Digital BW, The Print

> Humm,I see...Does it mean that it's a known problem of this inkset?

No, it means I think there is a lot of room for improvement with the entire
inkjet industry.  Then again, color photo materials used to also require
that every batch be re-profiled, and of course, every film and paper had
it's own characteristics.

So, between ink variances and paper differences, it's difficult to get and
keep the exact look one prefers.

If a blended monotone or even variable-tone ink is too magenta or too green
for a certain paper, there is little one can do about it.  The 3D approach
was, in part, to allow one to adjust for these differences.

It's odd that the inkset at issue here is the UT-FSN.  It actually has the
least magenta mix of the toned grays.  (The issue is actually the ratio
between the cyan and R800 blue -- looks like grape juice -- that is used to
cool down the carbon.)  The glossy paper you're using may be the source of
the magenta look.  The older glossy papers were the worse that way.  If you
try a Kirkland glossy for drafts and a Crane Silver Rag for the final print,
I'd guess the look would be quite different.

One of the reasons the amount of "magenta" in the toned inks differ is that
I mix them to a specific set of papers.  That set of papers changes with
time.  Crane Silver Rag did not exist when the UT-FSN formula was made.  On
the other hand, the older glossy papers were becoming good enough to use.
Now, however, I think it is critical that an inkset print well on CSR, and I
recommend people move away from the older, acidic glossy paper technologies.


Paul
www.PaulRoark.com