Digital BW, The Print

Paul,

Thomas sent me a sample print also.  I downloaded his file and printed it 
with my regular 1160 quadtone setup.  Using MIS VM with medium warm curve, 
and a gamma of 1.8, I could exactly match Thomas' print sample.  Of course, 
the ink colors were different, but print tonality and shadow/highlight 
separation looked the same.

Thomas used IP5's neutral setting, and his print does seem snappier than MIS 
VM medium warm.  Without a loupe, I can see more dots in the IP5 print from 
the highlights through the midtones than in the MIS print.

At first I was taken with IP5's B+W but I cannot get the color profiles to 
work on my 2200.  In my case, it seems like a cash cow for B+W only and so I 
have just about decided to stick with my 1160 and MIS and use the 2200 with 
custom profiles for color.  It will be interesting to see if Jon Cone's new 
system for the 2200 will have the ease of switching cartridges between his 
quads and Epson's colors.  I am not interested in dedicating the 2200 to 
quads or using a CIS with it.

Since the 2200 carts remember their levels and require no plugs, if someone 
came up with quad substitutes that you could just switch in and out, I would 
be the first customer. 

Helene 

> I received some samples of 2200 IP5 output today (thanks Tom Fors) and was
> curious how they compared to the quads many of us use.
> 
> In general, I think the 2200 output looks very good.  However, the dots in
> the highlights are apparent on some of the prints.  A 1600 dpi scan of the
> print makes it clear that much of this print is still a color print.  I was
> surprised at how much color is still used even at 50%.  Then again, the
> UltraChrome light gray ink is quite warm.  So, even if for no other reason,
> a fair amount of magenta and cyan has to be added to get the print neutral.
> 
> At any rate, looking at the highlight dots, I scanned a number of test
> strips at the 5% patch and used the Photoshop Histogram Standard Deviation
> as a measure of the relative roughness of the print at that point.  I think
> this gives a reasonable measure that correlates with visual appearance.  (I
> have no authoritative citation for this, however.)
> 
> At any rate, here are some measures of 5% patch standard deviations.  The
> lower the number, the smoother the print highlights.  I've also included 
> the
> 50% reading.  All samples are on EEM/EAM.  All were at 1440 as far as I can
> tell.
> 
> Printer/Driver-curve/Ink   5% Std. Dev.   50% Std. Dev.
> 
> 2200/IP5/Neutral tint     5.54       5.03
> 
> 870/neutral/MIS-VMS     2.15       3.56
> 
> 3000/Neutral/VMS       4.80       7.91
> 
> 1280/Neutral/MIS VM     2.56       3.38
> 
> 1280/Piezo/FS-N       3.04       4.34
> 
> 1280/Blk only/PT       7.46       10.2



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