Digital BW, The Print

Ernst wrote:

>> So, the star is the UltraChrome matte black, and the UltraChrome and
>> PiezoTone midtones are both excellent and about equal.

>...
>Quads and hexatones for an Epson 3000 and 9000 with an
>Ultrachrome black and Ultrachrome 50% to begin with and
>a fluid to mix the other tones then.

Rick wrote:

>Why not create quadtone inkset
>using standard black Epson pig. Inks?
>What dilutions might be required to match Cone driver?

Hopefully we'll be able to find an appropriate base.  I'll soon be receiving
some materials from MIS that may be part of an UltraChrome (UC) clone also,
including a new base.

I definitely see some potential steps forward in our quad insets based on
these new UC inksets.

The first obvious step is to see if we have a superior black for our
existing quads.  If the PiezoTone midtone problems are cured, the UC-K with
the PT midtones looks to be about as lightfast as any current technology can
get. The FS-N and VM-S are just behind that.  Recall that the UC
lighfastness for B&W is over 100 years.  I'd guess that the reduction in
lightfastness rating from the Archival inkset is really only in the UC color
inks.  So, that 200 year figure Epson originally claimed for the Archival
ink on EAM might not be that far off.

As aside on paper --

A 200 year ink on a 30 year paper (EAM/EEM) doesn't make much sense.  So,
with this new ink longevity, we need to find an appropriate paper.

For those who missed it, the UltraChrome inks are rated in the U.S. version
of the 7600 information download as having only a 30 year life.  The reason
for this is that Wilhelm is starting to look at paper life as well as
accelerated fading.  There are no standards for this yet, but his initial
report to Epson was that the EAM/EEM paper base would start to yellow in 30
years.  This is not the optical brightener yellowing that we are familiar
with, but yellowing that is probably caused by the paper's acidity.  So,
it's not that the UC inks have less lightfastness on EEM, it's that
EAM/EEM's paper base is looking much weaker than was originally represented
by Epson.  It may be that the skeptics were right -- it's just cheap paper.

Just because the EEM paper base starts to get a bit yellow in 30 years does
not necessarily mean than yellow affects the coating or image.  In a
subsequent talk, Wilhelm threw out 65 years as the predicted paper life.
Foreign Epson websites rate the UC inks on EEM at 75 years.  There just are
no standards, or quick and easy tests for paper life.

Nonetheless, I think it's the end of the line for "EAM"/EEM as a serious
paper for long term image permanence.  I have found an expert on paper
conservation who is going to test the paper for lignin and also has a line
to Wilhelm.  We'll have a much fuller story on "EAM"/EEM soon.  My current
view is that it's a great display and proofing paper, but we should use a
cotton or alpha cellulose paper for the old family photos, high-end sales,
or any use where the paper should look good for more than 30 years.

Some may have noticed that my latest curves -- for the 1290 -- included a
specific set for PhotoRag.  I still do most of my printing on EAM/EEM, but
I'm very interested in finding a true archival paper base that has at least
close to the image quality and image permanence of EEM.  So far, there are
not many good candidates.  It's hard to believe Epson can't make an alpha
cellulose version of EAM -- a name that it could then legitimately use.

Back to UC-derived inksets --

There are some interesting quad inkset alternatives I see for the 3000, et
al., and the UC & UC clone inks -- IFF (means "if and only if") those inks
work in the other printers.  Hopefully MIS will have a good UC clone so that
the inksets could either use the real Epson ink or the, presumably, more
affordable MIS ins.

I'd think FS/Piezo and VM inksets could used the UC & clone base inks and be
printable on glossy paper.  All it would take is a black ink switch to go
from one type of paper to the other.  Note that with the 3000, we can do
about 3 "black ink only" cleaning cycles to switch to the coated black
particle (glossy paper) -- much easier and cheaper than the 7600 switch.
(It's odd that Epson appears to have made a convertible inkset without the
hardware/driver ability to easily drain the black ink line only.  So, one
wastes a huge amount of other inks & $ in the 7600/9600 black ink switch.)

So, bottom line, between the UC inks and other experiments I'm doing, quads
just might take a leap forward this year.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com