Digital BW, The Print

You may be able to tell the diffference between 1.60 and 1.65...but 1.67 vs.
1.72 will be tough.  The higher you go the less visual difference the same
measured difference makes. But, I bet your wallet can tell the difference
between $.25/sheet and $1.25/sheet!


Robert

On 2/22/03 5:06 PM, "Bob_Michaels <bob@...>"
<bob@...> wrote:

> Paul: Thanks for bringing some objective data into play. Now in the
> subjective arena, should I be able to discern the difference between a
> D-Max of 1.72 and one that's in the 1.60-1.65 range? I suspect that if
> a print with 1.72 "looks good" then one with 1.60-1.65 should "look
> good" as well? Comment?
> 
> I must also add that my brain focuses much more on the content /
> emotion of the image rather than the quality of the print. So I can
> certainly live with any of these three papers.
> 
> Bob Michaels
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
> <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
>> Bob Michaels wrote:
>> 
>>> ... Critically comparing the HPR and EEM prints side by
>>> side, I simply can see no difference in the blacks, shadow detail or
>>> highlights. And, the base of the EEM is very slightly whiter than the
>>> HPR. ...
>> 
>> Out of curiosity I pulled some test strips and measured the whites and
>> blacks with the X-Rite spectrophotometer.
>> 
>> Whites:
>> 
>> Photo Rag - C = 0.03, M = 0.04, Y = 0.03, Visual = 0.04;
>> 
>> EAM -     C = 0.04, M = 0.04, Y = 0.02, Visual = 0.04.
>> 
>> So, for these batches of paper, the visual brightness is equal, the
> EAM is
>> slightly blue, and the PhotoRag is slightly magenta.  The PR
> readings were
>> the same from two separate batches.  The EEM/EAM has been fairly stable
>> recently, but did go through a period when it was distinctly yellower.
>> 
>> With respect to the blacks/dmax, PhotoRag has generally had about
> the best
>> that could be achieved by the FS/VM black ink.  It generally read about
>> 1.72.  On the old EAM, the FS/VM dmax would be about 1.65.  With the new
>> EAM/EEM, however, the FS/VM dmax has fallen to 1.60 or below,
> depending on
>> printer.
>> 
>> For most images, I find that as long as I get a dmax of about 1.65
> on matte
>> paper, it looks jet black.  In fact, except with ideal lighting, a matte
>> print dmax of 1.65 usually looks better side-by-side than a glossier
> print
>> with a 2.0+ dmax.  The reflections on even semi-gloss blacks eliminates
>> their advantages.  Of course, glass eliminates much of the advantage
> of the
>> matte paper.
>> 
>> Also, the new EAM/EEM seems to hold the high-load blacks better than
>> PhotoRag.  As such, for example, the new MIS matte black hits 1.69
> on EEM
>> with the 7500 and only 1.67 with PhotoRag.
>> 
>> (Note that EEM appears to be sold as EAM outside the U.S. and inside the
>> U.S. by outfits doing gray market.  They appear to be the same paper.)
>> 
>> Paul
>> http://www.PaulRoark.com
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other
> resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
> page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
> them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
> resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
> 
>