Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., grdglass@a... wrote:
> Lawrence,
> 
> I am coming to the realization that the 2200 is different, in more 
ways than 
> one, from the 7600/9600, especially since the 7600/9600 custom 
profiles 
> cannot be used on the 2200.  I will dig out my samples printed by 
Epson for 
> all three models to refresh my memory on whether there was a color 
shift or 
> only a reflectivity shift.
> 
> Helene  
> 
> 
> > Perhaps it's a subtle difference but I don't think what Colin is 
describing
> > is in fact bronzing.  I print on Lustre and Glossy from my 9600 
using photo
> > black ink.  While there is a difference in reflectivity in the 
darkest
> > blacks I do not see any real bronzing.  The reason it's 
called 'bronzing' 
> > is
> > that when it occurs there is also a tonal shift, not just a 
difference in
> > the reflectivity of the various colors/densities of the ink.   
I've used
> > inks/papers that do really 'bronze' and once you've seen it it's
> > unmistakable.  Perhaps the 2200 is different enough from the 9600 
to be
> > producing the effect but I doubt it.
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Helene, Antonis and Lawrence,

Apologies for this belated response to the surface effects reported 
using the Epson 2100/2200.  The phenomenon, whether technically 
bronzing or not, does exist and is remarked upon on both sides of the 
pond.  However the reaction against the effect seems stronger in the 
British weekly Amateur Photographer, maybe because the magazine's 
general readership may seek glossy finishes.  In the 7 September 
issue a different reviewer compares the 2100 with the Canon S9000 and 
again refers to the effect and refers to it as "a bronzing or 
chroming effect".

I guess I will wait until I have seen some real life prints before 
deciding which way to go – and from where to order it having regard 
to warranty issues and price, Euros or otherwise!

Thank you all for your contributions.

Colin