Digital BW, The Print

Hi all
Still working with EB6 and Epson 1430, my experiences with papers and drivers are getting better and better but...
Here's a few questions :

1-Someone saw a difference if you print at 360, 300, 288 or 240? (On matte paper)

2-Someone saw a difference printing a 16 bit file vs a 8 bit one?

3- Is it normal that with a loupe, the blacks show tiny white speckles (maybe due to the surface of the paper?)?

I'm reading and printing like crazy but I think I made a wrong choice with EB6. Since it's for matte paper only, the Dmax is lower than, let's say, luster paper, and what I expected. I'm aware that lot of people are searching for permanence, but I would trade a couple of years for a better output. I'm searching to match the output I had in a darkroom.

Thanks

In detailed comparisons, I've been able to detect the difference even
between 720 and 360 dpi files, but in the real world, 240 can look very
sharp.  With the 16 v 8 bit it's the same type of  thing.  16 is needed  in
files mostly to allow manipulations, for printing 8 makes a very good
print.  One one artificially generated ramp the 16 bit file looked better,
but I've never seen an 8 bit QTR print that showed a problem due to lack of
gray levels.  I'd guess the dithering pattern the printer has to use to
generate the levels makes  most of the theoretical differences moot.  In
side-by-side comparisons I've  also been able to detect a sharpness
advantage to the 1400 and its 1.5 pl drop when compared to the 4000 and
it's  larger drop size.  Again, however, in practice  nobody is going to
see a difference.

As to the dmax, be sure you try a high dmax paper  like Epson Hot Press
Natural or one of  the Hahnemuhle papers, and view them in actual indoor
display settings before concluding the matte dmax is not adequate.  The
reflections off the surface of the glossy papers often makes them appear
 to have worse black tones than the matte papers.

On the other hand, the I'm using the dyes on high gloss metallic  paper to
get  the most dramatic sense of dynamic range "3d" look.  When I was doing
wet darkroom work, I would look at the negatives and marvel  at
the dynamic range; the prints never seemed to look as good.  A couple of us
who are using these dyes have commented that they produce the first prints
we've ever seen that come close to matching that sensation we got from the
B&W negatives and good  color  slides.  Then again some have also commented
that they are gaudy, not "fine art," and not a medium then want hanging on
their walls.  So, there is a lot of subjectivity here.  I like having both
media available for different purposes.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 8:35 AM, jcphoto52 <jacques.caron@videotron.qc.ca>wrote:

> **
>
>
> Hi all
> Still working with EB6 and Epson 1430, my experiences with papers and
> drivers are getting better and better but...
> Here's a few questions :
>
> 1-Someone saw a difference if you print at 360, 300, 288 or 240? (On matte
> paper)
>
> 2-Someone saw a difference printing a 16 bit file vs a 8 bit one?
>
> 3- Is it normal that with a loupe, the blacks show tiny white speckles
> (maybe due to the surface of the paper?)?
>
> I'm reading and printing like crazy but I think I made a wrong choice with
> EB6. Since it's for matte paper only, the Dmax is lower than, let's say,
> luster paper, and what I expected. I'm aware that lot of people are
> searching for permanence, but I would trade a couple of years for a better
> output. I'm searching to match the output I had in a darkroom.
>
> Thanks
>
>  
>


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

Thank you Mr.Roark

I'm printing mostly 11x14 and 13x19, I'll stick with the 360 dpi and the 16 bit greyscale when the pictures are B&W, The color ones will stay in color since I've found that the print out was very good this way. If I can figure the output vs the color version on screen, I'll be quite happy.

As for the paper, I made some tests with Epson Presentation matte, Epson Ultra Presentation matte, Red River Polar matte. I was keeping the Hahnemhule for the end since it is a bit expensive. I'm using the Epson driver and let the printer manage; I tried with PhotoShop manage(with the right paper choice) but it compresses the end of the scale (both blacks and whites) too much. I made a test file with a scan of a 4x5" B&W neg at 360 dpi adding squares filled with black from 0-0-0 to 50-50-50, a 50% grey, plus five whites (from 235 to 250). I followed your tutorial for using my scanner(Microtek i800) as a densitometer. All my readings are made from scans.

At the end, I still see  a picture and not numbers; I'll buy the Epson Hot Press to compare.

As for metallic, isn't EB6 for matte only?

Thanks again... I'm having fun

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

>
> In detailed comparisons, I've been able to detect the difference even
> between 720 and 360 dpi files, but in the real world, 240 can look very
> sharp.  With the 16 v 8 bit it's the same type of  thing.  16 is needed  in
> files mostly to allow manipulations, for printing 8 makes a very good
> print.  One one artificially generated ramp the 16 bit file looked better,
> but I've never seen an 8 bit QTR print that showed a problem due to lack of
> gray levels.  I'd guess the dithering pattern the printer has to use to
> generate the levels makes  most of the theoretical differences moot.  In
> side-by-side comparisons I've  also been able to detect a sharpness
> advantage to the 1400 and its 1.5 pl drop when compared to the 4000 and
> it's  larger drop size.  Again, however, in practice  nobody is going to
> see a difference.
> 
> As to the dmax, be sure you try a high dmax paper  like Epson Hot Press
> Natural or one of  the Hahnemuhle papers, and view them in actual indoor
> display settings before concluding the matte dmax is not adequate.  The
> reflections off the surface of the glossy papers often makes them appear
>  to have worse black tones than the matte papers.
> 
> On the other hand, the I'm using the dyes on high gloss metallic  paper to
> get  the most dramatic sense of dynamic range "3d" look.  When I was doing
> wet darkroom work, I would look at the negatives and marvel  at
> the dynamic range; the prints never seemed to look as good.  A couple of us
> who are using these dyes have commented that they produce the first prints
> we've ever seen that come close to matching that sensation we got from the
> B&W negatives and good  color  slides.  Then again some have also commented
> that they are gaudy, not "fine art," and not a medium then want hanging on
> their walls.  So, there is a lot of subjectivity here.  I like having both
> media available for different purposes.

jcphoto52 <jacques.caron@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> ...
> As for metallic, isn't EB6 for matte only?
>
Yes.  I use dyes for glossy printing, including on the metallic paper.  See
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/1400-Claria-Noritsu-2K2LK.pdf and
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/4000-Noritsu-5K-Plus.pdf

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com


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