Digital BW, The Print

Hello All, 

I imagine the core group starting this is going to be an All 
Piezography group, but doubtless that will change with time.  

I can barely keep up with the Piezo list messages (sometimes 30-50) 
but I must admit that I am hooked and look forward to the learning, 
tips and dialog each day.  When my mail box is almost empty...I am 
really disappointed.  ; )

I wish this list the best of luck and will read your messages with 
interest.  And when I can, I will contribute what little knowledge I 
have squirreled away.

Regards, 
Steadman

PS I checked for photos here and found none.

Steadman,

I expect that you are right but hope to get the word out to people 
using MIS and Lysonic products as well. Not to mention using CYMK 
sets for B&W, film recorders, contact neg, production, etc.

One of the things that nydged me into starting this list was that 
some of the people on the Piezo list are apparently using other inks 
or combinations of Piezo and other inks. I hope to get them to come 
forward here and talk about their techniques and results.

I should have something up in the "Photos" area now if I'm driving 
this thing right!

Thanks for your input and keep on dropping by!

Martin

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., steadmanuhlich@k... wrote:
> Hello All, 
> 
> I imagine the core group starting this is going to be an All 
> Piezography group, but doubtless that will change with time.  
> 
> I can barely keep up with the Piezo list messages (sometimes 30-50) 
> but I must admit that I am hooked and look forward to the learning, 
> tips and dialog each day.  When my mail box is almost empty...I am 
> really disappointed.  ; )
> 
> I wish this list the best of luck and will read your messages with 
> interest.  And when I can, I will contribute what little knowledge 
I 

> have squirreled away.
> 
> Regards, 
> Steadman
> 
> PS I checked for photos here and found none.

I'm not a planner of this site, but my take on it was that it was open 
to discussion of any B&W digital printing method, including 
different inks, mixed inks, driver twiddles whether Piezography or 
not. No ties to any particular branding - if someone comes in with 
examples of India ink in a Canon, I'd think the ideas would be 
welcome.

Tim

> I imagine the core group starting this is going to be an All 
> Piezography group, but doubtless that will change with time.  
> 


--
Tim Spragens
http://www.borderless-photos.com

Hi All

There are some real issues to be tackled. One is the reluctance 
of Adobe to support 16 bit fully in Photoshop. This filters down 
into the plug-ins, like Silverfast, where all you can scan in is 16 
bit RAW. I did find a way to overcome this slightly - by changing 
the default gamma from 2.00 to the maximum of 3.00 - and you 
get a better looking image, but the companies just shuffle their 
feet. Let's do some real workflows around this problem.

Scanning protocols are also problematical. Silverfast is the only 
third pary scanning software that allows you to make your own 
LUT's. I've fooled around and come up with N+1, N-1 and N+2 
LUT's, and they work well - in 8 bit, of course. Both Mike Kravit 
and I scan in 16, drop down into 8 bit Silverfast HDR and 
optimize the image before it even gets into Photoshop. What do 
you guys do at the scanning stage? What works consistenly?

Does anyone have a solid technique for combining shadow and 
highlight exposures into one seamless image without resorting 
to hair-pulling in and after the Apply Command? Seeing as we 
are trying to get out of the darkroom into the lightroom, we need 
to explore "closed loop" solutions like Polaroid films, where we 
don't have much development control, but it doesn't go to the lab 
and get scrunched either. And if we don't have development 
control, what can we do with split exposures that takes care of 
the contrast problem well with little fuss and bother? What, for 
instance, defines a good highlight exposure and a good shadow 
exposure for this kind of process?

Can we arrive at a general workflow through Photoshop that a 
beginner could take and make a good print? This would be sort 
of like the Develop/Stop/Fix/Wash routine of the old darkroom.

How do we teach beginners about Black and White tonal 
values? I find in teaching workshops that the hardest part of this 
is for people to actually see that something is wrong and needs 
to be corrected tonally. But this is what probably separates great 
printers from simply mediocre ones.

As far as I can see, having tried all the Quadtone types available 
to date(and in spades, I might add),  Piezography is hard to beat, 
and for several reasons: 1) It has a 2100dpi RIP, 2) It has 
proprietary profiles for the inks and papers 3) It was designed by 
a photographer and a printmaker, not a businessman, 4) If you 
have a 7000, it prints in 16 bit, and 5) uses grayscale files.  The 
others suffer from the fact that they are CMYK or RGB files, do not 
have profiles, and cannot get over the hump of the 720 Epson 
driver - in reality, they sell inks, not a total process.

I also applaud Steadman's desire to talk about other important 
issues surrounding Black and White printmaking - Picasso once 
said that whenever artists get together all they want to talk about 
is where to buy good turpentine, and I suppose we're no 
different.

I, too, would like to have this be a serious discussion and not the 
typical "my brother stepped on a frog" list that the others tend to 
be.

We are the pioneers.

Somebody open a six-pack.

George

 







-

George,

Where to start (other than that six-pack of course)

You have touched on a large number of issues that are absolutely 
critical to the advancement of digital B&W.

The 8-bit/16-bit issue with Photoshop being appropriately at the top 
of your list. The unfortunate side of the situation is that they have 
no serious competition to drive them to change. There are reportedly 
some photo editing programs that answer these issue but lack the 
industry wide compatibility. In addition a friend has contact with 
Adobe informs me that less than 5% of Adobe's revenue is derived from 
Photoshop. Apparently, Acrobat is the big money maker. They appear to 
have little motivation to change.

So I suspect that the task of the foreseeable future is the 
development of the proper workflows to try an compensate for 
Photoshop's short comings.

I was lucky enough to stumble into Silverfast when I bought my 
Polaroid 4000 and also purchased in with my Polaroid 120 (although 
there is an incompatibility with my system I am still waiting for 
them to resolve.) I have been RAW scanning in 16-RGB (I develop in 
Pyro so the RGB makes sense for me), working the file in SF HDR then 
dropping into Photoshop. Some times pulling multiple "scans" out of 
HDR to recombine in 8-bit Photoshop.

I have used the gamma control in Silverfast to good effect. Some of 
the raw scan problems I have heard reported on the new Nikon 8000 for 
instance sound as if they are gamma relate and there is no adjustment 
available in the software.

I have not worked with the LUT's. I thank you for the tip and if you 
have the time more details in this regard would be appreciated.

The issue of creating an analog to push/pull development is of great 
interest not only to using Polaroid film in the view camera but for 
roll film shooters as well. Typically people speak of two exposures, 
one for the highlights and one for the shadows. Is this really the 
best approach? Why not three or more exposures? How do they get 
combined? What we are talking about here is developing the digital 
equivalent of the Zone System, a coherent approach to exposing film 
in light of the potential of combining multiple exposures and scans.

One aspect of teaching B&W tonal values requires exposing young 
people to high quality B&W prints. I doubt if 1% of the population of 
the 1st world has held in their hands or closely inspected a "fine 
art" level print. This is not to sound defeatist but to indicate that 
this is another area where greater thought and effort are needed.

Thanks to your magazine articles I escaped a lot of the trials and 
tribulations with the early ink sets. But I have to confess to some 
curiosity, as I have never seen any output from a MIS or Lysonic 
system. I have tried various methods of producing B&W prints from 
standard Epson inks and found it encouraging at the time but 
ultimately not satisfying. I have seen Iris B&W prints in galleries 
and I feel that Piezo is much better. I find the software to be 
excellent and enjoy the ease at which I can switch papers by changing 
profiles and minor tonal adjustments.

The 7000 and Piezo sound great but are not going to be price 
attainable for most. I hope that Epson will replace the aging 3000 
with a 17-inch wide printer incorporating 7000 technology. Others and 
myself have asked ConeTech about the possibilities of developing a 
Piezo version for the 5000 but never got a response. There is a big 
gulf (both $ and tech) between the current desktop technology and 
the "high end." I would love to see this addressed. I think there is 
a viable price point in the $1500 to $3000 range where a significant 
number of people would buy a complete hardware/software upgrade.

Much food for though. (I better get back to that six pack. It's 
getting warm.)

