Digital BW, The Print

I stumbled across a reference the other day on the MIS web site to an article on adding color toner (Pigment I presume) to carbon inks in order to control print tone. The link to that article was broken however, and I have not been able to find it again.
Does anyone know about/have this article? Any and all information about adding color pigment to a carbon ink set would be greatly appreciated.

dk

David ... <david@...> wrote:

**
>
> ... Any and all information about adding color pigment to a carbon ink set
> would be greatly appreciated.
>
Short answer:  Searching this forum with it's search capabilities and the
web will probably get you the best information.

I do not recommend most people do any more than dilute existing inks.  It
is much safer to use color inks in separate channels.  That opens up the
color issues to a lot of competitive alternatives and avoids many issues of
mixing different pigment types.

(I don't know which MIS article you saw.  I asked MIS to remove from their
"Roark's lab" page material that they had added that did not represent my
views.  That may have been what you saw.  I have not checked it recently
for accuracy.  It's not a page I write.)


Long answer:

I designed the MIS B&W inkset not as a contractor  for or under the control
of MIS, but as an independent photographer and printer who wanted something
that did not exist.  My formulas have mostly been published.  Bob Zeiss
(the founder of MIS) and I shared information regularly, mostly verbally.
 There was never a published manual on ink mixing, as such, from that
collaboration, aside from what you can access via this forum and web
searches (including of my pages).

The MIS toned inks are very good for most enthusiasts who use a desktop
printer.  However, note that I moved away from them.  (My older PDFs etc.
may not reflect my current views.  There has been progress and learning.)
Differential fade and ink separation/settlement issues made them less than
ideal for wide format printers and fine art or museum quality printing,
including longevity.  Getting good carbon inks is much easier for a small
company than getting top notch color pigments.   Particularly when you look
at the issues of blending and differential fade.

From a chemical compatibility point of view, there is a huge leap in
complexity between (1) mixing a generic base and (2) grinding/coating the
particles with compatible, carefully-matched electrostatic dispersal
chemicals.  The big companies have vastly more technical resources and
economies of scale compared to the small ink sellers (or me).  These
economies of scale have given the OEMs advantages with respect to both the
color inks and blended carbon + color inks.  This is not to say that a
small company cannot tap into a non-OEM chemical company to do this work,
but in the past the OEMs held the high ground on color pigments and blends.


You'll note in my latest inksets, I use MIS carbon, and I use Epson color
or HP blended gray inks in separate channels.  Having inks is separate
channels avoids many problems.  Also, software (making profiles) is a more
flexible approach than color-carbon blending.

What we and a number of others did in the past is just use the Image
Specialists' color and carbon pigments that were available.  Their previous
chemist and their suppliers handled all the issues relating to, for
example, the pigments' coatings and base.  The color and glossy carbon inks
from IS & MIS mixed well and were relatively compatible.  They used the
same base, but they were never designed explicitly with the mixing in mind.
They were, also, not matched very well with respect to fade
characteristics.  (Check http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/.)

HP, from what I can see, makes the best blended carbon + color neutral/cool
ink.  Fade tests and centrifuge testing (I use a medical counter-top unit)
shows good matching of the pigments' characteristics.  I like its color,
and it dilutes well with the generic base (or even MIS's amber base - for
reducing bronzing).  I use it diluted with the generic base to cool Eboni
(in separate channels).

MIS is now taking a shot at some new, upgraded blended inks like HP's.  I
have them in beta, but it's way too early to know much more than the tone
is good and they appear to print very much like the older IS pigments.  MIS
is doing fade testing now, and I'll do a centrifuge test for separation as
well as other tests.  (I've found the centrifuge test results correlate
well with my real world experiences with color separation and settling.)

For now, the only ink mixing that I recommend for most is, first, use of
available bases to dilute existing pigments without blending. Second, my
experience is that the MIS K4 inkset glossy inks can all be mixed together
with good results for Epson desktop printers.  (3800 and up will probably
experience some blended ink separation in the carts and tubing, causing
some print tone drift.)   Mix the MIS glossy color inks only with the MIS
glossy carbon inks (LK, etc, as well as the MIS UltraTone carbons).

