Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, sdmey4@a... wrote:
> Jim, The Silver printer going over the prints with a loupe wasn't
trying to 
> discredit the process,  he was only curious how good the process was
for 
> possibly his own work. He didn't say that nor did he know I knew who
he was, Thats 
> just the feeling I got from him.

I guess I can understand that. It's just the image of some guy walking
around a Musuem looking at everything with a loupe is just really
funny to me. What would he do at a Serat pointilest exhibition? :-) 


 I think he assumed all inkjet prints had dots. 
> A landscape Photographer such as he really probably only had a passing 
> interest in my images.
> I only brought up dots because they don't have to be there at all
and they 
> can be eliminated at a decent price.


Yes, I think the reasoning does hold for most folks, so I wasn't
disbuting it. I've gotten myself into a odd situation in the last year
or so: I'm now doing color, b&w, desturated color, heavy tints, and
even b&w with spot color- well small areas of print that have color in
them. I've been waiting just under a year for IP to release version 6.
I was told last May about combo b&w/color in one print feature. So I'm
doing prints with the b&w part having metamerism, in hopes I can go
back and re-print. I didn't think it would take this long (I was told
late summer 2003 initially for ver 6).

So although I have both a 2200 AND an 1280 and can do a workflow with
color inks and b&w both, I need to print b&w "areas" with color inks,
assuming IP6 ever does come out...


 I honestly thought they have been gone for 
> a couple years until I started looking at prints from other work flows
> (with a loupe) trying to save or discard the ones of interest. When
quad BW 
> inks are partitioned properly there are no dots regarldless of the
printer. Its 
> all trade offs, varible tints and dots color or not.
> And your right, image is everything, who cares about the dots? I 
> do(somewhat)because I paid to have them NOT be there, but the image
and feel is what 
> counts more than anything.
> I really only posted food for thought for troubled practioners and
those 
> looking for a direction. I'm not suggesting anyone change there work
flow, But I 
> know YOU have many times over the years, Me too.

3 1/2 years for me, and I don't even wan't to think about it. 

> My Only point? Technical perfection is avalible at a resonable cost
for all 
> images and styles and its been around awhile and it dosen't use
color inks. Why 
> should new commers fight it buying new printers, inventing new work
flows, 
> Puchacing more software just to tame the effect of color inks.

Since I guess the MIS UT inksets fixed the clogging problem in dry
climates like mine, I don't think there is any other reason unless one
wants to do color on the same printer as well.

Jim Hayes

 I'm not one who 
> strives to make prints that mimic air dryed Silver fiber prints. I'm
not in 
> this for that at all. 
> I'm just trying to steer people to the value of a 7000 or 9000
printer and 
> The excellenace of Studio print software perhaps instead of the new
4000 or 
> 9600.
> I will mention a set of prints I have from the tech exchange last
year with 
> many work flows shows some discolartion on EEM 2200 ultrachrome inks
with a 
> custom profile wheras the same printer using IP5 for BW has not
changed tint as 
> far as I can tell.
> Color inks for black and white makes me alot more nervous than dots
that can 
> only be seen with a loupe regardless of what Whilhelm says...
> With  Respect,
> Steve M.
> In a message dated 4/16/2004 2:04:58 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
> jimhayes@f... writes:
> Snip>
> > If I saw someone looking at my images with a loupe in a gallery I
> > would laugh out loud, even if it was a big name that could bring me in
> > fame and fortune. I don't want it that bad.
> > 
> > I don't judge an image on high technical purity. I judge it on
> > emotional/intelectual impact with sometimes a nod to design elements
> > like lines and lighting. And I won't change my workflow to please
> > someone else's viewpoint.
> > 
> > No offense though, I respect YOUR viewpoint, just not your famous
> > observer's. I have now and then seen (with envy)some artistic work
> > done by a member or two of this list up close that relied much on
> > attention to technical details. BUT also on the emotive impact. :-)
> > 
> > Jim Hayes
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]