Digital BW, The Print

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote:

> I looked at some of the AaI&A results to see if the Vivid magenta was so much more lightfast that it would make a difference in the ABW results.  I saw no indication, however, that the new magenta is more lightfast.  


The K3VM and HDR inksets got started more recently at AaI&A and haven't racked up enough exposure time yet for me to conclude I'm seeing any differences, either.  And I suspect where the differences will really manifest is in color printing, not so much the ABW mode although AaI&A test reports document any measurable color shifts along the way. 

One interesting fact that I forgot to mention earlier is that with a more liberal consumer fade tolerance, the ABW mode may not be blending enough magenta into the print for it ever to trigger the hue shift (color imbalance) criterion in the WIR set. With total drop out of the magenta, the green shift may still be within "acceptable" tolerance in the WIR criteria set, because after all, the set was developed with traditional color prints in mind.  In which case. the next criterion is a 25% density loss in the 0.6 or 1.0 neutral patch.  That's a considerable amount of fade, and a likely reason we see the "greater than" sign (">") still in effect even at the 406 display year rating.  It takes a whopping 800 megalux hours of exposure to get out to 400 WIR years, and even at accelerated test conditions that's a very long time in test. Due to the time needed to clock that kind of light exposure dose in test, it would seem that all of the scores are being based on performance of the original ABW K3 tests.

mark
http:/www.aardenburg-imaging.