Yahoo Groups archive

Digital BW, The Print

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC

Thread

[Digital BW] what to expect from desktop digital printing?

[Digital BW] what to expect from desktop digital printing?

2002-02-25 by Paul Roark

Bob,

For great B&W digital prints, use the "quad" inksets and a system that is
being used by others with success, so that you'll have some support from
successful users.  On this forum most use either the Piezo driver (Photoshop
plug-in) with Piezo or MIS FS inks, or the MIS VM (variable-tone/mix) inks.
Only certain printer models are supported by these systems, so be sure you
have a printer that is supported.

I always recommend people start with Epson Archival Matte for a paper.  It's
cheap and very good.  There are many other papers that print similarly, with
no need for other profiles.  Somerset Enhanced does require a different
profile, however.

One advantage of the Piezo system is its paper profiles.  The big advantage
of the MIS VM system is control of print tone.

I think once you learn how to use either of the approaches noted above, the
prints will be every bit as good as the wet darkroom prints, with the
surface differences (flat for pigmented inkjet v. more of a luster for
air-dried, glossy, fiber-based silver prints) being the most obvious visual
differences.  Even these disappear if the print is framed under glass.  Of
course, the inkjet papers give you lots of choice with respect to texture
that are not available in the wet darkroom.

I frankly think the inkjet prints are often (if not usually) superior to
silver prints due to the shoulder-less highlights that inkjets have.  This
gives a brilliance to highlights that only bleaching can achieve with the
silver prints.

Good luck.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

_____________________________________


I've recently scrapped my wet darkroom since my Photoshop skills are
lightyears ahead of my darkroom skills, but my prints so far have
been far from pleasing. Up till now the only things I've printed
digitally have been "digital art" images, which have (or so I always
thought) been fine. Trying to get a print of a "photograph" seems to
be much more difficult than I thought it would be. I use an Epson
Stylus Photo 1200 w/MIS archival color CFS. My paper of choice is
Epson Heavyweight Matte. With Epson inks my b&w prints came out
somewhat posterized, and deep shadow areas were splotchy and ugly.
Now that I've switched over to the MIS ink the results have gone from
bad to worse. One particular image, hard side lighting and contrasty,
prints horribly posterized. I bought a pack of Somerset Photo
Enhanced Velvet to try out and the tests have been ugly as sin.

I've seen posts by various people in various places about getting
wonderful results with their 1200's and even EX's, which tells me
that I must be doing something dreadfully wrong somewhere. I had
limited success, with Epson inks, with bumping the black point about
25% in each color channel with curves...less splotching in the
shadows but the prints were flat. It doesn't seem to work quite as
well with the MIS inks. My photos are mainly portraits and nudes shot
in a studio.

Can anyone help a guy out and give me some advice, or even just a
starting point? All I really want is a smooth tonal range in my
photos. I thought I knew what I was doing but I see now that isn't
the case.

Bob

Re: [Digital BW] what to expect from desktop digital printing?

2002-03-08 by photographyworks

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> Bob,
> 
> For great B&W digital prints, use the "quad" inksets and a system 
that is
> being used by others with success, so that you'll have some support 
from
> successful users.  On this forum most use either the Piezo driver 
(Photoshop
> plug-in) with Piezo or MIS FS inks, or the MIS VM (variable-
tone/mix) inks.
> Only certain printer models are supported by these systems, so be 
sure you
> have a printer that is supported.
> 
> I always recommend people start with Epson Archival Matte for a 
paper.  It's
> cheap and very good.  There are many other papers that print 
similarly, with
> no need for other profiles.  Somerset Enhanced does require a 
different
> profile, however.
> 
> One advantage of the Piezo system is its paper profiles.  The big 
advantage
> of the MIS VM system is control of print tone.
> 
> I think once you learn how to use either of the approaches noted 
above, the
> prints will be every bit as good as the wet darkroom prints, with 
the
> surface differences (flat for pigmented inkjet v. more of a luster 
for
> air-dried, glossy, fiber-based silver prints) being the most 
obvious visual
> differences.  Even these disappear if the print is framed under 
glass.  Of
> course, the inkjet papers give you lots of choice with respect to 
texture
> that are not available in the wet darkroom.
> 
> I frankly think the inkjet prints are often (if not usually) 
superior to
> silver prints due to the shoulder-less highlights that inkjets 
have.  This
> gives a brilliance to highlights that only bleaching can achieve 
with the
> silver prints.
> 
> Good luck.
> 
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com
> 
> _____________________________________
> 
> 
> I've recently scrapped my wet darkroom since my Photoshop skills are
> lightyears ahead of my darkroom skills, but my prints so far have
> been far from pleasing. Up till now the only things I've printed
> digitally have been "digital art" images, which have (or so I always
> thought) been fine. Trying to get a print of a "photograph" seems to
> be much more difficult than I thought it would be. I use an Epson
> Stylus Photo 1200 w/MIS archival color CFS. My paper of choice is
> Epson Heavyweight Matte. With Epson inks my b&w prints came out
> somewhat posterized, and deep shadow areas were splotchy and ugly.
> Now that I've switched over to the MIS ink the results have gone 
from
> bad to worse. One particular image, hard side lighting and 
contrasty,
> prints horribly posterized. I bought a pack of Somerset Photo
> Enhanced Velvet to try out and the tests have been ugly as sin.
> 
> I've seen posts by various people in various places about getting
> wonderful results with their 1200's and even EX's, which tells me
> that I must be doing something dreadfully wrong somewhere. I had
> limited success, with Epson inks, with bumping the black point about
> 25% in each color channel with curves...less splotching in the
> shadows but the prints were flat. It doesn't seem to work quite as
> well with the MIS inks. My photos are mainly portraits and nudes 
shot
> in a studio.
> 
> Can anyone help a guy out and give me some advice, or even just a
> starting point? All I really want is a smooth tonal range in my
> photos. I thought I knew what I was doing but I see now that isn't
> the case.
> 
> Bob

