Digital BW, The Print

This is so funny, 

We are shifting from film to digital, and one of the main complaints 
about film is the necessity to use toxic chemicals that stink to high 
heaven. How do we end up? Mixing toxic chemicals that stink to high 
heaven. LOL! LOL.

Ain't life just grand though?

Cheers and where can I get some glycerol?

Jules



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> 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@c...] 
> 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