Digital BW, The Print

Tyler;

You're right, I do prefer the 'mixed in' approach to the extent it's 
possible for neutral B&W, and yes, the differences between the two 
could stand more discussion. I find looking closely at a B&W image 
and finding it's made up of color dots almost as off-putting as 
microbanding. While it may not be a mechanical flaw like 
microbanding, it is still a reminder that this print was made by a 
machine. And while I can adjust to that at one level, I also don't 
want to be reminded of it in that way.

> think there is a difference between mixing color pigs in with the
> carbon directly in the solution, and mixing it in via dots with an
> additional head. There is an image structure difference, and I 
suspect
> a longevity difference and metamerism difference, but there has 
been
> little discussion of those differences and they haven't really been
> explored in depth.
> 
> Based on your post I think you favor the "mixed in" approach, but 
to
> be clear, you actually are utilizing a color component.

I've always aknowledged as much-now how do we get rid of it, if 
indeed removing all color does give better permanence?  I'm assuming 
it would, but I remember well the earlier sets of Quads-the diluted 
inks faded/colorshifted fastest, so in the end two or three 
dilutiuons of Eboni may not be the panacea I'm hoping for.

> 
> One note of interest. Much to Bill Bergh's dismay, the IJM's Carbon
> Sepia inkset, which he designed as supposedly pure carbon, fell
> slightly short of the other sets that do have color pigs mixed into
> them for hue, in their RIT tests. There seemed to be some positive
> symbiotic effect on longevity.
> Clearly there is more going on with mixing inks than some of us 
might
> think at a glance...
> Tyler

Seems the only thing that's certain is that we need more testing! 
Good thing the FDA isn't involved we might not live long enough (g)

Steven