Digital BW, The Print

I just ordered a Workforce 1100 and am torn between Eb4 and the 'cotton and carbon' concept,  and the 'EZ-ness' of the K2-quad. 

(I will say that I think 'slightly' warm is as warm as I want to print, and plan to start with Epson Cold Press natural paper).

I read in Mr. Roark's 1100.pdf that one idea is to use the Eboni-6 M/LK instead of the UT14 LC.  All this leads me to 2 questions.

  1) Which ICC should I use for this setup? 
  2) How warm will this be compared using the Eb-4 setup?

I really appreciate any advice anyone can provide!

"kbee123456789" <dkbb1@...> wrote:
>
> I just ordered a Workforce 1100 and am torn between Eb4 and the 'cotton and carbon' concept,  and the 'EZ-ness' of the K2-quad.


I do like the "EZ" or "K2-Quad" single density midtone workflows.  The partitioned Eboni-4 will make the smoothest, most neutral prints for a 100% carbon setup, but there are some potential drawbacks.  One is that, in general, I recommend QTR for any partitioned workflow.  While I have tried to make Photoshop curves that are tolerant of ink and paper variables, PS curves for partitioning are generally not as reliable as QTR curves.  On the other hand what I call a "sequential" ink starting profile that works so well with the single light ink setups is very portable and reliable.

Another, issue, is, of course, whether the slight warmth of the 100% carbon setup is going to satisfy you.


> (I will say that I think 'slightly' warm is as warm as I want to print, and plan to start with Epson Cold Press natural paper).


Of course, how much you want to spend is also an issue.  The HP Z3100 PK and Gray are a notch below 100% carbon, but they are very good and better than any other blended neutral pigment as far as I know.  An EZ setup can be based on these and print very neutral inks with many papers.


> 
> I read in Mr. Roark's 1100.pdf that one idea is to use the Eboni-6 M/LK instead of the UT14 LC.  All this leads me to 2 questions.
> 
>   1) Which ICC should I use for this setup?


I didn't see an ICC in my list for that setup.  The one for the LK inks would be close.  As a practical matter, you'll want to learn how to linearize profiles.  There is almost certainly a PS sequential curve that'll work well with the Eb-M/LK (18% Eboni), but it may not be quite linear.  


 
>   2) How warm will this be compared using the Eb-4 setup?


Looking at the Epson Hot Press White, which has more of a Lab B rise than the natural, Eb4 has a 2 unit rise, v. Eb-EZ's 3 unit rise.  (I didn't have any recorded info on the EZ Eboni performance on the Natural version.)  In general, the M/LK dilution is the warmest, while 100% K and 2% are usually the least warm.  

Note that with Eb4 a full partitioning curve leads to a Lab B rise of 1.33 on Epson Hot Press Natural.  However, I also made a curve that is more of a sequential starting curve than a full partitioning curve for the Eb4 inkset.  This curve leads to a Lab B rise of 1.82.  I suspect that the sequential curve will be more tolerant of variables.  So, if one of the partitioned ICCs does not work well, use this alternative workflow that is only 0.5 units warmer.

Since MIS sells the Eboni-4 pre-loaded and you're leaning toward trying some 100% carbon approach, I recommend you buy a set of Eb4 carts and see if you like the setup.  There are lots of alternatives if you find it's just not for you.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Paul,

Thank you for the informative reply.  There is definitely a lot to learn about this. I think I will go ahead and try the Eboni-4 and then learn how to linearize.  (I think I recall that you have a pdf that addresses that topic, you are a gold mine of info).  BTW not sure why I said 'cold' press, I meant 'hot.' <g>

I am pretty excited to try this....

