Digital BW, The Print

Hi Josh,

Sorry I didn't mean to make this difficult.
But you should post this question to the group that is set up to cover
these QTR questions specificly. It is: 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/QuadtoneRIP/?yguid=181774681

Roy monitors this group regularly so you can go to the source with
your concerns. Apparently QTR can convert on the fly to a grey scale
print space.

I personally have always set my profile in the Epson driver at 2.2
gamma and have achieved perfect results in regard to contrast and
density exactly as I see them on my monitor without any extra ink load
settings utilized. My personal approach is to not soft proof color
tone or use RGB for monochrome because I don't think it is subtle
enough and have always prefered to make a small proof and set it aside
for future reference. I have about 15 different possibilities that I
draw from. I do always work in 16 bit though until print time.

I did suggest this method to you because it has worked so well for me.
I wouldn't worry too much about all this. It might be a good idea to
do a couple of quck tests of 4x5 images to see what your best results
are both ways. I also don't know the differences betweeen QTR's
function on a pc if you are in a Windows environment. But again, Roy
is the one to ask about all this.

John





--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "joshhackney"
<joshhackney@g...> wrote:
> A recent post from John Dean started my brain spinning.  Could
someone help calm my 
> thinking?! 
> 
> John Dean wrote:
> 
> "And he would probably get much better results printing out of
greyscale 2.2 with QTR 
> rather than trying to use RGB and the Epson print driver by itself."
> 
> Considering that I am using a completely digital workflow, including
digital capture, is it 
> still necessary to convert to graygamma 2.2?  My images are captured
RAW and then 
> created in ProPhoto from ACR.  Color to B&W conversion is performed
with a channels 
> layer.  In a zip file that I downloaded from the qtr download site
called 
> "grayspaceXYZv2.zip" there is a document titled "gray-readme.rtf",
and it says,
> 
> 
> "In the past when printing to QuadToneRIP in the Print with Preview
dialog the Print Space 
> was always Same as Source.  This disabled the Photoshop color
management system 
> during output to QuadToneRIP and the printer.  With soft-proofing it
was possible to 
> preview what the output would look like.  However you would still
have to edit your file to 
> take into account the different between the look of profile attached
to the image and the 
> soft-proof profile.  Which basically means you are editing to a
particular paper/ink setup.  
> Most of the time this is OK but if you'd like to try a different
type of paper such as photo 
> paper rather than matte paper you would need to re-edit the image
for the new paper.
> 
> With the two new generic print profiles the color management system
of Photoshop can be 
> used the automatically convert between the look on the display,
matte paper and photo 
> paper.  In other words you just edit to a generic working space
profile.  The Photoshop 
> color management system converts the data for display and will also
now convert for the 
> print using perceptual intent and black point compensation –all
seamlessly without having 
> to even use soft-proofing.  Since QuadToneRIP already has builtin
linearized profiles we 
> can use two generic ICC profiles to handle both matte and photo papers.
> 
> To use this simply, in Print with Preview select a Print Space
Profile either Gray Matte Paper 
> or Gray Photo Paper rather than Same as Source when you print.   You
should also have 
> Intent: Perceptual and Black Point Compensation selected."
> 
> 
> The document I just quoted uses the expression "Generic working
space profile".  
> Considering this information, my thinking is that is shouldn't
matter if I use a generic 
> working space profile that is RGB or gray gamma 2.2.  What
difference does it make if I 
> manually convert from RGB to graygamma 2.2, or if PS does it for me
when it converts 
> from RGB to this gray matte paper print space. 
> 
> Is my reasoning flawed?
> 
> It certainly would be easy to change my workflow and convert to
graygamma 2.2 after 
> doing my color to black and white conversion.  It's not that I want
to eliminate this step.  
> I'm just trying to understand what's going on so that I can do or
not do the conversion 
> because it is needed, not because I am following a recipe like a robot.
> 
> Thanks for any insights.
> 
> Best.
> 
> Josh
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" 
> <deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> > I would never assume that what a monochrome image looks like on a
> > screen is the same animal as a print on rag paper. Reading the numbers
> > are far more important in regard to tonality, contrast, and density. 
> > 
> > If he is not using QTR, Bauhaus, or another rip with the 9600 for
> > black and white he should be. And he would probably get much better
> > results printing out of greyscale 2.2 with QTR rather than trying to
> > use RGB and the Epson print driver by itself. Just my thoughts from
> > direct experence with this machine.
> > 
> > John 
> > 
> >