Digital BW, The Print

Shilesh,

I wonder if the two pigment particles (unocated and coated) will show up differently?  They are not going to be sliced - but rather imaged as dry powder particles. I haven't seen pigment imaged before at this level - but I would anticipate one will be rough, the other smoother? Will be a disappointment if they're too tiny or the material inside or outside causes imaging problems (which is what she is anticipating and is considering using a second type of technology in anticipation.) She has imaged carbon nano-tubes successfully. Those I saw.

ConeColor LK and LLK are not pure carbon - you could substitute Sepia K7 shades #4 and #5 for the pure carbon affect. We have a number of customers now running Piezography shades #1, #4, #5 in several flavors in their ABW systems.

My understanding from reading the HP patents is that they do not permit a range of shades from a competitor such as Epson to produce "neutral" oriented lt blacks. Epson has to remain outside a very specific range of ab that they published as "their invention" - which of course is debatable were it further examined. Anways, that was my read on it but I'm not the lawyer.

Jon Cone




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "shileshjani" <janishilesh@...> wrote:
>
> OK. I get the difference between resinated and encapsulated. I doubt you will see much meaningful differences on an electron microscope (other than size), especially a scanning electron microscope operating at high EV. On a transimission electron microscope - potentially, yes. But how do you slice the proverbial sub-micron encapsulated pigment M&M? I drive electron microscopes at work, so I am eager to see your results.
> 
> OK, so are OEM LK and LLK not 100% carbon? And ConeColor LK and LLK?
> 
> Shilesh
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "piezobw" <jon@> wrote:
> >
> > Shilesh,
> > 
> > Encapsulation is an expensive and wasteful process that is difficult and it's not something that many companies can attempt. Epson and HP do. HP probably has the best encapsulation process because it also negatively charges the resin layer which aids keeping pigment in suspension. 
> > 
> > Piezography started doing encapsulation in 2005 for one specific reason: pigment particles have static charges. The charges attract one another and this attraction causes pigment particles to agglomerate and form tiny clumps. Even tiny clumps of several hundred pigment particles can clog a print head. Encapsulation in a polyester micro-coating that completely seals the pigment particle and eliminates the ability of a pigment particle to attract another pigment particle. We started this with K7 and this ink has proven to be very clog free as a result.
> > 
> > Resin is used to produce better gloss adhesion in an ink vehicle. But polyester encapsulation will also produce the same effect when the encapsulation is thick enough. Because encapsulation only produces an extremely thin layer, it takes a triple process in order to produce a thick enough coating to promote glossiness - hence the triple encapsulation.
> > 
> > Resin can act to absorb some electrical charges, but can not eliminate them. It's considered the poor man's encapsulation. MediaStreet inks were one of the most popular examples of resinated inks before they closed. Resinating is literally a physical process of mixing a dispersion into a base that is high in resin and usually occurs as a last stage in the ink making process. Encapsulation takes place during the pigment modification stages and well before the ink making stages.
> > 
> > The difference between the two processes is a hard thing for many to picture in their mind. I am getting some time on an electron-microscope and I hope to be able to post images soon of the differences in PiezoTone Sepia pigment particles and Piezography K7 pigment particles. The challenge of course is with imaging these materials. We recently produced a portfolio of images for a scientist working with an electron-microscope and who has access to two different technologies. When we get images we will post them and show them. We are hopeful that the coating will be apparent and make visual sense.  Otherwise - bite into an M&M candy carefully so that you leave the hard candy outer shell intact along with the soft chocolate center. That is a perfect cross-section example of encapsulation and easy to picture in your mind.
> > 
> > 
> > The ConeColor LKs do not try and improve on the OEM. So I carefully replicated the greenish/brownish cast of the OEM. To improve things you can replace the OEM shades LK with a Piezography shade #4 and OEM LLK with a Piezography shade #5.
> > 
> > Jon Cone
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "shileshjani" <janishilesh@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Paul,
> > > 
> > > Thank you for the information below. I did not know that K4 (presumably Image Specialist) LK and LLK were 100% carbon. I thought 100% carbon inks (e.g. Cone Sepia) were not gloss compatible. I can indeed attest that these MIS K4 are significantly warmer than equivalent Epson OEM K3 inks.
> > > 
> > > So:
> > > 
> > > (1) Are OEM LK and LLK not 100% carbon?
> > > (2) Are Cone Color K3 compatible LK and LLK also not 100% carbon because they purport to mimick the OEM colors?
> > > (3) Is there any fade data available for K4 PK, LK, and LLK used without color inks?
> > > 
> > > Also, what is the significance of "triple encapsulation" that is used for Cone inks? As distinct from "resinated" inks used by Image Specialist?
> > > 
> > > I personally find the color of K4 LK and LLK (warm/red) to be gorgeous compared to OEM equivalents, which seem warm/green.
> > > 
> > > Shilesh
> > > 
> > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" <roark.paul@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "ben" <benjschneider2@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I am wondering what carbon based inks are available for printing on glossy stocks like Epson's Exhibition Glossy paper?  ...
> > > > 
> > > > The MIS K4 LLK, LK, PK, and various UT inks (e.g., UT7 C and LC) are 100% carbon and glossy compatible.  They are very warm on glossy paper, with a Lab B = 14 (plus or minus a little).  This puts them into what I consider a light sepia range.
> > > > 
> > > > The best glossy neutralized gray ink is HP's Z3100/3200 PK, LK ("gray"), & LLK ("light gray").  Since the HP inks are coated, the light ones can be user-diluted with the generic base <http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Ink-Mixing.pdf> and still be glossy compatible.  They can be diluted with MIS glop or a mix of 50% glop and C6 base, and the ink will then have less bronzing than the OEM mix.  Glop or a spray can, of course, reduce the bronzing.
> > > > 
> > > > In general, the MIS approach -- having the coating in the base and not on the particle -- appears to reduce bronzing, but it also results in a slightly less glossy appearance.  I like this, but it means the super-high gloss look can't really be achieved with the MIS inks without a post-printing spray.  
> > > > 
> > > > It also means that the MIS glossy dmax is a bit less than the coated PKs can achieve.  (Some say the super high dmax glossy PKs also have dye in them.  That could also be why the MIS carbon PK is a bit lower in dmax.  I don't know about that.)  At any rate, I use the HP PK for the glossy K even with the MIS LK when I want a sepia in my 1400.  The neutral HP PK does not significantly affect the sepia tone.  In my 7800, I'm going with MIS PK because I do want 100% carbon in that printer.
> > > > 
> > > > The warm MIS and neutral-cool HP inks can be in separate channels to make a variable tone inkset.  My 1400 is now set up with MIS LK and HP PK, allowing me to print from sepia to neutral-cool on glossy paper. 
> > > > 
> > > > The only 100% carbon print I've been able to make that is neutral required spraying Eboni, which had to be applied in a black only mode.  So, it was a bit rough and a hassle to make.  I don't recommend it.
> > > > 
> > > > Hope this helps.
> > > > 
> > > > Paul
> > > > www.PaulRoark.com
> > > >
> > >
> >
>