Digital BW, The Print

Jerry, et al,

I just opened my three boxes of Legion Photo Matte 230gsm (LPM) and examined the paper.  It seems fine to me.  Paper came from Media Street. 

Remember that the 230gsm is not a measure of thickness per se.  It is the basis weight for a known size and and quantity of paper.  In other words, a paper may be both "thin" and heavy at the same time.  This paper appears to have a nice thick coating on the front, so I expect that explains it. 

The LPM I received is a nice ultra smooth sheet that is more "flexible" than the EAM (which is more like an index card in flexibility).  The LPM appears to me to be very flexible and "supple" and at this weight is designed to go through most printers (even those without a straight paper path) easily.  

Another good characteristic I see is the opacity of the paper, which appears to be "very opaque" due to the heavy coating.  This is nice for a reflective surface.  

If this LPM is properly mounted on a backing board or in a sheet protector, it should do fine for piezo. 

Of course this is all a matter of personal opinion.  I prefer this paper to the feel of EAM.   And let' not forget it is "acid free" sulphite too. 

Regards to all, 
Steadman

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jerry Olson 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 2:44 PM
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] "silver" prints from digital systems?


  To the group.

  I have just received my first pack of the Legion Photo Matte Paper from Digital Arts., and also 3 from media street.

  This paper is NOT as thick as the samples they sent out in their sampler (legion paper co.). The actual boxes of paper are about the same thickness as Epson's Archival Matte.

  This is very disappointing, in fact it might be illegal labeling. I can easily pick out the heavier sampler paper with my eyes closed. The difference is not huge, but it is obvious. On the label on back of the sampler it says 230 gsms.

  On the boxes of legion paper, it also says 230 gsms. but it isn't quite as thick as the sampler.

  If anyone else got the sampler pack first, and then the actual paper, can you confirm, please?


  Jerry


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       

  If you do not wish to belong to Digital B&W, The Print, you may
  unsubscribe by sending an email to:
  DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



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

Jerry,

Steadman is right.  The thickness is measured with a caliper and given in 
mils. It may or may not correlate with the gsm of a paper.

LPM (230) is listed as 10.5 mil

As a reference,  Concorde Rag (181 gsm) is listed as 11.5 mil
and Sommerset Photo Enhanced Textured (225 gsm) is 16mil.

You can find more in the Excel sheet I just uploaded.


Antonis

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Steadman Uhlich" 
<steadmanuhlich@k...> wrote:
> Jerry, et al,
> 
> I just opened my three boxes of Legion Photo Matte 230gsm (LPM) and 
examined the paper.  It seems fine to me.  Paper came from Media Street. 
> 
> Remember that the 230gsm is not a measure of thickness per se.  It is the 
basis weight for a known size and and quantity of paper.  In other words, a 
paper may be both "thin" and heavy at the same time.  This paper appears to 
have a nice thick coating on the front, so I expect that explains it. 

.....


>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: Jerry Olson 
>   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y... 
>   Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 2:44 PM
>   Subject: Re: [Digital BW] "silver" prints from digital systems?
> 
> 
>   To the group.
> 
>   I have just received my first pack of the Legion Photo Matte Paper from 
Digital Arts., and also 3 from media street.
> 
>   This paper is NOT as thick as the samples they sent out in their sampler 
(legion paper co.). The actual boxes of paper are about the same thickness as 
Epson's Archival Matte.
> 
>   This is very disappointing, in fact it might be illegal labeling. I can easily 
pick out the heavier sampler paper with my eyes closed. The difference is not 
huge, but it is obvious. On the label on back of the sampler it says 230 gsms.
> 
>   On the boxes of legion paper, it also says 230 gsms. but it isn't quite as 
thick as the sampler.
> 
>   If anyone else got the sampler pack first, and then the actual paper, can 
you confirm, please?

> 
> 
>   Jerry

Steadman,

My complaint was that it did not match the sample they sent out. I expected the heavier paper, and didn't get it.
It's still a nice paper, but I wanted something thicker than Epson archival!

Jerry



Steadman Uhlich wrote:

> Jerry, et al,
>
> I just opened my three boxes of Legion Photo Matte 230gsm (LPM) and examined the paper.  It seems fine to me.  Paper came from Media Street.
>
> Remember that the 230gsm is not a measure of thickness per se.  It is the basis weight for a known size and and quantity of paper.  In other words, a paper may be both "thin" and heavy at the same time.  This paper appears to have a nice thick coating on the front, so I expect that explains it.
>
> The LPM I received is a nice ultra smooth sheet that is more "flexible" than the EAM (which is more like an index card in flexibility).  The LPM appears to me to be very flexible and "supple" and at this weight is designed to go through most printers (even those without a straight paper path) easily.
>
> Another good characteristic I see is the opacity of the paper, which appears to be "very opaque" due to the heavy coating.  This is nice for a reflective surface.
>
> If this LPM is properly mounted on a backing board or in a sheet protector, it should do fine for piezo.
>
> Of course this is all a matter of personal opinion.  I prefer this paper to the feel of EAM.   And let' not forget it is "acid free" sulphite too.
>
> Regards to all,
> Steadman
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Jerry Olson
>   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 2:44 PM
>   Subject: Re: [Digital BW] "silver" prints from digital systems?
>
>   To the group.
>
>   I have just received my first pack of the Legion Photo Matte Paper from Digital Arts., and also 3 from media street.
>
>   This paper is NOT as thick as the samples they sent out in their sampler (legion paper co.). The actual boxes of paper are about the same thickness as Epson's Archival Matte.
>
>   This is very disappointing, in fact it might be illegal labeling. I can easily pick out the heavier sampler paper with my eyes closed. The difference is not huge, but it is obvious. On the label on back of the sampler it says 230 gsms.
>
>   On the boxes of legion paper, it also says 230 gsms. but it isn't quite as thick as the sampler.
>
>   If anyone else got the sampler pack first, and then the actual paper, can you confirm, please?
>
>   Jerry
>
>         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>               ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>   If you do not wish to belong to Digital B&W, The Print, you may
>   unsubscribe by sending an email to:
>   DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> If you do not wish to belong to Digital B&W, The Print, you may
> unsubscribe by sending an email to:
> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Greetings -

I've been lurking on this list, and previously on several others related to
digital imaging, for a few months now. Having learned a great deal from
everyone -- for which many thanks -- and come to some conclusions, I
thought I would briefly describe my experience in case it's useful to
anyone else starting out.

I take pictures with a 35mm camera on Kodak TMax 400 film, developed in
TMax developer. For a number of years I printed on both Agfa Multicontrast
8x10 RC paper (prints to give away and for my own file collection) and
Ilford MG Fiber (for my "portfolio"). I have never sold a print as such,
and have seldom been paid for a picture: I do this for my own reasons and
to create pictures to give to other people.

Darkroom work is something I have had to shoehorn in between work and the
rest of my life, and the time and tedium of setting up, washing, drying,
spotting, etc., not to mention the cost of materials and darkroom rental,
were getting to me. I have therefore ended up with the following digital
equipment set: a Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II (2820 ppi), Photoshop 6.0 on
an iMac, and an Epson 1160 printer. The scanner produces excellent results:
I can see the grain of my negatives (which I like a lot; see below), and
that grain is pin-sharp corner to corner. The printer appears sturdy and
reliable. I have a lot to learn about Photoshop, but already I can
manipulate images to create a more balanced print than I ever learned to
make under the enlarger.

What I have not ended up with, to my surprise, is _any_ of the quadtone B&W
inksets. Having tried the Epson OEM color inks (weird color casts), PiezoBW
(too brown, too much nozzle clogging, too expensive), and the MIS
variable-tone inkset (best of the bunch), I found that I simply do not like
the grainless "large-format" look that quadtones produce on paper. My
pictures are often about expressions and gestures and fleeting events, and
seldom depend on sheer technical excellence for their impact; I like 35mm
for that reason, and I like the way a good lens retains its sharpness down
into the film's visible grain.

So what I _am_ going to use is just the black cartridge on my 1160, by
simply selecting "black" rather than "color" in the Print dialog. I will be
trying out both Generations and the MIS double-density black in an effort
to get maximum depth. Yes, I will see tiny little dots in the highest-value
areas; but I need to look very closely and in any case they don't bother
me. I am accustomed, after all, to understanding a picture as a pattern of
tiny black dots of silver on a sheet of white paper. The results on Epson
Heavyweight Matte (for now) are just what I'm looking for: a
black-and-white image that retains the distinctive look of 35mm but with
all the flexibility of Photoshop adjustments and desktop output.

Are there any other 35mm photographers out there who feel as I do? or is
everyone else happy with, and striving to achieve, that smooth big-negative
look? Am I alone in my deplorable practice of just using the black
cartridge?

Thank you all again for the enormously valuable information you are
providing. I look forward to more stimulating discussions.

Best regards,

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

on 8/21/01 9:07 AM, Nicholas Hartmann at POLYGLOT@... wrote:

> Are there any other 35mm photographers out there who feel as I do? or is
> everyone else happy with, and striving to achieve, that smooth big-negative
> look? Am I alone in my deplorable practice of just using the black
> cartridge?

a lot of my street shooting results in gritty grainy images which need
punchy blacks and sharp grain for their impact. It is perfectly possible to
get this look using quadtone inks without resorting to the fake grain the
epson dither introduces when you use black ink.

1.  Scan at 4000 dpi so you cature 400 asa grain (and shoot a combo like APX
in Xtol 1:2 which will give you nice sharp grain but not golfballs).

2.  Sharpen slightly more than you would normally. Try 100% at 0.7 or 1
pixels for a 35mm neg scanned at 4000 dpi.

3.  Make sure you crush the blacks slightly. If you are looking for an
intense image you want a strong assertive black in the picture. Push the
black slider up into the shadow peak (there's usually a peak in the
histogram in the dark shadows, which usually is a good point to set your
blacks for this kind of image)

4.  Print on a paper which gives you maximum detail and maximum blacks. This
means a smooth, coated paper like Epson Archival Matte or Legion Photo
Matte.

