Digital BW, The Print

In a message dated 11/18/2002 8:18:23 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
mark@... writes:

> After all my bellyaching, I might still actually consider a dye 
> version of the 9600. I'm back to that age old question: is it better 
> to have a print that looks great today, but that might fade in time, 
> or one that's unexciting now, but you know that it'll remain 
> consistently unexciting for decades to come?
> 
> I come back to two visions:
> Dyes: Charcoal Blacks
> Pigments: Veiled Blacks
> 
> MT
> 
Mark, with integegrity, and the utmost in high standards being at the heart 
of your work, How can you risk your reputation and consider a dye based 
printer?
One premature fade episode and your screwed! Better off going to lightjet?
I think a gallery rep or curator should decide for you, or at least give an 
opinion. Maybe your too close to the forest to see the trees? Your stress is 
even giving me chest pain 3000 miles away. Your the only one I can think of 
that is very unhappy with the ultrachrome blacks, but if Mark Tucker isn't 
happy with the look, then I have to look at my own standards and raise the 
bar if I can. 
Any idea if image print delivers a better black with the matt black inks?
No 9600! still on the fence.
Steve M.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]