Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets" 
<odets@c...> wrote:
> Hey--
> 
> I'm really knocked out by the quality of the discussion here, and 
I 
> wanted to thank Clayton, particularly, and all others for their 
> responses to my post of last night.
> 
> So, I have some other thoughts and observations on the 2400, BW 
> printing and print evaluation.


Hey Walt, what a great set of comments and thoughtful observations. 
Just last night I critically compared R2400 prints on EPSG paper (I 
like glossier surfaces) to my darkroom silver gelatin prints and 
invited over a friend who is the head of a photography dept. at a 
local art school and is also an internationally exhibited fine art 
photographer. He has a very good eye and knows all the issues. We 
looked at the prints in halogen, regular incandescent, and daylight 
lighting and talked about our reactions.

First of all there was no metamerism, bronzing of any significance, 
or neutrality issues. I use the ABW portion of the Epson driver and 
am not using a RIP. I had "toned" my prints at 2vertical/2horizontal 
and really could have gone to 3/3 to get away from the really cold 
neutral point Epson sets.

Our main discussion revolved around the "look" of these prints. The 
R2400 prints all looked fabulous and were much better rendered than 
the darkroom prints (even though I am known as a good printer 
trained by Sexton). The more precise control of Photoshop made for 
better dodging and burning as well as contrast and "exposure" 
control. This was very evident and in general we like the R2400 
prints better and yes they do have a different look. I just would 
describe it as better. I think I realized that in general the silver 
prints were so much more affected by the toe and shoulder of the 
variable contrast paper and the digital prints just seemed more open 
and less compressed especially in the deep shadows and bright 
highlights.

On my chosen Epson Premium Semigloss paper the dMax was easily equal 
to my selenium toned prints and very attractive and lush. The 
only "hangup" was our pre-trained aversion to things "RC". When 
handling the paper, it had that plastic feel, but the image was 
still lovely. When drymounted and over matted and the mat was 
handled, the difference was virtually nil. We discussed how in the 
color printing world until just recently, all color printing was 
done on "photo" papers and we had no complaints. We also realized 
that we are the victims of our previous dislike of RC B&W papers 
because of their early poor quality and lack of longevity etc.

So our conclusion was that if it is the image that is important, the 
R2400 prints looked better. Handling a bare print felt "different" 
than fiber paper, but did not affect the image and when matted up 
for official display or presentation, the difference was essentially 
none. For me, the use of the EPSG, gives me the dMax that I like, 
but others may like the mat paper aesthetic more. But I think the 
point here is that the R2400 prints, at least in my hands, look 
great.

I must admit I am going through a bit of angst now, as I think I am 
making the transition out of my darkroom, since I think I am 
surpassing my results there. Just some thoughts on this new printer 
and output that I think is looking fantastic.

Cheers, Scott