Digital BW, The Print

I just wish I had been able to see the prints noted in several of these 
posts--yours and several others (I've looked at the online images that have 
been linked).  I understand totally about the photographer and his input 
being the most crucial, but after saying that---I keep wondering about OEM 
(I'm waiting for a 3800, have a 2200 and 1280) vs., for instance, the 
Piezography's K7 split tone set for the 2200 or Paul Roark's UT-7 or Clayton 
Jones' approach using ABW with K3 inks.

Think I will just continue to follow along, try the 3800 'as is' and then 
consider what more I"ll do.  I have said previously, that I've 
procrastinated for years about using a b/w dedicated printer (conversion of 
my 1280) and working with QTR for monos in the 2200, so its not that I have 
to rush to make a decision, but the threads concerning the prints in 
NY/workflows, inks and printers by many and the results (though I missed the 
initial information about that and need to go back and do a search for the 
criteria) have gotten me to thinking about how I'm going to continue 
printing monos in the future.

Diane
-----------
Diane B. Fields
picnic@...
photo site  http://www.pbase.com/picnic

----- Original Message ----- 

<snip>

>>But I next had to check off another item on the list: inks. I dug around
until I found a copy of the same image printed on an Epson k3 printer, with 
OEM
inks, and (again) a PrintFIX PRO2.0   profile. So the main difference here 
was
instead of a number of tinted gray inks interacting to form the tones here, 
it
was predominantly one light gray for highlights and one dark gray for 
shadows,
with supporting roles for the color inks as toners. I rather expected that
the relatively fragile illusion of 3d would be clearly present in the 
monochrome
inks image, and missing in the OEM inks image; but, to my suprise both 
images
held the illusion in the same areas (subject, and backlit stemware to one
side) and did not hold it in the same areas (back wall and knife rack). So, 
at
least in this case, the "thinness" of OEM neutral printing did not effect 
the 3d
illusion, or show (to my eye, at 24 inch examination distance) any real
difference in detail, smoothness, or color noise. Gosh, you guys almost had 
me
convinced. <G>