kb

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

>
> "kbee123456789" <dkbb1@> wrote:
> >
> > I just ordered a Workforce 1100 and am torn between Eb4 and the 'cotton and carbon' concept,  and the 'EZ-ness' of the K2-quad.
> 
> 
> I do like the "EZ" or "K2-Quad" single density midtone workflows.  The partitioned Eboni-4 will make the smoothest, most neutral prints for a 100% carbon setup, but there are some potential drawbacks.  One is that, in general, I recommend QTR for any partitioned workflow.  While I have tried to make Photoshop curves that are tolerant of ink and paper variables, PS curves for partitioning are generally not as reliable as QTR curves.  On the other hand what I call a "sequential" ink starting profile that works so well with the single light ink setups is very portable and reliable.
> 
> Another, issue, is, of course, whether the slight warmth of the 100% carbon setup is going to satisfy you.
> 
> 
> > (I will say that I think 'slightly' warm is as warm as I want to print, and plan to start with Epson Cold Press natural paper).
> 
> 
> Of course, how much you want to spend is also an issue.  The HP Z3100 PK and Gray are a notch below 100% carbon, but they are very good and better than any other blended neutral pigment as far as I know.  An EZ setup can be based on these and print very neutral inks with many papers.
> 
> 
> > 
> > I read in Mr. Roark's 1100.pdf that one idea is to use the Eboni-6 M/LK instead of the UT14 LC.  All this leads me to 2 questions.
> > 
> >   1) Which ICC should I use for this setup?
> 
> 
> I didn't see an ICC in my list for that setup.  The one for the LK inks would be close.  As a practical matter, you'll want to learn how to linearize profiles.  There is almost certainly a PS sequential curve that'll work well with the Eb-M/LK (18% Eboni), but it may not be quite linear.  
> 
> 
>  
> >   2) How warm will this be compared using the Eb-4 setup?
> 
> 
> Looking at the Epson Hot Press White, which has more of a Lab B rise than the natural, Eb4 has a 2 unit rise, v. Eb-EZ's 3 unit rise.  (I didn't have any recorded info on the EZ Eboni performance on the Natural version.)  In general, the M/LK dilution is the warmest, while 100% K and 2% are usually the least warm.  
> 
> Note that with Eb4 a full partitioning curve leads to a Lab B rise of 1.33 on Epson Hot Press Natural.  However, I also made a curve that is more of a sequential starting curve than a full partitioning curve for the Eb4 inkset.  This curve leads to a Lab B rise of 1.82.  I suspect that the sequential curve will be more tolerant of variables.  So, if one of the partitioned ICCs does not work well, use this alternative workflow that is only 0.5 units warmer.
> 
> Since MIS sells the Eboni-4 pre-loaded and you're leaning toward trying some 100% carbon approach, I recommend you buy a set of Eb4 carts and see if you like the setup.  There are lots of alternatives if you find it's just not for you.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

"kbee123456789" <dkbb1@...> wrote:
>
> ...I think I will go ahead and try the Eboni-4 and then learn how to linearize.  (I think I recall that you have a pdf that addresses that topic, you are a gold mine of info).


I use the DataColor Spyder 3, but a flatbed scanner (and even a digital camera) can be used.  (See my Workflow notes, linked to http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Workflow%20Notes.pdf .)

Roy Harrington made a Photoshop script to automate the flatbed scanner procedure.  See the StepWedge tool at http://www.quadtonerip.com/html/QTRdownload.html .

There is one apparent bug with the WF 1100 to note.  When used in connection with my (Windows 7) Photoshop CS5, the printer or PS seem to "remember" some of the last settings used in the PS "Print" screen.  So, if I am changing the number of copies to be made or the ICC used, I'll print a plain paper copy (with the Epson driver set to the highest speed & plain paper -- settings the system does not remember) and waste that page in order to get the correct ICC set.  It's a weird bug I don't run into with other Epson drivers.


Good luck with the setup.  I really like the 1100, with the caveat that it's slow and has no QTR support.  

As an aside for those looking into competing printers, note that the 1100 with the Epson driver, while being very fast with text, is slow in printing photos.  It's a bit slower than the 1400 with QTR.  The 1400 with the Epson driver is nearly twice as fast as the 1400 with QTR.  With my dyes and making cards, the 1400 has yet to match the lack of edge microbanding of the 1100.  It may be slow with photos, but the 1100 can make very nice print.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com