Re: [Digital BW] Digest Number 509
2002-02-27 by Warren Denning
Hey Steve, Here's a list of things I'd love for you to bring over on Friday so I can pack them for IBAC. D30 + microdrives + charger + extra batteres Jackrabbit + cord + charger Dyna 2000 pack 550 Strobe + bounce card 4080 and 4040 heads + 1 7 reflector Walkie talkies Thank you, Warren DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com wrote: > > 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. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > There are 25 messages in this issue. > > Topics in this digest: > > 1. Re: Anyone built/seen a BW lightjet? > From: Todd Flashner <tflash@...> > 2. Re: Anyone built/seen a BW lightjet? > From: Daniel Perez <tronicart@yahoo.com> > 3. Re: Anyone built/seen a BW lightjet? > From: "rcoda" <rcoda@...> > 4. Re: Re: Anyone built/seen a BW lightjet? > From: sdmey4@... > 5. Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > From: "Steadman Uhlich" <steadmanuhlich@...> > 6. Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > From: sdmey4@... > 7. Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > From: "Steadman Uhlich" <steadmanuhlich@...> > 8. Re: dark images > From: "mwesley3" <mwesley250@...> > 9. Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > From: "mwesley3" <mwesley250@...> > 10. Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > From: "mwesley3" <mwesley250@...> > 11. Roark Curves Updated > From: "ednmetrodc" <ed@...> > 12. Re: Time Is On MY Side (WasB & W Mag) > From: toomagenta@... > 13. Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > From: toomagenta@aol.com > 14. Re: Anyone built/seen a BW lightjet? > From: "mwesley3" <mwesley250@...> > 15. Using MIS VM inks, a question > From: "lyonscox" <lyonscox@...> > 16. Re: Re: Anyone built/seen a BW lightjet? > From: sdmey4@... > 17. Using a 1270 question > From: "lyonscox" <lyonscox@mindspring.com> > 18. Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > From: "the_mattclark" <matt@...> > 19. Leaving your Epson left on/off > From: Forrest MacCormack <forrest1@...> > 20. Re: Using a 1270 question > From: "lyonscox" <lyonscox@mindspring.com> > 21. Re: Using MIS VM inks, a question > From: Todd Flashner <tflash@...> > 22. Re: Leaving your Epson left on/off > From: Todd Flashner <tflash@...> > 23. Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > From: "earregardless" <earregardless@...> > 24. Moving to quadtones/MIS FS > From: "bensongary" <bensonga@...> > 25. Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > From: "tomoc" <tomoc@...> > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 21:47:36 -0500 > From: Todd Flashner <tflash@...> > Subject: Re: Anyone built/seen a BW lightjet? > > I've got to figure the media would need to be chromogenic (c-print) or RC BW > at best. > > Todd > > > Hi, > > > > I am extremely happy with the output from the lightjet for color work > > and was wondering if anyone had experience with making BW lightjet > > prints? > > > > Here are a couple of links describing the technology: > > http://www.cymbolic.com/products/lightjet5000.html > > and the newer > > http://www.cymbolic.com/lightjet430.html > > > > Thanks, > > Mark > > http://www.interwalk.com/pinhole.htm > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 18:56:55 -0800 (PST) > From: Daniel Perez <tronicart@...> > Subject: Re: Anyone built/seen a BW lightjet? > > Before I got my inkjet printers set up with pig inks, > I used to output on lightjet machines. I did a couple > of b&w prints with satisfactory results(I was > suprised). > As much as they might hate it, you need to be active > in your print's creation. I had them do a couple of > prints before I found the tone to be accurate. I also > took in a proof I had created on my 1270 with the old > japanese OEM inks, which used to make pretty good > (neutral) b&w prints before they reformulated the > inks. > You also might want to ask when was the last time they > changed out the chemicals in the machine. This could > effect the neutrality of the final print. > If you've had lightjet prints made already, I'm sure > you're familiar with the routine. > good luck, > > Daniel Perez > > --- interrante <interrante@yahoo.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I am extremely happy with the output from the > > lightjet for color work > > and was wondering if anyone had experience with > > making BW lightjet > > prints? > > > > Here are a couple of links describing the > > technology: > > > > http://www.cymbolic.com/products/lightjet5000.html > > and the newer > > http://www.cymbolic.com/lightjet430.html > > > > Thanks, > > Mark > > http://www.interwalk.com/pinhole.htm > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Greetings - Send FREE e-cards for every occasion! > http://greetings.yahoo.com > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 03:07:02 -0000 > From: "rcoda" <rcoda@...