Digital BW, The Print

Jean-Marc,

Je viens d'acheter la combinaison dont vous parlez: 4000+QTR. I am a 
very finicky worker from the wet darkroom, with unsharp masks, 
thiocarbamide toning, selenium... I am absolutely delighted with the 
printer: the output looks better to my eye than what I can do in the 
wet. B.t.w. the B&W output using the Epson driver looks good only under 
one light source: wild metamerisms.

If you want to see a print, I would be happy to send you one.

Frank


On Apr 22, 2005, at 5:50 AM, Jean-Marc Humbert wrote:

>
>  A am ready to purchase a stylus 4000 (you know the price in 
> Europe...),
>  for printing mostly B&W. My idea is to use the so well appreciated QTR
>  RIP.
>
>  Since I am living in France, there is no real exchange between
>  photographers as in the US and I never had a chance to look at a print
>  printed with such configuration (I mean on a 4000 or 2200/2100 with
>  QTR).
>
>  My previous configuration (what a hassle!) was an Epson 1160 with MIS
>  FSN, piezography plug in and permanent banding, cloggs and so one... 
> As
>  a result I've stopped printing for more than one year.
>
>  Do you think I am on the good way with the combination of a 4000
>  together with QTR and that I will be able to print A3/A2 pics with the
>  same quality as the ones I've painfully obtained with the Epson 1160
>  and the MIS inks (when it worked)?
>
>  Thank you for your help in getting me convinced that I am not again
>  making a stupid decision with at the end, a big frustration, because 
> my
>  goal is to print pictures that I love and not to become a printer
>  guru...
>
>  JM Humbert
>  Paris, France
>
>
Frank Döring
901 Cramer Ave.
Lexington, KY 40502
U.S.A.
http://www.doeringphoto.com


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]