Digital BW, The Print

Thanks, Walt.

I don't know why PS adds the ink black with the paper white.  I'll have to
try a few things and see if I can have an effect on that.  

Roy

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets" <odets@c...> 
wrote:
>
> 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.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>