Digital BW, The Print

Hello,

I've just read Clayton Jones' article Using Color Settings
and Workspace Profiles for Grayscale Printing, and I'm not getting it.  I
understand the points about dot gain, gamma, using curves, etc.  What I
don't understand is the WYSIWYG thing.  If my monitor is calibrated (lets
say with an EyeOne Display), and I have a profile then for it (this would be
considered the front end...correct?).  And lets say I'm using EEM on an
R2400, epson driver.  I have WYSIWYG don't I?  Doesn't the epson driver take
care of that?

Is this for times when one can't get a pre-made profile?  If I use a
commercial RIP, is this issue also a null point?  (I thought that
calibrating my monitor and using a RIP was to get WYSIWYG).  If lets say Im
using ImagePrint, I have my image as I want in Photoshop, use ImagePrint to
select my ink, paper combo, and print.  If I change my paper type, I make
the change in ImagePrint, and the image will print the same on the new
paper.  If I'm unsatisfied with contrast/brightness/etc I can adjust in
photoshop, see the effect on screen, print again through ImagePrint, and see
the same changes as on screen.  Is this not how it works?

Sorry, for the stupid questions, just a bit confused.


Thanks!

Hello Guhan,

These aren't stupid questions, this is probably the most confusing
part about all this.

>I've just read Clayton Jones' article Using Color Settings
>and Workspace Profiles for Grayscale Printing, and I'm not 
>getting it.  I understand the points about dot gain, gamma, using 
>curves, etc.  What I don't understand is the WYSIWYG thing.  If my 
>monitor is calibrated (lets say with an EyeOne Display), and I have 
>a profile then for it (this would be considered the front end... 
>correct?).  And lets say I'm using EEM on an R2400, epson driver.  
>I have WYSIWYG don't I?  Doesn't the epson driver take care of that?
>Is this for times when one can't get a pre-made profile?  If I use a
>commercial RIP, is this issue also a null point?  (I thought that
>calibrating my monitor and using a RIP was to get WYSIWYG).  

The workflow described there is for people who aren't using
calibrated systems and special profiles, and the printer profile is
set to SAS ("Same As Source" or "No Color Management" in CS2).  My use
of the terms Front End and Back End is to get away from the technical
terms (because there are several overlapping ones which tend to be
confusing) and provide a conceptual idea of the push-pull relationship
between the image profile (front end) and the printer profile (back end).

The main point of it is that the front end profile affects how the
image pixels are displayed on screen, and (assuming the back end is
SAS), changing it (assigning, not converting) will not affect the
print. With an uncalibrated workflow the quality of the WYSIWYG, while
generally quite good with well chosen settings, can vary slightly with
extremely high or low key images, and it is possible to change the
screen image to be a closer match to the print in those cases by
assigning a different front end profile.

The approach is based on a workflow where an initial default gray
space profile (selectable by you in the "color Settings" window) is
used when the image is converted from color to BW (or when a neg is
scanned).  This initial profile determines the actual grayscale values
of the pixels in the image.  Because of this, it, of course, has a big
effect on the resulting print.  Another important setting is the
printer driver gamma setting (1.5, 1.8, 2.2 - or Light, Normal, Dark,
etc in ABW printers), which affects how the image pixel values are
sent to the printer.  The combination of these two things determines
the print values and the WYSIWYG quality.  

The reason I recommend using DG20 as the default gray space and driver
gamma 1.8 (or Light in ABW), is that this gives me very good WYSIWYG
and keeps good detail separation in the dark shadow zones.  This isn't
carved in stone, some people prefer other combinations.  I recommend
these as a good starting place that will produce very good results
right out of the starting gate.  I actually use a custom DG18% default
profile.

The initial "gray space" (or "working space" or "document space" or
"image profile", take your pick - there are nuanced differences in
meaning for these, but they are often used interchangably which adds
to the confusion) remains in effect unless the image is "converted" to
another (converting actually changes the pixel values).  However, a
different profile can be "assigned" without changing the pixel values.
Assigning a different front end profile changes how the pixels are
interpreted on screen, but the resulting print doesn't change because
the image pixels haven't changed.  This allows us to change the screen
image to be a closer match to the print, if necessary.  In actual
practice I do this only rarely, usually for very high or low key
images that are out on the extreme end of the scale.

