Digital BW, The Print

Clayton,

That was one of the more interesting posts I've read in awhile, on a
topic of particular interest to me at the moment.  In my studio, I
have a Epson 4000 as my main printer for B&W.  I'm using the standard
Epson UC inkset with Eboni Black instead of the Epson MK and using QTR
or BO.  I was thinking of adding the 2400 as sort of "test bed" to see
if I wanted to upgrade the 4000 to the 4800.  Think I'll wait for some
more reviews of the K3 inkset.  My only problem with BO is that I
frequently get microbanding that I haven't figured out how to get rid of.

Thanks for info.

Tony Bonanno

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones"
<cj@c...> wrote:
> >It's a thorough review, but I don't think it addresses the 
> >UT7 inks.
> 
> He never got to BW prints on matte paper with MK.  It's maddening.  I
> have yet to see a review that thoroughly evaluates this from a fine
> art perspective.  Everyone is going GaGa over glossy prints.
> 
> I recently downloaded & installed the 2400 driver on my laptop and
> went to a store & hooked it up to the floor demo that had MK
> installed, and printed a step wedge on PR in ABW neutral mode.  It
> made a beautifully smooth print with no dither banding, very
> impressive looking by itself.
> 
> Then I got home and did the same print/paper on my 2200 using Eboni BO
> and compared them.  Here are my observations:
> 
> 1) The Eboni print has better Dmax, no contest.  By itself the ABW
> print looks pretty good, but next to the Eboni print it's weakness is
> apparent.
> 
> 2) The ABW ramp moves into black too soon, decreasing shadow
> separation. Perhaps some good profiling can cure that.
> 
> 3) By itself the ABW print looks neutral, but next to the Eboni print 
> a variety of subtle color casts become apparent.  With a loupe the C
> and M color dots can be clearly seen of course, just like any other
> RIP with color inks.  
> 
> 4) Again, by itself it looks pretty good, but compared to the BO
> print's luminance the ABW print has that typical dull milky opaque
> look common to many full ink systems.
> 
> 
> I have several thoughts from all this.  First is the issue of how
> toning is achieved.  It seems that no matter how well done, and the
> 2400 is as good as any I've seen, you can't entirely remove the subtle
> coloration that exists when you mix color dots in with the blacks.  So
> it comes down to whether one is satisfied with that kind of result.  I
> know that many users are happy with RIP/color ink results, but having
> used a no-color-ink approach for so long my eye detects the color and
> doesn't like it.  I find the same thing in my experiments with various
> UT7 mixtures and 2K approaches (the 2nd K having color toners mixed
> in).   Besides coloration, there is the lower Dmax and the opaque
> look.  What these all add up to is that the 2400 would not be a
> satisfactory solution for me.
> 
> It seems that while BW printing technology was in its infancy all BW
> folks were thrown into one camp - we all wanted something that worked
> and lasted.  But now that BW technology is getting better, the users
> are being segregated into groups more akin to the "dark ages".  Please
> don't nitpick me on the following statement, I'm speaking in
> generalities just to make a point - There were on the one hand folks
> such as beginners, students, hobbyists, non-fine-art professionals,
> whatever, who were satisfied with RC prints and who didn't obsess over
> the finest nuances of things.  On the other hand were the fine art
> zonie types who only used fiber paper and all the rest.  
> 
> Seems like the 2400 will be an ideal printer for people in the first
> group.  It turns out really good looking prints if you don't examine
> them with too high a standard.  But will it satisfy people in the 2nd
> group?  Not me.  Even the glossy prints.  I know lot's of people have
> said "WOW!" upon seeing them.  But I have examined several prints and
> find them pretty good, but ultimately unconvincing compared to a good
> RC silver print, mostly because of the subtle coloration.  It really
> isn't neutral black, it's warm black with C and M added in an attempt
> to fool the eye.  Color is color.  They simply aren't the same.
> 
> The best non-BO prints I've seen, in terms of Dmax and luminance, were
> done with a 2K approach using QTR with Eboni and some sort of LK.  It
> preserves enough luminance to avoid the milky opaque look and is much
> smoother than BO.  The only drawback is the coloration in the LK.  My
> "holy grail" is still to find a way to dilute the K, so that both inks
> respond the same to the paper the way Eboni BO does.  That will avoid
> the coloration look and side-step any longevity issues associated with
> color inks.  So I'll stick with the 2200 for now.
> 
> Regards,
> Clayton
> 
> 
> Info on black and white digital printing at    
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm