Digital BW, The Print

Paul, if I understand, looking at the 100% QTR Ink Separation Page for Epson Ultra Premium Luster printed with my R1800 at 2880, uni-directional my "max visual PK black" is at the 60% ink limit.

So, are you suggesting I use 60% for my PK Ink Limit?...then for Black Boost 65 or 70%?

I've been linearizing using ChartThrob & scanner and placing the generated Photoshop .ACV curve in the GRAY CURVE TAB's "Curve Section."  Previous to generating the ChartThrob PS curve I've played with the Shadow, Highlight and Gamma settings to "shape" the ink curve.  The resulting .ACV curve is a very mild adjustment to this "shaped" ink curve.

BTW – Using GG 2.2 and 16bit files.

Comments appreciated.

Terry


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
>  "Terry" <TerryGls@> wrote:
> >
> > ... if you choose to set your Black % much above the visual
> > looking "max black" don't you "hurt" your shadow detail when
> > you linearize the steps? 
> 
> I don't think so.  QTR will not linearize if there is not some increase in density above some minimum.  In fact, QTR works better when it has an abundance of deep shadow information.  So, a somewhat compressed toe -- similar to the final gray gamma 2.2 curve -- is helpful to avoid interpolation errors in the deep shadows.
> 
> By the way, I recommend you put your K ink limit at the visual max and use the Black Boost (I'm assuming we're talking QTR here) to set the final measured dmax if that is what you want to do.  This results in a better pre-linearized ramp, and, in general, the better the ramp going into the linearization step, the better the the final result. 
> 
> > ... the blacks at 95%, 90%, etc visually look the same ...
> 
> Coming from the old days of 8 bit files, I used to object avoid using the Gray Gamma 2.2 space because it compresses the deep shadows (what we old darkroom people call the "toe" of the curve).  With the limited 8 bit gray steps we used to have, I thought this was just a waste of those precious 256 steps.  
> 
> However, with 16 bit files now the norm, I'm a big fan of Gray Gamma 2.2 and the compressed shadows.  It's a reserve of information that sometimes becomes valuable.  Not only does it often save the day if you need more detail in an area, but it also relates to why I switched to glossy paper for my gallery brochures.  
> 
> While I find matte paper prints look the same as glossy prints under glass in the gallery, when people take my brochures out into the sun, the "excess" information in those shadows becomes visible, whereas the old matte brochures would just show gray down there.  So, a very high dmax and gray gamma 2.2 makes a real nice combo when a print may go from standard indoor lighting into direct sun.  That seemingly excess dmax and "wasted" toe info may not be totally useless.  With direct sun, you can really see into those deep glossy shadows.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>