Digital BW, The Print

Steve-

This is where the measurement approach fails.  The MK on HPR has 
the "veiled," "fogged" look of the simulate ink black on screen.  It 
as if a milkiness has been introduced into the shadows.  By 
comparison, the same ink of VFA as a deep, rich, clean look that is 
much more like the preview without simulate ink color.  This is an 
obvious difference.  

I've had two prints of the same full-range image sitting side by side 
on an easel in the kitchen for two days.  Not only are the blacks 
better on the VFA, the VFA print gives the impression of more detail 
(local contrast?).  I suspect the latter is an issue of dot gain.  
Bottom line, comparitively speaking:  the HPR is murky, the VFA 
crisp.  The HPR, by itself, is a good (very good?) print, but it 
doesn't hold up to a side-by-side comparison to the VFA.  So this is 
a disappointment to me because I like the hand, color, surface and 
weight (308) of the HPR.  But I certainly can't use it for an image 
with a lot of shadow area.  Having begun my experience with the 2400 
with VFA, I have always been a bit puzzled with the preoccupation 
with matte Dmax.  Now I know.

Thanks,
Walt 



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> What happens if you try to do a soft proof of PK ink on photo paper?
> 
> (What you are in effect saying is that you get a black point shift 
from
> Simulate Black Ink that hits the mark in one case but not in 
another. And
> this over relatively small differences - 7% visual density - in 
black.)
> 
> 
> > From: Steve Kale <stevekale@b...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 09:46:13 +0100
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Conversation: [Digital BW] Re: Simulate Ink Black . . .
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Simulate Ink Black . . .
> > 
> > Walt
> > 
> > I think you are going round in circles here.  I very much doubt 
that a
> > combination that produces a dMax of L*16.5 or so gives you a 
match but a
> > combination with an L* of 13.9 doesn't.  Especially when your 
display is
> > capable of producing both (and stronger) blacks.  I guess you see 
what you
> > see but it's rather illogical.  You use an i1 right?  Take a look 
at the
> > contents of your i1 monitor profile to se what the latent black 
of your
> > display is.
> > 
> > Steve 
> > 
> > 
> >> From: wwodets <odets@c...>
> >> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> >> Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 02:51:45 -0000
> >> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> >> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Simulate Ink Black . . .
> >> 
> >> Roy-
> >> 
> >> It's very weak compared to the same ink on VFA.  On HPR it looks 
more
> >> or less like the soft proof with simulate ink black checked.
> >> 
> >> Walt
>