Digital BW, The Print

Also to print another image you have to quit and reopen ImagePrint....I don't seem to be 
able to close the current window and open a new one or to open the next image in a new 
window....



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Kale" <stevekale@b...> 
wrote:
> 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.)