Digital BW, The Print

sorry I was working on the previous reply before I came back and saw this... No I make no assumptions about the ink compositions other than believing outright what you say about yours, and what solid plain statements have been made about the Piezotone Carbons. Perhaps my last post explains.
I certainly think, based on what we have before us, that given an artistically acceptable print hue, a pure carbon approach is the most sensible given longevity as the over riding priority.
I'm just tossing in that there is a great deal of proprietory information not available to us, and some of that which we are proceeding on is actually educated guesses. I'm also not insisting that matters much, I just wish I knew a lot more, and am willing to accept that there is more to know, from a purely scientific standpoint.
Tyler


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" <roark.paul@...> wrote:
>
> "tboleyyh" <tyler@> wrote:
> >
> > ...carbon only ink prints (which is still a a mythical object whose existence is somewhat suspect), ...
> 
> Do you think Cone Carbon Sepia and MIS Eboni are not 100% carbon pigment inksets in the sense that the image forming substance includes some colorants?  
> 
> The Aardenburg-Imaging fade test results certainly look very different than the blended B&W inksets tested.  I've summarized the 20 MLux-Hr midtone results here: 
> http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/20MLux-AaI-Carb-v-Blended.jpg
> 
> Note particularly the change in the Lab A values.
> 
> I think these test results are most consistent with the 2 carbon inksets shown (Cone Carbon Sepia and MIS Eboni MK-3) being, in fact, composed of carbon pigments with no colorants added.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>