Digital BW, The Print

Hello Roger,

>I just received a sample of Hawk Mountain papers including Osprey, 
>Merlin and Condor BW and I'm wondering what settings (paper type, 
>speed, resolution, etc.) you would use for black only printing with 
>these papers on an Epson 1280 using MIS Eboni black.  Should I set 
>the paper feed control to wide for any of these papers?

Paper Type: Enhanced Matte
High Speed: checked
Resolution: 2880 dpi

I use the "Manual" setting for the rear paper feed.  I force fed some
Merlin through the sheet feeder a few times and it finally complained
(refused to take it and blinked and burped at me for awhile as
punishment).

>Do you find that each of these papers requires a different dot 
>gain setting to get good WYSIWYG?  

Changing among these papers seems to make no significant
difference as far as dot gain goes.  I think the difference among
papers in actual ink gain must be very little (isn't eliminating dot
gain is one of the purposes of the coating?).  


>When using EEM, I had my input profile set to dot gain 20 which gave 
>too light a print when the output was set to "same as source", so I 
>changed the output profile to dot gain 10 for good WYSIWYG.
> 
>You indicated that you change the input profile rather than the 
>output profile in a recent post.  Is there any advantage to changing 
>the input profile versus the output profile?

Yes, but you have to understand how they interact.  The main thing is
that when the back end is "Same As Source" (SAS), changing the front
end makes no difference in the print.  The purpose of changing the
front end is to get the screen image to match the print.  

By changing the back end you are making the print match the screen
image.  The problem with this is there is not a direct translation any
more.  Neither the screen nor the print is a true representation of
the image file.  When you begin using other papers for final prints
you often end up going around in circles trying to find settings
that give what you want for each paper.  It's random, time consuming,
usually makes no sense, and often is inadequate with papers needing
more complex adjustments than dot gain curves provide.  So changing
the back end during workup on proof paper defeats the purpose of
having an easy and consistent workflow.

The back end at SAS cancels out the front end, resulting in the image
being sent to the printer without any profiles affecting it.  So the
print is a true representation of the file.

You said your initial EEM print, with back end at SAS, was too light.
That means the image was too light because the print was a true
representation of it.

So the idea when beginning work on an image is to make the first
test print (back end always set to SAS), and then change the front end
until the screen image best matches the print (for my monitor DG18
works best for most).  This gives a screen image that is also a
true representation of the file.  So the screen and the printer are
now interpreting the image the same way.  From that point on, whatever
changes you make to the image will show up the same relatively in the
print, and no matter what other paper you use the print will always be
a true representation of it, according to how that paper handles the
ink.  

If the final print is substantially different than the EEM print, then
you can either use a custom back end curve or apply a "paper curve"
layer to the image in order to compensate.  But this is only done for
final prints on different paper.  During the workup of an image on
proof paper, the back end should always remain SAS.

At first I used custom back end curves because I didn't like the idea
of adding a paper curve layer to the image.  Back then (before Eboni)
I was making all final prints on PR which most of the time required no
changes, or at most a slight over all darkening.  But I changed when I
began using other papers which often require small contrast changes. 
With a curve layer you can see right away how the curve affects the
image.  With a custom back end curve you must make a print to see what
effect the curve has.  I now save the paper curve layer in the file. 
I usually choose one paper which suits the image, so I rarely have to
change the curve once it's finalized.  If I ever want to print it on
EEM I just deactivate the layer.

In effect, with this approach you establish a standard workflow with
EEM as the standard proof paper.  In time you get very attuned to this
workflow because there is a similarity of reaction to everything you
do.  You become very efficient and productive.  Otherwise you end up
with different front/back end settings for each image.  Everything is
always different and there's a chaotic aspect to the work.  

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm