Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "fogmarco" 
<marco.fogarolo@...> wrote:
>
> I'm trying to create new icc profile for ut3d with 2100.
> still today I used a old densitometer with the Paul Roark workflow 
> (thank you Paul).
> Now I have available the new datacolor spyder3print and I have some 
> question:
> 1- is possible to create directly the profile for ut-3d with this 
> software? The guide say that I need the 2.0 version.
> 2 - I will have better result using directly the datacolor software or 
> is better to going on with paul workflow?
> 

Hello Marco,  I've used both methods with an R220, which should be close to the 2200.  
You can get different results with the different methods.  If you are after neutral prints I 
think you will do better with Paul's workflow.  If you build profiles with the SpyderPro 2.0 
you can build profiles that will allow an easy method of split toning with matte papers by 
treating the UT3D as an RGB inkset (albeit with a very limited gamut).

With glossy papers you must use a PK of some sort in the K position and I found it hard to 
maintain the tones at the transitions from deep shadows to blacks, above that point the 
transitions are very nice and smooth,  (I tried using a PK and a PKN).  Using the SpyderPro 
with the glossy papers and a PK(N) will be different as Paul's workflow uses the two dark 
grays to produce the K on glossy.   You cannot use the straight UT3D with the Eboni in 
place with the SpyderPro method on glossies as you will get massive gloss differential and 
flaking of the Eboni.  It might be possible to smooth out the transitions of a PK(N) with a 
Photoshop curve but for neutral prints on glossy I think it is much easier to use Paul's 
method. 

Good luck.