Digital BW, The Print

Hi Steve,

> 
> I understand your drive to get an all-carbon gloss inkset for 
> longevity purposes, but it does seem like an uphill struggle
> 

Actually, I think we've overcome the problems already.  The approach 
appears to work very well on many papers.  

The need for a second pass for coating is a disadvantage, but it 
looks like you're doing it with the K3 setup anyway.  I've thought 
for some time that glossy prints needed to be sprayed to really look 
good.  It looks like we both have found that a second glop coat makes 
that job juch easier.  What printers aside from the 1800 allow this 
without wheel marks is uncertain.  If you're using the Epson glop in 
the 1800, you might find the MIS glop is both far cheaper and does a 
better job, judging from Carl's experiences.

The other disadvantage of the 100% carbon glossy approach is that the 
3MK setup can't get as smooth as an inkset with dilute inks, which 
might affect some types of images, particularly in the midtones.  For 
most of my images, it's not a problem.
 
Overall, even aside from the 100% carbon aspect, the prints are 
simply the best glossy prints I've been able to make.  I think Carl 
agrees with this.  I still, however, am not 100% sure I like glossy 
prints as well as matte, but I have to say the dmax difference in 
good lighting makes a visible difference.

I think those who use Piezo inks may want to use this approach to add 
a gloss option to their existing inks.  That would give that user 
base access to the new baryta and fiber based papers.  The Piezo 
options on those papers could be interesting.  Aside from the unknown 
with respect to the base compatibilities, I think the approach should 
work.  Those who know how to use QTR or other rip should be able to 
find a spot in their K7 systems for a glop cart and profile the 
systems.

Paul        
www.PaulRoark.com