Digital BW, The Print

Ernst,

If you look at the material safety data sheets, the UC inks often have
mostly water and glycerol in them.  Some have glycols and probably all have
"proprietary organic materials" in addition to the "proprietary dyes and
pigments."  My goal was to make a bare-bones supplemental base that would at
least not be incompatible with the existing Epson base (which they will not
provide to us hackers).

The main things that are missing in the simple glycerol water base appear to
be wetting agents and binders.  With the Epson pigs, however, the acrylic
coating is the main binder, so that is not missing.  (That would not be the
case with an Eboni diluting, for example.)  For a cleaning fluid, a binder
is also not helpful.  

I experimented with wetting agents and even some de-foamers that are said to
be better than glycol (like isopropyl alcohol), and I could not tell that
there was any difference in the Epson ink dilutions (except the alcohol in
some of the mixes smelled bad).  I used to prefer Kodak Photo Flo -- a
glycol & alcohol mix similar to what is often used in the inksets -- and it
looks like whatever Epson is using also works just fine at half the strength
they use.  

From my perspective, the benefit of not putting anything more in the mix is
that the risk of incompatibility is virtually eliminated.  All I'm adding is
a chemical that is already a major part of the mix.  

If you are interested in a cleaning solution, a bit of Photo Flo (try 0.2%)
could be added to give the base the wetting agent characteristics.

I'll be curious how the fade test of my UC-based mixes looks.  If one is
close to competitive, I'll refine it and publish the formula.  That way
there will be an Epson-based inkset out there that would always be available
to everyone.  Some who think that third party pigs are somehow inferior
might prefer an Epson-based formula.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 
______________________________

-----Original Message-----
From: Ernst Dinkla [mailto:E.Dinkla@...] 
Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2004 1:08 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Blackless printing

Paul Roark wrote:

> I'm not sure that is the case.  The Eboni is the one that is much more
> neutral than the MIS version.  I have a test inkset made with UC inks and
> that inkset's "warm-carbon" curve seems to be more neutral than the MIS
> version.  (Perhaps it's my new base -- real complex: distilled water and
> glycerol.)

Paul,

Is that all, distilled water and glycerol ?   I have  a 10000CF 
now and it will be converted to MIS 7600 but I think a cleaning 
has to be done in between. If that base would do the trick then 
I'm less worried.

John Nollendorfs mentioned glycerol as a component of the Ilford 
Archiva inks ages ago. It has the thixotropy and the retarder 
qualities to keep pigments suspended and nozzles open.


Ernst