Hi Steve, Thanks to you and also to Paul and Tyler for your helpful replies. Re your comment about not getting hung up on dots, I hear that, and I'm only really trying to be thorough in this research phase that I'm in. I'm worried about how prints look to the naked eye, and I'm not concerned about what people might see if they start examining my prints with a loupe. Tyler, thanks for that nice summary of the range of options. There are some software packages there that I hadn't heard of before, so I'll read up on those a little bit. I can see that's an important distinction you make between systems that rely upon RGB or CMYK curves in PS (where effectively you're working with narrow-gamut colour images) and those which use a monochrome image and do all the work in the driver. The former gives the advantage that you can create split-tone images where the tone is linked to things other than the grey level, which opens up some creative possibilities. The second approach theoretically allows fine tuning of the way the ink patterns are applied, specifically to give better B&W quality. It seems from your and Paul's comments that the Epson driver is still a pretty good choice though. Paul, your observations about hiding the origins of digital images are very interesting. I guess I'm slowly coming to accept that I have to work *with* the look of digital output a bit more, rather than fighting against it constantly. As an amateur, the main audience I'm trying to please is my own unaided eyes, but they are a fairly critical audience. For instance I've seen jaggies on an A4 colour 2100 print made from a full-size Minolta 5400 scan. I guess I'm the type of guy who probably won't relax completely until the true on- paper resolution exceeds 1000ppi. That's not to say that in the meantime I won't be able to make some prints that I'm happy with -- it's certainly been true in colour and as you point out, things should be better in some ways in B&W. That said, UT7 certainly seems like the obvious starting point for me. I want the flexibility of being able to generate good quality gloss and matte prints from the same inkset, and I'm definitely interested in split-toning. I'll probably try some black-only prints as well, and if I've understood correctly that should also be possible with that setup. Best regards, -= mike =-
Message
Re: [Digital BW] Pure quadtone vs. "toner" inksets
2004-04-23 by mike_nunan
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.