Digital BW, The Print

> From: Clayton Jones <cj@...>


> For these reasons I consider
> Eboni BO to be superior except for the pesky graininess.  That's why
> seeing the 4800 BO print gave me such hope for the 2400.  Whether from
> the smaller dots or dither pattern or however, that was the smoothest
> BO print I've seen and it preserved the luminance.  I'm really
> disappointed that the 2400 doesn't have it.  I was all poised to get one.

Does the UK driver have black only setting?  Bob?  I was reasonably
confident following my conversations with Epson UK that they would "put it
back" and when I saw it in the 4800 I thought they likely had.  It's a pity
if they haven't as it is really a no-brainer way to please a lot of people.
> 
> I know many don't like BO, but many of us do and are willing to put up
> with the graininess in order to have the other advantages.  There has
> been plenty of validation for this. Over the past few years there have
> been numerous reports of unbiased viewers preferring BO over full ink
> prints when shown identical images printed both ways.  They don't
> understand the technicalities, but just say it "looks better".  I've
> shown BO prints to people for 3+ years now, including some experienced
> darkroom people, and never once has anyone made a negative comment
> about being dotty or grainy or whatever.  They always get positive
> responses.

Yeah at 2880dpi and 3.5pl I reckon you've got to have a very good set of
eyes to see any dots without a decent magnifier.  One thing that may have
made the 4800 black only a bit better than the 21/2200 is if the greyscale
ramps more smoothly.  (I simply can't believe that your eye can pick up a
modest change in dither or dot size at 2880dpi when the dots aren't visible
but I could be wrong.)

Roy Harrington has some cool stuff on the way which will allow you to print
a step wedge, measure it and create a greyscale ICC profile for your
individual workflow, ink, paper etc.  We can circulate some 21/2200 Eboni
black only ICC profiles when this is finished.  This will make the BO
workflow even better in that it will simplify having to do a print s curve
etc.  It works wonders on the Epson Adv B&W matte paper workflow.
> 
> I'm becoming convinced that the ultimate compromise lies in a RIP/2K
> system.  Both Carl Schofield and Steve Karafyllakis are experimenting
> with QTR/2K using Eboni and a mixed LK and getting extremely smooth
> results that preserves the luminance.  The stickler is the LK has to
> have some cool toner mix of some sort.

Here again you may find Epson has helped if they have really neutralised the
LK (and LLK) ink.  You could run, say, Eboni and the 2400 Lk with QTR.
Although I thought Carl was using an already neutral MIS LK-N.


> Carl is using a mix right now
> that has excellent luminance and isn't real obvious in coloration.
> I've also been trying it - the challenge is finding the right LK mix
> that will work ok on different papers.  To me the ultimate would be to
> find a way to dilute Eboni for the LK and avoid the toners.
  
Or better yet actually have a true LK rather than a dilution.  I wonder if
the Epson LK and LLK are dilutions or "true" inks by which I mean the
pigment colour is fundamentally different from K.

But as you head down this route it is a sliding scale towards smoothness and
away from that mystical "luminance" you mention...kind of a Goldilocks
situation where you want smoothness but not too much.  I say "mystical
luminance" because while a greyscale made of just one ink versus several can
have the same luminance (in a technical sense) there is some quality about
the former which you prefer.  Not luminance but I think I know what you are
trying to express.  I just struggle to believe that the 4800's ink dot size
and dither is giving you the kicker you see in the 4800 prints (unless it is
the Epson MK vs Eboni but I doubt it).  Maybe it's just a good excuse to
fork out for a 4800....  :-)