Digital BW, The Print

I sent the following message to Jon Cone.  I did not intend for him 
to cause him grief over this technical issue of great interest to me.

Shilesh

Dear Mr. Cone,

Thank you for your post on the BW list.  My post was not intended to 
create a flap, not consciously at least.  I was excited by my 
findings, and wanted others to know of them.  My intent was to share 
a new way of exploring the ink-lay issues, which you have opened up 
with your experiment.  I apologize for the cynicism/sarcasm that 
crept in my post, and regret it disturbed you.

What we are all after is dotless, milk chocolate smooth, high Dmax 
prints that will last forever on the paper of our choice.  There have 
been many attempts, and surely many more to come.  In the end, there 
will be more than one way to achieve our desired goal.

I am curious about how the partitioned Piezography (and other RGB) 
methods deal with a true 4 color printer versus a 6 color printer.  I 
think we will find each of these printer classes require a unique 
approach to achieve the best results.  The clues are already there in 
the images from the 980 printer you have posted. But that is another 
discussion, in which I will participate more objectively.

Regards.

Shilesh


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Jon Cone <piezobw@c...> 
wrote:
> I do not know if there is enough time in the world to read the BW 
list as
> well as our own Piezography lists. I sleep little as it is.
> 
> But I think that I understand that I have caused a stir over at BW 
with the
> idea that I am dissing workflows and I am not. I would never put 
down any
> experimental printmaking. There is nothing greater to me than 
experimenting
> with process and especially print process.
> 
> My web page that illustrates a workflow process did so to illustrate
> longevity in inks and not any qualitative differences between the 
RGB
> process and PiezographyBW plugin. Now we are not experts on RGB 
workflow
> process and this is the first one we have ever printed. We did so 
to see why
> a customer's prints faded fast with the RGB process when it did not 
in
> Piezography. So we followed her workflow which was to:
> 
> take a grayscale image,
> Then she applied an output levels correction to it that made 0 , 15.
> Then she applied a curve called the John Woolf Full Spectrum Curve 
to it.
> Then she printed it through the EPSON driver setting the color inks 
option,
> and grayscale as the space. Then in advanced settings she chose 
EPSON -
> Matte Heavy Weight, ahe set the dpi to 1440, and she set the color 
settings
> to Photo Realistic and she printed. We printed to a 980.
> 
> Her results look great when first printed. Kudos to John Woolf for 
figuring
> out something like this using an RGB driver. I can see why this has 
been so
> popular. That there are many of these processes boggles our 
collective minds
> here and makes us smile at the ingenuity required!
> 
> What we wanted to do however, was see "how" it prints. "How" - 
meaning what
> inks print where. So we loaded up color inks except we put a clear 
cart in
> the black position so we could see the under inks. Using mono inks 
it is
> impossible to tell what prints where.
> 
> -- When we did it in color we noticed that in Woolf, the lightest 
tones are
> printed with the cyan ink. PIezographyBW plugin prints the light 
tones only
> with the yellow ink.
> 
> -- We noticed that Woolf also printed the mid tones with the cyan 
ink and
> PiezographyBW Plugin uses only magenta to print these after yellow 
has
> tapered out. 
> 
> -- We noticed that the Woolf 3/4 tones begin to phase out of cyan 
and
> tapered to instead mostly the yellow ink which had a screening of 
cyan and
> magenta and it made it appear as a gray. This is the position in 
which
> PiezographyBW begins to print cyan nearly full into 3/4 and then 
reducing
> slightly, but none the less - with a heaping of cyan ink, after 
tapering out
> magenta.
> 
> -- When we added the black cart in to the process, we were 
surprised to see
> that black ink carried so much information in the Woolf process.
> PiezographyBW uses a short black "plate" (if you know CMYK process -
 short
> is steep and does not extend past the 3/4 range, and most often 
falls far
> short of it. Short blacks are used with little GCR or UCR. 
PiezographyBW
> prints its deepest concentration of black ink over a significantly 
dark
> under printing of cyan. In Woolf, the deepest concentration of 
black ink is
> over very little ink at all. This is a significant difference.
> 
> Whether dedicated quad printers using RGB drivers think this is 
correct or
> not, this is how Quad Blacks are printed via a CMYK driver. We 
published
> this original method for IRIS nearly 10 years ago when we produced 
a table
> generator which could control mono inks. The use of bell shaped 
curves can
> be written with software that controls individual inks by supplying 
output
> values and the control is different than trying to do this in 
Photoshop
> because tables do not have restrictions and any point can be 
brought in or
> out or turned on or off. The early IRIS mono products we sold also 
used
