Digital BW, The Print

Allen,

Well it sounds like there is a not too expensive path to give the 
inks a try. I figure some empty 1200 cartridges and refill supplies 
at about $30 and a set of ink is $180. In switching a printer over 
from either the Epson, MIS, Piezo, Lyson, etc. inks are there any 
incompatibilities to watch out for? Do you need to run a cleaning 
cartridge through first?

I know the 4 papers you sent me are your tested papers for maximum 
life but can you give us a list of other papers (in 8.5X11, 11X17 and 
13X19) that you have tried with good results or believe are likely 
candidates? In other words what are the resin and polymer coated 
papers currently on the market?

I agree with you that a 17X?? with the Spectratone inks from the 3000 
on the Oce watercolor paper would be wonderful. (I take it the RIP 
allows you to get past the 22" length limit of the Epson?) For myself 
I am reluctant to buy a 3000 because of cost, reported feeding 
problems, and I suspect that it is about to go out of production 
(hopefully to be replaced by something better).

On the contact negs are you getting enough Dmax for contact printing 
to standard silver paper and what do you think the quality would be 
like? I am thinking in terms of the photographer who wants all the 
Photoshop advantages but would like to get back to a silver fiber 
print all on the desktop without having to go to a lab for the 
digital neg.

I see Peter Lindman has taken you up on your offer to beta test on a 
1280. I hope that works out and look forward to hearing about the 
results.