5.  Print big enough that you can see the grain. That means 8x12 or so.

Using these techniques I can get piezo prints that look as shitty as Robert
Frank's pix in THE AMERICANS, which is saying something!
-- 
John Brownlow

http://www.pinkheadedbug.com

ICQ: 109343205

>a lot of my street shooting results in gritty grainy images which need
>punchy blacks and sharp grain for their impact. It is perfectly possible to
>get this look using quadtone inks without resorting to the fake grain the
>epson dither introduces when you use black ink.

John -

I certainly remember your hair-raising street shots, and I can understand
how you would want to see them printed.

Your advice is all good, and some day I'm sure I will come around to
quadtone again. For the moment, however, the options are so bewildering and
fluid -- and my needs so modest -- that I'll stick with the itty-bitty
dots. I do have a box of Legion Photo Matte on order, and if the reviews
here are anything to go by, it should look great.

Best regards,

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

on 8/21/01 10:19 AM, Nicholas Hartmann at POLYGLOT@... wrote:

> hair-raising

that's the nicest thing anyone's ever said about my photos!

I REALLY like that!

-- 
John Brownlow

http://www.pinkheadedbug.com

ICQ: 109343205

Steadman, This is becoming truly bizarre. I sense a disturbance in the force.

Two papers can be labeled 230 gsm, but they aren't the same thickness or weight.
Two papers can be labeled the same, and one can be thicker than the other, but no heavier.

That's probably what it is in my case, BUT

Surely there must be some kind of universal weight/thickness measurements that are the same from company to company so one can actually get what he thinks he is getting based on the labeling of the papers!  Short of getting a VERY precise electronic scale that can weigh a single sheet of paper with extreme
accuracy, what is it?

Are mils the same everywhere? Is a 20 mil paper the same between all companies? Pound weight sure isn't the same, as I've found out!

I REALLY need a vacation.

Jerry



Steadman Uhlich wrote:

> Jerry,
> It may not be thicker...but it is heavier.  And it is ph neutral and so smooooooth.
>
> Steadman
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Jerry Olson
>   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>   Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 6:15 PM
>   Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Legion Photo Matte "Thickness Issue" (was "silver prints...)
>
>   Steadman,
>
>   My complaint was that it did not match the sample they sent out. I expected the heavier paper, and didn't get it.
>   It's still a nice paper, but I wanted something thicker than Epson archival!
>
>   Jerry
>
>   Steadman Uhlich wrote:
>
>   > Jerry, et al,
>   >
>   > I just opened my three boxes of Legion Photo Matte 230gsm (LPM) and examined the paper.  It seems fine to me.  Paper came from Media Street.
>   >
>   > Remember that the 230gsm is not a measure of thickness per se.  It is the basis weight for a known size and and quantity of paper.  In other words, a paper may be both "thin" and heavy at the same time.  This paper appears to have a nice thick coating on the front, so I expect that explains it.
>   >
>   > The LPM I received is a nice ultra smooth sheet that is more "flexible" than the EAM (which is more like an index card in flexibility).  The LPM appears to me to be very flexible and "supple" and at this weight is designed to go through most printers (even those without a straight paper path) easily.
>   >
>   > Another good characteristic I see is the opacity of the paper, which appears to be "very opaque" due to the heavy coating.  This is nice for a reflective surface.
>   >
>   > If this LPM is properly mounted on a backing board or in a sheet protector, it should do fine for piezo.
>   >
>   > Of course this is all a matter of personal opinion.  I prefer this paper to the feel of EAM.   And let' not forget it is "acid free" sulphite too.
>   >
>   > Regards to all,
>   > Steadman
>   >   ----- Original Message -----
>   >   From: Jerry Olson
>   >   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>   >   Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 2:44 PM
>   >   Subject: Re: [Digital BW] "silver" prints from digital systems?
>   >
>   >   To the group.
>   >
>   >   I have just received my first pack of the Legion Photo Matte Paper from Digital Arts., and also 3 from media street.
>   >
>   >   This paper is NOT as thick as the samples they sent out in their sampler (legion paper co.). The actual boxes of paper are about the same thickness as Epson's Archival Matte.
>   >
>   >   This is very disappointing, in fact it might be illegal labeling. I can easily pick out the heavier sampler paper with my eyes closed. The difference is not huge, but it is obvious. On the label on back of the sampler it says 230 gsms.
>   >
>   >   On the boxes of legion paper, it also says 230 gsms. but it isn't quite as thick as the sampler.
>   >
>   >   If anyone else got the sampler pack first, and then the actual paper, can you confirm, please?
>   >
>   >   Jerry
>   >
>   >         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>   >               ADVERTISEMENT
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   >   If you do not wish to belong to Digital B&W, The Print, you may
>   >   unsubscribe by sending an email to:
>   >   DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>   >
>   >   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>   >
>   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>   >
>   >
>   > If you do not wish to belong to Digital B&W, The Print, you may
>   > unsubscribe by sending an email to:
>   > DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>               ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>   If you do not wish to belong to Digital B&W, The Print, you may
>   unsubscribe by sending an email to:
>   DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> The Group Homepage can be found at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

You also lose out on smoothness and shadow detail. You can also add
grain in
Photoshop that looks exactly like film grain. There are many ways to do it.

Jerry





Nicholas Hartmann wrote:

> Greetings -
>
> I've been lurking on this list, and previously on several others related to
> digital imaging, for a few months now. Having learned a great deal from
> everyone -- for which many thanks -- and come to some conclusions, I
> thought I would briefly describe my experience in case it's useful to
> anyone else starting out.
>
> I take pictures with a 35mm camera on Kodak TMax 400 film, developed in
> TMax developer. For a number of years I printed on both Agfa Multicontrast
> 8x10 RC paper (prints to give away and for my own file collection) and
> Ilford MG Fiber (for my "portfolio"). I have never sold a print as such,
> and have seldom been paid for a picture: I do this for my own reasons and
> to create pictures to give to other people.
>
> Darkroom work is something I have had to shoehorn in between work and the
> rest of my life, and the time and tedium of setting up, washing, drying,
> spotting, etc., not to mention the cost of materials and darkroom rental,
> were getting to me. I have therefore ended up with the following digital
> equipment set: a Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II (2820 ppi), Photoshop 6.0 on
> an iMac, and an Epson 1160 printer. The scanner produces excellent results:
> I can see the grain of my negatives (which I like a lot; see below), and
> that grain is pin-sharp corner to corner. The printer appears sturdy and
> reliable. I have a lot to learn about Photoshop, but already I can
> manipulate images to create a more balanced print than I ever learned to
> make under the enlarger.
>
> What I have not ended up with, to my surprise, is _any_ of the quadtone B&W
> inksets. Having tried the Epson OEM color inks (weird color casts), PiezoBW
> (too brown, too much nozzle clogging, too expensive), and the MIS
> variable-tone inkset (best of the bunch), I found that I simply do not like
> the grainless "large-format" look that quadtones produce on paper. My
> pictures are often about expressions and gestures and fleeting events, and
> seldom depend on sheer technical excellence for their impact; I like 35mm
> for that reason, and I like the way a good lens retains its sharpness down
> into the film's visible grain.
>
> So what I _am_ going to use is just the black cartridge on my 1160, by
> simply selecting "black" rather than "color" in the Print dialog. I will be
> trying out both Generations and the MIS double-density black in an effort
> to get maximum depth. Yes, I will see tiny little dots in the highest-value
> areas; but I need to look very closely and in any case they don't bother
> me. I am accustomed, after all, to understanding a picture as a pattern of
> tiny black dots of silver on a sheet of white paper. The results on Epson
> Heavyweight Matte (for now) are just what I'm looking for: a
> black-and-white image that retains the distinctive look of 35mm but with
> all the flexibility of Photoshop adjustments and desktop output.
>
> Are there any other 35mm photographers out there who feel as I do? or is
> everyone else happy with, and striving to achieve, that smooth big-negative
> look? Am I alone in my deplorable practice of just using the black
> cartridge?
>
> Thank you all again for the enormously valuable information you are
> providing. I look forward to more stimulating discussions.
>
> Best regards,
>
> -- Nick
>
> NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
> 611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
> Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...
>
> Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English
>
>
> The Group Homepage can be found at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

>You also lose out on smoothness and shadow detail. You can also add
>grain in
>Photoshop that looks exactly like film grain. There are many ways to do it.

That's what's odd: with my negatives, scanned in my scanner, I get a more
open and readable print, with entirely plausible tonal transitions and in
fact _better_ shadow detail, with the black-only method. My mileage is, I
guess, varying.

It's very possible that I am not exploiting all the capabilities of the
quadtone methods; but at the moment I simply want to get images onto paper.
The best is sometimes enemy of the good, and right now I need good.

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

Nicholas Hartmann wrote:

> <snip>
> I take pictures with a 35mm camera on Kodak TMax 400 film, developed in
> TMax developer. For a number of years I printed on both Agfa Multicontrast
> 8x10 RC paper (prints to give away and for my own file collection) and
> Ilford MG Fiber (for my "portfolio"). I have never sold a print as such,
> and have seldom been paid for a picture: I do this for my own reasons and
> to create pictures to give to other people.
>
> <snip>`. I have therefore ended up with the following digital
> equipment set: a Minolta Dimage Scan Dual II (2820 ppi), Photoshop 6.0 on
> an iMac, and an Epson 1160 printer. The scanner produces excellent results:
> I can see the grain of my negatives (which I like a lot; see below), and
> that grain is pin-sharp corner to corner. The printer appears sturdy and
> reliable. I have a lot to learn about Photoshop, but already I can
> manipulate images to create a more balanced print than I ever learned to
> make under the enlarger.
>
> What I have not ended up with, to my surprise, is _any_ of the quadtone B&W
> inksets. Having tried the Epson OEM color inks (weird color casts), PiezoBW
> (too brown, too much nozzle clogging, too expensive), and the MIS
> variable-tone inkset (best of the bunch), I found that I simply do not like
> the grainless "large-format" look that quadtones produce on paper. My
> pictures are often about expressions and gestures and fleeting events, and
> seldom depend on sheer technical excellence for their impact; I like 35mm
> for that reason, and I like the way a good lens retains its sharpness down
> into the film's visible grain.
>
> <snip>Are there any other 35mm photographers out there who feel as I do? or is
> everyone else happy with, and striving to achieve, that smooth big-negative
> look? Am I alone in my deplorable practice of just using the black
> cartridge?