> > Subject: Re: Anyone built/seen a BW lightjet? > > Yes, at AIPAD a few weeks ago in NYC. They were prints by David > Fokos, who is well-known in the digital to silver circles. > > I had inquired two years ago about doing BW on a LightJet and was > rather discouraged by the responses I got. However, the prints I saw > a few weeks ago were stunning. I read the print info card on the wall > and couldn't believe that it was a chomogenic C-print. I think a lot > had to do with the fact that they were from large (8x10 I think) > negatives. The tone was neutral and they were on the matte surface > paper. Looked almost like Kodak Elite the way the light reflected off > it. I was very impressed and would now have to reconsider it as an > option for digital output. > > Richard M. Coda > www.rcodaphotography.com > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 4 > Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 22:29:16 EST > From: sdmey4@... > Subject: Re: Re: Anyone built/seen a BW lightjet? > > In a message dated 02/26/2002 7:11:08 PM Pacific Standard Time, > rcoda@... writes: > > > > > Yes, at AIPAD a few weeks ago in NYC. They were prints by David > > Fokos, who is well-known in the digital to silver circles. > > Snip>> > I have seen these prints also, At first I thought they where Silver prints > and to my amazment I found out they where in fact black and white light jet > prints on Fuji Crystal Archive paper. He has the tone down perfect! There is > also a black and white digital lightjet paper from Kodak that has a real > slick foil look to it. Very different and very interesting look. After seeing > Davids Prints I rushed out and tried a couple test prints and I decieded all > papers other than Fuji looked cheap in comparision for black and white. This > route is solid but will cost ya. > Steve Meyers > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 5 > Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 15:45:49 -0600 > From: "Steadman Uhlich" <steadmanuhlich@...> > Subject: Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > > Completely agree with you there. > > That is why I am now selling dated "vintage" digital prints! > > "Vintage Digital Prints" you ask? > > Yes...as the digital time line is an exponential timeline...(what was that called...the x factor...no it is that guy who invented the IC...what's his name...N---something...) > > Anyway...since digital progresses so quickly...any digital print that is one year old is (by dog years) already "vintage" in my book (grin)! > > Some fun, > > Steadman > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Martin Wesley > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 3:31 PM > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > > Steadman, > > This is essentially an untenable position on their part and a betrayal of > the interest of their readers. Now is the time to collect early digital > prints. You have to be rather thick to not realize that eventually digital > is going to be a very large and important B&W medium and the very first > efforts will be small in number, much sought after and highly valued. > > Time will render the proper verdict on their decision. In the meantime I bet > they don't turn down any ads by photographers selling digital prints! > > Martin Wesley > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steadman Uhlich" <steadmanuhlich@...> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 1:09 PM > Subject: [Digital BW] B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > > > Hello, > > > > This is just a short news item for you....the recent issue of B&W magazine > (for collectors of fine photography) has dropped digital prints. > > > > In his letter to readers, the editor in chief says that digital prints do > not have the tradition, heritage, and well....some other qualities he thinks > important for collectors...given that they are made by "machine" and not in > a traditional manner. So...from now on...this mag will not have any > articles or feature any discussion of digital prints. > > > > Too bad he doesn't realize the hours I spend on making a single great > print...the sweat and the frustration of dealing with the technical issues > to get it perfect.....the multitudes of "not-perfect" prints that I throw > away...the attention to detail and the careful use of archival papers and > inks...and the creativity involved not only in the image making but > also...gasp...in the printing itself! Yes...it is hard to make perfect > prints....very hard. Despite the best of tools and the best > techniques...perfection is always hard....and sometimes unobtainable. > > > > Despite this...at least one of the profiled photographers says in his bio > how important the traditional process is to him and his photography....and > then at the bottom of the page offers to sell his prints as "giclees > starting at....$xxx" so... > > > > Comments? > > > > Steadman > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > 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 http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > 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. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 6 > Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 22:47:26 EST > From: sdmey4@... > Subject: Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > > My subscription ran out last month! I WILL NOT renew it. The editor, once > admired, is now an idiot in my mind. If you look in all the ads from > galleries, there are many that are selling some form of digital work and he > is happy to take there ad money. > Steven Meyers > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 7 > Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 21:46:37 -0600 > From: "Steadman Uhlich" <steadmanuhlich@...