All of this is pretty much irrelevent for people using calibrated
color management approaches because it's a completely different
conceptual framework.  I hope this has helped and not made it worse!

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Thanks a lot for the information Clayton and Steve, it was very helpful in
clearing up some, but not all, the questions :)  (of course I have a slew
more)

So I'm deciding on the 2400, and the calibrated monitor approach.  If I
understand correctly, I should then look at Harrington's QTR Create ICC.
Steve, you say there are two components, inbound, and outbound.  Are these
equivalent to a monitor profile and printer profile?

So I'll use my profile from my DisplayOne as a system colour profile, and in
Photoshop I can use the QTR soft-proof (inbound) profile to proof my B&W
prints...correct?

Steve, thanks a lot for offering to share your 4800 profiles.  How hard will
it be for me to get 2400 profiles?  Are downloads available anywhere over
the net (I've just joined the QTR group).

Does QTR support colour printing profiles (and are users making profiles for
K3 inks printed in colour onto various types of paper)?  I will be using one
2400 for both colour and B&W.

Is there a printing workflow detailed on the web using QTR on a 2400
(starting from a converted & corrected digital capture)?

Clayton:  Am I correct in thinking that you believe (and others too), that
Eboni inks are superior to the K3 inks? (not only d-max, but other qualities
as well).  (If I use BO with Eboni, vs. your 2400 K3 workflow, I'll get
better blacks, less shifting, etc with the Eboni...right?)

I cannot use a BO printing method on the 2400 unless I use a RIP...correct?

Finally, will using a more expensive RIP (like Colorbyte or ImagePrint)
remove any headaches, ease any of the work? (having pre-made profiles for a
number of papers seems to be of great value).

Thanks again, have a good weekend

gu

Hello Guhan,

>Clayton:  Am I correct in thinking that you believe (and others 
>too), that Eboni inks are superior to the K3 inks? (not only 
>d-max, but other qualities as well).  

Well...yes, no and maybe <g>.  You are actually lumping together
several things.  First, Eboni is "ink", not "inks".  Eboni is just a
black ink made by MIS that is used as the black component in many
different ink sets.  It is even used by some as the black in K3 ink
sets, with all the other inks being unchanged.  Eboni is a bit cooler
than the Epson K.  It's dmax is close to the Epson K (although it's
cooler appearance often makes it appear darker), and can measure with
a densitometer slightly more or less depending on the paper.  Most
people use it for it's cooler and prettier appearance than for dmax
reasons.


>(If I use BO with Eboni, vs. your 2400 K3 workflow, I'll get better 
>blacks, less shifting, etc with the Eboni...right?)

Eboni is the preferred ink of BO users because it is cooler than Epson
K and is rendered in a range of different warm-cool tones on different
papers and has a beautiful and clear look to the tones, where the
Epson K has a muddier look to it.  By "shifting" if you mean color
shifting, that's not an issue with Eboni because it has no dyes or
toners in it.

As for the BO workflow vs my 2400 workflow, they are both designed to
 be simple and easy and avoid the complexities of the calibrated color
management approaches.  There are pros and cons to BO vs 2400, but
they are mutually exclusive because a 2400 can't do BO.  The BO
workflow was primarily meant for pre-K3 printers.  With a 2400 we can
get smooth toned prints with the same ease and simplicity as the BO
workflow.  

The 2400 can do BO with a RIP, but then you are moving away from the
simplicity/ease part of the equation.  The only reason for doing so
would be if the particular BO advantages were desired enough that
using a RIP is worth it.  

So there are lots of variables in all this and it really boils down to
knowing what you want, why you want it, and what degree of cost, time,
effort and hassle you are willing to give in order to get it.

I hope this helps clarify things a bit.  It can be real confusing at
first.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm