Digital BW, The Print

Steve,

>...I too am just now setting up a 7500 for B&W fine art printing
>...

>The partitioned workflow approach: When it works well, it works very
>well also, but as far as I know,  there is only a set of curves
>available for the MIS VM inks and the 7000,

If I don't get a solution soon to the problems I've run into with the new
inkset, I'll just make an improved version of the existing vm-s inkset and
write curves for the 7500.  Since the vm in the 7000 works, I'm quite sure
we'll at least have some viable Epson-driver inkset to fall back on.

>... for the 7500, and am ... using Epson Archival Black
>(drawn out of a 7500 cartridge and diluted with clear Epson
>base stock) for the gray positions,

What clear base are you using?  My initial experiments with the MIS clear
base looked fine, but they did not do well in a fade test.  I don't know
whether it is the MIS clear base or whether the Epson Archival black just
does not perform well diluted.

My impression of Epson Archival Matte K is that it is great as a black for
RC paper -- the highest pigment dmax I've seen.  It is also solid on EEM at
the 100% spot in terms of fade resistance.  At the 50% patch it is not quite
as good, dropping 0.02 units versus 0.00 for Epson and MIS Photo Ks.

Why didn't Epson use the Archival black in the UC inkset?

Why does new Epson UC Photo K not have quite as high a dmax?

I hate to even mention the possibility, but does Epson Archival K have some
dye in it?  The diluted performance is similar to what I see with MIS FS/VM
K.  This just does not make sense.

I will soon test new 1000 Arc K diluted with MIS's new UC base to see if
there are any differences.  However, for now, I do not recommend Epson 7500
k in any diluted solution.

I think we really need to find a cooperative company with a high-end fade
tester that can hold the humidity up to where it should be.  My tests just
do not show any beneficial effect from the Epson coatings.  The last test I
did was even on a water bath to try to raise the humidity -- no effect.

I think paint and coatings companies, among others, have these machines.  If
anyone has any contacts with such companies, perhaps we could get a little
free test time.

I also think Cone and Zeiss should hire RIT to compare their new matte
blacks to Epson's Archival black.  If RIT tests show the same results I get,
advertising that the new matte black beats the black Epson uses in its "200
year" "Archival" inkset might be real impressive.  (The Epson representation
is still out there on non-U.S. Epson websites.)

If the Epson coating is mostly hype, we need to know it.  The new base that
has been developed allows third party RC compatibility with no coating on
the particles.  My tests indicate these are excellent inks for our uses.  I
have no interest in paying Epson's prices if the coatings do not add to
longevity.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com