Digital BW, The Print

Hello Paul,

  going through a large amount of literature (mostly patents by Epson
or similar ink related firms), it appears that inks require tipically
two different kinds of surfactant. We also found that Simple Green
composition has exactly two of the right kind, in more or less, the
correct proportion. Infact, the components of SIMPLE GREEN are, by
weight, about 5.8% glycol ether ethylene glycol monobutyl ether, sold
commercially as BUTYL CELLOSOLVE, about 3.75% nonylphenol ethoxylate,
about 1.5% tetrapotassium pyrophosphate, and about 88.95% water.

We have tried Simple green in our base once, but amount was incorrect.
The surface tension was lowered to a point that the imk was
spontaneously dripping from the head in the printer. We are a very
small studio and do not have enough time and resources  to make many
tests. May be you are willing to take over those tests and complete
your very nice work by also trying a couple of formulae including
Simple Green as surfactant?

Thank you very much. Cheers,

 Daniela 



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark"
<pr_roark@...> wrote:
>
> By the way, this is the latest ink base mix I've made. 
> 
> http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Ink-mixing.pdf 
> 
> I recommend staying with what MIS will make available, but this one 
> appears to work and is totally open source.  
> 
> It's a good exercise to explore these alternatives.  The substances and 
> basic knowhow are available, and most old darkroom workers would be 
> comfortable doing this.  On the other hand, how much benefit can come 
> from fine tuning a base to a specific matte paper is uncertain. As with 
> my previous experiences with custom mixing of film developers, when 
> Kodak or other company came out with a good, pre-mixed solution, I used 
> it.  (Anyone want my old ingredients to mix POTA developer?)
> 
> Frankly, matte papers printed with older printers are easy to deal 
> with.  The more serious work here is going into trying to cure glossy 
> substrate artifacts and dealing with increasingly fast printing speeds 
> with smaller nozzles.
> 
> Of course, the most interesting thing I ran into is the inkjet printing 
> of carbon nanotubes for various purposes.  Even totally new types of 
> heads that can work faster and with smaller droplets have been 
> developed.  But nanotubes actually appear to be able to be printed with 
> Epson printers using a base similar to the one outlined above. 
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>