Digital BW, The Print

If you are already on top of the following, please don't be offended.
I find most of these kinds of problems have more to do with workflow
than materials variables. The papers I use seem to be remarkably
consistent, and other than the very rare exception, the inks as well.
The only ink problem that seems to come up is from pigment settling,
large format carts and CIS bottles need to be shaken once a week or
so, and with a large format printer or a CIS system that has long
lines to the heads, without consistent use they will settle out in the
lines as well, requiring moving enough ink through the lines to
refresh with good ink.
The remainder is getting a handle on color management settings and
making sure they remain consistent, making sure files are tagged and
displaying properly, a calibrated monitor (recalibrated often), driver
settings that are cast in stone and nailed down.
Then things should remain consistent. Beyond that, a good monitor to
print match requires a good soft proof method, which should be fairly
easily accomplished.
I find, even with the option of relinearizing our RIP if needed, here
things are very consistant rarely requiring a relinearization.
Tyler

--- 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
> flat panel 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