Digital BW, The Print

In a message dated 5/31/07 2:30:06 PM, e.neilsen2@... writes:


> Perhaps, It is more an indication that Epson has really been paying
> attention to the needs of the B&W digital printer and tried to eliminate the
> undesirable outcomes. It would be interesting to see the ink usage of a
> neutral ICC profile, made by PFP, an EYE One set up, etc., to see how they
> stack up. 
> 
How they stack up in other respects might indeed be interesting, but there 
would not be any meaning to looking at the ink usages between them; all an RGB 
profile can do is ask for R,G, and B. It can't tell the driver how to define 
channel splits, or ask it to eliminate components.


> However, unless you are only printing B&W I see no reason to fret
> about .87% yellow ink. Those needing a system that does both would be better
> off leaving things be and those printing only B&W might be better off with
> just a dedicated ink set with toners included within the more neutral ink.
> 
Toners included in the neutral inks are still toners. It doesn't much matter 
if that yellow ink is mixed into a gray ink or not, it will still cause the 
same degree of illuminant metamerism, or the same degree of fading, as the case 
may be, ; plus it will add the highly undesirable situation of mixed inks with 
differential settling and differential moving in the lines. Inks built out of 
pure, single tone pigments are a much better deal for B&W inksets than ones 
with colored toners added. 

If you are going to add color, adding it directly from a color cart offers 
the advantages of knowing just how much you're going to get, and allowing you to 
choose how much you want. I'd certainly love to see the next generation of 
Epson drivers reduce the percentage on color inks for neutrals even further, to 
minimize the issue at even a theoretical level.

C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Business Unit
Datacolor Inc.
CDTobie@...
www.colorvision.com


**************************************
 See what's free at 
http://www.aol.com.


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