Digital BW, The Print

I was asked off list to comment on what we know of the new Piezo inks (not
by MIS), so I thought I might post that here for what it's worth.  These are
just my off the cuff thoughts:

>What do you think about Cones approach with this?  
>Sounds a bit limiting, but...

Jon hasn't told us a lot about it, but here is what he's said and some
questions and thoughts I'd have:

> ... InkjetMall is about to release seven true dilutions of one black 
> tone...

There is, to a certain extent, a trade-off between flexibility and
smoothness.  And the flexibility is not just to get different tones, but,
perhaps more importantly, to be able to profile papers.  The problem is that
not only do different papers print with different tones, but also that a
single paper doesn't print the same in the highlights, shadows and midtones.
So, if he really has only one tone, he won't even be able to profile a
single paper very well.   


> 
> If we thought that the best print possible was created with three  
>dilutions of ink, we would have followed the trend of current solutions 
>which use warm and cool inks in a set.

> Rather we see the remarkable quality and improvement  of producing a 
>new Piezography system with 7 dilutions - each printing at the same 
>time.

Well, he can't really mean that all 7 inks are firing at the same time.  I
assume what he means is that the printer doesn't completely eliminate one
channel.  That is, it prints more or less like the Epson driver -- and the
way the printer was designed to be printed.

This is a bit of a flip-flop from his earlier claims that 3 inks could make
a smooth ramp.

At any rate, I think he's right to a certain extent.  My experience is that
a certain percentage of 2200s (and other Epsons) band, and this is more
visible if one of the channels is cut out.  So, in the UT2 and UT7 inksets,
the "slider" controls have all the inks firing, and this works best in a
certain percentage of (marginal) printers.  Presumably, the QC standards
Epson follows allows banding if one channel is cut out but not if all are
firing.

So, the "slider" mode for these inksets is not only to allow non-PS apps to
print, it's also a fall-back position for those who have a marginal printer.
In this mode, I have several options to control the range of the tones.  For
example, I recommend people who do not print sepia take that ink out and put
a second light carbon there.  That makes the slider printing as lightfast as
the curves.  Yet, they can print an excellent range of tones with all the
jets operating as Epson designed them.

 
> ... producing a more narrower focus of product which has to be "more 
> than better", which has to really satisfy those photographers who 
> believe their work should be printed and presented at the highest 
>standard possible.

I think he may be right, in that the 2400 is going to take the average user
market, so to survive he must cater to a limited group of people who want
the very best -- and think they'll get that from his approach.

> It is a new formulation from the ground up. Pure pigment in each of 
> the seven dilutions.

If he means 7 different dilutions, then he may be finally improving his
density distribution.  The standard Piezo M is too light, and the gap
between M and C is too large.  So, what I'd do if I wanted to design the
ultimate monotone is have the Y essentially as is, then have the M be the
light end, say LM, of a pair with something like an LK as the M.  Then I'd
keep the C as is, with a density like my UT2 & 7, & 7500 LC being the LC.
Even though I zeroed in on my 7500 LC empirically, it ended up essentially
where the UT2 & 7 light inks are.  The Epson cross-overs work best with inks
of a certain relative density.  When one moves away from this, the printers
start to show a "grain" and/or band.  

The bottom line is that the ultimate smoothness probably can be achieved
with a set of inks, each of which is a different density.  These have to be
designed for the particular cross-overs being used.

Additionally, the different densities allows the inks to start at different
points.  This spreads the difficult points of the curves and tends to hide
the defects.

So, I think he might be able to have a very smooth inkset.  Of course, the
existing ones are very smooth also.  So, I think the approach is over
killing one dimension at the expense of others that are more important than
the very small gain he'll achieve in smoothness.  But, different people want
different things.


> Its designed to be Lab Neutral on a variety of papers that have a 
> similar paper color as Hahnemuhle PhotoRag.

There are few papers that print just like PhotoRag.  The other Hahnemuhle
papers of that generation may be the closest (same coating?).

> We did that because we beleive that that has become a "standard"
> paper. So there will be several options to get the "dead neutral"
> look. 

I think PhotoRag was yesterday's standard.  The flaking and surface
sensitivity are such that it might well lose its position to Innova for
those who favor dmax and UltraSmooth/PremierArt for those who favor
durability.

>On our Bradford Brilliant White it appears similar to PiezoTone 
>Selenium Tone inks. And warmer papers shift it warmer.

He's taking the old monotone view that the paper is the way to control the
tone. 

Overall, I think InkJetMall be able to sell some inks with this approach,
but whether the market that is interested in this narrow focus is large
enough to be very profitable is questionable.  The 2400 could hit the quad
industry hard.  

I suspect MIS will do better just based on price of inks.  If the 2400
execution is as good as I expect from Epson, those who do not compete on
price may be in trouble.

Obviously, I favor tone control over the last minutia of smoothness.  Once
there is a 7900 or whatever that has a second black ink spot, I'll be very
interested in either going with it or making a slightly modified inkset that
basically follows that approach.  Having a carbon ink and cooler ink that is
carefully designed to give a good tone on a wide range of papers is a huge
advance over a pure monotone in terms of ability to profile papers.
However, having three separate "color" inks to add the third dimension to
that ability solves some of the worst problems I have with the UT2 & UT7
approach.  Basically, with the carbon and cool inks I have control along a
single axis -- yellow-blue.  (The sepia can give some additional control,
but I don't like to use it that way.)  What I lack is good and flexible
control of the magenta-green axis; it has to be a pre-mixed compromise.  For
the best profiling, I need to get control of that axis.  The 2400 - 7800
approach does this.  However, with large format printers the ability to
print on glossy and matte paper without changing inks keeps the UT7 approach
superior for my uses.

I also wonder if the profiling software packages are going to support the
2400 - 9800 B&W approach.  Given the volume Epson does, they probably will
decide to support it.  When that happens, the high end will go that route
and Piezo may be left with very little.

Overall, I think Epson is closing in on the quad market.  MIS will survive
on price, but the pure B&W solutions will mostly be serving the older
printers -- again, those who have some price sensitivity, not the high end
folks.  

Anyway, time will tell.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com