Digital BW, The Print

> For the last week, the emails have been about so much tech stuff that
is over
> my head, my delete button finger is getting a good work out.  My
questions
> are basic.  Do I want to do digital B&W prints?  How does it work with
my
> images?  Does it provide a voice to my vision? How much time and money
am I
> willing to spend to learn to use digital output?

Basically, I am in the same general situation that you are, except that I
am apparently just a few steps ahead of you, in that I have purchased an
Epson 3000 printer, complete with installed, new MIS Quadtone cartridges,
and a set of cleaning cartridges, for $520.00 total. (no shipping, the
seller was local)

Then, I bought a 35 foot parallel printer cable ($50.00, new), and a ream
of cheap 8.5" by 11" practice paper, and a ream of Epson 11" by 17" paper
(another $50.00, new), and began asking questions on the list, and
turning out test prints (small ones, to save on ink), until after 6
tries, I have something that I would not be ashamed to offer for sale on
eBay, where I do a lot of selling of my hand-rendered work... paintings
and drawings.

I am essentially still ignorant of what I am doing (I have Photoshop 5,
to manipulate my images, and prepare them for printing, purchased used on
eBay for $35.00), but I do have a slight edge, in that I am a bit of a
computer geek already (programming and Unix), and so am used to mastering
technical issues with the computer.

I intend to invest a significant amount of time, and a less significant
amount of money (the initial investments already having been made) in
mastering inkjet print making, but I also intend to earn significantly
more than the venture costs me, in the long run.

I chose B&W as my point of entry because it offered me a point of entry
with fewer variables to contend with than colour printing... and also,
because I am a great lover of B&W media, and do a lot of it anyhow... oil
paint, watercolour, charcoal, pencil, etc. I am not really interested in
just making copies of work that I have done in other media, or in
reproducing photos. I am more interested in printing the output of
graphic programs that I develop in C myself, and things that I produce
using my Wacom tablet, and software programs like Bryce, Poser, Ray
Dream, etc., which require a fine printer to exist in a non-digital form.

> My opinions on digital B&W prints change from day to day.  One day I
like
> them the next I prefer the prints of the wet darkroom.  I think I may
> continue to straddle the fence for a while to come, maybe never commit
> totally to one process.  I have worked with alternative printing
methods
> before and they seem to be the best for some projects.  This may be the
case
> with the quad inks.  But the one thing I have found for sure is that it
takes
> time, just like it did in the wet darkroom. Just like the wet darkroom
you
> need a big trashcan.  I have been told that I make good wet prints so
the
> learning curve is easier this time with digital because I know what I
want to
> accomplish but the problems are frustrating.

For me, digital imaging is the right way to go, as I am not a
photographer, and have no interest in doing my own developing (or space
for a darkroom), but I do have a powerful network of computers, and the
basic computing skills necessary to enter the field without climbing a
painful learning curve.

> I hate equipment problems....printer clogs, dead HD, finicky CD-RW
drives,
> scanners, software, etc. Getting it all to work and to work together is
a
> miracle.   Learning how to use PHotoshop is still a challenge but using
it
> doesn't turn me on like working in the wet did.  But the bottom line is
this
> is another part of the craft....I've got to plug thru it, make it
second
> nature so I can get on with making it another tool in my toolbin
because I
> dream of small books or portfolios.  It seems like the digital process
if
> well suited to some of these ideas (if I can get it all to work
together.)

I have some of the same sentiments, where easel painting is concerned,
but I recognise the power that the computer offers, and believe that it
offers so many positives to the painter who is willing to acquire the
skills, that it is well worth the effort. Paintings (and photographs) are
both forms of information. The computer is an information manipulation
device, and the Internet is an information distribution device. I have a
website, and am now earning a subsistence living, between sales on my
website, and more importantly, sales on eBay. The same computers that
allow me to sell my work, and buy my supplies, is now helping me to
produce more and more varied work, than I was capable of using only the
easel and sketch pad.

> Sometimes on this e-group, it seems like everyone is trying everything.
And
> there are so many variables that you can't necessarily compare your
workflow
> to another's workflow because equipment, software, hardware vary.  But
I
> think that the only way to get the craft behind you is to master ONE
thing,
> one ink, one printer, one paper.  Then when you know what the
boundaries are,
> then you can make an informed decision about the next step.  And, of
course,
> pray daily to the nozzle gods for clean nozzles.

I am very careful about making only one change at a time, where my
variables are concerned. However, I do not agree 100% with your idea of
mastering only one thing at a time. Somehow, in the course of 6.5 years
as a painter, I have managed to come reasonably close to mastering many
different media, subjects, genre, etc., although total mastery of
anything, is hard to even define. I am pretty good at what I do.

-wittig http://www.robertwittig.com/
A business is as honest as its advertisements.
.