Digital BW, The Print

Peter,

I had about an hour or so last night to play around with BO printing, again.
Since I had run out of PR, I decided to run a
few experiments using EAM and SPE on my 1160. The EAM, using a media setting
of PQIJ, produced a print that was
somewhat light, but did not exhibit the unwieldy contrast that I saw when I
printed on PR. It's not WYSIWYG BO printing,
like Clayton Jone's experience, but the gamma could be easily controlled in
PS. A softproof set up could be established
allowing accurate previewing of the printed image. I found that EAM, using
the typical media setting of HW Matte, produced
a print that was much too light; though the contrast was acceptable. The SPE
was much too light and started to exhibit the
contrast problems that I saw with PR; IMO not worth the effort.

An unexpected surprise, though, came about when I decided to try printing on
my Epson 1270, on EAM, using the Epson
standard dye inkset for this printer. I chose BO ink, and printed one image
at gamma 2.2 (I think this is the value Clayton uses
on his 870) and one image at gamma 1.8. The overall tonality was stunning,
contrast was certainly within any acceptable
range, and the prints looked quite neutral. The 2.2 print was too dark for
my taste, but the 1.8 print was just about perfect! OK,
what am I trading off, here? Longevity? Since I'm fairly old now and I don't
sell my prints, longevity is not a major concern
of mine. Gorgeous print quality is! :>) Yes, dots are visible under a
magnifying glass or loupe and, also, to my daughter's young
eyes when examined a very close distance, but, at normal viewing distances,
you would be hard pressed to see any dots. I'm
finally encouraged and "fired up" to continue experimenting with BO
printing. Are you listening, Clayton? I'm not saying that BO
printing will replace my VM prints, but it could be another useful quiver in
this photog's toolbox. I think that with certain
images--old wooden buildings, stormy landscapes, etc--BO printing could
provide an extra "edge." I wouldn't use it, for instance,
for something like a snowscape; dots in the infinite number of lighter grays
would probably be much too noticeable.

Just thought I'd toss out my latest findings playing around with BO
printing. Clayton - this is basically what I was going to send
you, offlist.

Wishing everyone a happy Thanksgiving holiday,
Alan Huntley

----- Original Message -----
From: "peter_in_seattle" <lists@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 3:10 PM
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Seeking black-only workflow info


> Alan,
>
> I was trying the BO workflow for fun, mainly because the grays (color)
> cartridge had run out, but since my new FS-N inkset arrived shortly after
I
> began the BO experiment, I didn't get too far with it.
>
> Generally, I'd agree with your observations about fairly high contrast and
light
> tonality. In comparison to a standard quadtone print, I'd have to say it
doesn't
> hold up. But in comparison to, say, Epson OEM inks on Epson Photo Glossy
> paper, it was much more rich and pleasant to look at. I haven't tried it
with a
> really good image yet, however; nor did I print a step wedge. As I said,
my
> attentions were diverted by the FS-N inks.
>
> I'm using a Mac Powerbook G4 with OS X 10.1.5. Not sure what version of
the
> 1160 printer driver I have, because it's not so clear on OS X, but the
Epson
> Printer Utility is v1.20. One thing I did do is try to tweak local values
in
> Photoshop, rather than using something global like the Epson brightness
> slider. I left the Epson settings unchanged. I'm sorry, I don't recall
what they
> were, but I used the settings that someone else on the list posted
recently, so
> you might do a search.
>
> Once I get the kinks worked out of the FS-N workflow, I may again try to
> experiment with black-only. Please keep me posted on your progess with it.
>
> Cheers,
> Peter