Digital BW, The Print

Hello Paul,

I am thinking of implementing a warm carbon set along the lines of the one you mentioned in a recent post - Eboni, LK, LLK, but still have some unused bottles of the U2R2 warm inks left from use in an R220.  Can you tell me whether these two inks are essentially the same as the LK and LLK inks or are they of different densities?  Is there a table anywhere showing the densities of the inks in the various MIS B&W specific inksets?

Many thanks for your advice.

David Whistance

"david627890" <david.whistance@...> wrote:
>
> I am thinking of implementing a warm carbon set along the lines of the one you mentioned in a recent post - Eboni, LK, LLK, but still have some unused bottles of the U2R2 warm inks left from use in an R220.  Can you tell me whether these two inks are essentially the same as the LK and LLK inks or are they of different densities?  Is there a table anywhere showing the densities of the inks in the various MIS B&W specific inksets?


The R2 warm inks are denser than LK and LLK.

Here is the outline of MIS carbon ink densities:

The basic dark ink to light ink dilution is 30% (that is, 30% darker ink, 70% clear base).

Since we started originally with only matte papers, the original carbon midtones were, essentially, the same as a 30% dilution of K and then another 30% down to the light midtone.  These are usually called by me UT-C (30% MK density) and UT-LC (30% UT-C)

Then Epson and others went to glossy inks with PK, LK, and LLK, again using the 30% formula for the most part.  PK, however, is a lower load ink than MK.  So, LK and LLK are lighter than the UT-C and UT-LC.

The order from most dense down is as follows:

MK, PK, UT-C (includes R2 warm C and M), LK, (UT-EZ warm), UT-LC (includes R2 warm LC, LM, and Y), and LLK.

In the Eboni-6 family, you can get an idea of the relative densities by looking at the dilutions:

Eb6-K = 100% Eboni MK

(PK is not in the Eboni family.  However, in my 7800 I use it as the substitute for Eb6-C and also overlap it into the Eboni at the 100% point to kick up the dmax on Arches uncoated.)

Eb6-C = 30% Eboni (about like UT-C, less dense than PK)

Eb6-M = 18% Eboni (about equal to LK density)

Eb6-EZ = 13.5% Eboni (Not an official MIS ink, but what I have recommended and used for C88 EZ setups.  It's M and LC poured together.)

Eb6-LC = 9% Eboni (about like UT-LC)

Eb6-LM = 6% Eboni (about like LLK density)

Eb6-Y = 2% Eboni  (MIS has no glossy 100% carbon that is like this.)


The dilution does not directly and linearly correspond to the print density because one gets decreasing print density increases per unit of carbon added.  Similarly, for any given ink dilution, the more that is put on the paper does not increase density in a linear fashion, and these non-linear ink load to print density curves are not congruent.  So, when I say one ink has a density similar to another, that may be at only one ink load point.  So, the above outline is approximate.

Hope this helps.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Paul,

 

Many thanks, that is really helpful.  

 

Presumably the R2 warm inks are pure carbon like the LK and LLK?  If so
presumably a set consisting of Eboni, PK, R2 Warm Dark, LK, R2 Warm Light,
LLK would make a viable K6 inkset although I suspect the densities are sub
optimal?  Would it gain any smoothness over using Just Eboni, PK, LK, LLK?

 

David Whistance

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul
Sent: 21 January 2012 23:25
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Question for Paul Roark

 

  

"david627890" <david.whistance@...> wrote:
>
> I am thinking of implementing a warm carbon set along the lines of the one
you mentioned in a recent post - Eboni, LK, LLK, but still have some unused
bottles of the U2R2 warm inks left from use in an R220. Can you tell me
whether these two inks are essentially the same as the LK and LLK inks or
are they of different densities? Is there a table anywhere showing the
densities of the inks in the various MIS B&W specific inksets?

The R2 warm inks are denser than LK and LLK.

Here is the outline of MIS carbon ink densities:

The basic dark ink to light ink dilution is 30% (that is, 30% darker ink,
70% clear base).

Since we started originally with only matte papers, the original carbon
midtones were, essentially, the same as a 30% dilution of K and then another
30% down to the light midtone. These are usually called by me UT-C (30% MK
density) and UT-LC (30% UT-C)

Then Epson and others went to glossy inks with PK, LK, and LLK, again using
the 30% formula for the most part. PK, however, is a lower load ink than MK.
So, LK and LLK are lighter than the UT-C and UT-LC.

The order from most dense down is as follows:

MK, PK, UT-C (includes R2 warm C and M), LK, (UT-EZ warm), UT-LC (includes
R2 warm LC, LM, and Y), and LLK.

In the Eboni-6 family, you can get an idea of the relative densities by
looking at the dilutions:

Eb6-K = 100% Eboni MK

(PK is not in the Eboni family. However, in my 7800 I use it as the
substitute for Eb6-C and also overlap it into the Eboni at the 100% point to
kick up the dmax on Arches uncoated.)

Eb6-C = 30% Eboni (about like UT-C, less dense than PK)

Eb6-M = 18% Eboni (about equal to LK density)

Eb6-EZ = 13.5% Eboni (Not an official MIS ink, but what I have recommended
and used for C88 EZ setups. It's M and LC poured together.)

Eb6-LC = 9% Eboni (about like UT-LC)

Eb6-LM = 6% Eboni (about like LLK density)

Eb6-Y = 2% Eboni (MIS has no glossy 100% carbon that is like this.)

The dilution does not directly and linearly correspond to the print density
because one gets decreasing print density increases per unit of carbon
added. Similarly, for any given ink dilution, the more that is put on the
paper does not increase density in a linear fashion, and these non-linear
ink load to print density curves are not congruent. So, when I say one ink
has a density similar to another, that may be at only one ink load point.
So, the above outline is approximate.

Hope this helps.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 





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

"David Whistance" <david.whistance@...> wrote:
>
>
> Presumably the R2 warm inks are pure carbon like the LK and LLK?

Yes.

>  If so presumably a set consisting of Eboni, PK, R2 Warm Dark, LK, R2 Warm Light, LLK would make a viable K6 inkset 


Yes.

> although I suspect the densities are sub optimal? 

One could debate that.  Where I'm at currently is that the 30% dark-light is near optimal for crossovers, and I think 2 LKs is better than a strictly serial partitioning -- that is all different densities. Although the strictly serial, different-density approach profiles easier in QTR. You may have seen that I went to an LLK, 2 LKs and a K in one of the 1100 setups, and with the dyes I use 2 LKs and 2 Ks.  That is in a 1.5 pl printer (1400).  That arrangement is not just for ease of mixing and maintenance, but also because more than one experiment has resulted in double LKs as resulting in smoother prints -- less likely to band.  So, bottom line, what is "optimal" is very much open to debate.


> Would it gain any smoothness over using Just Eboni, PK, LK, LLK?

The additional smoothness of the double LKs comes from more overlaps in the middle.  If you had the UT-C and LC (and K) in a separately partitioned channel so that they overlapped the LLK-LK-PK-K, etc. channel, you'd probably get more smoothness.  More inks firing and staggered crossovers are factors.

Good luck with the setup.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com