Digital BW, The Print

See my message below to Walt.  K4 does have lower gloss.

Walt,

I'm using the MIS K4 (both in a 2400 and in a 4000, without the LLK in the latter) and CSR 
does exhibit slight bronzing and GD with both printers.  As John noted a light coat of 
Printshield will eliminate this problem.  The nozzle check patches exaggerate the bronzing 
and GD.  I've also made comparisons using Hahnemuhle FA Pearl and Innova F Type.  The 
H pearl surface looks almost the same as the CSR (but on a whiter paper base) and it also 
has about the same level of bronzing and GD.  Innova F Type has a slightly glossier 
surface, but exhibits essentially no bronzing or GD and unlike the other two papers it does 
not require Printshield treatment.  Except for the surface imperfections, the Innova F Type 
looks most like my air dried silver prints.  Recent discussions indicate that there are 
batches with a smoother surface.  Mine was in the boxes with the blue label.  Note that all 
of these comments are specific to MIS K4 inks which tend to produce a slightly lower gloss 
compared to Epson K3.

Carl

On Jul 3, 2006, at 8:23 PM, wwodets wrote:

Folks-

I've finally gotten a box of Crane Silver Rag and had a quick and
dirty look.  I did this simply by printing an auto nozzle check
(solid rectangles) with the MK still in the printer, just wanting to
see what the ink looked like on the surface.  This is a 4800 with K3
inks.

If I leave out the MK swatch, the ink is *much* glossier than the
paper itself--the ink looks like something laminated to the surface
of the paper.  So, I am imaging that an image would show significant
gloss differential between very open highlights and more dense areas
of the image, as well as between dense areas of the image and the
paper surround.

In comparing the CSR to a few silver gelatin, fiber, gloss, matte-
dried prints, the SR is actually more matte than the fiber paper.
The gloss of the ink is a closer match to the gelatin paper.

Though the CSR doesn't really look like a matte-dried paper, I like
the look and find it very "photographic."  But with the K3 inks, I
can't see that it would be useful without a Print Shield spray or
something like that.

Any comments on evaluating the paper/ink in this way or on my
observations?

Thanks,
Walt


On Jul 4, 2006, at 2:32 PM, Keith R. wrote:

Haven't had the chance to try the new papers yet, but after reading 
Walt's comments, I was wondering if the "gloss issue" he mentions has 
to do with the micro encapsulation of the K3 inks. Has anyone tried 
the MIS K4 inks in a x800(or 2400) on these papers? MIS states that 
their K4 inks are "not as glossy as the Epson K3 inks".
The reason I'm asking is that I'm getting close to point of having to 
get ink for my 4800, and now that MIS has gotten their problems 
resolved with their funnel fill carts, I am once again rethinking the 
K4 inks set.

KeithR 


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets" 
<odets@...> wrote:

Folks-

I've finally gotten a box of Crane Silver Rag and had a quick and 
dirty look.  I did this simply by printing an auto nozzle check 
(solid rectangles) with the MK still in the printer, just wanting 
to 
see what the ink looked like on the surface.  This is a 4800 with 
K3 
inks.

If I leave out the MK swatch, the ink is *much* glossier than the 
paper itself--the ink looks like something laminated to the surface 
of the paper.  So, I am imaging that an image would show 
significant 
gloss differential between very open highlights and more dense 
areas 
of the image, as well as between dense areas of the image and the 
paper surround.

In comparing the CSR to a few silver gelatin, fiber, gloss, matte-
dried prints, the SR is actually more matte than the fiber paper.  
The gloss of the ink is a closer match to the gelatin paper.

Though the CSR doesn't really look like a matte-dried paper, I like 
the look and find it very "photographic."  But with the K3 inks, I 
can't see that it would be useful without a Print Shield spray or 
something like that.

Any comments on evaluating the paper/ink in this way or on my 
observations?

Thanks,
Wal