Digital BW, The Print

> In contrast, M.Reichmann has had the opposite opnion on the 4800. He
> 'prefers' the BW prints with his 4000 and Imageprint RIP versus the
> 4800 ABW option. Which am I to believe?

I don't know who to believe either but cerftainly not Reichmann because is the guy who, 
reviewing the 1270, stated that it produced dead neutral b&w prints right out of the box; he 
then wrote the same about the 1280 and the 2200 -- and we know all this is nonsense. It 
seems to me that he doesn't have a good eye or doesn't know what a b&w print really looks 
like. His review is also onesided towards matte papers: he concludes that the 4800 is a 
disappointment because matte prints are not better than with the 4000 -- but most people 
state that for glossy-type papers there is a great improvement: vitrtually no bronzing or 
gloss differential, and much deeper blacks that don't look veiled. Is this true? Impossible to 
say without seeding the prints or getting a review from someone whose eye one can trust.

--Mitch/Bangkok