> > Subject: Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > > Good points Paul. > > I especially think the archival nature of partially toned (and possibly those improperly processed) prints is a key issue....but not for them. > > Steadman > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Paul Roark > To: DigitalB&WPrint > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 5:01 PM > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > > Steadman Uhlich wrote: > > > In his letter to readers, the editor in chief says that digital prints do > not have the tradition, heritage, and well....some other qualities he thinks > important for collectors...given that they are made by "machine" and not in > a traditional manner. So...from now on...this mag will not have any > articles or feature any discussion of digital prints. > > It seems to me there are a couple of approaches that warrant letters to the > magazine that will get them into more of a corner. > > For example, I'd want to know if silver prints that went through a digital > step are covered. For example, what of the Lens Work type images. > > Next, I'd want to know how collectors or the magazine can tell if there was > a digital step if the process. Can they really police the policy? Do they > have affidavits from all their advertisers and the photographers and others > whose photos are published? > > I wonder what the other attributes of digital are that are of concern? > Maybe they could be specific. > > If longevity and light fastness is one factor, how do they know that the > photos that are featured and advertised are properly processed? If they are > not the carbon pigments on good paper is probably more archival. > > In fact, if the partial toning that we silver printers were doing, it turns > out that the images are not really that archival. I think I'll be able to > measure the yellowing of partially-toned silver prints. It may be low, but > I hope to match it -- in fact non-warming paper (no brighteners) may do it > already. > > We must confess that the easy of making many copies is a problem for any > machine print. Collectors want an object that cannot be made in quantity. > How one raises prices, all else being equal, is to limit output. From an > economics perspective, the control that a monopolist has is limiting output. > It is only from that action that prices rise. So, out put limitations is a > key to collectible value. But, how many prints to A. Adams "make?" I think > over 80,000, but this is hearsay. > > So, there are issues we can work with here. If the magazines' policy > becomes self-defeating, they'll change. > > Paul > http://www.PaulRoark.com > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > 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. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 8 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 04:43:34 -0000 > From: "mwesley3" <mwesley250@...t> > Subject: Re: dark images > > Scott, > > No need to go back to the camera exposure or to development. > Negatives I made decades ago for silver printing work just fine with > inkjet. > > Keep working with the curves. Try the John Woolf workflow. You might > want to consider buying Piezo for $335 but stay with the FS inks you > already have. > > Martin Wesley > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "smichener" > <smichener@y...> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'm a new comer to digital black and white, so I hope this > isn't > > a ridiculus question. > > I'm using Jim Nevins curves with FS MIS inks in an 1160. I > > continue to have problems with dark images. After the curve is > > applied the images print very dark. If I lighten the image with > > brightness, contrast or a tonality adjustment, it results in a flat > > image with blending of the grays, little contrast and a very > digital > > look. > > I did a gray scale stepwedge and created my own curve which was > > not perfect, but close. This brought back contrast and more detail > > to my images, but they still print very dark. > > Do I need to go all the way back to the camera and increase my > > exposure or is there a nice way to lighten these images up and keep > > detail and contrast? > > Thanks all, > > Scott Michener > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 9 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 04:50:10 -0000 > From: "mwesley3" <mwesley250@...> > Subject: Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., toomagenta@a... wrote: > > In a message dated 2/26/2002 4:32:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, > jeffm@g... > > writes: > > > > > > My problem is that my body is no longer in agreement with those > > famous Rolling Stone lyrics, "Time is on my side". :) or is it :( ? > > George J Kunze > > You mean their cover of the Irma Thomas song. How quickly they > forget! <G> > > Martin > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 10 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 04:52:10 -0000 > From: "mwesley3" <mwesley250@...> > Subject: Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., toomagenta@a... wrote: > > In a message dated 2/26/2002 4:38:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, > > mwesley250@e... writes: > > > (snip) > > > > BRAVO!!!!!! > > George J Kunze > > > Well okay then, I guess I can forgive you about poor Irma. <<G>> > > Martin > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 11 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 04:53:28 -0000 > From: "ednmetrodc" <ed@...