> supplied pre-sets. Both our IRIS process, and our first EPSON 
process, used
> three inks in all overprint locations and PiezographyBW plugin uses 
two.
> Otherwise, very similar concept.
> 
> There are many reasons for not wanting to take a black long and 
that escapes
> the length of this already long post.
> 
> We rely in PiezographyBW, on under ink in a very prescribed fashion 
for
> longevity in the new PiezoTone original black position. So we 
allowed for
> the Black ink to be brought up in Optical Density to a new level 
with the
> use of a metal complex because we could rely on the undercolor of a
> completely stable ink (cyan position) and one which had 
extraordinary
> longevity. All shadow tones in PiezographyBW driver therefore are 
the result
> of two inks mixing (cyan and black position). What is left is the 
mixed
> compound. That is what we tested and settled on for an endpoint 
which was
> similar to current products using our driver.
> 
> The Woolf process does not afford this type of protection to the 
shadows.
> The shadows were made instead with black ink and a rather large 
amount of
> yellow with small % of cyan and magenta. This compound is not good 
for
> longevity. That it apparently extends past 50% was particularly 
alarming for
> us to see. We never saw that coming. In Woolf the black ink carries 
the
> majority of the 50% and higher tonal info - completely opposite way 
of
> working from PiezographyBW which carries with magenta and cyan.
> 
> So we did not do this experiment to either dis nor dismiss RGB 
workflows but
> only to see why an ink's longevity would perform differently with 
one
> software over another. And we did not do this for a "marketing 
advantage".
> Although there will be a replacement for our current software, we 
also like
> selling inks to other software users and that can include RGB 
driver users.
> So no underlying untold story. Just that the story did not have a 
preface I
> suppose, or people are looking for a story which was not there.  8^|
> 
> I hope that everyone understands that EPSON piezo printing can not 
really
> accommodate much more than 130% total inks - sometimes more is 
possible, and
> often only less - the paper is critical. So maximum black is not 
created by
> printing 100% black at the maximum position - lest the CMY 
transitions are
> thrown off. You do not write Quad tables from black to white, 
rather from
> white to black so you can eliminate as much dot as possible. This 
is not a
> limitation, but just how it is done with quads through 4 channels. 
If you
> can do this, you can under print black and see where it becomes 
darker than
> printing it in full by itself. It takes a great deal of different
> combinations and measuring, but it is possible to exceed the full 
black on
> its own by multiplying the densities of the cyan position and the 
black
> position. This is what CMYK drivers afford.
> 
> We have a number of projects in house which can print quads and 
could make
> for really nifty products for those who want to produce their own 
quad
> routines - but it would need an ink limiter on the GUI because the 
tendency
> is for a user to load up the inks. It is surprising how little 
total ink is
> needed and how little can actually be used before it pools and 
puddles. We
> probably will always release profiled product for control. And if 
people
> want to use different inks - it is easy enough to knock an ink off. 
So we do
> not view the profiles as a way to limit others inks, but rather to
> streamline the process for those who do not have time to 
experiment. We
> never published any comments as far as I am aware that stated our 
software
> would not work with MIS inks. MIS bumped off the original inks 
rather well.
> We're trying to make the best inks, and as they get bumped off, 
we'll be
> continuously developing better ones and someday we may get a moment 
to catch
> our breath. Maybe we won't. This is competition and free market in 
USA!
> Whew!
> 
> Now the EPSON driver may print 100% black with either a little or 
now I read
> "no" undercolor. That is if either we did the workflow wrong or 
Sileesh did
> not follow our process. If the customer did not do the Woolf process
> correctly than this is going to be very alarming, that users 
experiment on
> top of experiments. Stable workflow is essential to publishing 
predictable
> longevity data (our ultimate goal).
> 
> I have not read all the posts in regard to the viewing of the web 
page. But
> the concept of some untold story seemed to disturb me last night 
when users
> on my list said things were becoming a controversy here because of 
it. I
> realize that the BW list is made mostly of RGB process printers. 
Monday we
> are going to see how the Randall flow works and I do not want 
anyone to
> assume we are doing this to discredit these workflows. On the 
contrary. We
> need to know which of our three PIezoTone black ink positions are 
suitable
> for these processes and will try to determine a caution statement 
based on
> looking at the popular workflows. Certainly if there are any 
processes
> unpublished and in question - we will appreciate receiving them. We 
want to
