Digital BW, The Print

Thanks Tyler.  I wish I could see some of your prints.  The reason I was
asking is that I just finished printing the last 3 images on this webpage:

http://homepage.mac.com/stevekale/Photography/PhotoAlbum39.html

on Ilford Smooth Pearl paper with the 4800 at 2880dpi.  I have been over
them with my 6x6 loupe and honestly can't see any dots anywhere.  I scoured
the highlights and still nothing.  I see the texture of the paper very
clearly but no dots.  And that's on a photo paper where I would expect dots
to be more obvious.  Given the nature of the images and their smooth
transitions I thought they would show the limitations of the printer.  I'm
wondering how much more there is to play for with additional inks to make up
the greyscale.  I guess I simply need to see some true "pro prints" to see
what I am missing out on.  Seattle is a bit far away for now though...

Thanks

Steve


> From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>
 
> 
> There is no universal need. Clayton just needs one, and likes it
> better than more (that may have evolved, if so sorry Clayton). Those
> with IP, QTR, etc. with the current UC inks that are thrilled with
> their prints only need 2.
> Right now, I need at least 4. After seeing 6 I want 6. If I saw more
> and liked it even better, I'd want that...
> Also, without the means to put them down properly, more may not be
> better, more may create more problems. This is not a simple issue.
> 
>> (I say specialist because ideally I would like to hear from people
> who make a living printing
>> B&W for established photographers...
> 
> 
> I do that, depending on what you consider a living.