Dear Nicholas,
I think what you are experiencing is a fault in the original scan that you are doing, not the inks.  I suspect
that you are not sharpening your scans via 'unsharp mask' in Photoshop.  All scans really need sharpening to
achieve the same clarity that the original has.

Let me be clear...I'm not talking about the plain old 'sharpening' filter in Photoshop, I'm talking of the
'unsharp mask' filter (an oxymoron), in which levels need to be set manually.  Also, the higher the original
bit level of your scanner, the less sharpening it needs.

This subject is nicely covered in the book, 'Real World Scanning and Halftones'.  But basically, one sets the
sharpening dependent on the final dpi you are using.  And.....this is very important....sharpening is really
the last thing you do to the image.  All image sizing, tonal adjustments, layers etc., should be done *before*
sharpening.  The only thing you might need to do, post sharpening, is 'spotting.  Sometimes the sharpening
makes dust, that wasn't visible before, appear.

When we need to send a scan to a magazine we always send it 2 ways...'Sharpened' and not.   That way, if the
magazine wants to do any adjustments, they can sharpen after those adjustments are made....It should be the
last thing that happens.

Another oddity of this field is viewing the images on one's monitor.  Due to the different resolutions of
monitors vs. actual output, lots of times, when you view the sharpened image on the screen, it looks
absolutely terrible, but it outputs fine.  I also suspect that this is partially what you are seeing (the
electronic 'noise') on your monitor when you say that the 'grain' looks great on your monitor, but that the
color inkjet outputs of your b&w images is 'grainless'.

By way of example:  We, in general, sharpen our 300 dpi scans to 200% amount, then 1.5 radius, and threshold
to 3 or 4 (3 being more than 4).

Try it, see if it makes a difference in your output.

Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography, NYC


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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Nicholas Hartmann <POLYGLOT@E...> wrote:
Nick, I occassionally print Ralph Gibson style grainy 35mm images, and have encountered many of the problems you 
mention. It's not only the severe separations that are the problem, but the Epson driver simply averaging out the detail in 
that grain.
If you are playing with doing your own separation methods, I've gotten best results by letting the darker inks come much 
farther up the scale than normal, but not really much more of the black ink.
All of John Brownlow's advice makes sense too. Particularly print size, additional sharpening work for me too.
Tyler

Responses to my unequivocal declaration yesterday that I was going to print
using only the black (K) cartridge ranged from (paraphrasing) "whatever
turns you on" to "you must be joking." So I devoted yesterday evening to a
runoff between black-only, the MIS VM inkset, and PiezoBW.

The images had been scanned at 2820 ppi on a Minolta Dimage, then spotted
and minimally adjusted in Photoshop. Histograms exhibited only minor gaps
or "combing," and looked great on screen.The usual output size was 6 x 9",
for a final ppi of over 400 (some very unround number with two digits after
the decimal).

The MIS VM set is still very clever: the image color appears absolutely
uniform over the whole tonal scale. But the images have two problems:

1) Statements to the contrary notwithstanding, the highlights are
definitely not "dotless." Yes, you need moderate magnification to see the
dots, but that's also the case for the black-only highlights.

2) In addition to the dots, the VM set displays what I can only call
"posterization": areas that, on the screen, show subtle variations in tone,
are rendered on paper as comparatively large patches of a single tone. The
effect is that of a silk-screen print; at a fairly fine scale, yes, but on
close inspection the image nevertheless consists of a patchwork of
variously-sized areas rather than an assemblage of identically-sized dots.
I find this very disturbing and un-photographic. I tried downsampling the
image to exactly 360 ppi, but the results were the same.

So I took the exact same file and output it onto the same paper through the
PiezoBW driver using the MIS VM inks. Leaving aside the weirdness of having
the Y (50%) channel print in a bluish color, the results in terms of
continuous tonality were far more acceptable: no posterizing, and in fact
no dots even under magnification. Piezo can produce, in some zones, what
looks like very fine-scale banding (like a quarter of a nozzle was
clogged). My private theory is that this is how Piezo prints so fast: it
somehow "cheats" by occasionally not quite overlapping successive printing
lines. Please correct me...

And finally, yes, the black-only output looks coarse next to either of the
quadtone methods. It's particularly bad right now because the MIS VM black
is quite weak: I have a bottle of Generations black on order that I hope
will come close to the Epson OEM black.

So here's the score:

MIS VM: great inks, clever tonal-adjustment concept; BUT patchy output and
dots in highlights.

PiezoBW: fast, convenient output procedure, excellent tonality; BUT inks
are far too warm and keep fading, and nozzle clogs are unacceptable (I have
had NO clogging problems with the MIS inks).

Please tell me if this is a solution: I get the impression that the MIS
Full Spectrum inkset is _functionally_ identical to the PiezoBW inks (same
ink strengths in the same positions). I also gather from MIS's web site
that their inks can be _tinted_ using their colored inks. So why not tint
each of the MIS Full Spectrum inks sufficiently to balance their inherent
warmness, load them into cartridges, and print through the PiezoBW export
plug-in? I'm sure the Piezo people won't like it, but Epson seems to have
survived the same treatment for quite a while...

Thanks for comments,

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

>Nick, I occassionally print Ralph Gibson style grainy 35mm images, and
>have encountered many of the problems you
>mention. It's not only the severe separations that are the problem, but
>the Epson driver simply averaging out the detail in
>that grain.

Tyler -

"Averaging out the detail in the grain" is the perfect description of the
problem I'm having. But please read my post of this morning ("More quadtone
experiences") and let me know whether the PiezoBW driver with different
inks offers a way out.

>If you are playing with doing your own separation methods, I've gotten
>best results by letting the darker inks come much
>farther up the scale than normal, but not really much more of the black ink.

I would be instantly over my head if I tried fooling around with
separations, but thanks for the suggestion.

>All of John Brownlow's advice makes sense too. Particularly print size,
>additional sharpening work for me too.

My scans look good enough that any sharpening I apply is quite subtle and
makes little difference on the paper. The print size issue is interesting:
bigger gets better (more ink dots per unit image) until pixelation kicks
in. Preliminary results suggest I can easily get 8x12" full-frame, maybe
even 10x15", from a 35mm negative. Sure beats wrestling with wet 16x20
paper...

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

>I think what you are experiencing is a fault in the original scan that you
>are doing, not the inks.  I suspect
>that you are not sharpening your scans via 'unsharp mask' in Photoshop.
>All scans really need sharpening to
>achieve the same clarity that the original has.

It's a matter not of clarity, but of the the overall "look" of the image on
paper. See my post of this morning ("More quadtone experiences") for a
better description of what I don't like about at least some quadtone
output. I'm already applying unsharp masking (my scans need very little),
and the scans look great on screen. I'm also familiar enough with my
negatives to know that what I'm seeing is indeed grain and not "noise."

Best regards,

-- Nicholas Hartmann

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

on 8/22/01 9:35 AM, Nicholas Hartmann wrote:

> 2) In addition to the dots, the VM set displays what I can only call
> "posterization": areas that, on the screen, show subtle variations in tone,
> are rendered on paper as comparatively large patches of a single tone.

Nick,

What printer are you using again?

Anyway, I'm using an 1160 (4 inks) with a piezo/generations equivalent to
the current MIS VT system.

I think something must be off in your workflow. I have had times where I got
this posterization in my prints, and I'm trying hard to remember what was
the fix, but it was something in my workflow, like a proper driver setting.
Try printing a 21 step grayscale. All your steps should separate distinctly.
The system is capable of better results than you are getting! My VT system
handles the "Piezo challenge" test and yours should too.

I think your dots may also be atypical of the system. But truth be told,
while I advocate a print of any size should hold up to the highest scrutiny
with your eye 2 inches from it, and mine do, I'm not at all concerned with
how they look under magnification. If I were an ant I might care about that,
but I'm not. ;-)

But do double check everything with your MIS VT setup, and make sure you've
got the latest curves for your printer.

Anyway, if your happy with your black-only output that's cool, it's a look,
but you do already have materials there that can vastly out perform it over
the long haul, if made to work properly. Unless of course you just really
like that gritty look. Why did you go to the black-only approach over
printing grayscale with all the color inks in the first place? My 1270 can
print as good, if not better print than my 1160 quad (Not as neutral, but
the right curves can give a nice selenium tone, or whatever tone is desired
other than neutral), but I wanted those long lived carbon inks. But said the
other way, my 1160 VT system is capable of printing just about as good as my
1270 with OEM inks, and yours should too.

Todd

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Nicholas Hartmann <
POLYGLOT@E...> wrote:
> Tyler -
> 
> "Averaging out the detail in the grain" is the perfect description of the
> problem I'm having.

Pretty sure that's why big prints show it more.

 But please read my post of this morning ("More quadtone
> experiences") and let me know whether the PiezoBW driver with different
> inks offers a way out.

Possibly, but it's an awful lot of fooling around. I hesitate to 
recommend something I haven't seen or tried. If you like the tone from 
the MIS inks, I think there is still a glimmer of hope there. Either 
there is some small error in the implimentation of the workflow, or 
the workflow needs to be tailored a bit to your needs. I understand 
not wanting to fool with developing your own curves, but it might be 
worth the time to carefully double check all settings in Photoshop and 
the driver, the smallest things can make the difference as Todd 
suggested. The inks are already loaded, what the heck?
I was suprised a traditional large format image full of continuous 
tone revealed less problems with ink seps than a grainy 35mm image 
from the wrong side of the tracks.
> 
> I would be instantly over my head if I tried fooling around with
> separations, but thanks for the suggestion.

I wonder if someone here familiar with the ink set could assist you, 
all you need is less severe and very smooth sep curves tailored to 
your printer.

> My scans look good enough that any sharpening I apply is quite subtle and
> makes little difference on the paper.

It's not really an issue of the quality of the file, it's forcing the 
Epson to describe it. You might try sharpening way more than you need 
just to see how it will print, just don't save the original file that 
way (that's something I would do...)
If none of this works, put on the rubber suit, put down the drop 
cloths, and start mixing ink I guess.
Interesting seeing different image sensibilities try to make all this 
work.
Tyler

>> 2) In addition to the dots, the VM set displays what I can only call
>> "posterization": areas that, on the screen, show subtle variations in tone,
>> are rendered on paper as comparatively large patches of a single tone.

