Digital BW, The Print

Using QTR with UC on my 2200 I find that I'm getting very close to 
what I see on the screen. However, I still often make different 
prints of a given negative because 1) prints just look different, and 
what I'm predisposed to like on screen may change when I see it on 
paper, 2) possible adjustments/improvements in tone, sharpening, 
grain, print size, etc. are easier (for me) to preceive in a print. 
Also, what I usually try to do is view the print under different 
intensities of light -- from bright sunlight to somewhat shadowed 
indoor light. Doing this lets me see the print's strengths and 
weaknesses, and, again, points to possible improvements.

Chris Hargens

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Bernie Ess" 
<albatros-@g...> wrote:
> 
> When I started b&w printing on an Epson, I thought one of the
> advantages over the darkroom was that once its well set up, there
> would be no trying and experimenting and that I would have 100%
> predictable results.
> 
> Now, a few hundreds or probably thousands of prints later I find 
that
> this is
> not exactly the case. On my 2100/UT7 workflow I find the following
> issues:
> 
> 1. My output from the file + Roark curves is roughly, but never
> exactly what I see on my monitor. When I look at the grayscale on my
> <a href="http://www.serverlogic3.com/lm/rtl3.asp?si=1&k=flat%
20panel" onmouseover="window.status='flat panel'; return true;" 
onmouseout="window.status=''; return true;">flat panel</a> the 100% 
to 0%
> steps are quite well separated, but in the uncorrected print the 
deep
> shadows (around 95%
> black) are not well resolved, 95% comes out totally
> black: So I had to make a curve that boosts the deep shadows.
> 
> 2. I often find myself having to do several prints of the same 
photo,
> because the general "look" of the print is not like on the screen, 
see
> also my other message about the foliage and trees. 
> 
> 3. The most mysterious thing is that my output seems to vary from 
time
> to time. Sometimes I find the prints too dark compared to the 
screen,
> sometimes they are slightly too light.
> 
> Finally its not that different from the darkroom, I would say
> gradually more predictable (maybe even by a large margin, but that 
is
> probably because my traditional darkroom skills are so poor).
> 
> So, do you have a 100% WYSIWYG workflow?
> 
> Thanks for your input,
> 
> Bernhard