Digital BW, The Print

Thanks, Mitch, for your input.  I appreciate your take on ImagePrint 
as I do want to consider that option fully also.

Yes, I am quite concerned about the waste involved in switching from 
Photo to Matte Black, although this would be far more of a problem 
with the 7600/9600 than with the 2200, where I think you waste about 
$1 worth of ink.  I had been thinking of starting off with a 13" 
printer and then working my way up to WF, but I'm not really sure.  
Perhaps it would be better for me to start wider and just get the big 
purchase out of the way.  We'll see.

And, yes, the 4000 is definitely an option, considering that 
switching blacks will just be a software change.  But part of me 
considers the 17" size neither here nor there.  It neither offers the 
options of starting off real cheaply, as with a 13" printer, and nor 
does it offer the option of producing the largest prints I'd like to 
do.  So, again, I'm not sure yet.

Plus, another consideration, for me, is that Epson is claiming far 
better black and white performance for the 4000.  Now, while I don't 
intend to endlessly speculate on what these changes will be over the 
next 3 months, I'm nonetheless concerned as to whether the 4000 will 
be released with better drivers that will eliminate metamerism in the 
same way a RIP does.  Obviously, a color & B&W solution that doesn't 
need a RIP would be both cost-effective and versatile.

Of course, a driver improvement that eliminated metamerism would, I 
assume, be an upgrade that could be applied to the 2200/7600/9600 as 
well.  If the 4000's drivers do perform much better, I can hardly 
imagine that owners of other Ultrachrome printers would be content to 
use drivers that as not as efficient, and I hardly think it would be 
wise for Epson to let owners of those other printers suffer from 
problems that have been eliminated in software.

Like I said, I don't intend to indulge in endless, idle speculation, 
but being able to purchase a 7600 with improved drivers would be much 
preferable to buying a 7600 plus having to spend $1500 for a RIP.  In 
fact, it might well be the difference between my getting a 7600 or 
not, so I can't help but wonder.

Well, at this point, the decisions are mine, including whether I care 
to wait until January and see what the 4000 brings.  As in life, 
there aren't any absolute choices, I suppose.  After everything sinks 
in, I'm sure I'll just make a choice that seems best for me.

Thank again for the input.

Mike


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mitch Alland 
<malland@x> wrote:
> For: Mike Botelho
> 
> > Also, there's the upcoming Epson 4000 that will supposed have 
drivers
> > that will handle B&W better. (Will this mean new drivers for the
> > 2200/7600/9600 that also do better?) Plus, having Photo Black and
> > Matte Black available as a software change makes it all the more
> > viable as a printer for both color and B&W. (Though I'm unsure if
> > I'd be willing to pay that much more than the 2200 for a few extra
> > inches. At that point, why not just spend a bit more and go with 
the
> > 7600 and get an impressive size increase, I think, maybe.)
> 
> I have a 7600 and am printing with ImagePrint. First, my take on 
> ImagePrint: I am very happy with it -- B&W is spot-on neutral 
without 
> metamerism, and the TintPicker allows for subtle "toning" of the 
print 
> if you want to make the prints, say, warmer or have a selenium-
toned 
> look. In my view the results are as good as B&W prints I previously 
> made using Piezography. For color prints, I have found the 
ImagePrint 
> paper profiles to be excellent obviating the need and cost and 
bother 
> of having custom profiles made -- at least this seems to be the 
case 
> for the 7600 and 9600 printers whose manufacturing tolerances, 
i.e., 
> variability between individual printers, seem to better than those 
of 
> the 2200. If you use a good number of different papers  -- 
apparently 
> ColorByte will profile any paper free that for which there is not 
> already a profile -- this means that you can save a lot of money 
that 
> you would have spent on custom profiles. The ColorByte color 
profiles 
> are a lot more accurate than the canned Epson profiles and a little 
> better in color, particularly in terms of shadow detail, than the 
free 
> Bill Atkinson profiles available for the 7600/9600 which themselves 
are 
> excellent. (The current version of ImagePrint has a "slider" that 
> allows you easily to control how much shadow detail or shadow 
> compression that you want).
> 
> As for the 7600, it is an excellent printer but the problem is that 
it 
> costs about $80 in wasted ink to change between Photo Black ink 
(used 
> for printing on glossy-type papers) and Matte Black ink (used for 
> printing on matte papers). For me this is a real problem. When I 
first 
> got my 7600, I started using Photo Black and Epson Semi-Matte paper 
(a 
> glossy-type paper) and eventually printed most of the prints for my 
> forthcoming exhibition using this ink and paper combination. When I 
> used up the Photo Black I switched to Matte Black and started 
printing 
> on EEM and Photo Rag. However, when I needed to complete the rest 
of my 
> exhibition prints I found that the matte color prints did not look 
as 
> good (in terms of "sharpness", saturation and depth of the blacks) 
as 
> the Photo Black/Semi-Matte paper combination; and this view was 
> confirmed by every one who saw the prints, which means that I need 
to 
> change back to Photo Black and Semi-Matte paper to complete the 
prints 
> for my exhibition. The trouble is that B&W prints with Photo Black 
and 
> Semi-Matte don't look very good and exhibit horrible "bronzing." 
This 
> problem is solved by the new 4000 printer which has both Photo 
Black 
> and Matte Black which allows you to change between glossy-type and 
> matte paper at will without any cost. The 2200 involves 
insignificant 
> ink waste in changing black inks but the small size of the ink 
> cartridges means that ink costs are very high. With the 4000 you 
can 
> use the same 220ml cartridges that the 7600/9600 use. 
(Incidentally, I 
> found that with the Ultrachrome inks both B&W and color prints 
looked 
> somewhat better on EEM than on Photo Rag.)
> 
>  From the above you can see that there is a great advantage in the 
4000 
> if you want to print both B&W  and color which, with the papers 
> currently available, means that you need to use both the Photo 
Black 
> and Matte Black, unless you like the way the color prints look on 
matte 
> paper, and some people do.
> 
> In my case, I already have the 7600 and I like to be able to make 
24x36 
> inch prints but the only hope on the horizon right now is that 
there 
> might be a new glossy-type paper which is not subject to bronzing 
for 
> B&W prints. There is one new paper, Oriental Graphica FB Glossy, 
that 
> may have such characteristics according to a July posting by Robert 
> Morrison, and I'll be interested to see what results people have 
with 
> this paper. In the meantime, does anyone have any solutions for 
> printing good B&W with Photo Black?
> 
> --Mitch/Paris