>What printer are you using again?

An 1160, same as yours.

>I think something must be off in your workflow. I have had times where I got
>this posterization in my prints, and I'm trying hard to remember what was
>the fix, but it was something in my workflow, like a proper driver setting.
>Try printing a 21 step grayscale. All your steps should separate distinctly.
>The system is capable of better results than you are getting! My VT system
>handles the "Piezo challenge" test and yours should too.

It's very possible that something is cockeyed in either software or
hardware. I printed using exactly the (very simple) workflow specified by
Paul Roark: convert from grayscale to RGB, load one of the VT curves, watch
the image go all red, then print in color at 1440 dpi. For what it's worth,
I have noticed the same partial posterizing and dots when printing
grayscale as color using the native Epson driver (without RGB conversion or
colorizing curves). I don't think there's anything functionally wrong with
the printer: nozzle checks are now perfect, and my alignment is within one
digit of standard. Maybe MIS got the inks mixed up? I was ultra-careful to
fill the right inks into the right cartridge chambers.

>But do double check everything with your MIS VT setup, and make sure you've
>got the latest curves for your printer.

How late is latest? And do my RGB settings make any difference? All the
color aspects of Photoshop and digital printing make my brain hurt, so I
just convert from grayscale to RGB without worrying about _which_
particular RGB.

Unless of course you just really
>like that gritty look.

Not gritty, but with grain as an element of the image: think of biting into
a not-quite-ripe pear...

Why did you go to the black-only approach over
>printing grayscale with all the color inks in the first place?

Because that's _really_ funny-looking: not just posterization, but the
presence of all that color (at the limit of perception, admittedly) in what
purports to be a B&W image, AND the prospect that each one of those colors
will fade and color-shift in different directions at different rates, gave
me an instant headache.

You mentioned Generations ink in passing: is it your experience that the
Generations black is visibly darker than the MIS black?

Best,

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

>> "Averaging out the detail in the grain" is the perfect description of the
>> problem I'm having.
>
>Pretty sure that's why big prints show it more.

No! My one experimental big print (a chunk of what would be a 10x15" image)
showed much LESS posterizing; or at least the posterized areas were much
smaller, probably because the image had become that much coarser and the
"averaging" was happening over much smaller areas.

carefully double check all settings in Photoshop and
>the driver, the smallest things can make the difference as Todd
>suggested. The inks are already loaded, what the heck?
>I was suprised a traditional large format image full of continuous
>tone revealed less problems with ink seps than a grainy 35mm image
>from the wrong side of the tracks.

I would need very specific guidance here: as I mentioned to Todd, I don't
do any aspect of color, so someone will have to explain all the color
spaces and profiles and separations in words of one syllable.

>I wonder if someone here familiar with the ink set could assist you,
>all you need is less severe and very smooth sep curves tailored to
>your printer.

My printer is your basic bog-stock 1160... And I did notice that when the
VM curves are applied to the RGB-converted image, THAT's when it starts to
look posterized: big swatches of red and black. I know something else
happens between there and the printed output, but it looks suspicious.

You might try sharpening way more than you need
>just to see how it will print, just don't save the original file that
>way (that's something I would do...)

I will try that; thanks.

>If none of this works, put on the rubber suit, put down the drop
>cloths, and start mixing ink I guess.

I'm awaiting word from MIS tech support as to whether all this is
technically feasible in the first place. I'm also of two minds in general:
the Piezo system is so convenient, and prints so much faster, that the
prospect of using their software with better inks is very appealing. On the
other hand, Paul Roark has made a real breakthrough with the MIS system and
has shared his results freely. I'm trying not only to get the best of both
worlds, but also to support everyone who's doing such valuable work for us
clueless photographers.

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

Nicholas,

Your results certainly do not coincide with mine. The VM black ink is about the blackest ink out there,
even a hair blacker than piezo. There are absolutely no dots in my prints, using Paul's curves and VM inks.
There is no banding, unless your heads need aligning or your nozzles need cleaning! No posterization,
either.

THere is something wrong with your system, somewhere.


> but on
> close inspection the image nevertheless consists of a patchwork of
> variously-sized areas rather than an assemblage of identically-sized dots.
> I find this very disturbing and un-photographic. I tried downsampling the
> image to exactly 360 ppi, but the results were the same.

> And finally, yes, the black-only output looks coarse next to either of the
> quadtone methods. It's particularly bad right now because the MIS VM black
> is quite weak:

No, this is not true. Do a dip and dunk test of every black ink you can get your hands on. The VM ink is
the blackest. Practically identical to generations Beta Black. Both are deeper than Piezo, but we're REALLY
splitting hairs here, it is only barely noticeable. These inks are all very good.

The Original Epson Black is the deepest, but of course not archival.

MIS VM: great inks, clever tonal-adjustment concept; BUT patchy output and

> dots in highlights.

Absolutely not. No dots and no patchy output. Again, something is wrong with your system.

>
> PiezoBW: fast, convenient output procedure, excellent tonality; BUT inks
> are far too warm and keep fading, and nozzle clogs are unacceptable (I have
> had NO clogging problems with the MIS inks).

I've never had a clogging problem with Piezo Black and white inks, and I've never seen them fade. THe PAPER
you print on shifts color long before the piezo inks change. There are several papers that piezo inks do
fade on, but not on the ones I've been using. (If a print can withstand 2 months in a south window without
visible color shift, It's okay in my book)

>
> Please tell me if this is a solution: I get the impression that the MIS
> Full Spectrum inkset is _functionally_ identical to the PiezoBW inks (same
> ink strengths in the same positions). I also gather from MIS's web site
> that their inks can be _tinted_ using their colored inks. So why not tint
> each of the MIS Full Spectrum inks sufficiently to balance their inherent
> warmness, load them into cartridges, and print through the PiezoBW export
> plug-in?

Because of the incredible amount of time and effort this will take. Their variable tone inks are wonderful.
You must find out what is wrong with your system. you are the only one that seems to have ever mentioned
any of these problems with the MIS variable tone inks!

Jerry

>You must find out what is wrong with your system. you are the only one
>that seems to have ever mentioned
>any of these problems with the MIS variable tone inks!

Oh terrific, Jerry: this is about as encouraging as hearing one's doctor
begin the diagnosis with "You know, I've never seen a case like yours
before..."

Let's assume there _is_ something wrong with my system. Let's also assume
that I have followed every instruction to the letter. Either there is
something implicit in the instructions that I am too ignorant to
understand, or the instructions are incomplete. Would somebody do me the
favor of rephrasing Paul Roark's instructions for the VM workflow,
including _everything_, and I mean _everything_, that a Photoshop 6 novice
needs to know? I mean RGB defaults, color spaces, preferred image ppi, how
to load curves, etc., etc. I'm not trying to denigrate either MIS or Paul's
workflow; I just find that right now it isn't working for me.

Thanks in advance,

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

Nicholas, there are also 5 different MIS black inks to confuse you even more.....

Jerry





Nicholas Hartmann wrote:

> >> 2) In addition to the dots, the VM set displays what I can only call
> >> "posterization": areas that, on the screen, show subtle variations in tone,
> >> are rendered on paper as comparatively large patches of a single tone.
>
> >What printer are you using again?
>
> An 1160, same as yours.
>
> >I think something must be off in your workflow. I have had times where I got
> >this posterization in my prints, and I'm trying hard to remember what was
> >the fix, but it was something in my workflow, like a proper driver setting.
> >Try printing a 21 step grayscale. All your steps should separate distinctly.
> >The system is capable of better results than you are getting! My VT system
> >handles the "Piezo challenge" test and yours should too.
>
> It's very possible that something is cockeyed in either software or
> hardware. I printed using exactly the (very simple) workflow specified by
> Paul Roark: convert from grayscale to RGB, load one of the VT curves, watch
> the image go all red, then print in color at 1440 dpi. For what it's worth,
> I have noticed the same partial posterizing and dots when printing
> grayscale as color using the native Epson driver (without RGB conversion or
> colorizing curves). I don't think there's anything functionally wrong with
> the printer: nozzle checks are now perfect, and my alignment is within one
> digit of standard. Maybe MIS got the inks mixed up? I was ultra-careful to
> fill the right inks into the right cartridge chambers.
>
> >But do double check everything with your MIS VT setup, and make sure you've
> >got the latest curves for your printer.
>
> How late is latest? And do my RGB settings make any difference? All the
> color aspects of Photoshop and digital printing make my brain hurt, so I
> just convert from grayscale to RGB without worrying about _which_
> particular RGB.
>
> Unless of course you just really
> >like that gritty look.
>
> Not gritty, but with grain as an element of the image: think of biting into
> a not-quite-ripe pear...
>
> Why did you go to the black-only approach over
> >printing grayscale with all the color inks in the first place?
>
> Because that's _really_ funny-looking: not just posterization, but the
> presence of all that color (at the limit of perception, admittedly) in what
> purports to be a B&W image, AND the prospect that each one of those colors
> will fade and color-shift in different directions at different rates, gave
> me an instant headache.
>
> You mentioned Generations ink in passing: is it your experience that the
> Generations black is visibly darker than the MIS black?
>
> Best,
>
> -- Nick
>
> NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
> 611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
> Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...
>
> Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage often and check the resources their regularly. The page can be found at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Nicholas Hartmann <POLYGLOT@E...> wrote:
> >> "Averaging out the detail in the grain" is the perfect description of the
> >> problem I'm having.
> >
> >Pretty sure that's why big prints show it more.
> 
> No! My one experimental big print (a chunk of what would be a 10x15" image)
> showed much LESS posterizing; or at least the posterized areas were much
> smaller, probably because the image had become that much coarser and the
> "averaging" was happening over much smaller areas.

