Digital BW, The Print

If the density of the Epson LK3 is the same or even close to the  
original UC LK I will try it in my 4000.  I'm not happy with the MIS  
UT7 LK that I've been using in my 4000 because I've been getting hue  
shifts (towards yellow) when printing for neutral and I have to add  
LM and LC to get neutrality.  The whole point of switching to the UT7  
LK was to avoid toning with the cyan and magenta inks, but It doesn't  
work.  Using a 50:50 mix of UT7 LC and LM position grays gets me a  
more neutral composite gray in my 2200 and I may try this as well in  
the 4000 if the LK3 doesn't work.  I would also like to have a  
MATCHED, NEUTRAL K and LK  for use in the 4000, but it looks like  
this will require a "roll your own " approach as the stock inks don't  
cut it.

Carl


>
>
>> 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....  :-)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]