Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, 
"slightlyoutoffocus" <by_design@y...> wrote:
> I have been experimenting with the 980 and the MIS VM inkset for 
> several months now, and have achieved good, but not great results.  
> Following advice from this Forum, I also have been using the Roark 
> 1160 curves (usually the cooler ones of the four).  I have not seen 
> the grainyness to which you refer.  My biggest problem has been, when 
> printing on LPM paper, the Roark curves yield the greatest visual 
> density at about 80% of the greyscale and then lighten and become 
> muddy on up to 100%.  I can partially fix this by using the Transfer 
> function in Photo Shop's Print Setup screen.  But, without a 
> densitometer and hours of free time, I still don't have a good linear 
> response, especially in the dark end of the range.
> 
> I fear that the 980 is an orphan printer with little support in the 
> quadtone pigment printing community.  I will definitely replace mine 
> someday.  But if your post brings some useful information out of the 
> woodwork, I might reconsider.
> 
> Kiefer Elliott
> Vancouver, Canada
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ccolbertbw" 
> <ccolbert@u...> wrote:
> > Hi all.
> > I bought a set of MIS VM quadtones before checking in detail which 
> workflow 
> > to use. Appears that there is no workflow for the Epson 980 for 
> these inks on 
> > the MIS site. I am using the latest 980 Epson driver on PC. Doesn't 
> seem to 
> > have the halftone option.
> > 
> > I started with the Roark 1160 workflow using EAM paper. A  5% 
> increment 
> > step wedge looks reasonable although perhaps the 95% and 100% are a 
> bit 
> > close. However, I can see darkish dots in the 5% easily without a 
> loupe. 
> > Interestingly, all but the 90-100% look grainy. Almost like each 
> density is 
> > marbled.  The nozzle check looks fine. This is at 1440 and set for 
> the Matte 
> > paper per the workflow. Going to 2880 helps a bit but not much in 
> the overall 
> > look. The resulting prints have an obvious inkjet print look to 
> them because of 
> > the coarseness.
> > 
> > Finally, the question. Is this coarseness what I should expect from 
> this printer/
> > ink combination?  I recently saw some prints in a show that were 
> labeled 
> > carbon pigment digital that looked like platinum prints. They were 
> very warm, 
> > but subtle and had a delicate glow. Far from the inkjet look I am 
> getting now.
> > 
> > Costa Colbert

For information purposes only; it won't solve the problem.

I use the 980 along with the 1160 but with the MIS FS ink set.  John 
Woolf has a workflow for both machines.  Both work very well in that 
there are no visible dots unless you use a loupe.  For the 1160, I 
prefer the workflow by Jeff Randall, no dots even with a loupe.

The Roark flow also gives good results on the 1160 with the FS inks, 
but dots are visible with a loupe.  Randall's workflow is the best, 
IMHO.

Harry Lockwood