Right, sorry, that's what I ment, a big print should show more of the true image structure because the driver dither is less 
of an issue per image area (not print area).
I think others who have had success with the workflow and don't grock your dilemma haven't tried the type of images you 
are trying to print. I've had the same problems, with workflows that worked great with more traditional image files.
Making sure your PS6 color settings are consistant with the workflow would be a very good thing to do though.
Tyler

>> >> "Averaging out the detail in the grain" is the perfect description of the
>> >> problem I'm having.
>> >
>> >Pretty sure that's why big prints show it more.
>>
>> No! My one experimental big print (a chunk of what would be a 10x15" image)
>> showed much LESS posterizing; or at least the posterized areas were much
>> smaller, probably because the image had become that much coarser and the
>> "averaging" was happening over much smaller areas.
>
>Right, sorry, that's what I ment, a big print should show more of the true
>image structure because the driver dither is less
>of an issue per image area (not print area).
>I think others who have had success with the workflow and don't grock your
>dilemma haven't tried the type of images you
>are trying to print. I've had the same problems, with workflows that
>worked great with more traditional image files.

Thank you, Tyler, for reassuring me that I'm neither crazy nor stupid. And
I had no idea I was being "untraditional": I'm working with largely
unmanipulated scans of ordinary 35mm B&W negatives made with standard Kodak
film and developer. Because I have been printing them effortlessly in the
darkroom all these years, I assumed the procedure would be equally simple
on the desktop...

>Making sure your PS6 color settings are consistant with the workflow would
>be a very good thing to do though.

Once I get home I will try resetting the Photoshop color defaults so that
all RGB color takes place in the sRGB... space, and all grayscale is in
Gamma 2.2.

I also just checked the Brandin workflow for the regular MIS inks and found
that he recommends converting grayscale not only into RGB but also then
into 16 bits per channel. Would that make a difference in my case? And why
do Brandin's RGB adjustment curves look so much smoother (a line of tiny
dots) than Roark's (a dozen or so squares)? My apologies if these are more
than usually dumb questions.

Thanks in advance,

-- Nick


NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

Nick, one more thing just to make sure I've beaten this to death, Anyone interested in printing this kind of imagery might 
take a glance at message number 4528 on the Piezography board.
Not my place to quote people, so take a look.
Tyler

on 8/22/01 11:24 AM, Nicholas Hartmann wrote:

> It's very possible that something is cockeyed in either software or
> hardware. I printed using exactly the (very simple) workflow specified by
> Paul Roark: convert from grayscale to RGB, load one of the VT curves, watch
> the image go all red, then print in color at 1440 dpi.


What about driver settings:

Source: Adobe RGB or sRGB
Space: Same as Source
Custom, Color Controls, Automatic

Use Adobe RGB for your RGB space, and Gamma 2.2 for your grayscale space
(subject to correction from Jerry or Paul or Mike) it's working for my mix.

That's what it was for the Piezo/Gen blend, not sure about MIS.

I'd check the MIS site for latest curves and workflow info. Follow the links
for Paul's VT method.

My only gripe with your black-only method is that it mimics the grain of
your image, but it doesn't reproduce it. There is bound to be circumstances
where the two different "grain" sources conflict with each other. A good
quad setup will describe your image, not recreate it.

I also recommend trying over sharpening, as Tyler suggested. Not as a rule
per se, but certainly as a test. But first you've got to get rid of that
posterization, or you'll never get the right pear. As Jerry suggested, make
sure your inks are in the right positions. All suppliers have been known to
sell inks in wrongly labeled bottles. It's possible you got two bottles of
inks which are the same density!

I just participated in the 30 print exchange, and I can assure you none of
the contributors to that are suffering from posterization. It's not normal.
Don't settle!

Todd

>Nick, one more thing just to make sure I've beaten this to death, Anyone
>interested in printing this kind of imagery might
>take a glance at message number 4528 on the Piezography board.
>Not my place to quote people, so take a look.

Aha! I'm not Ralph Gibson, and the grain of my images is a side-effect I've
come to be fond of rather than a pivotal characteristic I strive for, but
it's nice to hear Mr. Bergh himself make that suggestion. Now if only I can
get those Epson black inks to keep from turning reddish-brown...

Many thanks,

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

> Please tell me if this is a solution: I get the impression that the MIS
> Full Spectrum inkset is _functionally_ identical to the PiezoBW inks (same
> ink strengths in the same positions). I also gather from MIS's web site
> that their inks can be _tinted_ using their colored inks. So why not tint
> each of the MIS Full Spectrum inks sufficiently to balance their inherent
> warmness, load them into cartridges, and print through the PiezoBW export
> plug-in? I'm sure the Piezo people won't like it, but Epson seems to have
> survived the same treatment for quite a while...
>
> Thanks for comments,
>
> -- Nick
 I've taken some advice from people who have used both Cone and MIS FS and
I'm going to do just that: load a second 1160 with MIS FS and print through
the cone driver.

Julian

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Nicholas Hartmann <POLYGLOT@E...> wrote:
snip
> it's nice to hear Mr. Bergh himself make that suggestion. Now if only I can
> get those Epson black inks to keep from turning reddish-brown...

Well, I'm still not sure that's the best solution, but it is interesting.
But it so, perhaps someone else's black ink?
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Nicholas Hartmann 
<POLYGLOT@E...> wrote:
>I printed using exactly the (very simple) workflow specified by
> Paul Roark: convert from grayscale to RGB, load one of the VT 
curves, watch the image go all red, then print in color at 1440 dpi. 

Nicholas,

You have to set your Photoshop Color Settings as Paul describes. He 
suggests using the Photoshop 5 (Defaults) as your color space. 
Additionally, nake sure that ALL of your Epson driver settings are 
correct for the 1160. That includes the PRINT SPACE, which should 
read "Same as source".

If one parameter is off, the driver will not interpret the cureve and 
you will get posterization and dots.

Mike

>What about driver settings:
>
>Source: Adobe RGB or sRGB
>Space: Same as Source
>Custom, Color Controls, Automatic
>
>Use Adobe RGB for your RGB space, and Gamma 2.2 for your grayscale space
>(subject to correction from Jerry or Paul or Mike) it's working for my mix.

Todd -

So it doesn't matter if the RGB source is Adobe or sRGB? I've already
defined Gamma 2.2 for grayscale. Maybe the "Space: Same as Source" setting
is off.

>I'd check the MIS site for latest curves and workflow info. Follow the links
>for Paul's VT method.

Did that, and downloaded the Roark curves specifically identified for the
1160 printer, and found they're exactly the same as what I've been using
(last update in July 2001).

>My only gripe with your black-only method is that it mimics the grain of
>your image, but it doesn't reproduce it. There is bound to be circumstances
>where the two different "grain" sources conflict with each other. A good
>quad setup will describe your image, not recreate it.

A very good point, and certainly a disadvantage of black-only. But I have
to solve this posterizing problem before I go any further.

>I also recommend trying over sharpening, as Tyler suggested. Not as a rule
>per se, but certainly as a test.

Check.

As Jerry suggested, make
>sure your inks are in the right positions. All suppliers have been known to
>sell inks in wrongly labeled bottles. It's possible you got two bottles of
>inks which are the same density!

Here's what I see in a nozzle test:

	First row:
	Three panels, all densest black (= K cartridge)

	Second row, L to R:
		Very pale (? = 25%)
		Almost black (? = 75%)
		Medium blue (toner = yellow = 50%).

If that sequence is correct, then the inks are in the right places. If not,
then one or more bottles of MIS VM ink were indeed mislabeled, and they'll
be sending me, pronto and gratis, a correct set of labels and another CMY
cartridge for me to refill.

>I just participated in the 30 print exchange, and I can assure you none of
>the contributors to that are suffering from posterization. It's not normal.
>Don't settle!

I won't; it's just frustrating to be sooo close to good-looking output....

Thanks for spending the time to guide me through all this,

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

> I've taken some advice from people who have used both Cone and MIS FS and
>I'm going to do just that: load a second 1160 with MIS FS and print through
>the cone driver.

Julian, please let us know how the results look, especially as compared to
using the standard PiezoBW inks.

Thanks,

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

>Well, I'm still not sure that's the best solution, but it is interesting.
>But it so, perhaps someone else's black ink?

Definitely someone else's: the warm tone and the clogging have put me
permanently off PiezoBW inks.

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

>You have to set your Photoshop Color Settings as Paul describes. He
>suggests using the Photoshop 5 (Defaults) as your color space.
>Additionally, nake sure that ALL of your Epson driver settings are
>correct for the 1160. That includes the PRINT SPACE, which should
>read "Same as source".
>
>If one parameter is off, the driver will not interpret the cureve and
>you will get posterization and dots.

Mike, I will double-check all those settings and see what difference it
makes. The consensus seems to be that my color space settings are somehow
confusing the Epson driver; if I can un-confuse both the printer and
myself, maybe my results will improve!

Many thanks,

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

Hi Nicholas,

Here's my workflow for the Roark Curves, Let me know if you are doing anything different.

I use the  CIS system from http://www.nomorecarts.com   I'm using mine on the 1280 Printer.

Get the MIS variable tone inkset.  Be sure the black you get is the VM black, not one of the other 4 blacks
that MIS sells. Get the 4 color quad blacks  if you have a 4 color printer or the 6 color set if you have a
6 color printer.

Get Paul Roark's set of curves from paul.roark@...  This is a set of 5 curves from cold to warm.
Using the 6 color printers, to get a tone between one of the 5 curves, you vary the amount of the Magenta
position ink (In reality this is the blue ink that controls the amount of coldness you want). You can
choose any of paul's curves, and then by using the epson magenta/green slider, you can get any color you
want between curves! If you are using a 4 color printer, it's the YELLOW position slider that varies the
amount of coolness/warmness that you get.

Paul is up to the 15th version of his Cool Curve, The 4th version of his Cold curve, the 8th version of the
Neutral and Warm Curve and the 11th version of the Medium Warm.  Be sure you have the latest versions.

Just before printing, change your grayscale image to an RGB file, load one of Paul's curves from the
adjustment curve dialogue box from within photoshop using the "load" button. The image on screen will
immediately turn an over all color. Ignore it, it doesn't print.

Just print the photo, using the following settings:  1440 DPI, Error Diffusion, High speed OFF,  and "Photo
Quality Inkjet" for the Media Setting. The curves work well on Epson Archival Matte Paper, Epson Watercolor
Paper, Aspen Dual Sided Matte paper, or the new Legion Photo Matte paper, and also work very well with
Royal Riviera or Torchon watercolor papers. (same paper, different name). In the PRINT dialogue box, use
"Same as Source" as the profile.

