Digital BW, The Print

I never said their was a universal dislike for glossy. I said "everyone
seems to dislike" the "darkroom paper of similar name" to "RC". I said
nothing about whether I liked or disliked glossy.  I will now say that I do
like my glop coated semi-matte prints on either Epson Premium Semi-matte,
Epson Premium Luster or Ilford Smooth Pearl papers.

And by the way, have you tried glop?  Have you seen a print on semi matte
paper using UT7 inks and then coated with glop?  They are not "glossy".  As
for whether printers were designed for it or not, I think you have got
things in reverse chronological order.  Gloss optimizer was clearly invented
post the development of the 2200 printer.  It is a first attempt by Epson to
deal with one of the big issues of pigment inks on Resin Coated media (ooh
there's that term again).  It has been retained by the R1800. When Epson do
decide to replace the 2200 who knows what it might contain.  The large
format printers will always be slower on the technology curve.  Why?
Because these are typically business critical machines and not the right
place for a manufacturer to publicly explore new methods.  I can assure you
that Epson is very conscious of the big negative associated with the new UC
pigments inks - bronzing and gloss differential.  Gloss optimizer on the
R800/1800 is a first attempt to deal with this issue.  Smart people can
often find ways to use new ideas/procedures without having to replace their
existing equipment.  The use of glop in a 2200, 4000 or 7600 is a good
example of this.  Glop is not the be-all and end-all.  It has a few
drawbacks.  But prior to its advent, the printing of either colour or B&W on
Resin Coated inkjet media was really a waste of time.  We are slowly
improving our craft with new techniques, new materials and new ideas.


> From: Djon <westsidemaurice@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 16:31:03 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Let's simplify nomenclature
> 
> 
> 
> Steve, there's no universal dislike for glossy.
> 
> Many on this forum personally find it attractive...and like it or not,
> many MUST use glossy for certain clients (eg model headshots, band
> publicity,  press kits etc.
> 
> I think it's worthwhile to remember that some printers, the
> essentially-discontinued 1280 and the still-current 2200 and 4000 for
> example, are simply not built for glossy printing, though obviously
> some folks work hard to produce glossy with them.
> 
> Happily there are alternative printers that are designed for glossy,
> ...they make glop interesting but ultimately not very worthwhile,
> especially since glop doesn't help the printers do the job for which
> they were designed (color and/or B&W).
> 
> 
> <stevekale@b...> wrote:
>> 
>> While we are at it let's define RC paper in its INKJET form.  This
> is after all a digital print
>> forum...  At least over the last two years this has meant resin
> coated "photo" inkjet paper
>> encompassing all glossy, semi-gloss and semi-matte inkjet paper.
> Not to be confused
>> with the wet darkroom paper of similar name which everyone seems to
> dislike.  
>