Digital BW, The Print

Roy-

Let me elaborate a little further on my use of simulate paper white.  
Despite all the measurements we now do, I think that a print 
establishes its own tonal scale: that, within reason, a print tells 
the viewer what a white is and what a black is.  The highlights in 
the print, however, are directly comparable to the bare paper 
surrounding even a framed print (assuming a signature margin, etc.).  
So the print does not entirely establish the white point, the bare 
paper contributes.  For the blacks, a viewer will be inclined to 
accept the shadows as "black" if there is no black immediately 
adjacent to the print or the viewer is not insisting on a black "from 
memory."  A black mat (or even a black line on the mat edge, 
something framers are increasingly likely to use) can disrupt the 
black point of the print.  For these reasons, I like to use simulate 
paper white so that I have a visual measure of the print white point 
compared to the paper.  The black point in the print is less 
important to me.  I'd love to have a way to use simulate paper white 
(only) in 2.3.2.

Walt



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Harrington" 
<roy@h...> wrote:
>
> Walt,
> 
> I'm curious about your soft-proof comments.  You find the 2.3.0 
better
> than 2.3.2 ?  I would think the soft-proofs are the same in both as 
far as the
> gray densities -- 2.3.2 just adds color.  (I wouldn't use the 
Simulate Paper&Ink).
> 
> Roy
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets" 
<odets@c...> 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
> > <stevekale@b...> wrote:
> > The overall ink load with VFA, EEM, and HPR (almost) is fine.  I 
have 
> > reduced ink load with the ink load adjustment in the driver and 
this 
> > doesn't correct non-linearities.  Nor does the "density" slider.  
The 
> > light, normal, dark, etc.  setting in the driver seems about 
shadow 
> > compression and the darker setting is what is compressing the 
> > shadows.  You can see this in simply visually examining printed 
test 
> > strips.  I believe that this is the correct control to use and 
will 
> > report the numbers tomorrow.
> > 
> > Steve, also plesee see my last post about the soft proofing.  
What I 
> > didn't say there is that the canned Epson color profile provides 
> > about as good a soft proof as the 2.3.0 profile and a much better 
one 
> > than the 2.3.2 profile.  
> > 
> > Walt
> > 
> > 
> > >
> > > Yes I understand.  Do you have a color density slider under 
paper
> > > configuration?  If so try lowering the overall ink load with 
this.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > From: wwodets <odets@c...>
> > > > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 20:40:52 -0000
> > > > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Create ICC Soft Proofing 
question . . .
> > > > 
> > > >> 
> > > > Yes, I agree, but it is not the output of the printer that is 
not
> > > > linearized, it is the output of the ABW driver + printer.  
That 
> > is why
> > > > I am trying a profile on the light and normal settings in the 
> > driver.
> > > > I believe that the normal setting is the linearized output 
per 
> > Epson's
> > > > calibration and that is why "normal" is "darker."  I'll 
report the
> > > > numbers.
> > > > 
> > > > I'll try the color profile for interest re the screen match.
> > >
> >
>