The basic dilution ratio for dark to light is about 30% darker ink to 70%
base.  A 1:2 mixing ratio is easiest if accurate (0.1 gram) digital scales
are not available.  I've been able to make good cross-overs from about 50%
to 20% on the dilution steps.

The PK and MK inks have different densities on matte paper; MK is darker.
 So, the PK-LK-LLK (standard 30/70 dilution) will result in a different and
lighter set of matte densities than an MK-30%MK-9%MK progression.

The early B&W inksets were matte paper only and often used a matte paper
progression, particularly for the first density jump --  MK to 30%MK.  What
I call UT-C is at the "30% MK" density point.  UT-C is, however, made with
glossy MIS carbon.  Eboni-6 "C" (30% Eboni) is also at this printed density
point (although the original MK was not Eboni).  There has been some drift
in the densities and dilution ratios.

(Note that the ink-load/print-density curves are not congruent for
different pigment types, but they generally all declining slope curves.
 So, if you want to match inks, you often only match the densities at only
one point on the curve (aside from zero).)

The MIS glossy carbon inksets for color printing in K3 Epson printers use
the PK-30%PK etc. spacing.

For Eboni/Carbon-6 I decided to use the two standard MK and PK density
progressions that I'd used in the MIS inkset.  I was familiar with them and
they printed well.  It keeps the profiles more compatible also.  At any
rate, I ended up with 2 staggered, somewhat standard progressions for
Eboni-6.  Eb6-Y (2% Eboni), while lighter than any 100% carbon ink MIS has
in its glossy carbon sets, is a relatively standard dilution jump away from
the next lightest. (I round off to keep things simple for my scales/weight
based mixing.)

I hope some of this background is useful.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com


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

From:  Paul Roark 

"I do not recommend most people do any more than dilute existing inks.  It
is much safer to use color inks in separate channels.  That opens up the
color issues to a lot of competitive alternatives and avoids many issues of
mixing different pigment types."

OK, well I will have two ink stations unused with my grand scheme to take
over the world; C and LC.

Do I understand correctly, that if I want a heavy brown tone with my carbon
ink system, I would be better off putting magenta and yellow (right colors I
presume?), respectively, into the C and LC spots rather than mixing them
directly into the carbon inks? If so, who's Magenta and Yellow inks would
you recommend from a longevity standpoint?

Wouldn¹t having the color inks in separate stations lead to some of the same
visual defects seen when printing monochrome images with OEM color inks?

If you were going to experiment with such a system, what numbers would you
start with for the two colors, ballpark?

You'll note in my latest inksets, I use MIS carbon, and I use Epson color
or HP blended gray inks in separate channels.  Having inks is separate
channels avoids many problems.  Also, software (making profiles) is a more
flexible approach than color-carbon blending.

That makes sense. It also occurs to me that mixing color inks in with carbon
inks would get very wasteful and tedious as I try to blend just what I want.
Separate channels would mean simply tweaking a profile, but not mixing inks
and possibly having to throw them out. I also use different papers and
therefore the "brown" would require a different ink blend for each paper.
Bad idea. 

HP, from what I can see, makes the best blended carbon + color neutral/cool
ink.  Fade tests and centrifuge testing (I use a medical counter-top unit)
shows good matching of the pigments' characteristics.  I like its color,
and it dilutes well with the generic base (or even MIS's amber base - for
reducing bronzing).  I use it diluted with the generic base to cool Eboni
(in separate channels).

Would I be able to use HP's magenta and yellow inks alongside MIS's K and PK
dilutions without blowing up my printhead? Also, would magenta or light
magenta be better? (This may help: my brown tone is achieved using Epson's
inks with a solid color fill layer at the top of my layer stack set to Hue
43, Saturation 100, Brightness 13. Hue and brightness will vary a point or
two, depending on the paper and image.)

I am not necessarily after duplicating the above brown, exactly, but having
the option to get as close as possible to that is desirable.

Here's a thought too. Could one mix magenta and yellow in a single channel,
leaving the other empty slot open for a different mixed color, say a
selenium color? Or would that mixing present similar problems to those
already described?