> > Subject: Roark Curves Updated > > FYI, I just noticed that Paul's VM Curves have been updated 2/26/02. For the 1270 > Mac he went from version 5 to version 6, however, don't know if the other printer > curves have been updated. Anyone know just what has changed? > > You can find the curves at the following link: > http://inksupply.com/index.cfm?source=html/workflow_roark.html > > Ed > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 12 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 00:04:11 EST > From: toomagenta@... > Subject: Re: Time Is On MY Side (WasB & W Mag) > > In a message dated 2/26/2002 11:51:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, > mwesley250@... writes: > > > > My problem is that my body is no longer in agreement with those > > > famous Rolling Stone lyrics, "Time is on my side". :) or is it :( ? > > > George J Kunze > > > > You mean their cover of the Irma Thomas song. How quickly they > > forget! <G> > > > Got me! > George J Kunze > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 13 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 00:05:54 EST > From: toomagenta@... > Subject: Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > > In a message dated 2/26/2002 11:57:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, > mwesley250@... writes: > > > Well okay then, I guess I can forgive you about poor Irma > > Thank you. > George > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 14 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 05:04:12 -0000 > From: "mwesley3" <mwesley250@...> > Subject: Re: Anyone built/seen a BW lightjet? > > Steve, Richard, > > I last saw some Lightjet output several years ago and it had a real > RC look to it. How would you compare the current paper to silver > fiber and and RC? > > Anyone want to contribute some to an exchange? > > Martin Wesley > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., sdmey4@a... wrote: > > In a message dated 02/26/2002 7:11:08 PM Pacific Standard Time, > > rcoda@y... writes: > > > > > > > > > > Yes, at AIPAD a few weeks ago in NYC. They were prints by David > > > Fokos, who is well-known in the digital to silver circles. > > > Snip>> > > I have seen these prints also, At first I thought they where Silver > prints > > and to my amazment I found out they where in fact black and white > light jet > > prints on Fuji Crystal Archive paper. He has the tone down perfect! > There is > > also a black and white digital lightjet paper from Kodak that has a > real > > slick foil look to it. Very different and very interesting look. > After seeing > > Davids Prints I rushed out and tried a couple test prints and I > decieded all > > papers other than Fuji looked cheap in comparision for black and > white. This > > route is solid but will cost ya. > > Steve Meyers > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 15 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 05:18:39 -0000 > From: "lyonscox" <lyonscox@...> > Subject: Using MIS VM inks, a question > > Paul- or others familiar... > > Could some info be related on the choice of using sRGB as the space > to print from and what are the implications of choosing anything else > (i.e. a Cone Profile or Adobe RGB 1998)? > > Much thanks, > > Cleavis > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 16 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 00:27:35 EST > From: sdmey4@... > Subject: Re: Re: Anyone built/seen a BW lightjet? > > In a message dated 02/26/2002 9:07:43 PM Pacific Standard Time, > mwesley250@... writes: > > > Steve, Richard, > > > > I last saw some Lightjet output several years ago and it had a real > > RC look to it. How would you compare the current paper to silver > > fiber and and RC? > Snip> > The David Fokos prints where and are the same surface as Fuji Crystal Archive > Matte color paper. So not terribly RC looking. Its a matte finish paper but > not flat matt like silver paper is. Kind of a luster or pearl but smooth, not > quite an air dried glossy fiber but close. Tyler boley was with me when I saw > them and we both thought they where silver fiber prints. I remember thinking > > > They start at about 4,000.00 and sell very well. > Steve M. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 17 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 05:29:17 -0000 > From: "lyonscox" <lyonscox@mindspring.com> > Subject: Using a 1270 question > > I was blisfully printing over the weekend. > Then 2/3's of the way through a long print inktone dropped off, as > though it wasn't exposed enough. > > Today I get a communications error message (& don't know how to > resolve it). > > Clues? > > Using Win98se, 1270 via USB to it's own slot direct to tower, with > MIS VM inks. Also have a C80 attached to it's own slot in the tower - > tried turning that off and printing but to no avail. > > TIA, > > Cleavis > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 18 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 05:33:12 -0000 > From: "the_mattclark" <matt@innerrevolution.com> > Subject: Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Martin Wesley" > > Time will render the proper verdict on their decision. In the > meantime I bet > > they don't turn down any ads by photographers selling digital > prints! > > > > And obviously they value digital B&W images enough to use them for > sales purposes on their web site. Guess they could fax the images to > shoppers. No wait, thats digital too. Hmmm? What to do... > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 19 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 00:39:25 -0500 > From: Forrest MacCormack <forrest1@...> > Subject: Leaving your Epson left on/off > > This may seem like a stupid question... but as I've heard before "there > are no dumb questions". (Some of you might even wonder about this too > and have just never asked) > I have an Epson 1280 with a continuous flow system and pigment inks. Is > it a bad or good idea to leave the printer on when not in use? > Suggestions... thoughts? > > Best Regards, > > Forrest MaCormack > Arlington, VA > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 20 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 05:42:45 -0000 > From: "lyonscox" <lyonscox@...