Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
> I must admit I find this subject of perceived/observed colouration in a
> greyscale comprising colour dots rather interesting and, at times,
amusing.

It's so gratifying to hear that my personal goal, to be both
compelling AND entertaining, has been achieved at least this month.
Good morning Las Vegas!!

Steve, this issue is interesting primarily because it involves
perception, how the eye/brain registers information and how that
information strikes us as satisfying, or not. Particularly, all that
with regard to a bunch of people extremely experienced at responding
to B&W prints of any kind, as we have here.
It's all about the effectiveness of the prints, period.
Some people might be interested in quantifying all of that if
possible. I'm more interested in the result. I saw a show by a famous
photographer, all B&W, all UC(K2) RGB driver stuff with good profiles.
All carefully lit so they were neutral. I couldn't find a thing wrong
with them, files were well edited, tones nicely chosen, no color
banding, no visible color dots, nothing at all.
But I just didn't like them, without knowing how they were printed at
first. Other options with far less color ink involved, assuming well
done prints, have been much more satisfying. This is my personal
reaction, not one I preach.
Sometimes it just gets down to that. What the smallest perceptible
color dot size is, well it just doesn't matter all that much. I've got
some K3 samples here to compare with quad output, but to be fair I
need some on good coated art papers, this photo stuff is not appealing
and I can't print quads on it to compare directly. When the x800s come
out, I'll have one here for direct testing myself.
Tyler