Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" 
<cj@c...> wrote:
> Hello Martin,
> 
Clayton-

I am also using the ABW driver with "light" (smoother step wedge) 
and "neutral" settings.  I have not reduced the ink limit.  Do you 
have any correspondence between screen and print (i.e. something like 
a soft proof) and if so, what are you using for screen view 
(workspace, monitor calibration, etc.)?  I am using a workspace of 
gamma 2.2 and a monitor calibrated to 5K and 2.2.  The screen view is 
much darker than the print and the shadow compression is somewhat 
different between the two; so I use a PS curve for viewing to fairly 
closely match the print.  But I thought you might be doing something 
better than this.

Walt



> >Just so I understand you correctly, are you saying that the Mk 
> >C86 cart with the C86 chip works (without wreaking the printer) 
> >with the R2400?
> 
> NO!!!! Don't do that.  Sorry I wasn't more clear.  First, the 
cart.  I
> have MIS carts for the R200.  I was told that this same cart is used
> for the C86/R1800 printers, and also works in the 2400, BUT the 
chips
> for all these are different.  So I took the chip off the 2400 MK 
cart
> and put in on the R200 cart with Eboni.  It worked, the 2400 
accepted
> it without complaint, but it had the weird banding problem.
> 
> 
>  
> >As for the EEM paper with Epson R2400 Mk cart, the print was not 
> >as good as the HRag 188 paper (using the EEM profile) does look 
> >much better.  
> 
> Try using the VFA paper setting with the PR and see what happens.  I
> found MUCH better results on all the papers I mentioned, compared to
> the same papers using the Enh Matte setting.  I just keep it on
> VFA for everything now.
> 
> 
> 
> >My comment was only to say that the Eboni ink gave me better 
> >blacks.  Especially for images with a lot of heavy shadows in 
> >the Zone 3 range.  
> 
> Yes, I expect Eboni will be much better for everything.  I'm just
> concerned (because of this first experiment) that it won't work in 
the
> 2400 for some reason.  That's why I am hoping you will try it to see
> if you get the same result.  If you do, then we'll know it isn't 
just
> something in my printer and further testing will be needed to find 
the
> cause (and hopefully a cure).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >By the way, I did try BO on my C86, it was, as you said more vivid 
> >and did not suffer from the slight opaqueness...
> 
> Yes, it's quite a difference.  I still use BO except on certain 
images
> that are weakened by it - mainly those with large smooth mid-tone
> areas.  The other day I spent several hours working up a K3 print.  
It
> looked great by itself, but then I placed a BO print next to it and
> suddenly it looked wimpy.  How does your C86 do for BO?  Many users
> have reported it is too coarse, but a few reported good results, so 
I
> guess it varies - maybe you have a good one.  The one C86 BO print
> I've seen was very coarse.  My R200 is giving results that to the 
eye
> are as good as the 2200.  They have a bit more dither banding under
> the loupe.
> 
> 
> 
> >I will try the other papers, as especially the VFA paper, when I 
> >get up to speed with the R2400.
> 
> You don't necessarily need to use VFA paper, just use the VFA paper
> setting.  Try it with your PR with the ABW settings of 6h/1v.  I 
get a
> very pleasing tone that is very close to what I get with Eboni BO on
> that paper (that was my goal - I set out to try and match that 
tone).
>  I also put the Tone setting on "light" and ink config to -5%.
> 
> These are my standard settings for everything:
> 
> Paper Type: Velvet Fine Art
> ABW/Tone: Light
> Ink Config/Color density: -5%
> 
> I have this as a Saved setting.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Clayton
> 
> 
> Info on black and white digital printing at    
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm