Digital BW, The Print

> Myron Gochnauer <goch@...> wrote:

> I have been using MIS UT-3d with a 2200.  With minimal tweaking  
> (actually, none), and virtually no understanding of what is 
> going on cartridge by cartridge, I have produced very nice
> results on both matte and glossy papers.
> ...
> Paul and others seem to talk more about UT7 than UT-3d, ...

There is nothing wrong with the UT-3D inkset on a 2200, particularly 
if the profiles are for papers you like.  The addition of the ability 
to control the Lab A axis makes the UT3D more flexible in that 
respect, but this also ads some complexity for those who do the 
profiling.

> "jhargens2000" <chargens@...> wrote:

> ... As for a dedicated BW inkset, I'd definitely be interested 
> if 1) it printed on matte papers noticeably better than QTR 
> with just the Epson UC inks ...

Either the UT7 or UT3D inkset will print more smoothly than the OEM 
UC K2 inkset -- they have lighter inks and do not use high gamut 
color inks.

> 2) (and most important) it printed on glossy and semi-glossy 
> papers with a lack of bronzing and gloss differential at 
> least comparable to the 2400 and 3800.

I think the MIS B&W offerings are better with respect to reflective 
artifacts than the OEM inksets you mention.  It's been a while since 
I saw any comparisons, however.  The use of glop or a spray is needed 
for much more improvement, and the spray does a better job than glop 
in my experience.  

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com