Digital BW, The Print

Colin,

>--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
>> I'm not sure RC papers have made the grade yet,
>>but I like the surface and
>> price of the Ilford Smooth gloss and pearl papers.
>>They do seem to have a few defects with Ultra Tone inks, however.
>> [UT dusts in the deep shadows.]


>...
>I have tried [UC 2100 ink] Black Only on the pearl but find the green hue
>unacceptable in daylight.  ...

>I would like to know what hues the black ultratone displays under
>different lighting conditions?

I carried some test strips of the Ilford Smooth Glossy around to several
light sources, including bright, sunny daylight (but less than direct sun),
and I saw no green tint or metamerism.  This was also true of the Ultra Tone
that I mixed using the Epson UC Photo and Light black inks to make the
cyan-position dark gray ink that avoids the MIS shadow area dusting.  For
this approach, I also used the Epson Photo K.  Still, I see no green tint.

I thought the green tint/metamerism was coming from the Epson UC color inks
that are in the "B&W" 2100/2200 prints.  Does the green you see appear in
the shadows or midtones?

The specific RC paper seems to make a big difference in which inks are best.
With the cheap Epson Glossy Photo Paper (sold, for example, at our "big box"
stores like "Costco" over here) the MIS pigs are far better than Epson's.
The stock Ultra Tone has no bronzing and a (MIS Photo black) dmax of over
1.8, while the Epson-based UT version with Epson Photo K has a (pathetic)
dmax of 1.4 and bronzes.  On the other hand, for Ilford and Epson Premium
Luster, the Epson pigs do better.  But for spraying, even with these papers,
the MIS pigs seem to have a slight edge.  They seem to absorb the acrylic
spray better, at least in the 100% black areas.

It may be that people will want to find a paper they like, and then select
the inks based on that.

For now, I'm thinking the UT cyan and Photo black positions are all matter
in this regard.  That is, if the paper of choice dusts with stock UT, the
Epson-based cyan (dark gray) and Photo K are the ones that seem to take care
of the problem.  (I have not tested this on a hextone printer.)  The
high-load of the pigment seems to be the issue.  With the low-load light
inks, the MIS pigs seem as good as the Epson pigs even on the Ilford and
Epson Premium Luster papers.

The Epson-based cyan mix ratio for now (that is, my best guess based on
extrapolation of current data points) is 55% Epson Photo K and 45% Epson
Light black.  The mixing is not that critical, given the relatively close
densities of the two inks.  So, anyone could do this without super-accurate
scales.  I may try a 50/50 mix to see if that is close enough.  Then one
could just buy 7600 carts and pour them together -- bingo, a UT cyan &
inkset that doesn't dust.  If many people are interested in this MIS would
probably buy 10600 carts cheap and do the job for us.  The Epson-UC-based
cyan is not quite as warm as the MIS UT cyan, so the shadows are a bit
cooler -- not bad for the "selenium" neutral look.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com