> > Subject: Re: Using a 1270 question > > Went into my computer/printers/1270/properties/details and guess it > had switched itself somehow from EPUSB2 to 1 and had communication > error. Put it on EPUSB2 (EPSON Sytlus Photo 1270) and it's humming > away...don't know it I've lost (temporarily) the C80 now though. > > Thanks, > Cleavis > > <SNIP original> > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 21 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 01:10:14 -0500 > From: Todd Flashner <tflash@...> > Subject: Re: Using MIS VM inks, a question > > on 2/27/02 12:18 AM, lyonscox wrote: > > > Paul- or others familiar... > > > > Could some info be related on the choice of using sRGB as the space > > to print from and what are the implications of choosing anything else > > (i.e. a Cone Profile or Adobe RGB 1998)? > > > > Much thanks, > > > > Cleavis > > > > I use adobe rather than sRGB, just because it's my preferred space for color > work. There are subtle differences between the two, but nothing major. > However, I recommend you print a 21step wedge each way to see for yourself, > what I consider minor someone else may consider major. > > In another post someone spoke of updated curves. In the case where the > curves for one platform are not as far developed as those of the other > platform (i.e. Mac vs PC) I am finding that, at least on my Mac & 1160, the > PC curves work great. I ran out of ink in my 1270 so I can't say, but as the > Mac curves are at version 6, and the PC curves are at version 11, I'd give > the PC curves a try even on a Mac. Worst case scenario you might need to > make a gamma adjustment to the file, or on the master channel of the curve, > but for my 1160 even that wasn't necessary. > > Todd Flashner > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 22 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 01:15:55 -0500 > From: Todd Flashner <tflash@...> > Subject: Re: Leaving your Epson left on/off > > > This may seem like a stupid question... but as I've heard before "there > > are no dumb questions". (Some of you might even wonder about this too > > and have just never asked) > > I have an Epson 1280 with a continuous flow system and pigment inks. Is > > it a bad or good idea to leave the printer on when not in use? > > Suggestions... thoughts? > > Not sure if it's true for all printer models but the general rule is to turn > the printer off, with the switch, don't pull the power supply, to resist > clogs. When you turn it off the heads are put in contact with a capping > station that keeps them from drying out. Furthermore, upon startup a little > head cleaning action is part of the startup routine. > > You will spill a little more ink this way but it's probably less than if you > are performing several full cleaning cycles to clear major clogs. > > Todd Flashner > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 23 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 06:16:57 -0000 > From: "earregardless" <earregardless@...> > Subject: Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > > Wait a minute. I read Rasmussen's "Opening Shot" as stating that, in > his - the editor/publisher's - opinion, black and white's "connection > with the past" merits the policy that B&W "will not widen our > editorial scope to include Digital photography." Rasmussen > continues: "This is not a judgement reflecting the worth of > practitioners of the new ways, but a practical necessity - it's > impossible to please both sides in the same forum." > > I see nothing in the article (p. 7 of the April 2002 issue) that says > that digital lacks the tradition, heritage, and other qualities that > collectors are looking for. Rasmussen is clear - in his opinion, > digital is based more on technology and conventional photography is > based on craftsmanship. The magazine's concentration on conventional > photography is "a decision in consideration of constancy." > > Regardless of the possibly misguided basis for his opinion, he's > entitled to it. He does say that "we may from time to time > reevaluate our policy, and will keep readers informed of developments > in the Digital arena." Thus, there is nothing in the article that > suggests that it will not have any articles or feature any discussion > of digital prints. > > Face it folks, despite the raves of enlightened practioners, as of > February 27, 2002, there is still quite a bit of skepticism - and not > without reason - about digital photography. The leading - and, as > far as I know, only - magazine devoted to black and white photography > (and a damn fine publication) is not so much dictating standards but > is rather reflecting popular opinion. > > Besides posting here - which is a bit like preaching to the choir - > perhaps a letter to the editor would be more effective in getting > Rasmussen's ear and the issue before the collecting public. That > will ensure that, at least for the July 2002 issue, there will be a > discussion - not a monologue - on the merits of collecting digital > photography. > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Steadman Uhlich" > <steadmanuhlich@k...