Digital BW, The Print

"flashinet" <flashinet@...> wrote:
>
> I'm fine art photographer working mainly with black and white.
> I print my own photographs on Epson 7900 using ABW driver and 
> like the results, I also exhibit my prints. 

> Still I'm reading about dedicated B&W printers ...
> I'm worried that I'm missing something in quality .  
> I've made some research and figured that I can give it a 
> try by buying Epson 1400 printer and UT14 inks.

> But the question is: Is it worth it? ...

Whether its "worth" dealing with third party inks depends a lot on one's interests and criteria.  For me, the OEM approaches are not worth it.  But I have several personal goals that push me in the directions I go.  Some are quality related, but one is simply taking the road less traveled.

The OEM entrance into the B&W field with K3 systems, I assume, took most of the market, and I'm sure most people are perfectly satisfied with the results.  But the dedicated B&W approaches continue to serve several significant market segments.  

The inksets I've designed, some of which are sold by MIS (no royalties to me -- I'm just a customer) serve several different market segments and personal goals.  At one end and as a matter of principle, I want those on restricted budgets to have excellent B&W, easily, and at very low cost. The C88+ "EZ" system is at this end of the spectrum.  Yet the C88+ with the 100% carbon inks can produce a print that I believe to be more stable than anything the OEM systems can produce. 

The UT14 was aimed at making a variable tone inkset that could print on matte and glossy paper without changing inks, giving people who are interested in exploring B&W more seriously a very affordable 13" platform to easily experiment with different tones and papers.  It's what I think of as today's version of the UT2 which was made for the 1280. Yet on my 1400, I have not run UT14 for quite some time.  I use an inkset on the 1400 that serves the specific needs that I have.  
(See http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Eb1400.pdf)


My personal B&W fine art printing, such as I was doing all day on an old 7500, is strictly 100% carbon -- Eboni-6 or Carbon-6.  In part as a matter of principal, I simply will not have color inks in my workflow any more.  For most people the color inks in the "Advanced B&W" mode will probably never be of any consequence, but I don't want them in my work for a number of reasons.

The Eboni-6 or Carbon-6 inksets I use do have some quirks that make them more touchy in some respects, but less so in others.  One size does not fit all.  

I recently purchased a used 7800 and fully intend to use that platform for 100% carbon printing -- likely with a home made (dirt cheap) CIS (positive air pressure should make CISs work better easier).  So, between a user-made CIS and user mixed inks, the used K3 (and K2, maybe without the CIS) printers should be able to make B&W prints at a fraction the cost of the 7900, and they should have un-paralleled image stability. 

I'm hopeful that the 8 carbon inks and QTR will allow me to print on Arches uncoated watercolor paper more smoothly and with a better dmax than the OEM approaches, and 100% carbon on Arches is about as close to my "carbon on cotton" ideal medium as I think I can get.  (And it's going to be a lot of fun exploring tinting & painting with watercolors with my painter as well as photographer friends.)  

So, it's clearly "worth it" to me to do what I do, and the OEM approaches are not "worth it" -- to me.  

I hesitate to recommend what I do to others.  I'm just pursuing my particular ideals and goals, and having too many follow me on the road less traveled is not necessarily a positive result, but I will nonetheless make what I come up with public.  I think it advances the medium and its acceptance, and that does help me.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com