Digital BW, The Print

Mitch,

Thanks for the title "Master" but you are being too kind. I have made 
my share of crappy prints as well.

I also read Michael Reichmann's review. I have not seen color images 
from these printer. The only thing that I can imagine is that the 
person who printed these images (they were done by two different 
people) were not not experienced with the printer to thoroughly 
refine the settings.

I sent a set of two of the images to Martin Wesley for him to look 
at, so perhaps he can offer an opinion as to what he see's as well.

Mike



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Mitch Alland <malland@m...> 
wrote:
> >Recently I recieved  b/w prints made on an Epson 7600 and 
> >9600. Contrary to the reports in the media color crossover and 
> >metamerism were quite evident. I examined each print under 
> >tungstun, fluorescent (3800K CRI 92 lamps) and daylight.
> >
> >The output from my Epson 1280 and Epson 7000 with MIS FS/N 
> >Mix are far superior to what I examined. The 1280 and 7000 
> >prints are smoother and and have a "fine art" presence that the
> >7600/9600 prints lacked.
> 
> I assume that output from the 7600/9600 should identical to that 
from the 2200, is that right? In a review on www.luminous-
landscape.com, Michael Reichmann states that B&W prints from the 2200 
are so good and free of color casts that he is going to use it for 
all his B&W work instead of Piezography.
> 
> Having seen a couple of your B&W prints at Nina's in Paris, I can 
see that you're a master B&W printer, so I tend to believe your 
conclusion rather than Reichmann's.
> 
> Do you know how color prints on the 2200 compare to those on the 
1280 in terms of color gamut and quality?
> 
> --Mitch/Bangkok