Digital BW, The Print

Hello All,

Cadlink (http://www.cadlink.com/) recently released its PhotoScript+, 
version 6 RIP (Windows only for now, Mac later) which has a special 
hexblack feature for black and white printing using six blacks in a 
six color printer such as my Epson 9000.  I've been using the beta 
release for several months now for only B/W with the Lyson Quadtone 
(really hextone for the six ink E9000) inkset and have been very 
pleased with the ink control it offers. This special hexblack feature 
allows complete control over each of the six inks, to the point of 
ink pouring down the paper if you're not careful!

I haven't had much experience with other RIPs, but PhotoScript+, 
Ver.6 gives me deeper blacks than the standard Epson driver, the 
Fiery RIP, and the ImagePrint demo I did try.  The dot pattern is 
also smooth and inconspicuous.

Using the PhotoMatch program that accompanies PhotoScript+, I can 
generate a custom set of separation curves that use the individual 
inks efficiently for different tonal ranges and paper absorptions.  
This curve set can then be further tweaked with an overall correction 
curve in PhotoMatch.

I use the Lyson Professional Photo Gloss 265gsm paper almost 
exclusively and have been printing better-looking B/W images than I 
used to in my darkroom.

I'm posting this info for anyone else doing monochrome inkjet 
printing and who might be interested in possibly obtaining deeper 
blacks in their images, 'cause PhotoScript+ certainly did the trick 
for me! (Note: I don't work for Cadlink and am not being paid to 
advertise for them - I just want to share my experience of finally 
finding a solution to achieve the monochrome tonal range I wanted)

John Lytton
www.lyttonimaging.com

(Posted in both the Yahoo Epson9000 and the Yahoo Digital B/W 
Printing Groups)

On 5/8/02 4:26 PM, "johnl002" <jlytton@...> wrote:

> I haven't had much experience with other RIPs, but PhotoScript+,
> Ver.6 gives me deeper blacks than the standard Epson driver, the
> Fiery RIP, and the ImagePrint demo I did try.  The dot pattern is
> also smooth and inconspicuous.

When you get these deeper blacks...can you still resolve 100% from 99%
black?  

The key, as I understand it, is to find the dmax for a paper/ink combination
that allows you to resolve this difference and then to set up your ink flow
and mixing accordingly.  From what you have described you should be able to
do this with this RIP.  The dmax boost will likely not be better than what
you get with Imageprint, however, given that is what they are doing when
they profile.  Speaking with the Imageprint folks...they find that they can
frequently get 0.1 higher dmax for most ink/paper combinations than the
piezo driver does.  The epson driver is completely uncalibrated for this
with the inks that we are all using (it was set up for dyes on dye papers).
Some papers perform well...others don't.  The difference between papers once
this is correctly adjusted may be much less dramatic than it is now using
either the Epson or Piezo driver.
----------------------
Robert Morrison
rmorrison@...

310-397-2704

4131 Bledsoe Ave.
Los Angeles, CA 90066


Robert

Robert,

Thanks for your reply -

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Robert G. Morrison" 
<rmorrison@p...> wrote:
> On 5/8/02 4:26 PM, "johnl002" <jlytton@c...> wrote:
> 
> > I haven't had much experience with other RIPs, but PhotoScript+,
> > Ver.6 gives me deeper blacks than the standard Epson driver, the
> > Fiery RIP, and the ImagePrint demo I did try.  The dot pattern is
> > also smooth and inconspicuous.
> 
> When you get these deeper blacks...can you still resolve 100% from 
99%
> black? 


Yes, but only with a densitometer - at least my eyes alone can't 
easily discern the difference. 


> 
> The key, as I understand it, is to find the dmax for a paper/ink 
combination
> that allows you to resolve this difference and then to set up your 
ink flow
> and mixing accordingly.  From what you have described you should be 
able to
> do this with this RIP.  The dmax boost will likely not be better 
than what
> you get with Imageprint, however, given that is what they are doing 
when
> they profile.


Yes, that is pretty much what I did and the d-max boost with 
PhotoScript+ over Imageprint was about .1 for the same paper/ink 
combo.  


>  Speaking with the Imageprint folks...they find that they can
> frequently get 0.1 higher dmax for most ink/paper combinations than 
the
> piezo driver does.  The epson driver is completely uncalibrated for 
this
> with the inks that we are all using (it was set up for dyes on dye 
papers).
> Some papers perform well...others don't.  The difference between 
papers once
> this is correctly adjusted may be much less dramatic than it is now 
using
> either the Epson or Piezo driver.


I think Imageprint is a very good RIP from my limited experience with 
it, but I wanted more control and got that with Photoscript.  The 
Epson dye driver does very well with most Epson papers and Epson dye 
inks, but of course that's not quadtone printing and results in color 
tinges in b/w images, less longevity, etc. The Piezo driver - I 
presume this Jon Cone's PiezographyBW system - didn't work for me 
with his inks (pigmented - generally not good for glossy) or Lyson 
Quadtone inks.  However, I think Piezo b/w is warm & beautiful on 
some matte surface papers and fine art papers; but I prefer glossy 
for max tonal range.

For my situation, the difference between Imageprint and PhotoScript d-
max wasn't dramatic but discernable.  At this level of RIP quadtone 
performance, though, it's more the photographer's control over tonal 
relationships within the image that makes or breaks the image.  If I 
weren't perhaps fanatic about wanting complete control and doing my 
own thorough ink/paper testing, I would probably be happy with 
Imageprint.  No guarantee, 'cause different ink/paper combos react 
differently, but if one does his/her own b/w quadtone testing with 
PhotoScript+, there could be a payback of increased d-max.


Regards,

John Lytton
www.lyttonimaging.com