Digital BW, The Print

Jean Claude,

 

>Does that means that the Ebony is much more difficult to set 

>with QTR than BK and LK?

 

How the Eboni curves are set up affects the quality of the image.  My
intention is to come up with a standard set of curves for the Eboni that
minimizes the artifacts, and then most people would simply tweak the dmax
and linearize for different matte papers.  So come up with this initial set
of Eboni curves, however, is a manual trial land error effort to a certain
extent.  The QTR semi-automatic partitioning does not do it, since these are
all the same density.  Also, right now I have the Glop position carrying the
dmax.  I did this because I don't know if there is a simple way to check the
nozzles for that position.  So, I was just going to hide problems in the
deep shadows.  However, not having the black boost makes tweaking the dmax
more difficult, so I might move the dmax control back to MK to utilize the
boost.

 

Right now 2 of the 3 Eboni curves are just straight lines.  So, I have yet
to do a lot of experimenting with curve shapes.  That fact that I'm getting
creamy-smooth prints at normal viewing distance is encouraging.  Getting
them perfect with a loupe is not there yet, however. 

 

Some of the issues actually remind me of the old 3000, where the paper
transport was barely good enough even in the best of circumstances.  I'm
finding, for example, that the ends of the paper, particularly the bottom 1"
(2.5 cm), are more prone to microbanding.  The 1800 appears to benefit from
having both the main and exit rollers doing their jobs.  So, whereas I'd now
be getting nearly perfect 11 x 14 prints on 13 x 19 paper (which, by the
way, is my target for sale prints -- so I'm there for me), I'd like to see
if I can make more progress with smaller prints.

 

It may be that thinner paper is needed.  I'll try the 205 today. 

 

(I'm also getting flaking with Premier Art 270.  I've never had flaking with
the 205 or 325.  However, those 2 are dual sided.  I'm wondering if this
flaking is due to a single coating or is an artifact of Eboni.  I doubt it's
the Eboni.)

 

 

>>premier art smooth...

 

>is available but EPSON UltraSmooth got another name on European 

>market with same (of course) references SO41896 -13*19 it is 

>called here "photo art Fin ultra lisse..."

 

I'm finding the Premier Art (UltraSmooth) coating to give me the print tones
I like.  The more "edge" there is with the Eboni dots, the more the warmth.
So, more dilute means more warmth.  More small dots are warmer than fewer
large dots.  Papers that hold a tight dot seem to give a more neutral paper
than those that allow the dot to spread.  So, for neutrality, we'd like
perfectly opaque dots with perfectly sharp edges.  The Eboni is dense enough
that the centers of the dots are opaque, but minimizing the spread of the
dot makes a better print, in my view. 

 

I have not tried a large number of papers yet, but the Moab line is clearly
one that may be very suitable for this approach.  I suspect Clayton's
experiences with BO printing and print tone may apply here.  

 

(By the way, with 3.5 pl printers, I get a more neutral print.  To match the
R1800 print tone, I can add just a bit of LK.  This warms the larger prints
so they match the 1.5 pl prints.  It also significantly reduces the
roughness of the print.  Hint: don't throw away old 7600s and 9600s that
have a few clogged jets.  What's left of them may be perfect for making
large prints that match the tone of the small prints people with 260s will
be getting.)

 

I'll try to keep people posted on my progress, including the weaknesses.
This is not for everyone, but I am hopeful those who want to get the color
inks out of their prints yet still have a neutral-looking, photo-quality
print will be able to use this method to do so.  We'll see.

 

 

>with your 3 blacks Ebony inks is that possible to use 

>as "mid black" (dark grey) the PK ink ?

 

MIS PK makes a very warm print.  The Epson PK is warm and greenish.  If one
wants color + Eboni B&W in an 1800, then there is no more room for anything
else.

 

>meaning BK -Ebony Black- + PK + LLBK (ebony) in the Glop position

 

Recall that diluting leads to warmth.  So, what I'm doing is not using any
dilute black inks.  That's why I can make a relatively neutral print without
color inks (that will cause color -- green -- shift as they fade at
different rates).  

 

One could have a 3-ink, partitioned B&W inkset in the 1800 also.  With this
you'd use the color inks to tone the warm carbon core. The carbon core could
probably be partitioned almost automatically with QTR. This would be the
same as the generic K3 inkset I'm suggesting for the 220 and ALL Epson
hextone or better printers where one wants a variable tone inkset.  This is
easy -- almost too easy to be any fun for me.  One could probably just use
Mk, Pk, and Lk for the matte.  Then the question would be whether just the
LK and PK could make a good glossy B&W print.  The LK might spread enough to
cover the microbanding.  Also, you'd have color inks being poured in to
neutralize the image, so I'd probably be fine for a glossy B&W.  But, of
course, we'd be back to color inks in our B&W prints and all the
complexities of balancing the color inks.  Also, there would be no room for
Glop in this setup, but I use MIS inks for glossy B&W without glop for my
brochures and the like.  They don't bronze very much on many papers.

 

Paul

www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/>   

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]