Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> The Transfer Function is a crude control compared to the Photoshop Image
> Adjustment curves.  They are, unfortunately, not the same.

Certainly they are not the same, the functions are much more limited. Adjusting them 
fits better a WYSIWYG approach to the transition from a digital image to print and 
they should be used for fine tuning only.

> 
> >... about 40 sheets of paper+ink ...
> >I got only one blueish (not "cool") fairly
> >close to an acceptable print ...
> 
> Sorry to hear that.  The system works very well for many of us.
> 
> >What I don't understand is why there isn't 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 understand the Eboni clear base is not available.

> 
> 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.

The problem I have with the variable tone (UT) is that I can only adjust curves blindly 
and in RGB since I ca not tell how the colors are going to translate into grays, how 
they mix and so on. Multiply that by a number of papers and/or other variables.

Regards, Andu

> 
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com