything, to be gained
beyond an L* of 5 and I would trade the difference between 10 and 5 to get
the matte look of cotton paper (if only it were more scratch
proof...). The
key question of course is longevity. I have no idea on this but don't
expect this to be as good as the K2 Ultrachromes but then it's also
only the
first iteration. We shall have to wait and see. It would be a very good
thing if this ink shows the potential of what's to come.
----------------------------------------------

That is an excellent dmax on rag.

You also have the advantage if this stuff does work of single
universal black, right? If that is so that is a huge advantage for a
lot of people, and someting that Epson hasn't come up with, except the
"archival" black that didn't have the d max of MK on matte media. It
apparenty had some dye in it.

As for the chemestry of any of these inks it seems like we know very
little about all the secret components, encapsulation, and how this
all works together. I'm sure the deconstructors at MIS, and whoever
their chemists are know a lot more about Ultrachrome composition
than we do. They just aren't talking either. 

Really I don't care what is in the mix as long as it prints well and
holds up. That is where we get bogged down; who do we trust to do the
testing. Doing one's own fade testing is better than nothing but
limited in real accuracy to say the least.

How is the metamerism? I suspect it is there. It is with the 1270
hybred inks.

John

> From: john dean <deanwork2003@...>

> 
> That is an excellent dmax on rag.
> 
> You also have the advantage if this stuff does work of single
> universal black, right?

Yes this is the one ink.

>If that is so that is a huge advantage for a
> lot of people, and someting that Epson hasn't come up with, except the
> "archival" black that didn't have the d max of MK on matte media. It
> apparenty had some dye in it.
> 
> As for the chemestry of any of these inks it seems like we know very
> little about all the secret components, encapsulation, and how this
> all works together. I'm sure the deconstructors at MIS, and whoever
> their chemists are know a lot more about Ultrachrome composition
> than we do. They just aren't talking either.
> 
> Really I don't care what is in the mix as long as it prints well and
> holds up. 

I agree

>That is where we get bogged down; who do we trust to do the
> testing. Doing one's own fade testing is better than nothing but
> limited in real accuracy to say the least.

Yes.  Personally I think the only tests that matter are side by side
comparative tests similar to the ones Paul does.  One can of course continue
to debate whether the light exposure and all-important humidity is
"representative" but at least they are side by side.  Of course there are
also longevity issues other than light exposure.  I don't mind who does the
tests so long as they are independent and capable.  It doesn't have to be
Wilhelm.  And of course I'd also like to see our own amateur tests done as
well.

There's a long way to go on this side of things for these inks....But if
they only produced a normal black then I wouldn't bother looking out for the
results.


> 
> How is the metamerism? I suspect it is there. It is with the 1270
> hybred inks.
> 


I have jut done a QTR curve with the K (limit 45%, boost 50%) and LK (limit
50%) ink.  The resultant greyscale is quite cool. I guess I need to add some
yellow to warm it (?).  The first print has just rolled off now (HPR) and I
can't see any colour shifts, although it's a very grey day here and so my
daylight vs halogen comparison is just first impressions.  The print looks
very good for a quick hack version.  I did not like the Epson 2100 driver
prints I did earlier but then that should be no surprise to anyone.

Steve

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> I meant to say "I did NOT relish"  -  perhaps quite a Freudian 
slip  :-)
> 
> 
> > From: Steve Kale <stevekale@b...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 10:10:02 +0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Conversation: [Digital BW] Initial Nanochrome Testing
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Initial Nanochrome Testing
> > 
> > Yes your last sentence is the killer - especially since I passed 
on the 50%
> > discount day and my $400 voucher expired 4 days afterwards.  As 
for
> > enjoyment, I must say I did relish printing all these test charts 
and stuff
> > and working with the 2100 again.  The 4800 and Adv B&W is simply 
too easy...
> > ;-)


Well, when you get really bored, you might want to download some of 
the different demos and play around. Few will support the 2200, but 
your 4800 is supported by just about everyone. It's a lot more work 
to get goint, but also removes all the limitations when you are using 
third party inks (if you buy a good flexible RIP).

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> I think one would classify this as a "dye" ink although the border
between
> dye and pigment is getting blurred and there have been advances in dye
> longevity.  We once debated here, and I don't think we at all
resolved the
> issue, the question as to at what point does a pigment become a dye.
 I'm
> not a chemist but I would like to know a little bit more about this
sort of
> thing in lay terms. 

Pigment ink (inkjet pigment, that is) could actually be called "dye
ink", but I suspect that corporate marketing considerations have
caused this fact to be obscured (it being too confusing for the
consumer to hear that organic dyes are also used to make these
pigments). Better to have us think in terms of finely ground, immortal
mineral pigments; of Raw Umber and Burnt Sienna and the like. But of
course it ain't so.