For now, the only ink mixing that I recommend for most is, first, use of
available bases to dilute existing pigments without blending. Second, my
experience is that the MIS K4 inkset glossy inks can all be mixed together
with good results for Epson desktop printers.

So I could mix MIS K4 magenta and yellow in the same cartridge and use that
along with a B&W ink set?
(I read what you are saying to mean that all of the K4 inks can
theoretically be mixed together except K, because PK, LK, LLK, M, LM, C, LC
and Y are all glossy inks. Would this also be true of the same inks from
Epson and HP?)

I've been able to make good cross-overs from about 50%
to 20% on the dilution steps.

You lost me at that sentence. Cross-over?


The PK and MK inks have different densities on matte paper; MK is darker.
 So, the PK-LK-LLK (standard 30/70 dilution) will result in a different and
lighter set of matte densities than an MK-30%MK-9%MK progression.

MK being the blended, not 100% carbon black (not K), right? I'm kinda lost
here. Not sure why that blended MIS ink came into the discussion.
The alphabet soup of inks gets confusing.

David Kachel

___________________

Artist-Photographer
Fine B&W Photographs

www.davidkachel.com
david@...

Gallery:
www.reddoorfinephotographs.com
director@...

PO Box  1893
Alpine, TX 79831
(432) 386-5787
 




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

David,

**
> ...I will have two ink stations unused ... C and LC.
>
> Do I understand correctly, that if I want a heavy brown tone with my carbon
> ink system, I would be better off putting magenta and yellow (right colors
> I
> presume?), respectively, into the C and LC spots rather than mixing them
> directly into the carbon inks?
>

Yes, except that I'd use Y and LM, not the full strength M.  As long as you
use QTR, it doesn't matter which ink position you use for the inks.


If so, who's Magenta and Yellow inks would
> you recommend from a longevity standpoint?
>

Epson.



>
> Wouldn¹t having the color inks in separate stations lead to some of the
> same
> visual defects seen when printing monochrome images with OEM color inks?
>

The issue is how much color you use relative to carbon.  Whether they are
mixed together probably makes no difference.

With respect to the total ratio of carbon to color, the OEM setups use
color inks in their neutral gray to cool the carbon, then you'd be using
more color to warm it back up.  So, the bottom line is that if you start
with carbon to get to a warm, you'll be using less color inks and thus have
less of the issues that relate to them.



>
> If you were going to experiment with such a system, what numbers would you
> start with for the two colors, ballpark?
>

Start by calling the color inks "toners" in QTR.  Then you'll notice that
the density number (maybe start with 30) controls where the peak is in the
curve.  The load determines the amount of ink. The loads for toners can be
very low, but I've never gone the direction you're going.  Once you get
close with QTR's toner curves, you might want to take them manual via the
Point List.  (I'm talking Curve Creator.  I'm on Windows, so if you're Mac
it could be different.)



> ... It also occurs to me that mixing color inks in with carbon
> inks would get very wasteful and tedious as I try to blend just what I
> want. ...
>

Yes.  Software (changing a profile) is much more flexible and efficient
than mixing inks.


> ...
> Would I be able to use HP's magenta and yellow inks alongside MIS's K and
> PK
> dilutions without blowing up my printhead?
>

Yes, but when I looked at the best color ink fade matches, Epson did a bit
better.  That was with LM and LC, however.  The HP neutral did extremely
well, but I doubt they use the same color inks there that they use in the C
and M positions.  You might want to check http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/ .
 I looked at the pure color fade values.  I can't say for sure that those
numbers actually tell us what you're asking, cut it seemed like they
should.  So, see what the ratings are for the M and Y at, for example, 100
Mlux-hrs on papers that are similar to what you'd be using.


Also, would magenta or light magenta be better? ...
>

I think LM would be better.  The full M dots will show in the highlights.
 What you could do to hedge your bet is buy M and dilute it with generic
base (1 part M to 2 parts base).  Then if it's not enough you can start
increasing it's concentration until you get what you want.  I'd be
surprised if LM isn't good enough, however.



> ... Could one mix magenta and yellow in a single channel, ...
>

The early MIS "toners" were somewhat similar to that approach, and they had
separation issues in wide format printers.  I would not mix different
pigments.


