Digital BW, The Print

Well I think the place to start is to better understand how the R800
actually works, ie Epson's intentions.  Is the gloss woven into the dither
or does it follow the ink lay down like a spray (in the way the last set of
dots follows all the rest)?  Is it laid down evenly regardless of the amount
of ink (ie does a 100% patch receive the same amount of gloss as 0% patch)?
And yes there is no reason for the original print to be printed on an R800.
Also, there is no reason for the glosser to be an R800.  Any printer whereby
you can control the individual ink jets with QTR can be used.  The question
is whether to lay down the gloss as part of the original print, ie as part
of the dither, and if so then evenly or in inverse proportion to the amount
of actual ink, or whether to use the 2 step process to ensure an overspray.


> From: "Nunan, Mike" <mike.nunan@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 12:50:15 -0000
> To: "'DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com'"
> <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] QTR and Gloss Optimizer -- some lateral thinking
> 
> 
> Hi Steve,
> 
> Thanks for drawing attention to that, it's given me an interesting idea. The
> method they describe uses the "GLOP" in a different way to Epson's intentions.
> As you say, it's doing an overspray, hence the recommendation to use a white
> (or nearly completely white) file for a second run on top of the original
> print. What first occurred to me was that there is no reason why the original
> print needs to be produced on the R800. What's to stop you from coating, say,
> an A4 2200 print in this way? Furthermore, why use an R800 for the coating?
> Couldn't you use a C84 for this? I would be similar to doing an overspray with
> Premier ArtShield or Krylon, but guaranteed to be even.
> 
> -= mike =-
> 
>