Digital BW, The Print

David, I have B&W darkroom RC prints that are decades old. Far far older than any 2 gray Epson prints we probably both have laying around. They look to me like the day they are made. This hardly qualifies the quickly washed RC prints as a wise choice of process or serious work, final prints of importance, I'm sure you would agree.
In those olden days of lore, we had even the big resented corporate yellow, Kodak, providing information about the longevity concerns of our work, giving instructions for recommended double fixes, hypoclear treatments, and dilute selenium toning for work that "matters". At the same time they had rapid processes for work that had to get into a newspaper the next day. This feels like a far cry from the climate these days, where options pursued by those of us for whom no solution has been provided by the few major players, have even been discouraged by them. Kodak et al also had many products that made many many users happy, except for Ansel, Paul, etc etc.. Fine, no one said those should not be popular. But they also worked hard to make those few masters happy as well. I mean masters, not popular commercial portrait shooters.
The solutions provided directly by Epson, utilizing the tools your company develops, provides you with results you and your clients are satisfied, and I'm sure very pleased with.
You have said in the past you are actually a fan of Jon's inks, you have many friends over the years who have utilized many alternative solutions like those discussed on this list.
I just don't understand why, when some in the B&W ink community do find the OEM solutions meet their needs, and express concern about the future of B&W printing, and find other alternatives more suited to them and their concerns and those shared historically by the fine art B&W community, does such resistance arise.
Are we supposed to be argued out of our artistic aspirations and the highest standards handed down for generations in our medium?
In an off list exchange with Paul Roark just a few weeks ago, I found myself realizing that for the fist time in my photographic printing life, I have gone for years now, thrilled with the process I now use. I have tweaked it of course, and continue to learn how to use it to make my work alive on paper. But I have not restlessly left it behind, changed paper, inks, software, anything, as I have done ad nauseum for years up to this point.
So I'm supposed to be argued into leaving that behind, for something I know has lower technical photographic excellence, and feel has less artistic beauty?
Those happy with using a the current state of the art of B&W with a color printer, great, be happy, your needs are met and exceeded. Ignore those of us looking for something else, go make art. We do not all have the same needs, I've said it again and again. I would hope you would also wish the same for those of us also pursuing our unique concerns without taking offense.

Tyler
http://www.custom-digital.com/

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Cdtobie <CDTobie@...> wrote:
>
> Gosh, I've been doing it as long as there gave been printers with two  
> grays in them, on a wide range of media, some matted and framed, some  
> not, and I've never seen a single one of my prints turn red, or any  
> other color. Mayhaps you overstate the threat?
> 
> C. D. Tobie
> Global Product Technology Mngr.
> Digital Imaging & Home Theater
> Datacolor.com
> CDTobie@...
> 
> On Apr 9, 2009, at 5:45 PM, "Jon Cone" <jon@...> wrote:
> 
> > No, using Epson inks to make B&W is the road to color shifted images  
> > in a short time.  :)
> >
> > What I was referring to was looking at prints or looking at computer  
> > images. The original discussion was about prints versus screen images.
> >
> > So the comparison was to listening to live music or a recording of  
> > live music on an iPhone... a stretch I admit. even a tad  
> > sarcastic...  The print is always what it is. It is the print. But  
> > if we begin to look at images on displays - they will end up one day  
> > on iPhones. A display is what it is - a moving target.
> >
> > Jon
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen  
> > Kobrin" <kobrins@> wrote:
> >>
> >> Given what Mozart sounds like over an iPhone speaker that is a  
> >> pretty  harsh judgment.  Are you saying that anyone who does not  
> >> use Cone (or other carbon) inks can't be serious about making B&W  
> >> prints?  Is  Epson's ABW mode really the road to perdition and ruin?
> >>
> >> Steve
> >>
> >> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jon Cone"  
> >> <jon@> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> At the risk of being accused of sarcasm, what about listening to a  
> >>> string orchestra in a concert hall or listening to a recording of  
> >>> a string orchestra in a concert hall but through the tiny internal  
> >>> speakers of an iPhone using the concert hall ambient settings of  
> >>> its iPod app?
> >>>
> >>> Why is this group losing its focus on what makes black & white  
> >>> photography so extraordinary?  The Print.
> >>>
> >>> Has it been that long for so many that the inherent beauty of an  
> >>> exquisitely crafted silver or carbon print is now lost to memory?  
> >>> Or is it because the ability to craft one is becoming a lost art  
> >>> as so many navigate to printing B&W with color inks on Canon,  
> >>> Epson, HP and Lexmark printers?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Jon Cone
> >>> InkjetMall.com
> >>>