QTR-Quadtone RIP

Hi Duane,

Thanks for sharing your experience with this issue. The only gray 1.8
that I have is gray gamma 1.8. When I convert to it from the gray
gamma 2.2 space, the shadows are also compressed (using the info
window in Photoshop to check the K % value). I am do not understand
why the deep shadow steps are compressed when converting to these
other spaces?

I can see deepest shadow detail on my screen but I loose it in the
print unless I use the gamma slider to open up the tone curve. I would
prefer not to do this, since I assume the response is no longer
linear? I tried the gray matte paper profile and others for soft
proofing and didn't see any change.

I think the basic problem is there is no software that allows you to
softproof the QTR Printer output. Roy mentions this in his ICC
Info.txt file, " The current version creates profiles for the printing
side.  A soft-proofing version is coming soon."

Best wishes,

Ken

 
--- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "dlruckus" <dlruckus@...> wrote:
>
> Don't know the answer to your question as to why but---It's my
> understanding that the gray-lab.icc is based on a 2.2 workspace. I
> found the same problem you did. So, I tried changing to gray 1.8 and
> recalibrating my monitor. That worked to give me a better onscreen
> image in the shadows. I also found that there was really no need to
> use gray-lab at all then. I also discovered in using the Gray Matt icc
> for soft proofing, by accident, that the print and screen matched
> whether or not I used the Gray matt conversion before printing. Since
> that time, I use gray1.8 as the workspace,softproof with Gray Matt icc
>  and still do convert to it before printing (or more recently, with
> custom icc's via Create-icc program). I actually could get by with
> just editing in gray1.8 and printing but I fear that I might be
> missing some subtle refinements or something. I have experimented with
> doing this and can see no difference visually. You can test this by
> editing an image in 1.8 and, when you have it as you wish, use the
> Gray Matt.icc to softproof and switch back and forth. You can easily
> tell if the image changes when you do that. If it doesn't you are home
> free. Use BPC but not paper white when doing this. It is true that the
> 2.2 workspace does compress the shadow appearance somewhat.So does
> Adobe98 and any other 2.2 based workspace.
> 
> Hope this is of some use to you.
> 
> Regards
> Duane
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "prof_mgt551" <prof_mgt551@> wrote:
> >
> > Tom Moore pointed out something interesting in an earlier post: when
> > converting to Roy Harrington's provided gray-lab.icc profile to use as
> > a working space, the shadow end of the scale blocks up (using the B&W
> > test image provided at the Northlight Images website). In the readme
> > file provided in the profile folder, it says using this as the working
> > space "spaces the grayscale values linearly with respect Lab or
> > Luminosity". It is then suggested to convert to either Gray Matte
> > Paper or Gray Photo Paper when printing. This conversion also blocks
> > up the deep shadows.
> > 
> > Since Roy is the expert and source of knowledge when doing B&W
> > printing, I must not understand something - or many things :)  It
> > seems that there is no value in using spaces that block up shadow
> > detail in an image. So why are these icc profiles provided in the QTR
> > installation? What is the recomended working space for adjusting
> > images in Photoshop prior to making prints using QTR?
> > 
> > I am using a Windows XP computer and an Epson 2200 with the regular UC
> > inks. So far I have been printing on Epson Enhanced Matte paper and
> > Ilford Smooth Pearl.
> > 
> > Thanks for any observations,
> > 
> > Ken
> >
>