Digital BW, The Print

>... pictures taken in ranch country with "big skies". 
> I'm finding that the tonal variation isn't printing 
> as good as I'd like it to. At 8x10 size, the tonal 
> transitions in the sky look somewhat "mottled".

>... Canon 20D... Photoshop Elements ... R220 and MIS UT-R2 inks, 
> ... Epson Enhanced Matte and PremierArt Hot Press. 
> The effect seems to be a bit worse on the PremierArt paper.

>It's difficult to tell (I need a better monitor), but 
>I think the effect is also seen on screen.

>... Could it be due to working with 8 bit files in Elements 
> instead of 16 bit files?

It's hard to trace the sources of some of these artifacts.  It could be the
printing or in the file.

Both EEM and Hot Press 205 can mottle.  While the PA Hot Press 205 sheets
have been good for me, the rolls I've bought have been un-usable due to
mottling.  It really makes no sense that rolls would be worse, since sheets
are cut from rolls, but there is a bottom line -- I can't use the ones I've
tried.  Many notice EEM mottling in dark areas.

I find that I'm so critical with the prints today that I often find
artifacts that trace back to my old negatives -- artifacts that I never even
noticed with the wet process printing.  I would have thought that the
silicon chip sensors would have been made to a high standard with respect to
their evenness, but maybe not.

What makes slight un-evenness show is when we increase the contrast of the
scene substantially.  I do this often, so dealing with the resulting
artifacts is all too common.  The systems we use are probably made so that
their images look near perfect in their straight, un-manipulated form.  At
some point, however, even the best recorded image will show artifacts and
defects if contrast is increased enough.  It's one of the limits that I push
with every technology I use.  

(I copied very well done old print for the Elverhoj museum photo history
project the other day that I could only get to look good by doing 7 scans of
the sky, with the print moved or flipped for each scan in order to randomize
the scanner artifacts.  What a hassle cheap flatbed scanners can be for
critical work.  I should have insisted that the museum buy a drum scanner
for the project -- or, better, me.)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 
http://home1.gte.net/res0a2zt/photos.html (direct link until the new host is
set up)