Digital BW, The Print

Paul -

If I follow, there are 3 considerations: tonal integrity, longevity, 
and price. No doubt, dye inks are a poor solution with respect to 
longevity and price. If, however, we were to use a color inkset with 
excellent longevity and value, then the question boils down to tonal 
integrity. 

Perhaps I can re-state the question: Given pigmented inkset of 
comparable economy and longevity, what is the compelling reason to 
favor quadtone printing done with 4 or more inks, versus 
the "virtual" or "simulated" quadtone available through Photoshop ?

Thanks !

- Ken Lee



> A perfectly-profiled 1280 with Epson dye ink can make B&W prints 
that look
> very good -- in some light and for a little while.  However, even 
if you get
> the cross-overs/color tints out of the system when the print is 
fresh, with
> differential fade of the dyes there will be color shifts.  Also, 
the photo
> will suffer from "metamerism" -- tone shifts as the display life is 
changed.
> 
> Probably most of us have gone through the drill of trying to use 
color inks
> for B&W.  The 2200 might make the grade, but until I have seen the 
results
> of long-term fade tests (which I, among others, are doing) I'm 
going to
> remain a bit skeptical that Epson has entirely solved the problem.
> 
> Actually, a big factor you might want to consider is cost.  At 
least with
> the MIS ink, the cost is very low compared to Epson inks -- 
especially if
> you buy bulk ink and either load carts yourself or use a continuous 
inking
> system.
> 
> So, a spare printer with quads might make experimenting with 
digital photos
> both more satisfying and less expensive.
> 
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com