Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Carl Schofield 
<scho@m...> wrote:
> Steve,
> 
> I've found that the print surface seems to look 
slightly "smoother" if 
> the glop is applied with the other inks as the image is printed 
and if 
> the glop ink limit is set at 10%.  Prints made with higher glop 
limits 
> (I tried 10, 20, 50, 75, and 100) take longer to dry and don't 
look as 
> smooth (slight gloss differential). 

They definitely need much more drying time-like overnight and longer 
>Limiting the glop application is 
> of course also cost effective. 

Agreed! I've gone through about 2.5 ounces of it already, and have 
ccoated only around 30-40 sheets of paper!

> I also found that Epson Premium 
> Semigloss looked very good, but Ilford Smooth Pearl, Epson Premium 
> Semimatte, and Pictorico Gallery High Gloss White (not the film) 
also 
> gave excellent results (the latter only if you like a high gloss 
> finish).  Surprisingly, I did not get good results with IJA 
> Microceramic Luster (bronzing was still visible after coating) so 
there 
> are some RC papers that are problematic. 

The Kirkland (Costco) Glossy was a complete washout for me

>I've been doing these tests 
> with a custom inkset in my 2200 consisting of the MIS UT-FSN quad 
inks 
> plus the UT2 warm gray and sepia inks.  I use three QTR profiles 
for 
> neutral, carbon, and sepia toned prints.  The glop is in the black 
> cartridge slot 

Something like this in the 7500 would work for me, it would still 
allow me to overcoat the color & B&W 7600 ptints, while giving me a 
blended glop on this machine.

>because no black ink is needed with these profiles (the 
> dark grays are sufficient to generate a dmax in the 2-2.2 range).  

Are you getting a good dmax on matte papers as well?

 
> flat toner curve is used in the profiles to apply the glop evenly 
> across the print.  These are the first B&W prints I've made on RC 
> papers that have absolutely no bronzing or gloss differential.  I 
put a 
> Glop archive with the profiles (both .txt and .quad files) and 
toner 
> curve on my filesharing site for anyone who wishes to try them.
> 
> I also made some neutral prints on Epson Premium semigloss using 
the 
> Epson UC inks in my 4000 with two QTR profiles (one K-less and the 
> other with PK ink) and then coated with glop in my 2200 with 
various 
> glop levels using your BO overlay technique.  Unfortunately I 
could not 
> get rid of the bronzing completely on either print with glop (even 
at 
> levels of 120%).  I don't know if applying the glop with the UC 
inks 
> (as I do with the MIS UT FSN/UT2 inks in the 2200) would make any 
> difference or not.  I suspect that the glop just works better at 
> eliminating bronzing with the MIS UT class inks than with the 
Epson UC 
> inks.

This may turn out to be the case; after all MIS formulated it for 
their UC clones for the R800. And aside from that LK bronzing 
problem after dry-down, the MIS UC inks have worked well with the 
glop. I certainly hope I don't have to change all my UC inks back to 
Epson, then I'll actually have to start making some real money with 
these machines!

 
> Carl
> 
> http://homepage.mac.com/scho/FileSharing2.html
> 
> On Dec 20, 2004, at 9:21 PM, Steven Karafyllakis wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > A further report and observations on overcoating with MIS gloss
> > optimizer. Some bad news, I'm afraid, at least for those of us 
using