Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mike_nunan"
<mike_nunan@h...> wrote:
snip...
> He implies that if you want "dotless" printing, then you want a true 
> quadtone inkset.

Using a quad set alone doesn't gaurantee anything, the nature and
quality of the partitioning and the dither/screening of the driver are
two big factors.

>It seems logical enough that having a fine gradation 
> of different ink shades would help hide the dots, but what I don't 
> understand is why it would be much different for say UT7 using Paul's 
> workflow. If you don't use the cold and sepia toners, then you still 
> have pure black plus two shades of grey to work with -- essentially 
> a "tritone" pure carbon inkset. Why should that be noticeably more 
> dotty than a quadtone? Or is it more to do with the effect of the 
> RIP? But in that case, why doesn't QTR give similar results?

It may. There are too many variables. Printer dot size, best use and
partitioning of individual ink densities, the particular inkset, the
driver. As you suggest, a tritone from one printer, process and
materials may equal a quadtone from another.
Direct print comparisons would be good but are hard to come by. Some
of these processes offer different printing options, that's another
deciding factor.
Tyler