>
> For now, the only ink mixing that I recommend for most is, first, use of
> available bases to dilute existing pigments without blending. Second, my
> experience is that the MIS K4 inkset glossy inks can all be mixed together
> with good results for Epson desktop printers.
>
> So I could mix MIS K4 magenta and yellow in the same cartridge and use that
> along with a B&W ink set?
>

Note that I said they worked well in desktop printers.  If you are in a
wide format, I do not recommend it.



> (I read what you are saying to mean that all of the K4 inks can
> theoretically be mixed together except K, because PK, LK, LLK, M, LM, C, LC
> and Y are all glossy inks. Would this also be true of the same inks from
> Epson and HP?)
>

I don't know because I have not done it.  They are probably like the MIS
pigments in their ability to me mixed.  That is, they are probably not
incompatible, but they are also not made to be mixed together.  I would
expect them to have the same separation issues we had with the MIS pigments
(in wide format printers).

>
>
> I've been able to make good cross-overs from about 50%
> to 20% on the dilution steps.
>
> You lost me at that sentence. Cross-over?
>

In the profile when you go from a light ink to a darker ink, that
transition is called a "cross-over" (at least that is what I call them).
 You don't want them to be obvious -- or even visible -- in the print.



>
>
> The PK and MK inks have different densities on matte paper; MK is darker.
> So, the PK-LK-LLK (standard 30/70 dilution) will result in a different and
> lighter set of matte densities than an MK-30%MK-9%MK progression.
>

I meant "MK" there to mean 100% Eboni MK.  The 100% Eboni MK - 30% Eboni MK
(Eb6-C) - 9% Eboni MK (Eb6-LC) prints darker on matte paper than PK - LK
(30% PK) - LLK (9% PK).

(Note that not all LKs are 30% PK.   With, for example, MIS inks, the LK
was set initially with what is now closest to MP-PK, which is a higher load
(more carbon) ink than K4-PK.  However, the LK stayed the same in both
inksets.)

Hope this helps.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com


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

From:  Paul Roark 

"Hope this helps."

And a half! Thanks. I greatly appreciate that you are willing to take so
much time to respond to me and so many others.

It does occur to me that if I am going to go down the "toner" road and put
LM and Y into their own channels, I wouldn't really need to use PK inks but
could just go with all K dilutions, the difference between the two carbon
sets being so slight compared to what I am after. This would also allow me a
complete neutral option with the toner channels turned off.

Would I be correct in concluding that if I later wanted to explore a
"selenium" option, I would then use M and C as toners?


David Kachel

___________________

Artist-Photographer
Fine B&W Photographs

www.davidkachel.com
david@...

Gallery:
www.reddoorfinephotographs.com
director@...

PO Box  1893
Alpine, TX 79831
(432) 386-5787




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

David,

> ...
> It does occur to me that if I am going to go down the "toner" road and put
> LM and Y into their own channels, I wouldn't really need to use PK inks but
> could just go with all K dilutions, the difference between the two carbon
> sets being so slight compared to what I am after.
>
The difference is only 1 Lab B unit on Arches.  It is usually more than
that on coated papers.

An Eboni-based inkset would not allow you to make the sepia-looking 100%
carbon prints on "gloss" (including specifically baryta) papers.  Given
your preferences for print tone, that might be a loss.  I understand you
currently are not interested in that.  Other issues include that the
PK-based carbons do not settle nearly as fast as the Eboni-based inks.  I
agitate the Eboni-6 carts before using them if they've sat a week.  When
not in use, I agitate every 2 weeks. (I agitate the night before turning
the machine on.)  On the plus side for Eboni-6, the dilute inks have much
less binder and are thus essentially free from clogs.  (PK-based MIS inks
are average in that respect.)  If you mixed your own Carbon-6, the cost of
the ink is so low as to be rather irrelevant.  (It's the framing costs that
burn.)

I might note that I pulled the PK-based carbons out of my 7800 and now
simply use my every-day Epson 1100 filled with PK, LK and LLK to make very
good sepia prints (max 13" wide) when I need them.   A cheap 1100 as a
daily office printer (very fast text, left on 24/7) makes a good backup
printer for small prints, as long as the Epson driver can handle the work
(no QTR support for the 1100).  For QTR support and color, the 1400 is the
backup to use.  (I have 2 of those.)