In the case of inkjet pigments, the organic dye molecules are not
truly dissolved but rather caused to become aggregated (combined) into
small, *solid* particles--i.e., tiny crystals each containing
thousands of molecules. These dye particles can be kept in a stable
liquid suspension (i.e. kept from clumping together) by forming a thin
layer of a protective polymeric resin (or other stabilizers) on the
surface of each particle. Dye molecules within these tiny crystals can
absorb light (i.e., be colored) in a similar way as the dye in true
solution. But not exactly the same.

Why bother with the extra work? It's because the dye molecules inside
those pigment particles can be considerably more stabile against light
and chemical degradation by virtue of being in a "solid state"
environment--rather than in solution-state (i.e., rather than being
"molecularly disperse"). The downside of using dye in the solid state
may be that the pigment dye is less "efficient"--i.e., has lower
optical absorption (optical density) than comparable amount of dye in
true solution (i.e., the so-called "dye ink").

Both kinds of dye can (conceptually at least) be combined within one
ink; a relatively small amount of free (dissolved) dye component might
serve to boost the color density (although possibly at the cost of
some loss in overall fade-resistance).

Phil

> From: Phil Rose <pjrose@...>


> 
> In the case of inkjet pigments, the organic dye molecules are not
> truly dissolved but rather caused to become aggregated (combined) into
> small, *solid* particles--i.e., tiny crystals each containing
> thousands of molecules. These dye particles can be kept in a stable
> liquid suspension (i.e. kept from clumping together) by forming a thin
> layer of a protective polymeric resin (or other stabilizers) on the
> surface of each particle.

This is how it has been explained to me also.  The polyacrylic resin
encapsulate in Epson K3 ink prevents the pigment particles from
agglomerating.  One also needs a high glycol content in the carrier to act
as a dispersant apparently.


>Dye molecules within these tiny crystals can
> absorb light (i.e., be colored) in a similar way as the dye in true
> solution. But not exactly the same.
> 
> Why bother with the extra work? It's because the dye molecules inside
> those pigment particles can be considerably more stabile against light
> and chemical degradation by virtue of being in a "solid state"
> environment--rather than in solution-state (i.e., rather than being
> "molecularly disperse"). The downside of using dye in the solid state
> may be that the pigment dye is less "efficient"--i.e., has lower
> optical absorption (optical density) than comparable amount of dye in
> true solution (i.e., the so-called "dye ink").

Now if one could add a substance, and I am speculating here, to the mix that
binds the pigment dye particles together when they dry or upon reaction with
an inkjet coating then you might potentially get the best of both worlds:
very high density in liquid form and agglomeration on and binding to the
substrate at printing.  One can see how the interaction of substrate,
coating and ink is important and why they need to be developed together.
Think of those two part glues that only bond when mixed together.

> 
> Both kinds of dye can (conceptually at least) be combined within one
> ink; a relatively small amount of free (dissolved) dye component might
> serve to boost the color density (although possibly at the cost of
> some loss in overall fade-resistance).

Or added to the acrylic encapsulate. K3?

In the end though the proof is in the pudding...

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
> 
> In the end though the proof is in the pudding...
>


Mmmm, pudding...

Now if one could add a substance, and I am speculating here, to the
mix that binds the pigment dye particles together when they dry or
upon reaction with an inkjet coating then you might potentially get
the best of both worlds:very high density in liquid form and
agglomeration on and binding to the substrate at printing. One can see
how the interaction of substrate, coating and ink is important and why
they need to be developed together. Think of those two part glues that
only bond when mixed together.
------

Isn't that what exactly what HP has done with their long life
"pigment" inkset - developed for their unique media (swellable polymer
paper)? Problem is they don't have too good of media, it looks industrial.

--------------

> Both kinds of dye can (conceptually at least) be combined within one
> ink; a relatively small amount of free (dissolved) dye component
might serve to boost the color density (although possibly at the cost
of some loss in overall fade-resistance).

Or added to the acrylic encapsulate. K3?

----------------

But in that case K3 would have a superior gamut, right, and apparently
it doesn't over K2? 


john

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" > 
> But in that case K3 would have a superior gamut, right, and 
apparently
> it doesn't over K2? 
> 
> 


The gamut is different, and has a slightly large volume. There are a 
couple of places where K3 exceeds the gamut of K2. The biggest 
advantage is in the smoothness that the extra black gives you, even 
with full color prints.

To everyone testing Nanochrome inks:
I would like to know what the degree of "metamerism"
is with these inks. I put metamerism in quotes because
I understand that daylight is bluer than tungsten and
a print may appear cooler in daylight than under
tungsten, and vice versa, and that may not exactly be
considered metamerism. A better way to pose the
question would be: How great is the difference in
color appearance of a Nanochrome print under different
light sources, especially compared to that of an
Ultrachrome print (either standard Ultrachrome or K3)?
-John

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com