Digital BW, The Print

>... when  do you expect UT for C82 to be ready

MIS was supposed to get the new, easy to re-load carts in yesterday.  I have
not heard if they actually arrived.  We'll want to test them, but with luck
in a week MIS will be ready to go with at least the empty carts and bulk
ink.  It will take a little longer for MIS to get pre-loaded carts.

> and is it possible to tone prints?

I will test two toning methods as soon as I get the empty carts.  There will
be at least a neutral version.

> As I understand, you are positively surprised with
>quality of C82 prints. Is that correct?

Yes, with the C82 at 2880 the results are essentially as good as IP5 on a
2200.  When the carts for the C84 arrive, it's 5760 resolution should take
the quality to above the IP5/2200 level.  For the price, it's an amazing
performance -- and no Photoshop is needed either.  So, the barriers to
high-quality, archival B&W printing is about to drop dramatically.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com
_____________________________________





--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> I was curious how prints produced on the 2200 ($595 at MIS) with
ImagePrint
> ($495) (total $1090) compared to those produced on the C82 (now $90
at MIS)
> with the "no-workflow" (light UT cyan in all 3 color spots) "quad"
inkset I
> mixed last week.
>
> Here I'm just looking at the smoothness of test strips by scanning
equal
> density (5% & 50%) patches of the prints (at 1600 dpi) and
measuring the
> smoothness with the Photoshop Histogram tool.  I use the tools
Standard
> Deviation reading as the objective measure of smoothness.
>
> In March, I posted the results of a similar comparison among various
> printers.  In that comparison the 2200/IP5/Neutral 5% patch
measured 5.54 v.
> the 1280/MIS VM/Neutral of 2.56.  (Lower is smoother/better.)  The
MIS VM
> was also smoother at 50%, but not as dramatically so.
>
> To eliminate as many variables as possible, I scan the test strips
together.
> So, today's comparison numbers should not be compared to the above
numbers.
>
> Today, the 2200/IP5/Neutral 5% patch read 6.79.  The C82/LC (warm)
read
> 7.47.  (The IP5 prints a little lighter than the C82/LC, so I read
areas on
> the C82 test strip that had the same median density.)
>
> So, the IP5, which runs the 2200 Light black into the highlights
but then
> neutralizes them with the light magenta and light cyan, is slightly
smoother
> than the C82, which has UT LC in all spots.  The UT LC is somewhat
lighter
> than the 2200 Light K, but much darker than the UC LC and LM.  So,
the light
> UC inks pull the average density of the dots down.  (An equally
warm IP5
> print that only used the UC LK would, presumably, be rougher than
the C82.)
>
> (You can see a 1600 dpi scan of the 2200 5% at
> http://studio-nelson.com/inkjet/bw22003.htm)
>
> At the 50% spot, the IP5 measured 8.34.  The C82 measured 8.04,
slightly
> better than the 2200/IP5 combination.
>
> Overall, I think the 2 IP5 and C82 test strips are quite
comparable.  The
> partitioned quad is still the smoothness champ, but at normal
viewing
> distances and when real photos are used instead of test strips,
most people
> will not notice the highlight dots both systems have.  Critical
views on
> this list, however, might.
>
>
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com



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 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/