Digital BW, The Print

Hello all:

First post here, though I've been reading the list for a while.

I'm a long-time darkroom guy making the transition to digital BW. I have an Epson C88+ set up with MIS continuous feed using Eboni inks, and love the prints it makes on watercolor and drawing paper. I especially love that the whole thing just works, as they say, without my having to deal with profiles and Photoshop.

I am wanting to expand to a 17-inch printer (or even 24-inch).

What are my best options for a larger printer for dedicated, archival BW? Money is, of course, an issue, and I'm very happy to buy used. I like the idea of pure-carbon ink on cotton rag paper. One reason is that I have long sold hand-colored black and white darkroom photos, and would like to continue that work in digital.

I really like the simplicity of the C88 set-up and am a bit bewildered by the options for setting up anything larger.

All suggestions appreciated.

Best,

Bob Keefer
www.bkpix.com

Check the papers out there to see what will work for you first. It is  
a very different animal to hand color (with color pencils or Marshals  
oils) on non-silver papers.

Mark
http://www.stillrivereditions.com

On Jul 1, 2010, at 3:46 PM, bobkeefer@... wrote:

> One reason is that I have long sold hand-colored black and white  
> darkroom photos, and would like to continue that work in digital.

Yes, you're right about starting with paper, and I have. I've been doing some preliminary hand-coloring work on Arches hot-pressed watercolor paper (printed with the C88+) and am quite sure I can find a paper that's suitable. 

Rather than oils, I've used regular artist acrylic paints now for some years for coloring. Easier cleanup than oil, faster drying and less toxic: all the usual reasons. The challenge in digital is to get the image not to smear, but I think I'm finally getting that under control.

Thanks


BK



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mark Savoia <mark@...> wrote:

>
> Check the papers out there to see what will work for you first. It is  
> a very different animal to hand color (with color pencils or Marshals  
> oils) on non-silver papers.
> 
> Mark
> http://www.stillrivereditions.com
> 
> On Jul 1, 2010, at 3:46 PM, bobkeefer@... wrote:
> 
> > One reason is that I have long sold hand-colored black and white  
> > darkroom photos, and would like to continue that work in digital.
>

"bobkeefer@..." <bobkeefer@...> wrote:
>
> 
> ... making the transition to digital BW. I have an Epson C88+ set up with MIS continuous feed using Eboni inks, and love the prints it makes on watercolor and drawing paper. I especially love that the whole thing just works, as they say, without my having to deal with profiles and Photoshop.

No 17 or 24" printer will be as easy as the C88, if for no other reason than you'll have more ink positions to fill.

 
> What are my best options for a larger printer for dedicated, archival BW? Money is, of course, an issue, and I'm very happy to buy used. I like the idea of pure-carbon ink on cotton rag paper.

It sounds like you'd be a good fit for Eboni-6 or Carbon-6.  Carbon-6 is simply the name I've given to the user-mixed version of Eboni-6, which is available from MIS pre-mixed.

These inksets print with the Epson driver rather well, but a simple ICC made with QTR Create ICC perfects the printing.

>... I have long sold hand-colored black and white darkroom photos, ...


As you noted later, Arches Hot Press is your ticket here.  A painter and I collaborated on some B&W photo + water color works and they worked fine.  

With Arches, however, you'll want to learn how to deal with QTR.  Arches prints much better if the ink loads of the midtones are held down much more than the black ink, which can be very high for a good dmax.  If you use Arches with an Epson K3 printer you could probably just re-linearize the profiles I've made.

> www.bkpix.com

Looks like nice work.  I think the Arches with Carbon-6 will do the trick.

See http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Eboni-6.pdf, and
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Ink-Mixing.pdf.

I might add that Arches HP prints much better if you go with a printer that is at least in the Epson K2 league -- 7600 - 7880.  I think you'd want the ability to feed a full sheet into the printer, which knocks out the 3800 and 4800.  I bought a used 7800 and have been very happy with it.

If you want warmer tones, note that the MIS PK, LK, and LLK can do that.  I currently have those in my 7800.  I would probably not, however, aside from a special project I have this year that requires the warmth for old photo reproductions.

Good luck with the project.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 




>

Thanks, Paul.

There's an Epson 9000 available nearby for not too much money -- a few hundred $$. Do you think that printer is a reasonable option? Or is it too outdated?

BK

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "bobkeefer@..." <bobkeefer@...> wrote:
>
> 
> I am wanting to expand to a 17-inch printer (or even 24-inch).
> 
>

I own both the Epson 3800 and the 4800. The 3800 is my general purpose/color printer (as it holds both matte and photo black) and the 4800 is to become a dedicated BW printer (Eb-HPPK mix).

I must say, the extra cost of the 4800 does reflect itself in overall mechanical quality plus the option to print on rolls. I was lucky to be able to buy a 2nd hand one that still was brand new, so it is wactually cheaper then my 3800. In terms of print quality there is no difference. 

Joost

"bobkeefer@..." <bobkeefer@...> wrote:
>
> There's an Epson 9000 available nearby for not too much money -- a few hundred $$. Do you think that printer is a reasonable option? Or is it too outdated?

The 9000, like the 7500 I had, can print Eboni/Carbon-6 on coated inkjet paper quite well.  However, I was never able to get a very smooth image on un-coated Arches.  So, if you're into tinting, I'd avoid the 9000 and that generation.  

That generation of printer also had seals between the carts and printer that could not withstand many removals and re-insertions of the carts.  You'll need some way to agitate the carts.  I tried rocking the printer, but that was not very successful.  An alternative that some use is to buy the funnel fill carts and use a syringe to agitate the inks.  I've never done that, so I can't say how effective it is.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Thanks again, Paul.

My initial impression was the 9000 was more difficult than I wanted to tangle with, on a number of levels. There are other deals out there....

BK


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

>
> "bobkeefer@" <bobkeefer@> wrote:
> >
> > There's an Epson 9000 available nearby for not too much money -- a few hundred $$. Do you think that printer is a reasonable option? Or is it too outdated?
> 
> The 9000, like the 7500 I had, can print Eboni/Carbon-6 on coated inkjet paper quite well.  However, I was never able to get a very smooth image on un-coated Arches.  So, if you're into tinting, I'd avoid the 9000 and that generation.  
> 
> That generation of printer also had seals between the carts and printer that could not withstand many removals and re-insertions of the carts.  You'll need some way to agitate the carts.  I tried rocking the printer, but that was not very successful.  An alternative that some use is to buy the funnel fill carts and use a syringe to agitate the inks.  I've never done that, so I can't say how effective it is.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

I've been using the Epson R2880 for more than a year now and love it. The prints are museum/gallery quality.

Russ duPont

www.russdupontphotos.com

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

>
> "bobkeefer@" <bobkeefer@> wrote:
> >
> > There's an Epson 9000 available nearby for not too much money -- a few hundred $$. Do you think that printer is a reasonable option? Or is it too outdated?
> 
> The 9000, like the 7500 I had, can print Eboni/Carbon-6 on coated inkjet paper quite well.  However, I was never able to get a very smooth image on un-coated Arches.  So, if you're into tinting, I'd avoid the 9000 and that generation.  
> 
> That generation of printer also had seals between the carts and printer that could not withstand many removals and re-insertions of the carts.  You'll need some way to agitate the carts.  I tried rocking the printer, but that was not very successful.  An alternative that some use is to buy the funnel fill carts and use a syringe to agitate the inks.  I've never done that, so I can't say how effective it is.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>