Digital BW, The Print

Peter: FWIW, my expereince was that you can load MIS VM ink carts in a
1280, use the Roark workflow and get same quality prints in the amount
of time necessary to learn how to do the same in a wet darkroom.
Ditto, the MIS FSN inks with Woolf workflow. Ditto, Black Only using
Clayton Jones workflow. None will be great but at least the quality as
a beginning wet darkroom worker having spent the same time. 

BTW, Epson replaced my 1280 under warranty even after I told them it
was ruined by a 3rd party flush cart. 

Bob Michaels

 --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, peter nelson
<peter@s...> wrote:
> At 09:27 AM 2/12/2003 +0000,
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> wrote:
> >Are you asking when simple reliable BW printing will be available or
> >when it will be available using color inks on the 2200?
> >
> >If you insist on using the the 2200 and color inks you will, it seems,
> >not be happy with the results.  If you use quadtone inks ( I only have
> >experience with MIS or Piezotones) you will get the quality you are
> >looking for.
> 
> 
> I don't care if I use the 2200.  I'm happy to use any wide format
> (13"x19" or bigger) printer.  The requirement is that the process
> does not void the printer's warranty and that I have some reason
> to be confident that *I* can get good results.
> 
> As I said in my original post, I have no doubt that SOME people
> can get quads to work well.   But the impression I get from
> reading this forum and others is that it's hit and miss, and that
> it depends on your tolerance for tweaking and playing under
> the hood.   I've read tons of posts from people who tried it
> really hard and never got good results.   I quoted one poster
> who said he tried quads for a YEAR and didn't get as good a
> result as his first print out of the box with his 2200.
> 
> I can teach anyone to make decent black and white prints
> in the darkroom in a day.  Not necessarily Ansel Adams,
> but black blacks, white whites, continuous tones (assuming
> they exist in the negative, properly developed, fixed, etc.
> It's a simple, predictable, straightforward process.  If you
> can follow simple directions it's easy.  I'm looking for a
> digital printing process that's similarly straightforward and
> reliable.
> 
> Some people here tell me we already have it; others say it will
> never exist, so there seems to be some divergence on that
> point!