> wrote: > > Good points Paul. > > > > I especially think the archival nature of partially toned (and > possibly those improperly processed) prints is a key issue....but not > for them. > > > > Steadman > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Paul Roark > > To: DigitalB&WPrint > > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 5:01 PM > > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > > > > > > Steadman Uhlich wrote: > > > > > In his letter to readers, the editor in chief says that digital > prints do > > not have the tradition, heritage, and well....some other > qualities he thinks > > important for collectors...given that they are made by "machine" > and not in > > a traditional manner. So...from now on...this mag will not have > any > > articles or feature any discussion of digital prints. > > > > It seems to me there are a couple of approaches that warrant > letters to the > > magazine that will get them into more of a corner. > > > > For example, I'd want to know if silver prints that went through > a digital > > step are covered. For example, what of the Lens Work type images. > > > > Next, I'd want to know how collectors or the magazine can tell if > there was > > a digital step if the process. Can they really police the > policy? Do they > > have affidavits from all their advertisers and the photographers > and others > > whose photos are published? > > > > I wonder what the other attributes of digital are that are of > concern? > > Maybe they could be specific. > > > > If longevity and light fastness is one factor, how do they know > that the > > photos that are featured and advertised are properly processed? > If they are > > not the carbon pigments on good paper is probably more archival. > > > > In fact, if the partial toning that we silver printers were > doing, it turns > > out that the images are not really that archival. I think I'll > be able to > > measure the yellowing of partially-toned silver prints. It may > be low, but > > I hope to match it -- in fact non-warming paper (no brighteners) > may do it > > already. > > > > We must confess that the easy of making many copies is a problem > for any > > machine print. Collectors want an object that cannot be made in > quantity. > > How one raises prices, all else being equal, is to limit output. > >From an > > economics perspective, the control that a monopolist has is > limiting output. > > It is only from that action that prices rise. So, out put > limitations is a > > key to collectible value. But, how many prints to A. > Adams "make?" I think > > over 80,000, but this is hearsay. > > > > So, there are issues we can work with here. If the magazines' > policy > > becomes self-defeating, they'll change. > > > > Paul > > http://www.PaulRoark.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 24 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 06:39:10 -0000 > From: "bensongary" <bensonga@...> > Subject: Moving to quadtones/MIS FS > > All, > > Well, I've spent the past couple months scanning 35mm, medium and > large format B&W negatives (Canoscan FS2710 and a new Epson 2450), > learning some new Photoshop techniques and experimenting with my > Epson 980 printer. While I've been generally happy with the results > (using Epson inks and Epson heavy weight matte paper), I think I'm > ready to move on to quadtones. I'm getting tired of that metamarism > (spelling?) and odd color cast to these "B&W" prints in daylight. > > Reading the posts to the List over the past couple months, I'm > constantly aware of how much I have yet to learn. This is what I'm > thinking about doing....MIS Full Spectrum inks and trying to adapt > the John Wolf workflow and curves described on the MIS website to my > Epson 980 printer. Can anyone tell me whether and how to adapt those > curves developed for an 1160 and 3000 printer to my 980, or if I even > need to worry about this? Alternatively, should I be using a > different workflow/set of curves altogether? TIA for you assistance > and advice. > > Gary Benson > Eagle River, Alaska > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 25 > Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 06:53:34 -0000 > From: "tomoc" <tomoc@...> > Subject: Re: B&W Magazine "drops" digital prints > > Couldn't agree more... My letter to the editor cancelling my > subscription is in draft mode as we speak... As will be a letter to a > few of the largest advertisers in the last issue. > > I think this is a big blow if we let it pass...or an opportunity if > we can raise some cyber ruckus over it. > > Let's make sure some of the comments posted here find their way to > media stations who might be interested. > > BWDigital_the_print stages protest over luddite treatment by myopic > publisher... Etc, etc.. > > Tom O'Connell > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., John Labovitz <johnl@j...> > wrote: > > On 2/26/02 3:01 PM, "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@v...> wrote: > > > > > It seems to me there are a couple of approaches that warrant > letters to the > > > magazine that will get them into more of a corner. > > > > Good ideas, those. > > > > In addition, those of us who subscribe to and/or advertise with B&W > might > > let the editor know that we'll withdraw our support by cancelling > > subscriptions or choosing other vehicles for advertising. I'm sure > that > > being a "premium" magazine that is probably largely supported by > > subscriptions, B&W might look at the situation a bit differently if > it > > realizes that at least some of its support comes from the very > digital > > printmakers they are now alienating. > > > > (I haven't yet received my issue, so I don't want to comment > specifically on > > what B&W is trying to say.) > > > > -- > > John Labovitz > > johnl@j... > > www.johnlabovitz.com > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]