> support these RGB process authors. But we want to do so responsibly 
to their
> users. I have not heard of anyone ever expressing that longevity 
might be
> influenced by software.
> 
> However, longevity is not just based on inks and paper - but also 
software
> process. And we are trying to become responsible in every way we 
know how.
> Our intentions were not to stir up bad feelings but make people 
aware of
> their needs when they choose our products. We did not used to have 
workflow
> customers, or rather we did not have very many - just a sprinkling.
> Apparently this has changed, and it requires us to change as a 
company to
> accommodate new ways of using our inks.
> 
> When we made the PiezoTones we did not think that we needed a black 
position
> which was as stable as the grays because our driver afforded the 
ability to
> go towards greater dMAX and if the prints we're light abused they 
would fall
> back to levels which were the norm. Also, no one yet has really 
released a
> pure pigment black. Current black pigments are not dark enough for 
that. A
> pure "pigmented" black means a dispersion - and the only 
dispersions are
> non-pigment. So now we finally found a way to produce a pure 
pigment black
> which is dark enough at printing, and which will end up at a higher 
dMax
> after the competing pigmented blacks lose their 5% fade or 15% 
fades from
> the dispersion (what colorants the pigments were dispersed in).
> 
> But not all people want this longevity - if there are greater 
levels of
> Optical Density available. MIS, SUNDANCE and PiezoTone original 
black
> positions do lose density. We want to give users choices and we 
will do so
> by supplying fade data with our three black inks on Oct 30. The 
Museum Black
> will of course be the best choice from us for RGB, but it may also 
be
> possible to use the original black with some of the RGB process and 
we will
> supply those on the new labels. Portfolio Black may be a better 
choice. This
> is all we are trying to do.
> 
> So I hope I have given enough information so that the experiment 
used by
> Shilesh which he "more or less" tried to duplicate our experiment 
is not
> revealing of anything more, or some story. I do not think that we 
published
> the Woolf process settings which we used on that web page though, 
and I am
> unaware if there are many flavors of it. But this is the process 
which the
> customer used - and she was the only person to have actually sent 
us prints
> with fade and the way which she printed them. We were trying to 
eliminate
> all possible things like environment and coatings and when we 
learned that
> PiezographyBW wasn't used and that matched to others who had posted 
problems
> too, well we naturally wanted to see how that could have any 
affect. And if
> it did affect it, to devise a way to specify our products either 
for or not
> for RGB workflow and non-PiezographyBW process. And that is the 
whole story.
> It really is not very exciting unless you are intrigued by data 
gathering.
> But that is the limit of the intrigue.
> 
> I think that there are always more than one way to accomplish the 
same goal.
> I love it when anyone tries to build a better mouse trap, or who 
like myself
> attempts to upset the apple cart! We prefer direct control of the 
inks
> ourselves because this has always been our method. Just as long as 
the
> prints look good - right? Who cares how its done. Now if it doesn't 
look
> good, who cares how long it lasts, right? We have been moving these 
last few
> months towards making them last real long - longer than ever. To 
bring wARM
> stability in line with fade longevity - and the last thing in the 
world we
> wanted to do was piss off a ton of RGB process users - and then 
make them
> think we were dissing their workflow. If anyone felt that way - 
please
> accept my apologies. We are all working for the same cause.
> 
> And in advance, I may not be able to read the replies - so please 
be so kind
> as to :cc me if you need additional info at piezobw@c... or if
> you would like me to read your comments, or you would like a 
response from
> me on BW list. In order to read BW list we would need to fold ours 
into it
> so there was only one, and instead we are leaning towards putting 
our list
> on a DISCUS PRO server which we have bought and now set up - so 
that the
> topics and individual threads can be organized in folders and will 
allow us
> to read what we need to while all users can discuss whatever topics 
they
> choose in a more organized manner. If Digital Black and White would 
like to
> join us on the server it could be as a separate entity and with the 
same
> moderators. Then we would have time to read both lists because of 
the better
> organization of the threads! Martin and Antonis contact me off list 
for a
> sneak peak of our discussion software and if this would be of 
interest to
> you.
> 
> There would not be advertising and this usually consumes about 40% 
of my
> time, dismissing the add add to continue to a message. :(
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> 
> Jon Cone
> Piezography Brand Inks and Software
> Cone Editions Press, Ltd.
> InkjetMall