Digital BW, The Print

I think the MIS K4 PK is the same as the R1800 PK and different than
the older MISPRO PK or the UTR2 one I use.  I think the PKs are carbon
blended with color inks to make them more neutral and that diluted
carbon looks warm- Paul could tell you more.

The Epson OEM R2400 PK appears to be the same as R1800 OEM PK (I can't
tell any difference in my color prints and use them interchangeably).

I'm also interested in your full ink approach to the R1800 as I'm not
terribly happy with the 3MK output and am not sure if the coarseness
of the prints is inherent to this approach (versus my UTR2 prints) or
due to shortcomings in the ability of my R1800 to print perfectly in
three channels (PK and MK look good- Y is next best but marginal).

Being able to also print on glossy papers would be a nice bonus.
Do let us know how your experiments progress.

Roger


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Marsolais"
<bob@...> wrote:
>
> Paul and Roger, thanks for your responses.
> 
>  
> 
> Paul, I guess I was thinking so much along the lines of the 1800 and 3MK
> that I forgot about the UT14 inks.  I read your paper on them and I
am going
> to modify my approach.
> 
>  
> 
> > I'd recommend MIS K4-PK.  It's a little lighter load than the older
> 
> > PK and it works a bit better in the 1800. 
> 
> 
> Do you know how MIS K4-PK compares to their PK for the 1800.  Do the
same
> comments apply?
> 
>  
> 
> I think I'm a bit confused over the definition of carbon.  I thought
> "carbon" was synonymous with matte/eboni black and anything glossy
or color
> was some sort of pigment, but not carbon.  Since the UT-14 LK and PK
inks
> are carbon and glossy compatible, I guess I'm wrong.
> 
>  
> 
> If I put the six UT-14 inks in the 1800, that leaves me with two
more slots.
> If one is used for sepia, what would you recommend for the other? 
Would the
> 1800's tendancy to band influence this choice?
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks again!
> 
>  
> 
> Bob
>