Digital BW, The Print

Hello Cynthia,

>...I may have forgotten to change it to no color management...

That would certainly change things <g>.


>I tried your suggestions again using VFA as the paper type with Moab 
>Kayenta and Epson Watercolor Radiant and found that the results were 
>much better; the blacks were clearly deeper than when using the same 
>ABW controls but with the manufacturere's suggested paper type...

I have no explanation for it, but just from experimenting I found that
VFA seems to work best for all the matte papers I tried.  The results
are really beautiful.


>My workflow is to shoot raw, do whatever adjustments I would do in 
>the raw converter as if it were a color image and then bring into 
>Photoshop(CS2)where I use various actions (whichever one seems to 
>work the best magic)which are based on channel mixer...

Understood.  Another thing to keep in mind (and this is the part
referred to in the earlier articles [someone reading the 2400 article
by itself may miss this]) is that these settings assume an image is
worked up using DG20 (or something close to that, I use DG18) as the
image profile.  Whatever BW conversion technique is used, when the
final conversion to grayscale mode is done, the image is converted
with the profile that is specified for grayscale in the Color Settings
window.  If this is set to something other than DG20 (or close to it),
the resulting image will be different (even though it looks the same
on screen) and the recommended printer settings may not produce the
best results.  

What is explained in the earlier articles is that the entire workflow,
from grayscale conversion to final print, is all interdependent. 
Other settings can be used (for example, some people use GG2.2 for the
image and Dark or Darker for the Tone setting[Printer Gamma in non-ABW
drivers]).  It isn't religion.  I recommend these particular settings
simply because I found that they produce the best result.  For
example, I found that using GG2.2/Dark (or Darker, I forget which)
produces a similar density print but with more blocked up shadows,
where DG18/Light is much more open and easier to control.

BTW, you can't test this by assigning a different profile to an
already converted image.  You have to convert a color image twice,
once with each profile (and saved with different file names), then
apply the same workup to both, then try the various printer settings
on them.



>The only difference is that I found that setting the tone to light 
>was washed out, but I suspect that this may vary from paper to 
>paper.  I think the Watercolor Radiant behaves better if you give 
>it more ink whereas I find that I back off with other papers. 

I never tried that paper, but keep in mind that the Tone control
(Light, Dark, Darker, etc) does not really mean "more ink" or less
ink.  It changes the printer gamma setting.  In essence it is like an
adjustment curve being applied to the output data.  It affects the
contrast as well as density of the print (which will likely mess up
all your hard work).  If a paper really needs more or less ink than
another, the place to adjust that is the Ink Config/Density setting
(the one the article recommends be set to -5%).  

I keep the Tone control on Light for everything.  In this workflow it
is meant to match the printer output to the image profile, not to be a
control for making a print adjustment.  For consistency in workflow
and LPF (Life Pleasantness Factor), once you have decided how you want
to work, these two settings should remain fixed.  They are the
foundation for the entire workflow.  If you go to switching them
around from one image to another your life as a printer becomes much
more complex and unpleasant (and you would be well advised to buy a
home blood pressure monitor) <g>.


 
>Although I have not gotten this far in my re-experimentation, I 
>suspect now that I might be working closer to your workflow by using 
>VFA as the paper type, (that is what you are suggesting for all 
>matte paper, right?)

Yes, for whatever reason, to my eye it does a beautiful (and better)
job with all the matte papers I tried (VFA, Dourian, PR, Aurora,
Condor, Merlin, Kayenta - all the usual suspects).  I just leave it on
VFA and forget about it.

And BTW, except for paper type, all the recommended settings work fine
with Silver Rag, etc., with paper type Premium Glossy giving the most
open shadows (with PK ink of course).


>using a lighter tone than the default of 
>normal, that your suggested color wheel numbers may work better.  
>It's at least a place to start.

I recommend anyone getting started to do lots of experiments and test
everything.  That's the only way to fully grasp how the system works
and what effects the various controls have (and, thus, how to get what
you want from it).   Otherwise you're just groping around in the dark.
I post the settings to help people get started and get good results
right away, but also encourage people not to take them as gospel.  The
only way to move beyond belief to knowledge is to do your own testing
and see the results.

 
>Thanks for responding to my post.

You're welcome, and good luck.  Let us know how it goes.


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm