Digital BW, The Print

I just gave up on Epson Enhanced Matte when I moved up to the
Ultrachrome K3 printers. For me that ink/paper combo just didn't work
very well. I never tried ImagePrint on the K3 printers, but even with
my own custom profile of EEM on K3 it still just didn't work very well.

I bought ImagePrint for the 2200 and returned it. I just couldn't
produce a superior print with that system than I could with my 2200
and custom profiles. I don't agree at all that the 3800 produces
inferior prints to the 2200 in any way other than EEM. And I seriously
doubt you'll get any response of consequence from Epson regarding this
letter. Most people find the Epson supplied profiles for this printer
to be pretty good. There are also a large number of people who have
been quite successful in making B/W prints with the ABW driver.

If you want better B/W I think you should be looking at 3rd party B/W
specific inks ala Piezography or MIS. Which aren't really available
for the 3800 yet, but may be in a few months.

---
Derek

blogging at: http://derekealy.com/WordPress

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "digikdm"
<monroekd@...> wrote:
>
> I have been printing with my new Epson 3800 for about 1 month, and I
> am a bit dismayed that the B&W prints I'm getting using the intrinsic
> Epson driver (with or without third party profiles provided by Eric
> Chan) are inferior to the B&W prints I get using ImagePrint with my
> Epson 2200 printer. Admittedly, the prints are far superior to the
> intrinsic Epson driver for the 2200, but I would have thought that
> after 3-4 years of R&D, you guys would have figured out why ImagePrint
> is so superior to your driver. Also I have found that the color
> profiles provided in the driver vary in their quality. You guys are
> apparently aware of this situation, since you are offering the Bill
> Atkinson 7600/9600 profiles on your website and state that "in most
> cases, these custom ICC profiles will provide much better color and
> black and white print quality than with the standard profiles already
> shipping with every printer". I don't understand why it is so
> difficult for a company that is totally devoted to printing to create
> the best possible canned profiles for their own printers and papers.
> You would likely prevent numerous defectors to third party papers, if
> you created the best possible profiles for your own papers. If one
> spends >$1000 for a printer, they should not then have to scour the
> internet for profiles or third party drivers to get the best possible
> prints. The Bill Atkinson profiles do not work well for the 3800, and
> thus the 3800 users are left out in the cold for accurate color
profiles.
> I have also found it confusing that you have discontinued Epson
> Enhanced matte and Archival Matte
> papers and yet these profiles are still in the driver software. If the
> Ultrapremium presentation matte is the same as Ep Enhanced which I
> thought was the same as Archival matte, then why are there separate
> profiles in the driver for Enhanced matte and Archival matte? The
> profile/paper combo for premium luster is superior to that for the
> Enhanced matte profile/ultrapremium presentation matte paper combo,
> but both could be improved. 
> The enhanced matte profile in concert with Ultrapremium presentation
> matte paper is particularly poor with muddy/blocked-up shadow areas. 
> Perhaps you should pay Bill Atkinson to create some color profiles for
> the 3800 or better yet, Epson should purchase Colorbyte.
> Thanks
> Kevin Monroe
>