Digital BW, The Print

I agree that the NK7 inks work really well with this printer, however sadly
they won't work on any glossy papers.

David Whistance

  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of steveh0607
  Sent: 11 October 2006 14:09
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Ilford Smooth Pearl


  --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Joseph Chandler
  <over40_98@...> wrote:
  >
  Try the NK7 inks from Cone, they work fantastic.

  > O.K. folks, a little help here please. I just set up
  > my Epson R1800! I printed some Butterflies on Epson
  > Ultra Premium Glossy and the results were fine.
  >
  > So I have two questions: can I print both B&W (My
  > heart) and color from this printer and not worry? And
  > what ink set from MIS would be best?
  >
  > Joe Chandler, infrequent participant
  >
  > --- Paul Roark <paul.roark@...> wrote:
  >
  > >
  > > >do you know if Costco's Kirkland paper has the same
  > > problems?
  > >
  > > My Abbey Publications acid test pen (from (512)
  > > 929-3992) indicates the
  > > Kirkland glossy paper base is much more neutral. It
  > > probably is buffered.
  > >
  > > Whether it has enough buffering in it for the long
  > > haul is harder to tell.
  > > The ratio of lignin to buffering is the issue. Some
  > > standards call for less
  > > than 1% lignin and more than 2% calcium carbonate.
  > > In cheap paper with lots
  > > of lignin, the acids they put out will eventually
  > > overwhelm the buffering.
  > > Also, lignin itself is photo sensitive, turning
  > > brown in the sun. Buffered
  > > newsprint still turns brown.
  > >
  > > The Epson Premium glossy, etc. papers are well
  > > buffered and archival.
  > >
  > > The new glossy papers -- Crane Silver Rag, etc. --
  > > appear to be well
  > > buffered and acid free.
  > >
  > > As an old fan of Kodak and still faithful user of
  > > its discontinued Technical
  > > Pan film, it pains me to say this, but I no longer
  > > believe anything they
  > > say. I tested one of their vaunted swellable
  > > emulsion dye papers and it was
  > > the worst in the test. They consider a "year" of
  > > display to be half the
  > > amount of light Wilhelm and others use. In general,
  > > my experience is that
  > > failing companies engage in this sort of thing in an
  > > effort to survive, and
  > > that appears to be the mode Kodak is in.
  > >
  > > The cheapest archival papers (unless Kirkland is
  > > indeed archival) are the
  > > low-priced, highly buffered matte papers like
  > > Premier Art Premium Matte.
  > > See http://www.photowarehouse.biz/premier.html
  > >
  > > Paul
  > > www.PaulRoark.com
  > >
  > >
  > >
  >
  >
  > __________________________________________________
  > Do You Yahoo!?
  > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
  > http://mail.yahoo.com
  >



  


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]