Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Dina" 
<lbdina@c...> wrote:
> He actually agreed that his results with the Epson driver were a 
bit 
> sub-par and agreed with my findings.  He did say that shadows using 
> the UC color inks didn't exhibit the Dmax I wanted, but that using 
> more MK provides excellent Dmax with a RIP.  With a CMYK RIP, you 
can 
> control these variables, but the driver does what it does.  It was 
> refreshing to hear a vendor actually speaking straight instead of 
in 
> riddles.
> 
> He told me he would do some in depth experimentation and testing 
with 
> the Epson driver and if he finds the right combo that makes this 
> paper sing, he will get back to me.  For a change, in this jaded 
> world, I actually believe him.  If I find we uncover the magic 
combo, 
> I will be sure to post it here.
> 


Yes this does seem very refreshing from the normal "run around" that 
we have come to expect.

Just for clarification, what I was able to get with my RIP was an 
L=15.77, which if ColorshopX is correct, the same patch measured to a 
density of 1.68 k status T with my i1 rev A spectro. This was on the 
thinner 250gsm version, so the 365 might be slightly different. That 
value was for the black ink only, through my RIP, measured from the 
linearization target. The density slowly reversed to a 1.55 as more 
ink was applied. Most of the innova papers I was able to push to the 
same dmax, and most of the Hanemuhle papers can be pushed to a little 
more, around 1.72-1.74. Real working dmax for the Max and Innova 
papers is closer to 1.66, and 1.69 or so for the Hahnemuhle papers. 
So it is right in the ballpark with all the rest for me.

In over inked areas, scuff resistance in nil. In normal inked areas, 
it is only slightly better than the Hahnemuhle papers (with my inks). 
This was tested on a print that has dried for about 1 week. And as I 
said earlier, I'll probably give it a bath this weekend to see how it 
likes water.