Bob! I would sell the 1200 and by a 1290 with piezo driver and cone 
inks. No problems forever  and outstanding prints. Regards, - Bernhard

Re: [Digital BW] what to expect from desktop digital printing?- Please trim your replies!

2002-03-08 by Bill Morse

Folks, please trim your replies, so we don't have to wade through pages of
stuff we've already gotten to find the 2 lines you've added. (Bernhard, I'm
not picking on you, we've all been doing this more and more.)

I'm on another list, where the moderator will actually kick you off if you
do this too much (I know because I recently received a "final warning [s]).
It's tough love, but it makes for a much better list.

Bill Morse
PhotoProspect
Cambridge, MA 02139

on 3/8/02 9:27 AM, photographyworks wrote:

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> Bob,
> 
> For great B&W digital prints, use the "quad" inksets and a system
that is
> being used by others with success, so that you'll have some support
from
> successful users.  On this forum most use either the Piezo driver
(Photoshop
> plug-in) with Piezo or MIS FS inks, or the MIS VM (variable-
tone/mix) inks.
> Only certain printer models are supported by these systems, so be
sure you
> have a printer that is supported.
> 
> I always recommend people start with Epson Archival Matte for a
paper.  It's
> cheap and very good.  There are many other papers that print
similarly, with
> no need for other profiles.  Somerset Enhanced does require a
different
> profile, however.
> 
> One advantage of the Piezo system is its paper profiles.  The big
advantage
> of the MIS VM system is control of print tone.
> 
> I think once you learn how to use either of the approaches noted
above, the
> prints will be every bit as good as the wet darkroom prints, with
the
> surface differences (flat for pigmented inkjet v. more of a luster
for
> air-dried, glossy, fiber-based silver prints) being the most
obvious visual
> differences.  Even these disappear if the print is framed under
glass.  Of
> course, the inkjet papers give you lots of choice with respect to
texture
> that are not available in the wet darkroom.
> 
> I frankly think the inkjet prints are often (if not usually)
superior to
> silver prints due to the shoulder-less highlights that inkjets
have.  This
> gives a brilliance to highlights that only bleaching can achieve
with the
> silver prints.
> 
> Good luck.
> 
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com
> 
> _____________________________________
> 
> 
> I've recently scrapped my wet darkroom since my Photoshop skills are
> lightyears ahead of my darkroom skills, but my prints so far have
> been far from pleasing. Up till now the only things I've printed
> digitally have been "digital art" images, which have (or so I always
> thought) been fine. Trying to get a print of a "photograph" seems to
> be much more difficult than I thought it would be. I use an Epson
> Stylus Photo 1200 w/MIS archival color CFS. My paper of choice is
> Epson Heavyweight Matte. With Epson inks my b&w prints came out
> somewhat posterized, and deep shadow areas were splotchy and ugly.
> Now that I've switched over to the MIS ink the results have gone
from
> bad to worse. One particular image, hard side lighting and
contrasty,
> prints horribly posterized. I bought a pack of Somerset Photo
> Enhanced Velvet to try out and the tests have been ugly as sin.
> 
> I've seen posts by various people in various places about getting
> wonderful results with their 1200's and even EX's, which tells me
> that I must be doing something dreadfully wrong somewhere. I had
> limited success, with Epson inks, with bumping the black point about
> 25% in each color channel with curves...less splotching in the
> shadows but the prints were flat. It doesn't seem to work quite as
> well with the MIS inks. My photos are mainly portraits and nudes
shot
> in a studio.
> 
> Can anyone help a guy out and give me some advice, or even just a
> starting point? All I really want is a smooth tonal range in my
> photos. I thought I knew what I was doing but I see now that isn't
> the case.
> 
> Bob

Bob! I would sell the 1200 and by a 1290 with piezo driver and cone
inks. No problems forever  and outstanding prints. Regards, - Bernhard


Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- Include your full name with your message.
- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
- Complete your Yahoo profile.
- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.