Digital BW, The Print

thanks Greg, that'll do I suppose, though I don't see them as squared off against each 
other frankly. But since that's what the posted jpegs were, it's accurate and I deserve it.
Anyway, I want to answer some questions but feel this thing is getting beat to death and 
not helping the way I thought it might. Anyway...

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" <cj@...> wrote:

Clayton, I was not at the printoff, I did not see the other prints nor am aware of all the 
workflows represented. In my opinion the one thing that contributes to a 3 dimensional 
quality in monochrome is to work with subtle hue shifts throughout the scale, Many 
analogue methods have this as well, it has a long tradition. All of the B version prints I 
sent had different subtle splits and blends, none were one straight mono ink set. The A 
versions were. That experimentation (B verions) was what I wanted to get feedback on 
from that great gathering of people and it was intentional. Those processes are not 
identical to the jpeg I posted and I will say a bit more later about that. The jpeg was a 
straight quad with normal 3 grays + black, except there was an additional dark gray 
underprinting the K. It's a very skeletal K so that should have not effected the resolution 
differences observed.
It had some hue shift as a result of the ink set used, the seleniums, which are not identical 
in hue from top to bottom, and in fact a bit warm, mostly in the highlights.

snip...

> One of my questions is whether the quality of that print is something
> that is unattainable by most even very knowledgeable printers using
> the best tools and ...

I have seen resolution tests from the straight off the shelf K7 QTR outout that exceeds 
StudioPrint quad resolution. But since I can't post those, nor even use that setup, I'm very 
hesitant to bring this up. Even my posted example with proof seems to be questioned.
I have no tests from IJC, or QTR, from quads, to know if there is a significant difference 
from my setup.
I was sent a scan from and IJC setup output from my same file that was excellent and of 
similar character to my quad output. But you have no reason to believe me, just words 
again. I  have every reason to believe well used QTR or IJC setup with at least 4 partitions 
will do well also, this should be no suprise to anyone, it's one reason we use these mono 
inks and it's inherent in the process. Anyone with a good understanding of how dots are 
derived from the input info and put down on paper knows this. There shouldn't be any 
suprise about the comparison at all. You have opinions, and you have science, take your 
pick.
and again, this doesn't mean there aren't many apropriate way for people to print.

>... that Tyler posesses some rare knowledge

yes, I'm the 14th re-incarnation of Nostradamus, silly

> ...Can someone
> using QTR or IJC or IP, other things being equal, not expect to get
> that kind of result?

see above

>  (In all my experiments with QTR I never got
> results that were worth the extra work.  There was always something
> that was unacceptable to me.

OK, but with multiple K and grays?

>  ...Do you think
> there would be as much difference if the source image was from a 35mm
> neg?

You've pondered a few times, and I don't know. But my test was initially for my own 
purposes and the idea was to use source data with hopefully little or no image structure or 
character of it's own larger than the printer's ability.
The whole idea was to try and see the pure nature of the printing system's structure. 
Perhaps it would have been better to use a manufactured file, but I had this one handy and 
with little to no enlargement and at a native res I thought it would be apropriate.
As I said, the relevance of this to other people's source material or worlflows I did not 
judge. Years ago I sent you quad output from drum scanned 35mm triX and I don't believe 
you liked it. Wonderful by me, I'm happy you are using something rewarding to you.
When I mentioned contact prints I did not mean I necessarily want that look. I was refering 
to it as an output system, is closely represents the image structure given it, adding little to 
know image structure of it's own. 
...
> Another question, Tyler's final remark seems to point to the inks,
> specifically more grays, as being the defining factor:
...
> Your (Bill's) final remark seems to be at odds with that:

and Bill and I may have slightly different opinions about that, MAY. The higher detail 
resolved, the finer representation of levels, and the greater dot covereage is inherent in 
the nature of multple partitioned K/gray monochromatic printing. I think Bill had 
additional thoughts about what he was seeing, also valid and based on years of experience 
and a critical eye toward the fine print tradition. I apreciate him stepping out and posting 
his opinions here.
There are many wondeful ways to print, more very day. I was attempting to remind this 
community about the inherent capabilities of one aproach to ink usage that has been an 
important part of our world here for some time.
Tyler