Digital BW, The Print

Yes but why would you want to do black only with a 4800?  The Advanced B&W
output to photo paper is excellent and sooooo simple.  Dmax to matte paper
hasn't changed that much but a RIP will let you boost ink limits.  Still the
look of 1.7dMax is a long way off 2.4dMax.  BO's biggest strength is its
simplicity in achieving metamerism-free prints.  This is not an issue with
the 4800.

The bottom line is that the 4800 produces fantastic photo paper output
whereas the 4000 doesn't.  Toning is easy.  Matte paper output (other than
the toning through the driver) is not materially advanced in my view.


> From: Joe Davajon <davajon@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 18:54:41 -0700 (PDT)
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Advice needed... 4000 vs. 4800???
> 
> --- John Broski <jbroski@...> wrote:
> And some sources indicate that its BO
> performance is not good.
> 
> John,
> Would you kindly refer spefically to those "sources"?
> I'm considering the 4800 specifically because of its
> touted superiority for B@W as reported by some.  I've
> had my 4000 for over a year and have been delighted
> with it except my dMax on matte B@W do not compare
> with the richness and density of my silver B@W.  I'd
> hate to lose money on my 4000 and spend more $ for the
> 4800 only to learn that my gains would be minimal.
> Thank you for any consideration.
> Joe Davajon