Digital BW, The Print

Thanks, Antonius,

I will probably opt for the IJC/OPM solution for my first tests on 
the 7500. I would be happy with similar results as was obtained on 
the 1160 / 3000 in the past.

Bob

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Antonis" 
<antonisphoto@y...> wrote:
> 
> > Does OPM yield as good results as the others?
> > 
> > The problem is that I have heard that neither of these would give 
me 
> > the "grainless" dotless prints I have been getting with the R9 
> > (Sundance) software. Is it true that the dotlessness in OPM only 
> > applies to the highlights? 
> 
> 
> Bob,
> 
> if by "dots" you mean printer dots (as opposed to dither), these
> are not so much a function of the software as they are a function
> of (a) the size of dot the printer puts down, (b) how many shades
> of gray you use and (c) how your inks are partitioned across the
> grayscale.
> 
> StudioPrint and IJC/OPM will both allow you to partition inks to 
your
> liking. But if you are using a 7500 which - relative to today's 
models -
> puts down rather big dots, you'll need all the help you can get. By
> cutting out 2 nozzles and working with 4, you won't get as dotless
> a print as using 6. Software won't matter in this regard.
> 
> The smoothest print out of those machines comes from doubling up
> the Cyan and Magenta positions by using the same ink in the
> Light C and Light M. If you make a  good profile with either 
software,
> you'll get as dotless a print as that generation of Epsons are 
capable of. 
> Perhaps in larger sizes, you won't be able to tell the difference
> between using 4 and 6 nozzles. But making the right profile
> is crucial either way to make sure you hide the dots as best
> you can. Either software that you are considering will give you that
> control. 
> 
> > 
> > I wonder if anyone has had the opportunity to compare R9 to 
> > OpenPrintmaker and StudioPrint in terms of overall quality, tonal 
> > range and dotlessness. (and what about Cone software?)
> 
> I only used the plug in (pre-R9) with an 1160 and remember getting
> very good results. However, when I moved to the 1280, I got pretty
> bad banding, due to the poor profiles supplied at the time. The 
> experience convinced me to never again use canned profiles.
> To answer your question, while I haven't compared R9 to either
> SP or OPM, I consider both of these superior because they
> allow custom profiling.
> 
> I have used the IJC/OPM solution on the mac for the last few years
> and have never had problems with banding or dots across a wide
> range of printers including a 7000 and a 9500. In those large 
formats
> I use the Piezotone inks loaded as would have been specified for
> the R9 or StudioPrint, i.e. M=LM and C=LC. 
> 
> As for the choice between StudioPrint and IJC....    as you know,
> SP costs a whole bunch and forces you to use a Windows box.
>  IJC otoh, because it doesn't have the features of a full
> RIP and doesn't support color, costs a lot less. It also runs under 
Mac OS X
> as well as Windows. Currently, the Windows version of IJC has a lot
> more features than the Mac version, but they are mostly there for
> convenience - the print quality is the same.
> 
> Antonis