Digital BW, The Print

Sam,

You wrote:

>I knew there was a blotch problem w/Museo but didn't
>realize it was that bad.

>Is it also that bad with the Media Street color ink set you use
>(Gen3?) too or just with quad tones?

I don't know.  I haven't printed any Gen 3 lately, as that was the CIS that
killed my 1160.  (This is not a reflection on Gen 3 but on old CIS's.)  I'll
probably try a color inkset that includes the tougher yellow and the VM
black for my next (filled-cart) color inkset.

>Do you need a distinct (from EAM) set of curves for Eclipse Satine

I confess I've not done enough with this paper to say.  I had some samples
and tested them, and have never gotten around to buying more.  An expected
museum preservation job will change that.

>and for the Hahnemuhle PhotoRags

I have some samples for others that look excellent with the default EAM
profile.

>I'm using Sepia-Neutral or Gen4 on 1160s if that matters. And on the
>old photos for which I use Sepia-Neutral, the blacks seem never to be
>very black, if that matters.

That is one of the reasons I don't like Museo.  The blacks are weak.  But,
they are also weak on Eclipse Satine (and they faded fast on the only
Hahnemuhle paper I tested).

I sure wish there were a way to do accelerated paper testing (as opposed to
image fading).  Truth is, we just don't know whether these other papers will
really last longer than EAM or not.  For my own family photos, I just use
EAM.  But for museums or others, I'm more comfortable saying the paper is
"acid-free" cotton/rag, as opposed to "lignin-free" wood pulp (EAM), even
though the later can be archival.

> Maybe that's why I haven't noticed the
>blotchiness. But of course some old photos are themselves blotchy.

True.  Their blacks usually were not that great either.  My experience is
that the digital reproductions make the old photos look almost too good to
be believable as old photos.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com