Digital BW, The Print

I used to use John Woolf's workflow with old FSN-E in my 1280 and
found to to yeild great prints and was very very easy to use.  I
corresponded with John a few months ago and he unfortunately has no
interest in updating it for the new inks. 

I've got great admiration for Paul Roark and everything he's done. 
But if the Wolfe workflow works, why not just stick with it? 

Bob Michaels


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "donbga"
<dstevenbryant@m...> wrote:
> This past weekend I tried the curves and workflow created by Paul 
> Roark found on the MIS website for the UT-FSN inkset on an 1160.
> 
> I found the result quite terrible and the instructions confusing, so 
> apparently I'm not doing something correctly.
> 
> I was using EEM setting my color space to Adobe 1998 and found that 1 
> curve gave extremely posterized results, and two other curves 
> lightened the print way too much and dark tones looked as though 
> there was a veil over those areas.
> 
> By comparison when using the R9/Cone driver and the John Wolfe work 
> flow results are much better, Wolfe's workflow produced the best 
> print by far, WYSIWYG in fact and I'm using a calibrated and profiled 
> monitor.
> 
> Have other people using the Roark curves, etc. with UT-FSN 
> experienced the same results?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Don Bryant