Digital BW, The Print

Hi Clayton, I apologize for the aggressive way I expressed myself. 

I too have used hundreds of sheets of EEM. I recognize its utility for
certain purposes and for a while I tolerated its appearance. 

Unfortunately EEM looks exactly like the old Kodak "N" surface, which
nobody I knew liked.  I've come to prefer looks that seem more
appropriate to inkjet, a beautiful medium of its own. 

You report using a lot of EEM to advance your expertise: a research
("test") material. It's perfect for that, a universally accepted
benchmark. But that's not "proofing" and the difference is more than
semantic.

Photographic old timers, including our custom printers, always relied
on the intended final paper for proofs (not like contact sheets
etc)...and inkjet technology makes that practice even more powerful,
as it enables us to utilize small proofs for big prints without any
exposure compensation, rather than interpolating from a "proof paper"
to final.

All of this aside, I know you're a master printer and I'm a
slowly-learning rookie with only a few hours a week to commit.  

EEM might be fine for me, except that I'm sad that I've delivered it
to others. It yellows within months: what's going to happen to it in
five years?  







--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones"
<cj@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Djon43,
> 
> >I don't think "proof paper" a logical concept for inkjet printing, 
> 
> My comments were not based upon logic or theory, but actual real world
> experience over the 5+ years that I've been doing this.
> 
> 
> >and I doubt many have ever bought EEM primarily for that purpose. 
> 
> Sorry you doubt that.  Based on this forum members' comments over the
> past years I feel confident in saying that probably many tons of EEM
> (once called EAM) have been purchased and used for that very purpose.
>  It has pretty much been a universal proofing paper.  The first advice
> I got as a newbie (along with get an Epson printer and MIS ink) was to
> get some EAM for proofing and tests.
> 
> 
> >If a paper "proof" needs to closely approximate the character of a
> >finished print then one should logically use a smaller piece of the
> >final print paper... 
> 
> Of course, logically.  Theoretically speaking, the best proof paper is
> the final print paper.  But I'm speaking from practical experience,
> not theory, and the reality is that it can be very expensive over
> time.  Think about how much proof paper you go through in a year's
> time and figure the cost.  If you can afford it, well then go right
> ahead.  I'd rather spend less.
> 
> I do a lot of testing and trying new ideas and so on and went through
> over 100 letter size sheets of EEM last year.  Why use expensive final
> paper for this at 5 or 6 times the cost when it goes in the
> recycle bin?   I use EEM for my early stage proofs when I'm working on
> the basic tonal values of an image.  I have pretty good WYSIWYG with
> my workflow, but there's still a big difference between reflective and
> illiminated versions and every now and then I need to run a print (and
> all my early proofs are on 1/4 size sheets, even with EEM).   And if
> I'm doing a complex fine art print with many layer masks and
> adjustments I may make more than a normal number of proofs, and at
> some point the proofs have to be bigger.  I would consider it a
> useless waste to use final paper for this stage.
> 
> I recommend forgetting theory and instead keep track of how much proof
> paper you use and calculate the cost.  Then decide what you're willing
> to pay for.
> 
> 
> >Why risk proofing on a lesser paper? 
> 
> Why do you consider it a risk?  I don't "consider" it as either a risk
> or not a risk.  I _know_ from actual experience that EEM is a great
> proof paper for my workflow and final papers.  Using it saves me a lot
> of money.  And I don't consider it a lesser paper.  As I said before,
> it has tone, contrast, density and dmax very close to many of the best
> final papers.  If it was archival it would be an excellent final
paper.  
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Clayton
> 
> 
> Info on black and white digital printing at    
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
>