Digital BW, The Print

dilcher [mailto:dilcher@...] wrote:

>... having trouble  deciding between Piezo and MIS methods.
>...Piezography is supposed to have a driver which makes a substantial
>difference in printing.  Is this so?

You will get a variety of opinions on this, I'm sure.  Mine is that the
Piezo driver does, in fact, make smoother prints on older quad printers, but
not on newer hextone printers.  Nonetheless, while I have the Piezo driver
and the older quad printers, I still prefer the Epson driver.  The
differences in smoothness are not enough to be relevant to my decision.

I think the pros and cons of the two approaches aside from the smoothness of
highlights are more important in making a decision as to which way to go.
Along those lines, I think tone control is the big MIS VM (variable-tone)
advantage, and paper profiles are the big Piezo advantage.  Additionally,
some think Piezo is easier to use, while some say that the Epson driver
delivers blacker blacks.

With my system, one of the most irritating aspects of the Piezo driver is
that I can't do other work while it is printing.  With the Epson driver I
can. Not all systems have this problem, apparently.

As a person who writes Photoshop curves to control inksets with the Epson
driver, the quality that a true RIP can achieve impresses me.  While I can
usually achieve similar quality, to be honest, a number of the curves that
are out there are draft curves that could use more work.  It's doubtful that
I'll ever have the time to get them all up to what a professional RIP can
do.

I have encouraged the RIP makers, including Cone, to support an open
variable-tone ink approach.  The combination of a professional RIP and MIS
inks may give the best of both worlds.  But, of course, one has to pay for
the RIP.

> I saw this link:
>http://www.piezography.com/piezographyBW-comp-mis.html
>but, don't know if it is a fair comparison.

I think this comparison exaggerates the differences between the systems.
First, it uses the old 3000, which is not representative of any of the other
printers that most on this list use.  The 3000 has relatively huge dots.

Additionally, while the comparison is conspicuously silent on what workflow
they used, I'd guess they used the Woolf, non-partitioned workflow for the
MIS image.  This allows the darkest gray inks to get into the highlights.
The better workflows "partition" the ink so that only the lightest gray ink
is in the highlights.  Piezo does this, and so can the Epson driver with
appropriate RGB Photoshop image adjustment curves -- which is what I and
most using the MIS inks use.

I use a 3000 with the Epson driver.  I recently attended a conference in the
Bay Area where I had both an Epson driver output and a Piezo output at its
highest resolution.  The prints could barely be distinguished.  Perhaps
others who were at that conference and saw the comparison can comment.

My conclusion is that with 16x20 prints from medium format Tmax 100
negatives, the differences in the dots are essentially irrelevant.  If I
were making small prints from the 3000, I might have a different opinion.
However, unless a person wants 16x20 prints, there is no reason to buy a
3000 instead of a more modern printer with smaller dots.

I think the smoothest prints I've ever seen or measured are the 1280 Epson
driver prints at 2880 resolution.

My system of choice includes two printers -- the 3000 for large prints and
an 1160 for smaller prints.  If I were purchasing now, I might even go with
the letter-size version of the 1160 if it were available.  Note, however,
that my choices are based in part on my need for quad machines that are
easier to mix and load inks into.  If you are not into ink mixing and don't
need 16x20 size, the 1280 is the best there is.

While I almost always print with the Epson driver, I also am comfortable
with tweaking the image adjustment curves to get whatever performance I want
out of the variable-tone system.  That said, I also am glad I have the Piezo
software.  Its profiles can be handy when checking out other papers.  (But
the system did not have a profile for Epson Archival Matte -- the most
popular paper for pigments -- for a very long time.)  I also use the Piezo
output as a standard for judging the quality of the curves that control the
MIS VM system.

The bottom line is both approaches have their advantages and
disadvantages -- neither is perfect.  Be sure to get a printer that is
supported by both systems.  That way you can switch as needed.

Good luck.  Either system should produce great prints for you.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com