Digital BW, The Print

Let me try to put a more positive spin on all of this. This could get
real long real quick, each topic deserves an entire thread in itself.
I'll try to be brief.
First of all, a printer is dedicated B&W or color simply by the nature
of the installed inks. I would argue that as soon as mono inks are
installed, you have a dedicated B&W printer. As we all know several
mono inksets are available, so I would say dedicated B&W printers are
available. There have been fits and starts to the viability of some of
these inks, but right now things seem pretty good indeed. The printer
is further defined by the software that comes with it. That the
drivers are optimized for the intended color output is an obstacle,
but it has been successfully addressed by various ways for quite a while.

Either the driver is forced to do what you want by manipulating RGB
data going in, or you use a dedicated driver more suited to these
needs. Good options for doing so are available all the way from free
RGB curves, $50 shareware, icc profiles, to expensive full featured
RIPs. What would have been un-dreampt of even a few years ago, is that
even some of the most affordable of these options are capable of being
hardware linearized. If you can't afford the hardware yourself,
someone can do it for you easily, or for a nominal fee. There are many
people happily printing using any and all of the options above. There
is a learning curve to everything including the darkroom, and and if
you have yet to be able to print using one of the available options,
there is a flaw somewhere that requires further effort. Of course, you
could be one of those faced with a problem with materials or  workflow
bug beyond your best perfect efforts. We've all been there and feel
your pain, but I'd say you are in the minority, and most of this stuff
works very well these days. Remember, this is all pretty new.

Soft-proofing, this has also been successfully addressed and evolving
for some time. A soft-proof method for any B&W output system can be
visually performed by doing this-

http://f4.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/QM9yQQcyMSI_x0pM_l1qzJJREDiLfw9JxQn1uhD61kZ-q_R8CBdCsyoFcxvh2vFj_p6553skticgw2wMln0cxZb4I7NcSw/Image%20Processing/Matching%20Your%20Monitor%20view%20to%20Your%20Prints.pdf

That this write-up bears my name is a bit silly, it's simply a summary
of well known procedures using Photoshop  features. It's also sorely
in need of a version update, someone?
THis method is not really fully icc compliant, but it works. True icc
softproofing has also been addressed for years, initially through the
creativity of Dan Culbertson., who logically realized any output
system including quads can be characterized (hence predicted and
soft-proofed) with profiling tools.
http://f4.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/QM9yQcm57zs_x0pMWloqSxffpfvVoQW1xyjmLuJTz3ZmPH02gFV2vaq5OEG-Ca5SgaIBRe1W8BvwuP5tHfey5uvoLJYYcw/Image%20Processing/RGB_Softproof_Quad.pdf

An example of this is some work I did with Martin Wesley some time
ago, with an MIS inkset. He was quite happy with the results and
posted here several times about it. This approach has been further
refined and brought back to the limelight by the creative efforts af
Carl Schofield. These methods do not result in output printing
profiles, but successfully characterize and preview any output method,
including tint, paper white and ink black, and are fully icc
compliant. I even use this method with StudioPrint, to hand off
preview profiles to clients wanting to use them while optimizing their
files for our output. I should also add that some of these output
systems are tuned well enough to not require an icc softproof method,
as evidenced by David Brooks comments about good monitor to print
match with Paul's curves (I assume, from a specific gray space
properly displayed), and a good match here from 20% gray space files
here matching well to Studio Print's linearized to 20% DG output.
Personally for both color and B&W, I love using PS softproof including
using paper white and ink black. The dilemma expressed in this thread
seems very well addressed by these features.
Hopefully without hyping the product, Cone's system and profiles
deserve mention. You have a dedicated B&W printer by nature of
installing the inks, you have icc profiles that softproof and print
directly from a grayscale file. If you are willing to use the Epson
driver's color management, you can print even from any application.
Does this not precisely fulfill the requirements expressed by this thread?
I'm not here to recommend this product, but I'm not sure the
significance of it's development has been fully acknowledged in the
community. I have friends with no experience with any of the other
methods we are all aware of here, and they are up and printing,
soft-prooing, etc., with no problems. This is just the first of such
products, and may inspire more to come from others.
That it all doesn't come in a neat package directly from Epson for
$59.99 seems to be the only thing that doesn't fit with what has been
asked for here.
The problem seems to be that information comes and goes, past
accomplishments are buried by history, new accomplishments come from
different factions. In my opinion, given the wealth of materials
available, the advances put forth by various parties including those
mentioned here, that a workflow can be put together that satisfies all
of the expressed needs in this thread, with your materials of choice.
Admittedly, this may take some work, and other than Cone it doesn't
all come prepackaged for you. But hey, it's only the beginning. It was
always work, consider this today's equivalent of a Picker newsletter.

Tyler