Digital BW, The Print

Very tough call on the B&W to my eye.  Again it is a bit frustrating as the watermark 
for B&W has, again to my eye, a slight purple tint to it and it is so dominant across a 
page.  In the couple of prints I have done thus far, IP prints seem more saturated in 
the darkest parts of the image (without a noticeable loss of detail across the image...) 
and so the QTR versions appear a little "washed out" by comparison.  I would be really 
interested in what others (Carl?) think as my testing here is by no means scientific.  
For completeness, I have been printing to Hahnemuhle Photorag using the 
ep2200mkb_grayPhRag308_2880 profile in IP and comparing it with QTR at 
1440x720HQ.  (I am a bit worried that printing at 2880dpi is saturating the page too 
much...?)

Some other initial comments:   I find the IP user-interface a little "cheap and clunky".  
The look is more OS9 rather than OS-X.  If you have a landscape print you have to 
look at the thing by twisting your neck - the image rotates rather than the page 
layout. (Am I missing something here?)  Setting Embedded to Prompt in Color 
Management produces a result that is nothing short of annoying.   The preview image 
is of very low quality.  I don't think they have bothered to get their paper sizes right, 
eg, unless I am mistaken, A3 is actually set up for A3+ dimensions.  All liveable with I 
guess but not what you would expect for a large pile of crisp, albeit falling-in-value, 
greenbacks....


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, <Alan.Huntley@c...> wrote:
> Steve,
> 
> I agree with your disdain of the watermark. The size of the letters makes it difficult 
to make accurate judgements when comparing prints. Wait 'till you print B&W...the 
letters are solid black which REALLY plays with your eyes when comparing shadow 
values.
> 
> I would be very interested to hear your comments regarding IP's grayscale 
capability when you feel ready to post a few opinions.
> 
> Alan Huntley
> 
> > 
> > From: "Steve Kale" <stevekale@b...>
> > Date: 2003/10/13 Mon PM 04:01:33 EDT
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] ImagePrint 5.6
> > 
> > Thanks for the comments.  I agree that the IP colour print I just did is ever so 
slightly 
> > "brighter" and "less saturated" (sky tones do indeed appear a more natural blue 
vs 
> > perhaps a slight tourquoise tint).  I am comparing the IP print using the daylight 
> > Hahnemuhle Photorag profile for 2880dpi against an identical print using the 
Epson 
> > driver and a profile for Hahnemuhle Photorag from 
> > 
> > http://lenscraft.com/profiles/bullock/2200/index.html
> > 
> > which has been designed for 1440x720 HQ (this print has also been sprayed with 
3 
> > coats of Lyson print spray).  The most annoying thing is the watermark which is 
over 
> > the entire print making it impossible for a decent comparison -  I understand the 
> > need for a watermark but this is complete overkill!!
> > 
> > I am now printing a B&W image (given that this is the focus of this forum) and 
will 
> > compare it with the same image printed using Quadtone RIP using Carl's 2200 
> > profiles 50:50 cool/warm.
> > 
> > Regards
> > 
> > Steve
> > 
> > (PS the colour image I was printing is of the Utah desert with a detailed 
foreground 
> > with brown tones and a blue sky speckled with white clouds - the horizon is low 
at 
> > about 1/4 of the height of the page.  It was Fuji Provia 100 35mm film scanned 
on an 
> > Imacon 848 at 6300ppi. Not a bad image to highlight the points you noted.)