These papers and settings should get you close to a perfect print the first time.

Jerry

> Let's assume there _is_ something wrong with my system. Let's also assume
> that I have followed every instruction to the letter. Either there is
> something implicit in the instructions that I am too ignorant to
> understand, or the instructions are incomplete. Would somebody do me the
> favor of rephrasing Paul Roark's instructions for the VM workflow,
> including _everything_, and I mean _everything_, that a Photoshop 6 novice
> needs to know? I mean RGB defaults, color spaces, preferred image ppi, how
> to load curves, etc., etc. I'm not trying to denigrate either MIS or Paul's
> workflow; I just find that right now it isn't working for me.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> -- Nick
>
> NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
> 611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
> Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...
>
> Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage often and check the resources their regularly. The page can be found at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

I've ordered today so I'll let youknow!

J
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nicholas Hartmann" <POLYGLOT@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 8:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] More quadtone experiences


> > I've taken some advice from people who have used both Cone and MIS FS
and
> >I'm going to do just that: load a second 1160 with MIS FS and print
through
> >the cone driver.
>
> Julian, please let us know how the results look, especially as compared to
> using the standard PiezoBW inks.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -- Nick
>
> NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
> 611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
> Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...
>
> Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English
>
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage often and check the resources their
regularly. The page can be found at:

>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Nicholas:

I'm using Gamma 1.8, (I'm on a Mac G4). I have Adobe RGB selected as my working space in the photoshop
color settings. Color Match also seems to work as well.

Jerry

Nick unfortunately I'm using a different ink mix than you (only for about
another week!) so I'm not the one to get specific with you about inks. One
last question though. Have you been using Epson Archival Matte paper? Though
Paul's curves do work well for many papers they are drafted using EAM, so
all your testing should begin on that paper to reduce variables!

Todd

PS, I don't think AdobeRGB, vs sRGB *should* make a big difference, but lets
take nothing for granted. Just make it exactly like Paul says until you get
it working.

>> What about driver settings:
>> 
>> Source: Adobe RGB or sRGB
>> Space: Same as Source
>> Custom, Color Controls, Automatic
>> 
>> Use Adobe RGB for your RGB space, and Gamma 2.2 for your grayscale space
>> (subject to correction from Jerry or Paul or Mike) it's working for my mix.
> 
> Todd -
> 
> So it doesn't matter if the RGB source is Adobe or sRGB? I've already
> defined Gamma 2.2 for grayscale. Maybe the "Space: Same as Source" setting
> is off.
> 
>> I'd check the MIS site for latest curves and workflow info. Follow the links
>> for Paul's VT method.
> 
> Did that, and downloaded the Roark curves specifically identified for the
> 1160 printer, and found they're exactly the same as what I've been using
> (last update in July 2001).
> 
>> My only gripe with your black-only method is that it mimics the grain of
>> your image, but it doesn't reproduce it. There is bound to be circumstances
>> where the two different "grain" sources conflict with each other. A good
>> quad setup will describe your image, not recreate it.
> 
> A very good point, and certainly a disadvantage of black-only. But I have
> to solve this posterizing problem before I go any further.
> 
>> I also recommend trying over sharpening, as Tyler suggested. Not as a rule
>> per se, but certainly as a test.
> 
> Check.
> 
> As Jerry suggested, make
>> sure your inks are in the right positions. All suppliers have been known to
>> sell inks in wrongly labeled bottles. It's possible you got two bottles of
>> inks which are the same density!
> 
> Here's what I see in a nozzle test:
> 
> First row:
> Three panels, all densest black (= K cartridge)
> 
> Second row, L to R:
> Very pale (? = 25%)
> Almost black (? = 75%)
> Medium blue (toner = yellow = 50%).
> 
> If that sequence is correct, then the inks are in the right places. If not,
> then one or more bottles of MIS VM ink were indeed mislabeled, and they'll
> be sending me, pronto and gratis, a correct set of labels and another CMY
> cartridge for me to refill.
> 
>> I just participated in the 30 print exchange, and I can assure you none of
>> the contributors to that are suffering from posterization. It's not normal.
>> Don't settle!
> 
> I won't; it's just frustrating to be sooo close to good-looking output....
> 
> Thanks for spending the time to guide me through all this,
> 
> -- Nick
> 
> NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
> 611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
> Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...
> 
> Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage often and check the resources their regularly.
> The page can be found at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
>

>Nick unfortunately I'm using a different ink mix than you (only for about
>another week!) so I'm not the one to get specific with you about inks. One
>last question though. Have you been using Epson Archival Matte paper? Though
>Paul's curves do work well for many papers they are drafted using EAM, so
>all your testing should begin on that paper to reduce variables!

Todd -

I have lots of Epson Heavyweight Matte so I've been using that; Jerry
suggests that EHM is similar enough to EAM for the curves to work equally
well.

See my reply to Jerry: it's possible that the problem lies in mismatched
color spaces (and an inability on my part to read plain English...). I'll
let everybody know tomorrow.

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

Last thing from me Nick as Paul and jerry covered just about everything.
Print on EAM and *also* select Matte Paper Heavyweight as your media in the
driver.

Todd

> Nick unfortunately I'm using a different ink mix than you (only for about
> another week!) so I'm not the one to get specific with you about inks. One
> last question though. Have you been using Epson Archival Matte paper? Though
> Paul's curves do work well for many papers they are drafted using EAM, so
> all your testing should begin on that paper to reduce variables!
> 
> Todd
> 
> PS, I don't think AdobeRGB, vs sRGB *should* make a big difference, but lets
> take nothing for granted. Just make it exactly like Paul says until you get
> it working.
> 
>>> What about driver settings:
>>> 
>>> Source: Adobe RGB or sRGB
>>> Space: Same as Source
>>> Custom, Color Controls, Automatic
>>> 
>>> Use Adobe RGB for your RGB space, and Gamma 2.2 for your grayscale space
>>> (subject to correction from Jerry or Paul or Mike) it's working for my mix.
>> 
>> Todd -
>> 
>> So it doesn't matter if the RGB source is Adobe or sRGB? I've already
>> defined Gamma 2.2 for grayscale. Maybe the "Space: Same as Source" setting
>> is off.
>> 
>>> I'd check the MIS site for latest curves and workflow info. Follow the links
>>> for Paul's VT method.
>> 
>> Did that, and downloaded the Roark curves specifically identified for the
>> 1160 printer, and found they're exactly the same as what I've been using
>> (last update in July 2001).
>> 
>>> My only gripe with your black-only method is that it mimics the grain of
>>> your image, but it doesn't reproduce it. There is bound to be circumstances
>>> where the two different "grain" sources conflict with each other. A good
>>> quad setup will describe your image, not recreate it.
>> 
>> A very good point, and certainly a disadvantage of black-only. But I have
>> to solve this posterizing problem before I go any further.
>> 
>>> I also recommend trying over sharpening, as Tyler suggested. Not as a rule
>>> per se, but certainly as a test.
>> 
>> Check.
>> 
>> As Jerry suggested, make
>>> sure your inks are in the right positions. All suppliers have been known to
>>> sell inks in wrongly labeled bottles. It's possible you got two bottles of
>>> inks which are the same density!
>> 
>> Here's what I see in a nozzle test:
>> 
>> First row:
>> Three panels, all densest black (= K cartridge)
>> 
>> Second row, L to R:
>> Very pale (? = 25%)
>> Almost black (? = 75%)
>> Medium blue (toner = yellow = 50%).
>> 
>> If that sequence is correct, then the inks are in the right places. If not,
>> then one or more bottles of MIS VM ink were indeed mislabeled, and they'll
>> be sending me, pronto and gratis, a correct set of labels and another CMY
>> cartridge for me to refill.
>> 
>>> I just participated in the 30 print exchange, and I can assure you none of
>>> the contributors to that are suffering from posterization. It's not normal.
>>> Don't settle!
>> 
>> I won't; it's just frustrating to be sooo close to good-looking output....
>> 
>> Thanks for spending the time to guide me through all this,
>> 
>> -- Nick
>> 
>> NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
>> 611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
>> Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...
>> 
>> Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Please visit the Group Homepage often and check the resources their
>> regularly.
>> The page can be found at:
>> 
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage often and check the resources their regularly.
> The page can be found at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
>

>Here's my workflow for the Roark Curves, Let me know if you are doing
>anything different.
[etc.]

Jerry -

I'm doing almost everything the same as you. My Roark correction curves are
dated July 23, 2001, and are the same as the ones downloaded today from the
MIS web site. The one difference is that, as instructed in Paul's workflow,
I am selecting the "Matte Paper - Heavyweight" profile in the Print dialog,
especially since the paper I'm using is in fact Epson Heavyweight Matte.

The one thing I have not been doing is selecting "Photoshop 5 Default
Spaces" in the Settings dialog under Edit > Color Settings. I had
misunderstood this to mean that Paul was using Photoshop 5; as a result, I
probably have myself tangled up in odd RGB spaces, embedded profiles, etc.
I'm hoping that getting that straightened out will solve the problem.

Paul has confirmed that the right inks are in the right cartridges, at least.

Stay tuned,

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

>Last thing from me Nick as Paul and jerry covered just about everything.
>Print on EAM and *also* select Matte Paper Heavyweight as your media in the
>driver.

Got the part about "Matte Paper - Heavyweight" in the Print dialog, but I
don't have any EAM so I'm using Heavyweight Matte instead. Given that
someone mentioned the other day that just _one_ of the Piezo paper profiles
will work perfectly for about 22 of the 25 papers they list, is the
EAM/EHWM mismatch going to be so bad as to cause the posterizing I've been
seeing? Please say No...

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

on 8/22/01 4:41 PM, Nicholas Hartmann wrote:

>> Last thing from me Nick as Paul and jerry covered just about everything.
>> Print on EAM and *also* select Matte Paper Heavyweight as your media in the
>> driver.
> 
> Got the part about "Matte Paper - Heavyweight" in the Print dialog, but I
> don't have any EAM so I'm using Heavyweight Matte instead. Given that
> someone mentioned the other day that just _one_ of the Piezo paper profiles
> will work perfectly for about 22 of the 25 papers they list, is the
> EAM/EHWM mismatch going to be so bad as to cause the posterizing I've been
> seeing? Please say No...

