Digital BW, The Print

They're only appalling in retrospect. At the time of their
introduction they looked pretty good against anything Epson had. With
the better yellow and used with Eboni as the black they aren't all
that bad even now. I suspect many of us don't expect or care if our
own prints are coveted beyond a normal lifetime. Besides, the relative
results reported by Paul and others are quite sufficient for
comparative purposes. It's all more or less based on prophesy anyway.

I have a feeling the vitriol on the wide format forum is based more on
the vaperware type announcements over the last year or more from
Futures and the fuss over the "blue wool" archival testing method than
anything else. Printers seem to be a somewhat bilious group when
excercised ;-)

Regards
Duane


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> I find it interesting that these tests are 6 years old on an ink set I
> suspect not many use anymore - that's a period during which significant
> change has occurred.  I wonder when they added the postscript re the
yellow
> ink (likely Sep 2000) and where the new results are.  Are there no
tests on
> their current or even more recent inks?  The poor guys at InkVillage got
> slaughtered on the wide format forum for not yet having longevity test
> results despite saying that they expect results early in the New
Year.  It's
> interesting that MIS is given a huge break even when the only
results they
> have made available are rather appalling....
> 
> 
> 
>  
> >> This RIT test for MIS is what most of us have probably seen:
> >> http://www.inksupply.com/rit.cfm
>