Digital BW, The Print

I am planning to use Semi-Matte paper with my 2400. I have also
purchased the MIS K4 inkset but after reading your comments on R2-PKN
versus K4-PK, I am questioning whether I bought the right PK.

Is the ink load on the R2-PKN and K4-PK the same? Why do you think you
getting higher DMAX on the R2-PKN versus K4-PK?

Is the tone on Semi-Matte more neutral with the R2-PKN or just higher
DMAX or both when compared to K4-PK?

Also is the lack of bronzing and metamerism that you noticed with
K4-PKN, the same with R2-PKN?

Thanks.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Carl Schofield
<scho@m...> wrote:
>
> I've been using the MIS k4 inks in my 2400, both with MK (Eboni) and  
> PK (mostly the latter).  I provided some comparisons of Epson k3 and  
> MIS k4  density measurements  in an earlier thread (see links below),  
> but the bottom line is that Epson k3 PK dmax is slightly higher  
> compared to MIS PK4 on the same papers.  Dmax differences between  
> Epson k3 MK and MIS Eboni are dependant on the paper, in some cases  
> Eboni exhibits higher dmax on 3rd party papers and Epson k3 MK does  
> better on Epson papers (VFA in particular).  On the RC papers with  
> MIS k4 inks surface gloss is noticeably less compared to Epson k3  
> inks on the same papers (a plus in my book) and on my two favorite RC  
> papers (Epson Premium Semimatte and Pictorico Premium Photo Glossy)  
> there is no bronzing or gloss differential as well.  The MIS R2-PKN  
> can also be used if you want a cooler black and slightly higher  
> dmax.  I've only made a few color prints on Epson Premium Semimatte  
> (I made my own profile) with the k4 inks, but they look great and I  
> see no difference compared to Epson k3, other than less gloss and  
> slightly lower dmax.
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/message/70576
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/message/70648
> 
> Carl
> 
> On Dec 12, 2005, at 8:02 AM, Bob Michaels wrote:
> 
> > Peter: my excellent experience with the MIS PRO matches yours. I use
> > it in a 1280. That's why I was hoping the MIS PRO and the K4 were the
> > same. Unfortunately, MIS says the MIS PRO is not usable in a 2400.
> >
> > Anyone got a report on how the K4 does?
> >
> > Bob Michaels
> >
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "bwbonkers"
> > <PeterDLevis@a...> wrote:
> >>
> >> Jerry
> >>
> >> I cannot answers your question with regards the K4 inks but I did
> > recently do a
> >> comparison with MIS Pro vs Epson ink in a 2100.  My friends 2100 had
> > MIS Pro ink and
> >> mine Epson ink. I  made profiles for Olmec Satin with my EyeOne
> > using the same settings
> >> for each setup. We then printer the same test chart from each
> > printer. Looking at the test
> >> print side by side it was hard to see much difference. The MIS print
> > looked to us just as
> >> good as the Epson print. We were both very impressed by the MIS
> > print. We also both
> >> thought that the MIS print exhibited less metamerism than the Epson
> > print. Apart from
> >> making a custom profile there was no hassle in using the MIS ink.
> >>
> >> One of the reasons for doing the test is that I upgraded my printer
> > recently to the 2400
> >> and like yourself I'm interested in the K4 inks. The result of our
> > simple test has given me
> >> confidence to try the K4 inks when I have used up my stock of  
> >> Epson ink.
> >>
> >> Just for interest we also printed the same test print on my 2400
> > with K3 Epson inks. The
> >> 2400 print was the clear winner. The print showed slightly more
> > detail and saturation but
> >> the real difference was that there was no metamerism. It showed
> > quite clearly why the
> >> 2400 is so good at BW compared to the 2100.
> >>
> >> Hope this helps.
> >>
> >> Regards Peter.
> >
> >
>