Digital BW, The Print

"dlruckus" <dlruckus@...> wrote:
>
> ... I fear you are looking at spectral deficiencies in the light sources themselves.


Yes, that is certainly the case.

> I'm not sure how you can overcome this.

Perhaps not completely, but the 100% carbon images seem to hold up very well under all the lighting I've tried.  The light's deficiencies are not particularly noticeable with a medium that does not itself consist of a "neutral" that is actually an R, G and B image that is balanced to look neutral.  It's that balancing of the colors that is impossible under the varying, un-even light sources.

So, I'm really back to where I started and what we know in the context of the lightfastness also - 100% carbon is the ideal, and moving away from this, the more carbon and less color we use the better off we are; nothing really new here.  What surprised me was, first, the large visual difference an apparently small difference in CRI made for the dyes, and, second, the extent of carbon + color image sensitivity under the LEDs.

So we know if the Epson printers with more colors are incorporating them into their ABW mode printing?  I wonder if spreading the toning function to more, different color inks helps.


> It's just an extended example of printing to match the display conditions directly because one can't have it all.


And printing to match my gallery's lighting as well as my home lighting are the top criteria for me, but I also don't want a customer to get a print home an find it looks green inder their lighting.

With respect to my gallery, I took what I though were the best compromises with the dyes and the MIS glossy carbon plus Lm and Lc to the gallery for an inspection under that (poor) fluorescent lighting.  The dyes just did not cut it.  Thus ends the Epson 4000-dye experiment.  Luckily, the MIS glossy carbon plus Epson Lm and Lc looked very good.  So, that is currently looking like my best path forward for neutral glossy printing for gallery display.  (The dyes will remain for cards and other high gloss output, but only the Epson 1400 will be used.)


> ... As for LEDs the spectral distribution is up and down all over the place and very lumpy indeed.

They are worse that I thought.  I wonder if those using the Epson ABW mode printing have noticed problems with the new LED lights. 


>... It's extremely doubtful that affordable lighting would be very consistent from lamp to lamp over time either....


I think this all reinforces my belief that 100% carbon on no-OBA paper is the safest medium for fine art.  But that doesn't give me the glossy neutral I'm after.  So, I'll continue to follow what appears to be the most promising path to that goal (as well as the 100% carbon matte prints, of course).

 
> Unfortunately our eyes are extremely sensitive to minute color deviations with truly neutral objects. The best, if one can call a compromise that, case might be to attempt to adjust the inks such that the lack of constancy bends in a pleasing direction and trust that the physiological aspects of human vision will handle things as well as possible.


Hitting that best compromise seems to be the trick with the color + carbon inksets. It may be rather venue specific, which may not bode well inflexible systems.

At the moment, I'm rather happy with what I've seen with the MIS LK plus LM and LC.  It's not in the same league as the 100% carbon, but I was able to profile it well enough to look good in the venues and under the lights I have.  I'm inclined to follow that path for neutral  glossy display printing at the moment.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com