Thanks,

Martin Wesley




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., allentakichi@e... wrote:
> _Martin, thanks for the evaluation, I'll 
> interject my comments in your text body.
> 
> 
> 
> Message: 23
>    Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 03:53:20 -0000
>    From: mwesley250@e...
> Subject: Spectratone Print Samples
> 
> Allen,
> 
> I got the sample prints you sent. Thanks a 
> lot, just when I was 
> getting used to the warm tone of my Piezo 
> prints you have to go and 
> send me these prints with a wonderful cool 
> selenium tone. Sigh.
> 
> Seriously the color of the ink set is very nice 
> indeed and the prints 
> sitting on my table say "silver." I seriously 
> doubt that the average 
> viewer would realize they were inkjet and not 
> the genuine article. In 
> side-to-side comparisons with selenium 
> toned Ilford and Oriental 
> fiber paper under a combination of quartz 
> halogen and tungsten 
> floods, the Spectratone looked a little cool. 
> Under tungsten very 
> neutral. Both nice and to my taste. Have you 
> considered a variable 
> tone approach similar to what Paul Roark 
> worked out with the MIS inks?
> 
> ~no, I'm keeping it simple at this stage of the 
> game
> 
> Anyone out there trying to get pigment ink to 
> stay on papers like 
> Kodak Ultima Satin should stop driving 
> themselves crazy and take a 
> look at this stuff. Allen, have you tried that 
> paper by the way?
> 
> ~no, I'm sticking to the polymer and geletin 
> coated papers for max longevity
> 
> I do have to disagree with you on the 1200 
> vs. 3000 output. To me the 
> 1200 print on the Ilford 9 mil glossy is the 
> best. Black looks a 
> little blacker. Slightly smoother tonal 
> transitions. Looks sharper at 
> normal viewing distances.
> 
> ~that's why I send the samples out.  i think 
> that they are very close and depending on the 
> media etc, may alternate on quality of dither.  
> the black point of the 3000 is controllable in 
> PressReady and these are kinda "general 
> solution prints"
> 
> Under magnification I can see the dot pattern 
> on 3000 prints and an 
> occasional tiny tonal band. At normal 
> viewing distances for these 
> 8.5X11's this gives the image a bit of a 
> grainy quality on the very 
> glossy film, which is very unforgiving, a 
> little less on the semi 
> matte and completely invisible on the Oce 
> Watercolor. With large 
> prints or on textured paper this would not be 
> an issue. 
> 
> The 1200 print under magnification shows a 
> dot pattern which is much 
> more subtle. (This is much better than the 
> "window screen" pattern 
> that I see in my Piezo prints with the 1200.) 
> The edges of the 
> letters are much sharper and cleaner than the 
> 3000 prints. Even on 
> the glossy paper I can't see the pattern under 
> normal viewing.
> 
> ~thanks for the in depth inspection.  
> depending on your requirements, the 3000 
> may be a "done deal" but if you are printing 
> small on glossy this kind of anaylsis may be 
> relavent.  The 3000 separations for the inkset 
> CMYK = 2341 are for a general solution 
> with a dark biased inkset so that you can also 
> print on high bleed uncoated papers as well 
> as the glossy papers.  Dan Culbertson has 
> probably worked out the ultimate smooth 
> solution for coated papers only.  
> 
> 
> The print from the 1200 indicates that it was 
> printed using 
> the "Standard RGB 1200 driver 5.6E" was 
> this done without PressReady?
> 
> ~yes.
> 
> I like the inks but I am not fond of the 
> papers. The Ilford papers 
> are too much like RC silver for my tastes but 
> at the same time the 
> 1200 print is closest thing to real RC silver in 
> quality I have seen. 
> In some ways I like is better. I can see some 
> slight "bronzing" 
> or "solarization" when light reflects off the 
> glossy prints, nothing 
> extreme like a pigment print on glossy paper, 
> but noticeable. 
> Probably less than a silver RC for that matter 
> but I don't have a RC 
> print handy to compare. The semi matte is 
> more appealing and shows 
> much less "solarization" than the glossy.
> 
> The Oce Watercolor looks the best except 
> that the texture is too 
> large for a print this size and overwhelms the 
> image. The print color 
> and tonality are excellent with better 
> separation in the shadows. I 
> would really like to see the ink on some 
> bright white papers ranging 
> in smoothness comparable to Museo or 
> Epson Archival Matte. Once again 
> there is a large amount of personal taste 
> involved here.
> 
> ~these are just small sample prints on the Oce 
> Watercolor paper.  think 17" x X" on the 
> 3000
> 
> This would be a perfect ink set and paper 
> combination for Rick 
> Schiller who was looking for a reliable 
> neutral B&W output for his 
> head shot work or anyone wanting the look 
> of a glossy silver gelatin 
> print. This would also be really great on the 
> big printers 7000 or 
> 9000 for display prints. The output is much 
> nicer than the monochrome 
> Fuji Crystal I saw a few years ago. (I 
> haven't seen anything recent 
> so the Fuji may have improved). A photo lab 
> or service bureau could 
> offer top notch B&W without the huge cost 
> of a LightJet. 
> 
> Would be a great way to provide contact 
> negs for alternative 
> processes as well. I can also see why Dan 
> Burkholder is looking at 
> this for making contact negatives. Not only 
> do you have the high 
> quality and density but it actually stays on the 
> film unlike the 
> pigment inks. 
> 
> ~we are still fiddeling around with a high 
> density black just for contact negs since Dan 
> isn't getting the D-max he needs for platinum 
> palladium prints.  I get good paper white 
> with gum bichromate and cyanotype but 
> haven't completed the circle on platinum.
> 
> For the lone photographer starting from the 
> ground up there look to 
> be two paths.
> 
> - The Epson 3000, Adobe PressReady and a 
> set of ink cartridges for 
> about $1,500. If you already have the 3000, 
> $500
> 
> -A refurbished Epson 1200 ($234), CIS, ink 
> and PressReady for about 
> $815. If you already have the 1200, about 
> $580.
> 
> First of all is that correct or can you go 
> without the PressReady on 
> either printer?
> 
> ~nope, no PressReady needed on the 1200.
> 
> ~I still haven't tried out PressReady on the 
> 1200 since I like the Epson built in 
> separation solution with the native free RGB 
> driver.   It's best to try out the spectratones 
> in a regular cart in the 1200 before 
> proceeding with CIS units since I haven't 
> run the various types of CIS units.  I still like 
> the 3000 since it's so reliable in it's 
> preformance and refilling is easy and 
> verifiable.  
> 
> 
> 
> Have you run the inks with an Epson 1270 
> or 1280? If I were going to 
> buy another printer, I would just as soon get 
> a model that is still 
> in production.
> 
> ~no, but I'm open to a little beta testing for 
> owners of current models.  drop me a line.
> 
> I'm curious to give them a try, but I would 
> like a better art paper 
> for small size "fine art" prints and some way 
> cheaper to stick my toe 
> in the water. I am thinking of trying the new 
> MIS on a 1280. If that 
> works out, I'll consider switching my 1200 
> over to the Spectratones.
> 
> Thank you again for the prints. I know you 
> sent them out to some 
> other folks on the list and I hope they will 
> chip in their opinions 
> too.
> 
> Keep us posted on your work with Dan and 
> developements in general.
> 
> Martin Wesley
> 
> ~thanks for the comments Martin.  if I get 
> time, perhaps I'll work on a more specific 
> solution for coated media on the 3000.  
> Now, I wonder what Dan Culbertson. has 
> been up to in this area?
> 
> Allen