Digital BW, The Print

Martin,

>I have not seen any HP output so far. I seem to recall that
>someone posted that the example they saw was not very good.
>Do you think their products will be of interest to serious users? ...

I have my doubts.  The dye solution for longevity is to use special paper.
With, for example, cotton paper I've heard the life of the ink is very
short.  I hope to get some samples and test it on both the special paper and
cotton.


* From: Paul Roark ...
*...
* I consider the Ultra Tones, PiezoTone WN & Selenium, Eboni,
* Museum, UltraChrome Matte, Photo, and Light black inks to be
* so good I'm not sure fade testing proves much.  It is
* unlikely fading will ever be a problem with these inks.

>I agree. With the "Class A" inks I think we have reached a
>point where fading is a non-issue.

>I guess the only real concerns are new inks as they
>come on the market, like the HP and Septones. ...

Agreed, and I'll get to testing them when time permits.

>As I recall you did test Eboni against PiezoTone Museum Black
>and Portfolio Black and found that Eboni was as fade resistant
>as the Museum Black and had the greater density of the Portfolio Black.

I think Eboni and Museum black are the same ink.  They test the same, at
least.

I'm not sure what Portfolio black is.  If it is not the original PT black,
then I might never have tested it.

>... "archival." Under optimum conditions on
>quality paper I think prints with these inks should last indefinitely.

Probably true, but "optimum conditions" may be hard to achieve.  However,
dark storage away from pollution (acidic containers, city air ...?) and at
reasonable temperature and humidity will probably give the prints on good
paper lives that are measured in centuries.

>The one area that we do not know much about it the paper coatings.
>The recent reports of yellow marks on Hahnemuhle paper from what
>sounds like out-gassing of the adhesive on the
>packaging tape is of concern. This is not just an issue of poor
>packaging but an indication that the paper is susceptible to
>environmental chemical damage. I wish that we had some guidelines
>to know what chemicals need to be avoided.

I agree.  My sense of it is that Epson has done more of the chemical testing
due to its fiasco with the dyes and ozone.

Truth is, I wish we could print on uncoated cotton paper -- and we're
getting close.  As the printer dot size decreases and with pure pigment inks
the "grain" of the uncoated paper is decreasing enough to make it a viable
option -- if you have the right inkset and controls.  Part of the equation
is to avoid light inks.  The tiny piles of pigments modern printers and inks
leave on paper stay put much better and do not wick out on those paper
fibers the way the older inks do -- but only if there is not too much base
to carry them out of the fibers.

In fact, the C82 with the "no workflow" inkset is very smooth on Arches Hot
Press.  The "no workflow" inks are more than just getting us to simple
workflows.  Unfortunately, the dmax with this printer and that paper is too
low to be of interest as a fine art medium.  It might be OK for the ultimate
in printing old family photos where print life is more important than the
depth of black.

The 1280 with the "no-workflow" inks is still flooding the paper and causing
a blotchy/grainy image we have come to expect with un-coated paper, at least
when it's used with no curves.  However, the dmax on Hot Press is up to 1.46
with Eboni -- getting close and probably fine for old photo reproductions.
I'll try to work up some curves for this combination that attempt to hold
back the light inks as much as possible to stop the paper flooding.
However, Epson's built-in cross-overs might get in the way.  With a RIP it
could probably be done.

At any rate, we are getting close to what I'd like to see -- carbon (or
neutral-toned carbon) pigs on un-coated cotton paper.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com