Digital BW, The Print

Hi Bob,

> > In my 220 I'm going to go to a 3K+cmy, adding the yellow....
>
> >One reason for my current approach is also so that 
> > standard inks can be used. One thing we've all probably 
> > found as we move from one printer to the
> > next is that we have wasted inks.

>You mentioned LC and LM for your 7500. 
> Is that because of the large dot sizes?

Actually, in the old 7500, with it's large and non-variable dots, I dilute
the LC 50%.  In new printers that is not necessary.  I do have the diluted
LC in my 2200 also, in part just for consistency with my 7500, but it's
marginal in how much smoothness it adds.  For most people the advantages of
a standard ink would probably outweigh the incremental smoothness from the
dilution.  Also, I'm trying to unify workflows, which have come to resemble
the fabled "Tower of Babel."  Since Epson has established a de facto
standard in their very successful K3 printers, I'm inclined to think a third
party approach that is consistent with that would be most useful.  

> Would it be correct to assume your standard "4k+cm" 
> inksets are as follows?

> Six ink printers such as the 220 (and I assume1280): mk, lk, llk, 
> pk, c, and m. Substitute y for pk if you want to match matting on
> matte prints.

Actually, I'm inclined to let people continue to swap out the MK - PK in
hextone printers.  If we have yellow in there, we can make sepia and also
match the borders to the mats.  So, I'm going to try LC = LC, LM = LM, Y =
Y, C = LK, M = LLK.

>Seven ink printers: mk, lk, llk, lllk, c, m, and pk.

I've pulled the LLLK on my 2200.  It added no smoothness and takes more
color to offset its warmer printing.  So, it's going to be less lightfast.
In my 2200 I have PK in all the time and use it between the LK and MK.  Its
usefulness is marginal, but since it's there, I might as well use it.
Again, since it is more dense than the LK, it reduces the amount of color
needed in the shadows.  

(I'm interested in whether a 1.5 PL dot size even needs to be LLK.  The less
dilute ink we use the better in terms of lightfastness, etc.  Also, many,
including the BO aficionados, think that more paper showing through the
highlights improves them.)


> On variable dot size printers, substitute y for lllk to match matte 
>(and increase lightfastness?).

There are no 7 ink Epson printers that are not variable dot, I believe.  So,
where the LLLK would really add something is on a machine like my 7500.
However, I'd rather have PK in there than LLLK.  So, I just live with a bit
of grain in my display prints.  Even the LLK is light enough that for
display print purposes I don't think anything lighter is needed.  If I were
doing small prints on the 7500, I might not be as satisfied.

> Eight Ink Printers: mk, pk, lk, llk, lllk, c, m, and y.

I'd rather have glop, or dark cyan in there than LLLK.

To be honest, I'm not sure I'd alter the ink positions of a 3800 at all.
The magenta is the least useful for B&W, but I might prefer to just have the
3800 do everything, including color.  The feedback I've seen indicates these
are very good B&W printers as is.  One must recall that our hacking in B&W
was primarily due to the fact that standard printers could not do good B&W.
That simply is not the case any more.  The easiest way to improve the B&W on
a 3800 is to use a rip, not mess with inks.  Old darkroom guys like me will
always be inclined to want to do something different just because it is
different.  However, the main practical reason to use a custom inkset today
is to avoid the cost of the Epson k3 printers.

> If one uses your profiled inkset, what advantages do the 
> $850 R2400's or $1300 3800 have over the $550
> 1800 (other that the 17" width of the 3800)?

The 2400 Advanced B&W mode is easy, even if it is a compromise in some
respects, and the Epson driver is fast.  If one puts carbon in the Y
position, the 2400 ABW mode prints become as lightfast with as low a
metamerism as any.  So, there are some reasons one might want a 2400, as
well as the obvious one of being able to print color as well as B&W.  (I
currently use my 2400 for color.)  

The 3800 is really about 17" paper and having the MK and PK more easily
switched than in other large format printers.  While this list has lots of
people who have no interest in color printing, I find color printing to be a
necessary occasionally.  I think the vast majority of people who buy a 3800
and prefer B&W will, nonetheless, leave the OEM ink positions as is.  So,
again, my interest is to have a workflow that is consistent with that likely
reality, but cheaper.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com