> This would also allow me a
> complete neutral option with the toner channels turned off.
>

Dilute Eboni is not completely neutral.  With Epson Hot Press Natural, the
maximum Lab B can be as low as 1.3 units above the natural paper base
(lowest Lab B rise I've ever measured with carbon with modern printers).
 On the wall, that looks quite neutral.  Premier Art Smooth BW (bright
white/OBA's) makes a quite neutral looking print also.  With my old,
large-drop 7500, I could actually print a 100% carbon print where the Lab B
stayed negative -- actually cool.  The smaller drops of the newer printers
does not allow that any more.  So, I've added some HP Z3200 gray, which is
much more stable than the OBA's.


> Would I be correct in concluding that if I later wanted to explore a
> "selenium" option, I would then use M and C as toners?
>

Yes, LM and LC are the toners most of us use to cool carbon.  The more LM,
the more the "selenium" look.

(Note that we don't know what HP or Epson actually use to cool their carbon
in their gray inks.  For color printing, they use high gamut, spiky
spectral response pigments.  In a gray ink, the ideal is a lower gamut
pigment with a wide spectral response curve ("skirts" on the curve) to
lessen issues of metamerism & color inconstancy.  I found that D. Smith's
Indanthrone blue made a very good, one-pigment carbon offset, but the small
companies did not have the volume to prep it for inkjet use.  Note that a
one-pigment carbon neutralizer would have a fade path that went straight to
warm without straying into the green zone.)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com


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

From:  Paul Roark 

"An Eboni-based inkset would not allow you to make the sepia-looking 100%
carbon prints on "gloss" (including specifically baryta) papers."

I feel like I am making some progress here. Soon, I'll be dangerous to
myself and others.  ;-)

What papers, gloss and otherwise, have you (others, please chime in) seen
carbon inks go completely sepia on?


David Kachel

___________________

Artist-Photographer
Fine B&W Photographs

www.davidkachel.com
david@...

Gallery:
www.reddoorfinephotographs.com
director@...

PO Box  1893
Alpine, TX 79831
(432) 386-5787




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

On 2013-07-29, at 9:43 AM, David Kachel <david@...> wrote:

> What papers, gloss and otherwise, have you (others, please chime in) seen
> carbon inks go completely sepia on?

Canson Platine works very nicely, and it has an excellent Dmax with MIS PK (around 2.40). I get Lab b* values that peak around 14. This is my standard gloss paper and I can easily print what most would consider sepia with it. If you'd like a graph of the Lab response from 0 to 100, or a file for soft proofing to see how it looks on your screen, please let me know. 

My standard matte paper is Epson Hot Press Natural. Unfortunately I don't recall the b* value peaks at the moment but I would characterize a carbon print on this paper as "warm" rather than "sepia".

One caution. You might get some Dmax surprises on gloss with MIS PK. Hahnemuhle's Harman Gloss Baryta, which was my Dmax champion with other inks, only gets to 2.14 with MIS PK. Sample packs are always a good idea. 

Terry.

David,


> **
>  ...
> What papers, gloss and otherwise, have you (others, please chime in) seen
> carbon inks go completely sepia on?
>

I mostly used Museo Silver Rag to get my "sepia" toned prints with MIS PK,
LK, & LLK.  Like Terry said, expect a Lab B max of about 14 on glossy
papers with MIS glossy carbons.  On matte papers MIS glossy carbons max out
at about Lab B = 8.

There is a graph of the MIS glossy carbon on Museo SR at page 7 of
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/4000-6K-Plus.pdf.

A graph of Eboni-6 on Epson Hot Press Natural is on page 10 of
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Eboni-6.pdf.  Page 11 has graphs of other
papers.  Note that the 1400's small dots print warmer than the 3.5 pl
printers on some papers.  With the 7800 Premier Art BW has a maximum Lab B
=1.

Arches HP has a starting Lab B of 3 and max of 5.

H. Photo Rag goes from about 0 to 4.  This is typical of many matte papers
with Eboni-6.

True sepia can have a max. Lab B of 25, and it's often more red/brown than
the yellower 100% carbon tones.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com


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