Digital BW, The Print

Martin,

My apologies for not responsing sooner.  I had to go back and look at 
all of the 2200/2100 prints from the technical exchange and numerous 
prints submitted to the Tom O'Connell exchanges.

My assesment:  Yes, without exception, prints made with 2200/2100 
prints are more dotty in highlights than with 1280 printers.  It 
seems independent of workflow.  My sample contains IP5, Stylus RIP, 
Epson driver, IProof RIP,and OPM.

My guess is that the dots are caused by the relatively high density 
of the light black ink.  So, if it was replaced with a lighter 
density ink, say equivalent of yellow position Piezography, then a 
simple adjustment curve could be used to bring the repsonse back to 
linear.

Hope this helps.  Regards.

Shilesh

Still searching for hiher Dmax!!

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Martin Wesley" 
<mwesley250@e...> wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Shilesh Jani" <shilesh.jani@s...>
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 3:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Off-center prints on Epson 1200
> 
> 
> > Bob,
> >
> > I agree with Martin.  The 1280 is a good choice.   I recently
> > participated in a Technical Print Exchange.  Comparing the 1260 
and
> > 1280, the prints were very similar in ramp smoothness and 
dottiness.
> > Both printers were  A LOT less dotty than the newer 2200 printer
> > using a number of different RIPs.  So, unless you find a good 
1260,
> > you can confidently go with the 1280.
> >
> 
> Shilesh,
> 
> Unfortunately, I wasn't a member of the technical exchange but I 
have
> communicat3ed with Clayton and I gather he is writing up a summary 
plus some
> additional info.
> 
> From the samples you have you feel the 1280 and 1160 out performed 
the 2200?
> That's too bad. I was hoping that the 2200 would represent a step 
forward
> but I guess the mechanics really are not changing and the factors 
that
> govern "dottiness" and smooth tonality as simply staying constant.
> 
> Martin
> 
> (snip earlier)