Digital BW, The Print

> so do i understand this correctly? you are using FS/FSN-Cyan in place 
> of PK/PKN?
Yes, if C is the darkest one (subject to memory failure).  There was
one other post on this forum, shortly after I bought my latest PK,
FS-N inks by someone else who observed the darkest FS grey was denser
than PK. 

I do not have a proper densitometer, but by both visual comparison and
profiled scan the FS-N dark gray was somewhat denser than the  PK (I
hesitate to put a number on it as I don't trust my calibration at
densities greater than about 2).  

Probably this is only a temporary measure until I get some new base
PK, but I have not decided yet. (I'll get some new base PK to use with
MISPRO for "other purposes".)  

> 
> you getting better results? is this with the density of the %100 
> patch, or just in terms of the bronzing in the darker areas?  (or 
> both)
yes both.  

> 
> i tried FSN-C (K position) in my 1280 when i still had it with no 
> luck, this was with when UT FSN was first offered.
> do you feel it's worth a try on my 2200?
I don't see why not, but I don't have a 2200.

> 
> side note (if it matters) ... i've been using PKN (K position) and 
> FSN-C (in light K position). both are more neutral than the PK & 
> light PK, and the FSN-C is around the same density as the light K. 
> that also means i end up with only 4 inks (PKN/C-C/M-C/M-Y) as 
> opposed to 6-7. i feel the prints are just as smooth as when trying 
> to use 6-7 different inks, but i'm only interested in a neutral print 
> for everything i do.
Yes, I find the hue of (new?) FSN-C is wonderful too, and I am content
with 3 inks for the moment (3"C"s, 2"M"s and a "Y"). 

Ken