Digital BW, The Print

The "better" ink may already exist for the 2200 -- UT7.

If I only want a B&W printer, then the 2400 with the magenta replaced by
R800 blue clone ink may be a possibility.  That would give me the ability to
profile the papers better along the green-magenta axis and also probably be
more lightfast.  This could be done even with the Epson driver.   

I suspect the first thing MIS should do is just be sure it has a clone
inkset for the K3.  I suspect this means simply having an LLK -- which ought
to take me about 15 minutes after I get a sample of Epson's LLK.  I suspect,
however, MIS's supplier will have the LLK done before most of us have a
printer or sample inks.

After that, the question may be whether there is enough demand for a
dedicated B&W inkset for the 2400 to bother with it.  For the large format
printers, setting up an inkset that can print glossy and matte without
changing the inks may be worth the effort.  As such, the 2400 may be simply
a test bed for that effort.  

I think it'll take QTR or IJC along with a dedicated inkset to do the glossy
or matte B&W printing system I have in mind.  With the Epson driver I won't
be able to lay down the LK and LLK while at the same time controlling the M
& C with curves.  So, a first step to such an inkset is for Roy or Joe to
get control of the individual inks.  Once that happens, then a superior B&W
inkset is very possible.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 


>If I were MIS I would be trying to invent a new ink set that is 
>better than the K3s....

> 
> You said it! Come on MIS lets go for it! 
>



> > Is there any reason why bulk K3 inks -- or, more accurately, a 7-color
> > inkset that incorporates the advances of the K3 set -- could not be
> > used in a 2200? If I were MIS, I'd be trying to create the equivalent
> > of k3 clones and marketing them to all the owners of Epson's "older"
> > pigment printers.
> >