No. They are twins as far as I'm concerned.

Good luck.

Todd

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Nicholas Hartmann <POLYGLOT@E...> wrote:
> >Well, I'm still not sure that's the best solution, but it is interesting.
> >But it so, perhaps someone else's black ink?
> 
> Definitely someone else's: the warm tone and the clogging have put me
> permanently off PiezoBW inks.

I thought you said the problem was with Epson's black ink. For K ink only printing, one of the ones I would have thought 
worth trying was Piezo. I think most of the warm tone is from the lighter inks and normal 4 ink Piezo driver use. Don't know, 
never done a K ink only print from any of these inks but Epson's, and that was a long time ago.
Tyler

WHERE did you say the photoshop 5.5 defaults is located? I can't find it.

Jerry




Nicholas Hartmann wrote:

> >Here's my workflow for the Roark Curves, Let me know if you are doing
> >anything different.
> [etc.]
>
> Jerry -
>
> I'm doing almost everything the same as you. My Roark correction curves are
> dated July 23, 2001, and are the same as the ones downloaded today from the
> MIS web site. The one difference is that, as instructed in Paul's workflow,
> I am selecting the "Matte Paper - Heavyweight" profile in the Print dialog,
> especially since the paper I'm using is in fact Epson Heavyweight Matte.
>
> The one thing I have not been doing is selecting "Photoshop 5 Default
> Spaces" in the Settings dialog under Edit > Color Settings. I had
> misunderstood this to mean that Paul was using Photoshop 5; as a result, I
> probably have myself tangled up in odd RGB spaces, embedded profiles, etc.
> I'm hoping that getting that straightened out will solve the problem.
>
> Paul has confirmed that the right inks are in the right cartridges, at least.
>
> Stay tuned,
>
> -- Nick
>
> NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
> 611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
> Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...
>
> Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage often and check the resources their regularly. The page can be found at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

I've used paul's curves on a lot of papers Nick, but the epson heavyweight isn't one. I can't believe that
that one paper would make a difference. All matte epson papers seem to print with the same settings. But it
COULD be the problem i suppose....

Jerry



Nicholas Hartmann wrote:

> >Last thing from me Nick as Paul and jerry covered just about everything.
> >Print on EAM and *also* select Matte Paper Heavyweight as your media in the
> >driver.
>
> Got the part about "Matte Paper - Heavyweight" in the Print dialog, but I
> don't have any EAM so I'm using Heavyweight Matte instead. Given that
> someone mentioned the other day that just _one_ of the Piezo paper profiles
> will work perfectly for about 22 of the 25 papers they list, is the
> EAM/EHWM mismatch going to be so bad as to cause the posterizing I've been
> seeing? Please say No...
>
> -- Nick
>
> NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
> 611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
> Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...
>
> Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage often and check the resources their regularly. The page can be found at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Jerry,

Edit>Color Settings> click in the "Settings:" box at the top of 
the "Color Settings" pop up window.

One of the choices is "Photoshop 5 Default Spaces". I don't see a 
Photoshop 5.5 choice.

Martin Wesley

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Jerry Olson 
<jerryolson@r...> wrote:
> WHERE did you say the photoshop 5.5 defaults is located? I can't 
find it.
> 
> Jerry
> 
> 
> 
(snip)

Nick,

One last thing to look for that I don't think has been mentioned 
directly is a gamma mismatch between the Gray Space and the RGB 
Space. Dan Culbertson posted a good method to make the transition 
from Gray to RGB if you are unsure if the gamma's match or not.

"2.Convert it to RGB.(note -be sure to convert to an RGB space 
identical in gamma to the source grayscale space. If you are not sure 
then convert to multichannel, make two duplicates of the grayscale 
channel, then convert to RGB. This will sidestep any gamma change 
when converting to RGB)."

Check you image histogram before and after the gray to RGB 
conversion. If they are not the same, the gamma's don't match.

Good Luck,

Martin Wesley

It doesn't come up there. It's not one of the choices.

jerry



"Michael J. Kravit" wrote:

> Jerry,
>
> Under Edit, Color Settings
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael J. Kravit, AIA
> Architect/Photographer
> www.kravit.net/photography
>
> [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
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Martin, that choice is not there!

Jerry



Martin Wesley wrote:

> Jerry,
>
> Edit>Color Settings> click in the "Settings:" box at the top of
> the "Color Settings" pop up window.
>
> One of the choices is "Photoshop 5 Default Spaces". I don't see a
> Photoshop 5.5 choice.
>
> Martin Wesley
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Jerry Olson
> <jerryolson@r...> wrote:
> > WHERE did you say the photoshop 5.5 defaults is located? I can't
> find it.
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> >
> >
> (snip)
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Photoshop 6.01

Jerry




"Michael J. Kravit" wrote:

> Jerry,
>
> Are you using Photoshop 6?  If not I forget where it is in Photoshop 5.
>
> Mike
>
> [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
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Jerry Olson <jerryolson@r...> wrote:
> It doesn't come up there. It's not one of the choices.

Open your system folder
open Application Support folder
open Adobe folder
open Color folder
open Settings folder

if there isn't a file called-

Photoshop 5 Default Spaces.csf

Then you've somehow trashed it, or done some sort of custom PS6.x installation that doesn't include it, and it won't be an 
option for you.
Tyler

Jerry,

Under Edit, Color Settings

Regards,

Michael J. Kravit, AIA
Architect/Photographer
www.kravit.net/photography


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

Jerry,

I'm sorry, I forgot you were using that other system. I guess the 
Photoshop color setting are located differently on the Mac.

Mike

Jerry,

Are you using Photoshop 6?  If not I forget where it is in Photoshop 5.

Mike



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

Jerry,

In Photoshop up at the top left click on [Edit}, is after [File}
Then pick [Color Settings] down at the bottom of the list.
Then at the top open the settings tab and pick Photoshop 5 (defaults)...all parameters are automatically selected.

Mike




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

>> Definitely someone else's: the warm tone and the clogging have put me
>> permanently off PiezoBW inks.
>
>I thought you said the problem was with Epson's black ink.

Tyler -

I got problems with all sorts of ink!

I am judging the Epson black ink (K cartridge) based on prints made a month
or so ago using an 870. Those prints, on Epson Heavyweight Matte, have
shifted to an extremely disagreeable reddish brown, having spent their
lives sitting on my desk in an environment no harsher than a 75W desk lamp
and indirect daylight from a window 6 feet away. My fear is that the Epson
1160 K ink, although it is the blackest I have seen yet, will behave
similarly.

For K ink only printing, one of the ones I would have thought
>worth trying was Piezo. I think most of the warm tone is from the lighter
>inks and normal 4 ink Piezo driver use. Don't know,
>never done a K ink only print from any of these inks but Epson's, and that
>was a long time ago.

The prints I've done with Piezo inks have shifted so radically toward warm
(a greenish rather than reddish brown this time) that I can't imagine the
black-only would be stable. Besides, the clogging problems (and the price)
put Piezo inks out of contention for me right away.

Please see my other message of this morning (replying to Todd) for
questions about black inks.

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

>I've used paul's curves on a lot of papers Nick, but the epson heavyweight
>isn't one. I can't believe that
>that one paper would make a difference. All matte epson papers seem to
>print with the same settings. But it
>COULD be the problem i suppose....

Jerry -

If EHWM _is_ the problem, then something else is going to have to shift for
a solution. MIS VM and the Roark curves are ingenious and innovative, but
if they don't work on the one good paper I can walk into an office supply
store and buy, rather than having to wait X days and pay shipping charges,
then they're not for me.

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

>One last thing to look for that I don't think has been mentioned
>directly is a gamma mismatch between the Gray Space and the RGB
>Space. Dan Culbertson posted a good method to make the transition
>from Gray to RGB if you are unsure if the gamma's match or not.
>
>"2.Convert it to RGB.(note -be sure to convert to an RGB space
>identical in gamma to the source grayscale space. If you are not sure
>then convert to multichannel, make two duplicates of the grayscale
>channel, then convert to RGB. This will sidestep any gamma change
>when converting to RGB)."
>
>Check you image histogram before and after the gray to RGB
>conversion. If they are not the same, the gamma's don't match.

Martin -

I just did all that. The sRGB space is also gamma 2.2 according to one of
this morning's messages, so there's no mismatch there. I also checked an
image histogram before and after converting from Gamma 2.2 grayscale to
sRGB; apart from half a dozen very short single-tone spikes in the RGB
version that weren't there in grayscale (a LOT milder than would be created
by a very conservative change in Curves or Levels), the curves look
identical.

Please see my message of this morning (replying to Todd) for more discussion.

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

>Good luck.
>
>Todd

Well, luck apparently isn't with me.

Having spent most of yesterday gathering wisdom from all of you, I went
home full of hope to apply it. I set the Photoshop Color Settings to
"Photoshop 5 Default Spaces." I sharpened the image a bit more than seemed
advisable. I even tried converting the RGB image to 16 bits per channel.
Everything I printed out looked pretty much the same as before.

I think the problem is that I just don't like the way the Epson 1160 driver
lays down whatever is in the CMY cartridge. It is, after all, the Epson
driver that's doing the work: it has no idea what's in the cartridge, or
what unusual curves may have been applied to the image. The Epson driver
uses widely-spaced dots of ink to render very light tonalities, and I
believe it "cheats" by laying down what I see as "patches" of ink in areas
where there is very little variation in tonality. The result is so
different from what I understand as a "photograph" -- tiny bits of
deepest-possible black on white paper -- that I cannot accept it as output
for my pictures.

This leaves me back where I started from, i.e. either using only the black
cartridge, or finding an acceptable substitute for Piezo inks and exporting
through the Piezo driver.

Either way, I need better inks. For black-only, I want the intensity of the
Epson OEM black cartridge with better stability, at least behind glass or
in a plastic sleeve in the dark. (Fade resistance on a south-facing
windowsill or the back shelf of the car is not relevant: people who subject
my prints to that sort of treatment deserve what they get.) By "stability"
I mean not so much archival life as some assurance that the image tone and
color will not radically fade or shift on a time scale of weeks to months
after printing. Does such a beast exist? If not, how close to the Dmax of
Epson black can I get? Another useful piece of information would be the
intensity sequence of the paper profiles in the Epson Print dialog, i.e.
which paper setting lays down the most ink, and which the least. I know
this was discussed a few weeks ago, but I can't find the information.
Thanks for any pointer to archives, etc.

