Digital BW, The Print

px3n120x@... wrote:

>... CIS ... FS was
>that I had to spend time daily unclogging the black ...

The co-solvent in the black ink evaporated through the CIS tubing -- a real
problem if not used very regularly.

>... was recommended (highly I would add) the UltraTones.

>It never made sense to me why people chose to colorize
>(curves) B&W images before printing specially that
>Photoshop allows for curves adjustments just before
>printing (transfer functions) ...

The Transfer Function is a crude control compared to the Photoshop Image
Adjustment curves.  They are, unfortunately, not the same.

>... about 40 sheets of paper+ink ...
>I got only one blueish (not \ufffdcool\ufffd) fairly
>close to an acceptable print ...

Sorry to hear that.  The system works very well for many of us.

>What I don\ufffdt understand is why there isn\ufffdt a plain
>Eboni based set of inks even if on the worm side ...

I tried.  The clear bases I have available to me do not appear to be
compatible with Eboni.  The resulting inksets would settle unpredictably.

So, I'm sticking to the MIS 7600/2200 inkset as an input.  That inkset was
carefully engineered as a set.  So, it's totally compatible.  There probably
will be some FS-like inksets coming out of my current efforts to make
"no-workflow," cheap systems for non-photographers -- so genealogists and
scrapbook makers can print archival B&W images.


> ... cool and worm shades can be so
>subjective and depend on other factors besides the
>ink.

That was a big reason for the variable-tone approach.  It's flexible.  I can
tame even the papers that print with different tones in the shadows and
highlights.  No single-hue inkset can deal with this.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com