Digital BW, The Print

John,

I think perceptually in that photo the blacks are pretty good, but they are
not great when measured with the spectro.
Coming in around L* 19.5.  About run of the mill for Matte. Velvet Fine Art
printed with ABW I think tops the league table with L* 14 and Ultrasmooth
with ABW is also pretty good @ 15.5
Both beautiful, but expensive papers.

Just don't want people thinking there is something magic going on with
Harmon and MIS.

Mike

On 20/07/07, David Whistance <david.whistance@...> wrote:
>
>   Hi John, the print is mine, hence my earlier comment to buy from MIS in
> the
> US rather than try to find something similar here in the UK. I've tried
> lots of different B&W inksets but have been really happy with MIS/Eboni.
>
> David
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>]On
> Behalf Of djon43
> Sent: 20 July 2007 19:37
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: black only print ink
>
> This doesn't answer your "source" question, but I'm looking at British
> person's print exchange offering, R220 using UT R2/Eboni with QTR..on
> Harman FB matte. Very convincing. The blacks are as deep as I've seen
> on matte paper. Easily rivals prints from 3800, 2400, 2200, 1280 in
> the same Exchange. A Leica R4 (film) photo.
>
> The photographer says he used a "neutral/warm split" to give a "slight
> sepia feel"... it could as easily be neutral or cold.
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "emte98"
> <jam.99@...> wrote:
> >
> > Sure, thanks. I guess I was just looking for something more local/
> > easily obtained.
> > Also I'm just starting to realise theat my R220 can't actually print
> > black only as the software only gives grayscale option. I downloaded
> > the US version as suggested on photo.net but it was the same. Any work
> > around for this?
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> 
>


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