If Piezo, then I need to find out if the MIS Full-Spectrum set will work
with the Piezo driver. If it does, then its image tone needs to be
considered, and adjusted if necessary by tinting with color ink. Laborious,
but a possible medium-term solution.

Whatever I do, or any of us does, is in any case going to be superseded in
a matter of months. I cannot imagine that Jon Cone and even Epson are
standing still; I also cannot imagine that every single photographer
investigating digital output is striving for the same smooth, warm,
pseudo-platinum look of present-day quadtone methods. 35mm photographers,
arise! You have nothing to lose but your developer stains!

Any advice on nice black inks will be much appreciated. Thanks again to all
of you for your time and attention.

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Nicholas Hartmann <
POLYGLOT@E...> wrote:
> The prints I've done with Piezo inks have shifted so radically toward warm
> (a greenish rather than reddish brown this time) that I can't imagine the
> black-only would be stable.

With any of these ink sets, it is in fact the black that tends to be 
the most stable. The shifting that occurs as a reaction between the 
ink and paper coatings is mostly in the lighter inks.
I've been using Piezo inks almost from the day they came out in two 
model printers, never had clogging problems. All of my MIS prints and 
new MIS tests I've seen have been greener than Piezo.
Good luck
Tyler

Nick, Epson Heavyweight Matte is ok, but the Archival Matte  is a nicer paper. Photo Matte is nicer yet. I would urge you to get better
paper, through the many websites that carry it, and have it on hand. When you get low, just order more. You'd always have it.

The curves DO work on the heavyweight matte paper, however.

Jerry





Nicholas Hartmann wrote:

> >I've used paul's curves on a lot of papers Nick, but the epson heavyweight
> >isn't one. I can't believe that
> >that one paper would make a difference. All matte epson papers seem to
> >print with the same settings. But it
> >COULD be the problem i suppose....
>
> Jerry -
>
> If EHWM _is_ the problem, then something else is going to have to shift for
> a solution. MIS VM and the Roark curves are ingenious and innovative, but
> if they don't work on the one good paper I can walk into an office supply
> store and buy, rather than having to wait X days and pay shipping charges,
> then they're not for me.
>
> -- Nick
>
> NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
> 611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
> Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...
>
> Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

>> The prints I've done with Piezo inks have shifted so radically toward warm
>> (a greenish rather than reddish brown this time) that I can't imagine the
>> black-only would be stable.
>
>With any of these ink sets, it is in fact the black that tends to be
>the most stable. The shifting that occurs as a reaction between the
>ink and paper coatings is mostly in the lighter inks.
>I've been using Piezo inks almost from the day they came out in two
>model printers, never had clogging problems. All of my MIS prints and
>new MIS tests I've seen have been greener than Piezo.

Well, there goes my mileage varying again...

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

Nick, I better explain that last statement. I just this morning made a print on the Heavyweight matte paper with the MIS hextone inks, and
everything printed fine. I'm making the same image on every paper I have, which with Steadman's new sampler pack he sent me will be a Lot! I
hadn't made a print before on it, as I have found so many papers I like better, I just never got around to it. Paul's curves seem to work on
just about any paper I've tried them on.

Jerry

Jerry,
Did you mean Legion Photo Matte or Epson P M?
Bill

From Jerry Olson,
>Epson Heavyweight Matte is ok, but the Archival Matte  is a nicer paper.
Photo Matte is nicer yet.

Epson Archival matte is nicer/whiter/thicker/better surface than Epson Heavyweight.  Photo Legion's Photo Matte is better/whiter/better
blacks/than either of the Epson papers.

Jerry



wparsons@... wrote:

> Jerry,
> Did you mean Legion Photo Matte or Epson P M?
> Bill
>
> >From Jerry Olson,
> >Epson Heavyweight Matte is ok, but the Archival Matte  is a nicer paper.
> Photo Matte is nicer yet.
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

>Nick, I better explain that last statement. I just this morning made a
>print on the Heavyweight matte paper with the MIS hextone inks, and
>everything printed fine. I'm making the same image on every paper I have,
>which with Steadman's new sampler pack he sent me will be a Lot! I
>hadn't made a print before on it, as I have found so many papers I like
>better, I just never got around to it. Paul's curves seem to work on
>just about any paper I've tried them on.

Jerry -

That's kind of what I had gathered. I do have some Legion Photo Matte on
the way (Media Street happily took my credit card number but neglected to
tell me the paper was on back order...), and I am looking forward to trying
it out AFTER I get the ink mess sorted out.

To everyone (just in case the question got buried):

What is the order (from most-ink-laid-down to least-ink-laid-down) of the
paper profiles in the Epson 1160 Print dialog? Please and thank you very
much.

-- Nick

NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...

Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English

on 8/23/01 9:48 AM, Nicholas Hartmann wrote:

>> Good luck.
>> 
>> Todd
> 
> Well, luck apparently isn't with me.

Nick,

Send me your mailing address and I'll send you a print from my system. If
you don't think it's up to snuff, case closed, if you like it than you
should continue to pursue the MIS VT solution.

Remind me, you are using the MIS VT inks with Roark's curves with a
nomorecarts CIS on an 1160?

The MIS inks are what - $56 for a set of 4 4oz bottles- what could be more
fair? It's not much more than one replacement set of cartridges from Epson.

Email me your address off list and a thumbnail of one of your images and
I'll see if I have a print that relates to send you. Either way I'llsend you
something. If you like it pursue it, if not, check out the spectratone inks
from Lincoln Inks.

Todd

Tyler,

I know you have seen a lot more of this stuff than I have, but the 
small collection of Piezo and MIS VM prints I have show the reverse.

There is a green tone in most of the Piezo prints (paper independent) 
that is especially noticeable under tungsten and halogen lights but 
shifts to neutral in daylight. An unpleasant metamerism. The MIS VM 
shows no green tone and behaves normally in moving between different 
light sources. Warmer under artificial and cooler in daylight.

Am I just seeing some ink batch variations?

Martin Wesley


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Tyler Boley" <tyler@t...> 
wrote:
(snip)
> 
> With any of these ink sets, it is in fact the black that tends to 
be 
> the most stable. The shifting that occurs as a reaction between the 
> ink and paper coatings is mostly in the lighter inks.
> I've been using Piezo inks almost from the day they came out in two 
> model printers, never had clogging problems. All of my MIS prints 
and 

> new MIS tests I've seen have been greener than Piezo.
> Good luck
> Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Martin Wesley" <mwesley250@e...>=
 wrote:
> Tyler,
> 
> I know you have seen a lot more of this stuff than I have, but the 
> small collection of Piezo and MIS VM prints I have show the reverse.
> 
> There is a green tone in most of the Piezo prints (paper independent) 
> that is especially noticeable under tungsten and halogen lights but 
> shifts to neutral in daylight. An unpleasant metamerism. The MIS VM 
> shows no green tone and behaves normally in moving between different 
> light sources. Warmer under artificial and cooler in daylight.
> 
> Am I just seeing some ink batch variations?
> 
> Martin Wesley

I have no idea Martin, but I certainly believe you. Could it be because I a=
lways let my Piezo ink prints "cure" to their real 
color before evaluating? They are certainly redder than when they first eme=
rge from the printer. And both inksets change 
to their final(?) color quicker when left out in the light (not direct sun)=
.
I would never say MIS prints are green, I'm only saying when both inks are =
held next to each other on the same 
Hahnemühle  family of papers, the MIS appear greener (I have a witness :). =
You could just as easily say the Piezo looks 
more red/magenta. I keep hearing about green Piezo prints and am not sure w=
hy, my very first Piezo prints were a touch 
green and I'm quite sure the Epson inks had not fully flushed through the 3=
000 tubes. The smallest amount of an inkjet dye 
can change a neutral tone quickly. After a few days it disappeared.
Could be batches, but both companies claim very tight manufacturing toleran=
ces. I don't get it, could very well be the 
curing issue.
Tyler

I think they are in order from most to least, but be sure you wait til someone else answers that knows for certain.

Jerry



Nicholas Hartmann wrote:

> >Nick, I better explain that last statement. I just this morning made a
> >print on the Heavyweight matte paper with the MIS hextone inks, and
> >everything printed fine. I'm making the same image on every paper I have,
> >which with Steadman's new sampler pack he sent me will be a Lot! I
> >hadn't made a print before on it, as I have found so many papers I like
> >better, I just never got around to it. Paul's curves seem to work on
> >just about any paper I've tried them on.
>
> Jerry -
>
> That's kind of what I had gathered. I do have some Legion Photo Matte on
> the way (Media Street happily took my credit card number but neglected to
> tell me the paper was on back order...), and I am looking forward to trying
> it out AFTER I get the ink mess sorted out.
>
> To everyone (just in case the question got buried):
>
> What is the order (from most-ink-laid-down to least-ink-laid-down) of the
> paper profiles in the Epson 1160 Print dialog? Please and thank you very
> much.
>
> -- Nick
>
> NICHOLAS HARTMANN                                +1 (414) 271-4890
> 611 N. Broadway, Suite 509                  fax: +1 (414) 271-4892
> Milwaukee, WI 53202, USA                       polyglot@...
>
> Technical and scientific translator:  German and French -> English
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

In my Win2K system, it's in C:\Program Files\Common Files\Adobe\Color\Settings

At 12:48 AM 8/23/2001 +0000, Tyler wrote:
>--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Jerry Olson <jerryolson@r...> wrote:
> > It doesn't come up there. It's not one of the choices.
>
>Open your system folder
>open Application Support folder
>open Adobe folder
>open Color folder
>open Settings folder
>
>if there isn't a file called-
>
>Photoshop 5 Default Spaces.csf
>
>Then you've somehow trashed it, or done some sort of custom PS6.x 
>installation that doesn't include it, and it won't be an
>option for you.
>Tyler


****************
James E. Martz
Milan, OH
jemartz@...
*****************