Digital BW, The Print

Richard,  I would add that there are some that always pick up the same box
of paper and try and make it work for a particular image, rather than pick
up the more appropriate box and let it do the work.

 

I have not used the K7 or K6 inks and only dabbled with QTR. I have been
using the ABW on my 4800 with K3 for almost a year now. I can certainly see
where it fails and where it works great. I also run the Piezotone Sepia set
with a 7000 and Image Print and have been using that set up for coming up on
4 years.  The set ups certainly have their sweet spots, just like a film and
paper combination did from years ago. It is tough getting a sweet spot as
there are a lot more choices in this arena than in the old days, of 4 or 5
major flavors. 

 

The older printers need more help, and I don't consider the X600 that old.
The biggest problem that exists is the Dmax melt down. This is where the
Epson driver just pours down the black, hiding the detail you tried so hard
to maintain. And it is not restricted to Epson drivers, but also to those in
pursuit of the ultimate Dmax. My reason for staying away from the K7, is
that it just doesn't have the color I need or at least I have not seen it. 

 

But back to the paper in a box,.   Matching scene to paper is quite
important as is ink to paper and scene. We all have a lot of playing to do
for a few years.   

 

 

Eric Neilsen Photography

4101 Commerce Street

Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

http://e.neilsen.home.att.net

http://ericneilsenphotography.com

Skype ejprinter

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
CorrPro96@...
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2006 5:36 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Hands-on impressions K3/ABW versus K7/QTR

 


In a message dated 10/20/2006 12:35:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, 
odets@comcast. <mailto:odets%40comcast.net> net writes:

3. While the Cone QTR profiles for the K7/4800 are excellent and 
pretty much make obviate the the need for ICC profiling, I did not 
find this with the K3/ABW. I think this Epson system pretty much 
needs ICC profiling for both best results and an easy, reliable, 
consistent workflow image to image. I know that Clayton and others 
do PS curves for this purpose, but this seems like an ongoing hassle 
to me. The ICC profiles are a do-it-and-forget-it deal and are very 
accurate and I would highly encourage it. The need to do this (and 
to own a densitometer) is the weakness of the K3/ABW system in my 
appraisal.

Hi Walt:

I've been using the ColorVision PrintFixPro for profiling my color printers,

and I'm waiting for their v 2.0 software to release which will give us B/W 
profiling capability as well. 
Perhaps CD Tobie will add to this very interesting thread to give us his 
perspective on what the future holds. This is a low-cost system that does an

excellent job without the hassle and expense associated with the Hi-end 
software-hardware products out there.
Although I've been able to make prints that I find comparable to the same 
negative printed in my old darkroom and exhibited years ago, there is a need
to 
be able to adjust print quality to lighting in exhibition spaces, just as we

had to do before. My biggest adjustment was to accept the matte paper look 
(I'm still tempted to apply a coat of wax to some prints, remember the green

boxes?). The gloss finish papers are even harder to adjust to. They call
them 
photo papers, but they fall short of the selection we had available in the 
darkroom. The Luster papers seem to offer the best finish, but they are too
thin 
and creases are too easy to make if you don't mount them quickly. I just 
wish that Bill Atkinson would make profiles for the 4800 K 3 ABW, and Epson 
would add some weight to their Prem Luster.

Richard (Brooklyn)

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

 



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