Digital BW, The Print

Thanks for the warning Steve. I'll double-check my methodology with
this paper.

Have you actually tried DVFG with the Epson UC inks (Photo Black
installed ) in your 2100 with the Epson driver? If not, I'd be
grateful if you could try the UC PK some time & let me know your
readings for black, for both PSG and GPPW media settings, 2880dpi, NCA.

I'm getting a suspicion, just looking at the printed profiling
targets, that the UC PK is reacting with the paper in an odd way,
depending on the ink load. For the GMB TC9.18 chart I'm using, the
first square, A1 (R,G,B = 0,0,0) looks slightly grey on the GPPW
setting  when viewed at right angles, whereas on the PSG chart it
looks black. It's like the paper can't cope with the ink load with
PK/GPPW/2880/NCA. This would tally with my high L reading for black on
this paper.

I've never seen this before with any glossy paper I've profiled with
my 2100 so far (and I've profiled many successfully, all in NCA mode,
with results as good as, or better than, those of independent
consultants that I used prior to buying my own spectro). The last time
I saw anything as odd as this was with my old Epson 1200 printer and
Ilford Classic glossy paper. That printer used to chuck out loads of
ink in NCA mode and was difficult to profile by any method.

Regards,

Alan

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> Alan
> 
> I really think something is wrong here.  I can get better than that
on matte
> paper.  The Nano K ink tends to slightly under-perform Epson PK (UC
or K3)
> in the dMax stakes and so I'd expect it to be behind the Epson PKs
on this
> paper.  And I got 5 or thereabouts on the 2100 and with the Epson
driver.
> 
> Nonetheless I still prefer other ink and paper combinations.  The Da
Vinci
> paper looks more natural and is whiter than the SR but it seems to
bronze
> more so.  I still think both loose a lot of shadow detail when ever so
> slightly tilted.
> 
> I have the same print here (the Elephant Mother and Baby I from
> http://homepage.mac.com/stevekale/photography/sabisand1.html ) on 1. Da
> Vinci with Nanochromes, 2. Crane Silver Rag with Nanochromes, 3. HPR
with
> Nanochromes, 4. HPR with Eboni/Epson K3 (Adv B&W on a 4800) and 5.
EPSM with
> Nanochromes.  All of the Nanochrome prints were done with a colour
profile
> and the colour driver on my 2100.  (The image is quite good for
checking out
> shadow detail in the baby elephant below the mother's chest.)  On looks
> alone, I would have to say the placing would go as follows:
> 
> 1. Nanochromes on HPR
> 2. Nanochromes on EPSM (Epson K3 would likely be a tad better)
> 3. Eboni/K3 Epson Adv B&W on HPR.
> 4. Nanochromes on SR
> 5. Nanochromes on Da Vinci
> 
> (I'd like to see Epson K3 on the second and last two but I'd have to
do an
> ink change in my 4800.)
> 
> Placings 2, 3 and 4 all revolve around surface reflection
characteristics.
> Eboni/K3 on HPR doesn't have quite the punch of Nano on SR but the sheen
> means a lot of SR hides a lot of this punch.  Hence EPSM jumping ahead
> because I think it has the punch with a better surface look.  HPR is of
> course much more fragile and the Nanos have their issues.  I'd like
to see a
> true matte PK "silver rag" and an archival Nano derivative....
> 
> Steve