Digital BW, The Print

The papers I have used with PKN are semimatte and Kirkland Glossy.
Does make you wonder if there is something up with the ink. Maybe
someone with a 2200 and/or semigloss  can add their experience. 

Costa

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan Traupman" <jont@c...> 
wrote:
> I printed the "Ink Separation.psd" file that has the 7 21-step wedges
> on it. With this paper, 100% was the densest for all the inks,
> although the density of PKN didn't really increase much after about
> 65%, which was around 1.85 or so. In the actual profile, I'll probably
> set the black limit to around 70% but with a BOOST_K=100 to get the
> darkest possible full blacks.
> 
> With which papers have you seen the best Dmax with PKN? I'm probably
> going to pick up some Premium Glossy to experiment with this weekend,
> and can get others, too.
> 
> -Jon
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ccolbertbw"
> <ccolbert@u...> wrote:
> > One other point is that the 100% patches are rarely the darkest.
> beyond some
> > point the density often decreases. You really need to print the file
> calibration
> > page and find the best ink limit. I have seen best ink limits as low
> as 45%.
> > PKN really can get up above 2.3 on many papers. I have not tried
> semigloss.
> > 
> > costa
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jonathan
> Traupman" <jont@c...> 
> > wrote:
> > > I've been doing B&W printing with a 2200 and the UT7 inks for about a
> > > year now and have been getting great results on matte papers with
> > > Eboni black. I drive the printer with Quadtone RIP and build most of
> > > my paper profiles myself with a Noritsu DM-201 densitometer.
> > > 
> > > However, I've had very limited success with printing on glossy and
> > > semi-gloss media. The biggest problem I've encountered is that the MIS
> > > Photo Black ink is simply not very dense. 
> > > 
> > > For example, I'm trying to create a QTR profile for Epson Premium
> > > Semigloss paper. If I print the QTR ink limit file in calibration mode
> > > with all limits set to 100%, the density of the 100% Photo Black patch
> > > is only around 1.9. This is weaker than the densities of the Dark Warm
> > > Gray (2.1) and Dark Cool Gray (2.2) 100% patches. I've actually gotten
> > > better results from profiles that just use the gray inks than from
> > > ones that use PK and the grays, though neither looked particularly
> great.
> > > 
> > > I recently ordered a bottle of the "experimental" PKN Photo Black
> > > Neutral ink since MIS claims it has a higher Dmax than regular PK.
> > > However, I neither noticed nor measured any appreciable increase in
> > > density, at least on the Premium Semigloss paper. It is a more neutral
> > > black, however.
> > > 
> > > So, is this normal behavior for the MIS Photo Blacks? With the Epson
> > > UC Photo Black, I routinely got densities of 2.2+ with this paper. It
> > > just seems odd that MIS's Photo Blacks would be this weak, when their
> > > grays clearly indicate that they can make a denser ink.
> > > 
> > > My search through the archives yielded little info on this topic, but
> > > it does seem that densities around 1.9 are what people have reported
> > > in the past for these inks. Is this true across papers, or is the
> > > Premium Semigloss just a particularly bad choice for the MIS inks?
> > > 
> > > The only potential problem that I can imagine with my setup is that I
> > > have put the PK ink in a light black cartridge and am using it in that
> > > position, because QTR allows me to control which black to use in
> > > software, and I have no need for the "Custom Light Black" that usually
> > > goes there because I'm not using the Epson driver. Perhaps the light
> > > black position in the print had incapable of laying down as much ink
> > > as the black position, but I've never heard mention of this.
> > > 
> > > I've already tried asking MIS about this, both on their forums and to
> > > their tech support, but received no response.
> > > 
> > > Any help would appreciated.
> > > 
> > > -Jon