Thanks,

Martin Wesley



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "George DeWolfe" 
<dewolfe@m...> wrote:

> Hi All
> 
> There are some real issues to be tackled. One is the reluctance 
> of Adobe to support 16 bit fully in Photoshop. This filters down 
> into the plug-ins, like Silverfast, where all you can scan in is 16 
> bit RAW. I did find a way to overcome this slightly - by changing 
> the default gamma from 2.00 to the maximum of 3.00 - and you 
> get a better looking image, but the companies just shuffle their 
> feet. Let's do some real workflows around this problem.
> 
> Scanning protocols are also problematical. Silverfast is the only 
> third pary scanning software that allows you to make your own 
> LUT's. I've fooled around and come up with N+1, N-1 and N+2 
> LUT's, and they work well - in 8 bit, of course. Both Mike Kravit 
> and I scan in 16, drop down into 8 bit Silverfast HDR and 
> optimize the image before it even gets into Photoshop. What do 
> you guys do at the scanning stage? What works consistenly?
> 
> Does anyone have a solid technique for combining shadow and 
> highlight exposures into one seamless image without resorting 
> to hair-pulling in and after the Apply Command? Seeing as we 
> are trying to get out of the darkroom into the lightroom, we need 
> to explore "closed loop" solutions like Polaroid films, where we 
> don't have much development control, but it doesn't go to the lab 
> and get scrunched either. And if we don't have development 
> control, what can we do with split exposures that takes care of 
> the contrast problem well with little fuss and bother? What, for 
> instance, defines a good highlight exposure and a good shadow 
> exposure for this kind of process?
> 
> Can we arrive at a general workflow through Photoshop that a 
> beginner could take and make a good print? This would be sort 
> of like the Develop/Stop/Fix/Wash routine of the old darkroom.
> 
> How do we teach beginners about Black and White tonal 
> values? I find in teaching workshops that the hardest part of this 
> is for people to actually see that something is wrong and needs 
> to be corrected tonally. But this is what probably separates great 
> printers from simply mediocre ones.
> 
> As far as I can see, having tried all the Quadtone types available 
> to date(and in spades, I might add),  Piezography is hard to beat, 
> and for several reasons: 1) It has a 2100dpi RIP, 2) It has 
> proprietary profiles for the inks and papers 3) It was designed by 
> a photographer and a printmaker, not a businessman, 4) If you 
> have a 7000, it prints in 16 bit, and 5) uses grayscale files.  The 
> others suffer from the fact that they are CMYK or RGB files, do not 
> have profiles, and cannot get over the hump of the 720 Epson 
> driver - in reality, they sell inks, not a total process.
> 
> I also applaud Steadman's desire to talk about other important 
> issues surrounding Black and White printmaking - Picasso once 
> said that whenever artists get together all they want to talk about 
> is where to buy good turpentine, and I suppose we're no 
> different.
> 
> I, too, would like to have this be a serious discussion and not the 
> typical "my brother stepped on a frog" list that the others tend to 
> be.
> 
> We are the pioneers.
> 
> Somebody open a six-pack.
> 
> George
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "George DeWolfe" <dewolfe@m...> 
wrote:
...
> 
> We are the pioneers.
> 
> Somebody open a six-pack.


George,

have one on me! Thanks for infusing this group with such positive energy. 
See my post on scan workflows. I will try to respond under separate threads 
so that all topics can be discussed under their own headings. 

While we are on "initial thoughts": I saw some of your prints on Museo when I 
met Robert Rex (rep for Crane). Impressive prints and more importantly I loved 
the images. I had met with him to discuss the merits of Museo vs the 
Hahnemuhle papers. I will take this up under a different thread as well, but 
this is just to say that my opinion of Museo shot up as a result of your prints. In 
evaluating papers, I had used a lot of my images that depend on black. Seing 
yours - where black was just accent - made me rethink what I thought about 
Museo. A good experience all around.

Antonis

Steadman,

You are absolutely right about the name. When I set this up the 
program would not let me use any spaces, commas or & signs. I am new 
to this, but I will correct is as soon as I figure out how!

Thanks,

Martin

P.S.
What about that great paper to replace EAM you were goint to tell me 
about?


