Digital BW, The Print

Paul,

I think the wonderful tonality of your print has as much or more to 
do with artistic judgment and mastery of craft as it does with which 
scanner or printer was used.

This is true in traditional photography and holds in digital as well. 
It is more important to use the tools and materials at hand to their 
full potential in the realization of your vision. We tend to worry 
too much over whether we have found the perfect camera, computer, 
film, etc.

Martin


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> Mark,
> 
> You wrote:
> 
> >For me, I'm still dumbfounded to know how Paul Roark got such
> >amazing sharpness, and smoothness, and detail, and lack of
> >dot, out of 3000, with the Epson driver. That print of the 
driftwood
> >...was printed with Epson driver; ...
> 
> Well, I'm flattered.  Let me comment on each point separately.
> 
> The sharpness of the 3000 with the Epson driver is as good as my 
1160 with
> the Piezo driver.  It's a very sharp printer -- thoroughly modern 
in that
> respect.
> 
> The film was Pan X, camera Rollei SL66 (very smooth focal plan 
shutter,
> mirror pre-released); the lens was the 150 Zeiss Sonar (very hard 
to beat);
> and most importantly, the camera was on a tripod.
> 
> Scanning was done by, first, enlarging the medium format negative 
(glass
> carrier, aligned enlarger, Apo-Rodagon lens) onto a Kodak #7302 B&W 
8x10
> film (tray developed under a safelight in Xtol full strength 4 - 6 
minutes).
> Then the 8x10 negative was scanned on a flatbed scanner that has a
> transparency adapter.  Such scanners can do outstanding 400 - 800 
dpi scans.
> 
> Careful Photoshop use of unsharp mask and other tools was also done.
> 
> The smoothness and detail are both mostly a result of doing the 
above steps
> carefully.
> 
> The lack of dots is not really there.  The 3000 does have dots.  So 
do they
> all.  The question for me is whether I see them in normal viewing 
of the
> print.  In that context, the 3000 can do a very nice job -- 
especially for
> 16x20" prints.  It cannot achieve the small dots of the latest Epson
> printers, but the extent to which that matters is much less than 
one would
> think.  The normal partitioning of the inks by the quad workflow 
does its
> magic on the 3000 just like it does on other inkjet printers.  The 
dots and
> dither pattern are larger on the 3000, but the dots in the 
highlights are
> sufficiently light and low contrast that they have very little 
visual
> prominence or effect.
> 
> >I thought maybe Piezo driver, to reduce dots.
> 
> No, it was the MIS VM inks, Epson driver and Photoshop adjustment 
curves.
> 
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com