Digital BW, The Print

Mike  -
 
From the various 'specs' it appears that the 'best' ink/paper DMax today is not as dense as the best silver/developer DMax.  It seems to me, however, that this comparison is not really valid except in a statistical sense.  From a personal point of view, I am beginning to realize that we really are working in a different medium.  It's still photography I guess, if the initial image is achieved with the help of a lens of some type.  Today, we still strive to make our output look like traditional silver prints.  In the not to distant future we will have the technology to achieve that.  But, the digital processes, even when you begin with a 'photographic' image, has much more potential for creativity than any previous photographic process.  It seems to me that we are not involved in evolution, but revolution.
 
But, this is a revolution mostly in the technical sense.  The 'traditional' b&w images won't cease to have value.  The great b&w images were great because they were art.  The new great b&w images will be great for the same reason, not because of the process with which they are done.  I believe, however, that we will begin to see more and more b&w art images that go where b&w has not been able to go before.  The digital processes allow us to control tonality in ways that we never dreamed possible. 
 
Also, through Paul's efforts (and a few others) the technology to achieve truly creative b&w imagery will be available to many more people than the darkroom of yesteryear could hold.   This is going to make for a great creative dialog. 
 
This is an exciting time for anyone with an interest in creative imagery.  Look around at your local galleries and club groups.  You'll already see some great new images 
 
So, jump in.  This is really great fun.
 
Tom Baker
 
 
Paul Roark <paul.roark@...> wrote:
Mike,

Welcome.

>...
>... upcoming Epson 4000, .. I've read that it's supposed
>to acheive a DMax of 2.1 on glossy media and
>1.69 on matte media.  ...

That's about normal for most of the more expensive, modern Epson printers.
A 0.1 dmax difference is well within what you could get from a single
printer from time to time.  In comparing dmax's the densitometers, paper
selection and batch, shade of the paper under the paper you're reading all
would affect the readings.  As such, comparisons with what others have
measured might be misleading unless all the variables are held constant.

I think, realistically, the big differences are between matte and RC/glossy
papers, and between the pure pigment and the hybrid pigment-dye inks.  RC
papers get a better dmax.  More dye means higher dmax -- and more fading and
warm shifting.

The Epson Matte black is about as deep a pure pigment matte black as there
is, with MIS Eboni and PiezoTone Museum right there with it.  (Actually,
about 0.1 - 0.2 behind on average, but the cooler tone of the Eboni/museum
make them look darker, in my opinion.)  They are all very lightfast.  The
hybrid blacks are not in the same league if stability matters to you, but
the dmax's can be impressive.

In comparing the visual differences between various papers, I think the
densitometer readings can be misleading.  The glossy papers give very high
dmax readings, but the reflections in the real world often eliminate this
advantage.  A 1.65 matte inkjet print can look better than a 2+ glossy
pigmented print.  Under glass, if you are at 1.6 or above with the inkjet, I
doubt anyone is going to see any difference between the good silver print
and a matte inkjet print.  I hang them together and they look very similar.
Of course, if you use dye on an RC paper you're really looking at a
potentially huge dmax, but as the dmax gets higher, the eye's ability to
distinguish those shades decreases.  Above 2.0 with an RC paper or 1.65 with
a matte paper and the visual differences are not that great, in my opinion.

I think you'll be pleasantly surprised by how good the matte papers look
with today's good pure pigment black.  It's a different look when not under
glass, but as an old silver printer, I've actually come to prefer the matte
look.  I really dislike the RC glossy look, and the semi-gloss or pearl
papers just don't make it either, in my view.  All the RC papers I've tried
have "bronzing" or other surface defects that are not very appealing.

Digital B&W is great fun and the technology is definitely ready for prime
time.  It will, of course, get better, but where we're at now is very
satisfying even for former darkroom printers.

Enjoy your journey.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com




Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- Include your full name with your message.
- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames
- Complete your Yahoo profile.
- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]