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Steadman Uhlich" 
<steadmanuhlich@k...> wrote:
> George, 
> Interesting comments from you.  
> 
> I bought a six of Killian's Red tonight and will share one with you 
anytime.  
> 
> O.K. Here is a rather simple observation for our moderator...
> 
> The name of the list "DigitalBlackandWhiteThe Print" takes up much 
too much space in the subject line on my email list.  There is only 
room for a word or two of what the real subject is on the email.  I 
suggest you truncate the list title or pick a shorter acronym or 
name.  
> 
> Good light to all, 
> Steadman
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: George DeWolfe 
>   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y... 
>   Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 10:00 PM
>   Subject: [DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint] Re: Initial Thoughts
> 
> 
>   Hi All
> 
>   There are some real issues to be tackled. One is the reluctance 
>   of Adobe to support 16 bit fully in Photoshop. This filters down 
>   into the plug-ins, like Silverfast, where all you can scan in is 
16 
>   bit RAW. I did find a way to overcome this slightly - by changing 
>   the default gamma from 2.00 to the maximum of 3.00 - and you 
>   get a better looking image, but the companies just shuffle their 
>   feet. Let's do some real workflows around this problem.
> 
>   Scanning protocols are also problematical. Silverfast is the only 
>   third pary scanning software that allows you to make your own 
>   LUT's. I've fooled around and come up with N+1, N-1 and N+2 
>   LUT's, and they work well - in 8 bit, of course. Both Mike Kravit 
>   and I scan in 16, drop down into 8 bit Silverfast HDR and 
>   optimize the image before it even gets into Photoshop. What do 
>   you guys do at the scanning stage? What works consistenly?
> 
>   Does anyone have a solid technique for combining shadow and 
>   highlight exposures into one seamless image without resorting 
>   to hair-pulling in and after the Apply Command? Seeing as we 
>   are trying to get out of the darkroom into the lightroom, we need 
>   to explore "closed loop" solutions like Polaroid films, where we 
>   don't have much development control, but it doesn't go to the lab 
>   and get scrunched either. And if we don't have development 
>   control, what can we do with split exposures that takes care of 
>   the contrast problem well with little fuss and bother? What, for 
>   instance, defines a good highlight exposure and a good shadow 
>   exposure for this kind of process?
> 
>   Can we arrive at a general workflow through Photoshop that a 
>   beginner could take and make a good print? This would be sort 
>   of like the Develop/Stop/Fix/Wash routine of the old darkroom.
> 
>   How do we teach beginners about Black and White tonal 
>   values? I find in teaching workshops that the hardest part of 
this 
>   is for people to actually see that something is wrong and needs 
>   to be corrected tonally. But this is what probably separates 
great 
>   printers from simply mediocre ones.
> 
>   As far as I can see, having tried all the Quadtone types 
available 
>   to date(and in spades, I might add),  Piezography is hard to 
beat, 
>   and for several reasons: 1) It has a 2100dpi RIP, 2) It has 
>   proprietary profiles for the inks and papers 3) It was designed 
by 
>   a photographer and a printmaker, not a businessman, 4) If you 
>   have a 7000, it prints in 16 bit, and 5) uses grayscale files.  
The 
>   others suffer from the fact that they are CMYK or RGB files, do 
not 
>   have profiles, and cannot get over the hump of the 720 Epson 
>   driver - in reality, they sell inks, not a total process.
> 
>   I also applaud Steadman's desire to talk about other important 
>   issues surrounding Black and White printmaking - Picasso once 
>   said that whenever artists get together all they want to talk 
about 
>   is where to buy good turpentine, and I suppose we're no 
>   different.
> 
>   I, too, would like to have this be a serious discussion and not 
the 
>   typical "my brother stepped on a frog" list that the others tend 
to 
>   be.
> 
>   We are the pioneers.
> 
>   Somebody open a six-pack.
> 
>   George
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   -
> 
> 
>   If you do not wish to belong to Digital B&W, The Print, you may
>   unsubscribe by sending an email to:
>   DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@y...
> 
> 
> 
>   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of 
Service.