Digital BW, The Print

Not to challenge David's choice, or any inkset Mark might be 
considering, but I'm curious and eager to know their, and others', 
opinions of Lyson's dye-based Fotonic inkset, which is the one I've 
thought I would use.

Sam


>Mark, I couldn't agree with you more.  I am about to switch back
>to MIS dyes from MIS pigs.  When I compare the "look" of my b&w
>& sepia images made with dyes vs. those made with pigs, there
>is an unbelieveable difference.  For the past several months I've
>spent about $500. on profiles and wasted an equal amount on
>paper to try and convince myself that the pigs were getting close.
>An old photographer friend visited a couple of weeks ago, and
>we did a little show and tell. After he showed me some beautiful
>work, I shared some of the new pigment prints with him.  Then I
>got out some prints that were made with dyes a few months
>ago...It was like the emperors new cloths!  The dye prints were
>so much richer & smoother and had a 3-D air to them.  Side by
>side..no contest.
>I ordered a replacement CIS for the 1280 and a new set of MIS
>dyes this week.
>25 years is enough for me right now.  Think of all those C prints
>sold in the 70 & 80's by Meyerowitz and Shore & others, surely
>they are not going to hold up as well as these.
>Just a few years ago I remember reading on the Nash Edition
>website, that they were not using the longest lasting inks
>available, but rather decided to use the inks that gave them the
>BEST looking print, as that was a more important aspect in the
>final viewing.
>Hopefully, during the next year someone will come out with a
>longer lasting dye, but untill then, I guess that I will settle for 25 to
>29 years.
>My 2 cents.
>David Aschkenas