Digital BW, The Print

paul,

somehow the message below got misdirected to me!

Since I have you here, one question:

Does it make sense to create ICC profiles for the UT
inks on the different papers and create cool, neutral
and warm tones with the ICC profiles?

Alfred



--- Paul Roark <paul.roark@...> wrote:
> Sean,
> 
> >What are your current thoughts on using MIS-UT with
> C82/C84 vs. 1280?
> 
> The big differences are that the 1280 can print 13"
> paper, the dmax is a bit
> higher (1.62 on cotton v. 1.55, 1.66 on EEM v.
> 1.55), the 1280 has smoother
> highlights than the C82 (unknown with respect to the
> C84), but the C82 is
> about as good at the 2200 with IP5, so it's not bad.
> 
> The C82 is going to be simpler -- no curves, etc. --
> and cheaper.
> 
> >How about newer Epson models like 960 and the
> mysterious PX-G900?
> >Reason to delay a purchase decision?
> 
> I don't know much about them.  The idea was to get a
> machine that was as
> affordable as possible and see what it could do in
> terms of archival
> printing.  The results, frankly, surprised me.  I
> never expected such high
> quality.
> 
> >Finally, I'd love to hear your thoughts about what
> to recommend for
> >archival *color* printing, if you do any of that.
> 
> Well, the 2200 is a fine machine.  However, the C82
> with its color Durabrite
> pigmented inks does a very good job, and it's a lot
> cheaper.  The Durabrite
> inks appear to be essentially the same as the
> UltraChromes, but without the
> light black -- the lightfastness and longevity are
> about as good.  So, my
> recommendation for the scrapbookers and genealogists
> is to get the C82 (or
> C84 when the carts arrive) and just switch back and
> forth between the
> Durabrite and carbon pigs as needed.  On matte
> paper, I think this little
> 4-ink printer at 2880 does an excellent job.   It's
> a great way to get into
> digital printing affordably.
> 
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com
> ________________________________________
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com,
> "Paul Roark"
> <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > >I looked in the Epson site and they list a C-84
> and it is in the
> right
> > >price range (@$79 USD) but has a much higher
> claimed resolution....
> > >or is the C-82 yet to be released.
> >
> > I think the C82 is an older model.  MIS and Amazon
> have them, but
> I'm not
> > sure how many are still out there.  The C84 will
> be the next one,
> > presumably, but for now there are no 3rd party
> carts available. MIS
> thinks
> > they use the same inks, but different chips.
> >
> > The higher resolution of the C84 is probably
> visible with color
> inks on
> > RC/glossy paper, but with B&W on matte, I think a
> loupe would be
> required to
> > see the difference.  I was, frankly, astounded at
> how good the C82
> is at
> > 2880 (with High Speed off -- it does make a
> difference with this
> printer)
> > and when the same gray ink (MIS UT Light cyan) is
> in all three color
> carts.
> >
> > The weaknesses I've found so far with the C82 are,
> first, the dmax,
> and
> > second, a possible paper handling glitch.
> >
> > While the dmax of the C82 doesn't match that of
> the 1280, the C82
> with
> > PhotoRag hits 1.57 with Eboni black, which is not
> too bad for
> cotton.
> > Recall that the new cotton papers from Epson and
> Moab were hitting
> 1.6 -
> > 1.62 with the 1280 and Epson driver.  I suspect
> those papers don't
> do much
> > better than the C82 when the Piezo driver is used
> with, for
> example, an
> > 1160.  The Piezo driver, like the C82,
> under-prints the black ink
> with the
> > "color" inks.  It's a trade-off between smoothness
> and dmax.  With
> EEM the
> > dmax is 1.55, same with the new Permajet (cotton)
> ISC (there will be
> a new
> > name when released in January).  Some cotton
> papers are not good,
> however.
> > PremierArt was down at 1.46.
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > I thought my old 1160 was a fine quad, but the
> dither and smoothness
> on this
> > cheap C82 is way ahead of it.  I suspect the
> vertical placement
> makes
> > alignment (and cheap assembly) much less of an
> issue, because I'd
> guess it
> > is mostly machined in the head when it's made --
> by a very accurate
> machine.
> >
> > The carts for the C82 (and C84) are still a bit of
> an open issue.
> It
> > appears MIS has some new ones for the C82 that
> might make re-filling
> > extremely easy, avoiding the foam problems. 
> (Having only one
> "color" ink
> > also makes the process rather easy for both
> re-fillers and MIS.)  It
> may be
> > that with a re-setter, a single set of carts will
> last a very long
> time.
> > The current carts are, apparently, not easy to
> re-fill.  I'm not
> certain
> > when the C84 carts will be ready.
> >
> > The independent color carts also appear to be all
> the same.  This
> could be
> > very interesting.  The yellow pumps in less ink
> than the others.
> So, if I'm
> > lucky, a toner might be able to be mixed that, for
> example, makes a
> neutral
> > print when in the magenta spot and medium-warm
> print in the yellow
> slot.
> > Similarly for a sepia toner.  (Having one [already
> in inventory]
> gray ink in
> > all carts -- which just happen to be the same --
> is also a nice
> little
> > inventory and cost benefit to MIS, which hopefully
> will be passed
> on the
> > users.)
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > Keep in mind that this is a $69 machine.  I don't
> recommend people
> throw
> > their 1280s away, but there are a lot of people
> who don't want to
> put out
> > that kind of cash.  The goal here is to lower the
> financial and
> expertise
> > barrier to outstanding, archival B&W printing by
> getting a cheap
> printer,
> > "no-workflow" inkset, and non-Photoshop image
> editor competitive
> with the
> > best systems -- and the C82 has made me believe
> more than ever that
> 
=== message truncated ===


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears
http://launch.yahoo.com/promos/britneyspears/