Digital BW, The Print

>>My only comment would be that in the world of B&W photography where silver
>fiber sets the standard, 80 years would not be considered archival.
>Photographs from the 1800's are still going strong so I think we need a
>print life of 150+ years if not more. This assumes you care about archival
>prints or want to get involved with all the issues around "fine art" print
>sales.
>
Thanks for your responses, Sam and Martin. My next question is why I read so
much about piezo inks and rarely hear mention of the Lyson quad black inks.
I ended up trying them because they are much less expensive and don't
require software - so it was just easy! And as I said I think the prints are
beautiful. So, is there something I should know about these inks that would
sway me towards the piezotones? Thanks.

Lynne Siler
http://www.lynnesiler.com 


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

Just startet B/W printing using Lyson´s Quad Blacks with an Epson 1200. 
Metamerism is really strong. Prints on Epson Heavyweight Matte and 
Archival Matte (my favourite papers) have a strong greenish cast in 
daylight and turn magenta under warm tungsten light. The latter effect 
seems to be reduced after a few days of (dark) storage. So these prints 
just never look perfectly neutral – very annoying. Maybe glossy or 
watercolor paper is a better choice...
What I like about Lyson´s Quad Blacks is the workflow. No extra 
software (no extra cost) and no endless testing with curves etc. I use 
Lyson´s ICC profiles (available at their website) which render great 
shadows and highlights.
 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Lynne Siler <lhsiler@b...> 
wrote:
> >>My only comment would be that in the world of B&W photography where sil=
ver
> >fiber sets the standard, 80 years would not be considered archival.
> >Photographs from the 1800's are still going strong so I think we need a
> >print life of 150+ years if not more. This assumes you care about archiv=
al
> >prints or want to get involved with all the issues around "fine art" pri=
nt
> >sales.
> >
> Thanks for your responses, Sam and Martin. My next question is why I read=
 so
> much about piezo inks and rarely hear mention of the Lyson quad black ink=
s.
> I ended up trying them because they are much less expensive and don't
> require software - so it was just easy! And as I said I think the prints =
are
> beautiful. So, is there something I should know about these inks that wou=
ld

> sway me towards the piezotones? Thanks.
> 
> Lynne Siler
> http://www.lynnesiler.com 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Lynne Siler <lhsiler@b...> wrote:
> Thanks for your responses, Sam and Martin. My next question is why I read so
> much about piezo inks and rarely hear mention of the Lyson quad black inks.

You are simply seeing the preferences of most of the members here. Like any other of the inks discussed here, the Lysons 
have their strengths and weaknesses. I used them for quite some time, all of the sets, before the Piezo inks came out. They 
are good inks, but have some problems that knock them out of the running for many people. On the other hand they do 
some things that the pigment sets don't, so they definitely have their place. It sounds like you have found a good use for 
them, there's no reason not to stick with them if they suit your needs and you like your prints.
Tyler

Has anyone tried printing Lyson Quad inks with the Piezo driver to see if 
they work? - MDC


_________________________________________________________________
Join the world\ufffds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com

Lynne-

I use both piezo driver with MIS and the new piezo tones and in 
another printer the Lyson Small Gamut inks. 

A couple of issues that have come up in this thread. First, the small 
gamut inks are a much newer and better ink than the lyson quads. I 
have never seen any significant metamerism with the LSG ink (but you 
do with the quads).

An advantage of the LSG is that you don't need any special software 
or curves...there are profiles available free from Lyson (that 
include WYSIWYP monitor settings) and all you have to do is ad a hue 
adjustment layer to get the level of toning you desire. This is very 
similar to the VM inks that Paul Roark has developed for MIS but the 
difference is that the Lyson are dye inks and will make stunning 
prints on most glossy papers, whereas the pigment inks are pretty 
much best on matte (and more permanent...longer than I will live <g>).

None of the Lyson inks will work with the piezo drivers.

In my opinion, the biggest advantages advantage of piezo are the 30+ 
paper profiles and the speed it prints at (maybe 3x faster than the 
Epson driver)...and I must say, the new piezotone inks are really 
impressive.

The Lyson is a little fussier... Some papers work better than others, 
etc... But there is no better way to make great glossy prints...and 
certainly it prints nicely on many matte papers (but I use the piezo 
driver for the reasons above to print matte.)

Cheers,

Tom O'Connell

TomOC@...
www.thomasoconnell.com



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Lynne Siler <lhsiler@b...> 
wrote:
> >>My only comment would be that in the world of B&W photography 
where silver
> >fiber sets the standard, 80 years would not be considered archival.
> >Photographs from the 1800's are still going strong so I think we 
need a
> >print life of 150+ years if not more. This assumes you care about 
archival
> >prints or want to get involved with all the issues around "fine 
art" print
> >sales.
> >
> Thanks for your responses, Sam and Martin. My next question is why 
I read so
> much about piezo inks and rarely hear mention of the Lyson quad 
black inks.
> I ended up trying them because they are much less expensive and 
don't
> require software - so it was just easy! And as I said I think the 
prints are
> beautiful. So, is there something I should know about these inks 
that would

> sway me towards the piezotones? Thanks.
> 
> Lynne Siler
> http://www.lynnesiler.com 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

My "real" b/w inkjet experience began some months back when I 
traded my Epson Photo 1200 for someone else's Epson 1160 to 
get "serious" (more or less, anyway) about printing (while buying 
a refurb Epson Photo 1270 from the Epson Store to take over the 
color work), and the first quadtone ink set I bought was from 
Luminos, which, I was tipped off about by someone later on, was 
simply rebadged (and seriously marked-up) Lyson ink. My 
experience with Lyson Quad Black Neutral has mostly been 
good; except for two clogging episodes (I was perhaps a bit 
overzealous in not using a cleaning cart set after receiving the 
1160), I've been getting quite good results, mostly on EAM (using 
both Luminos' curves and Lyson's "just print it straight RGB and 
Wing It" instructions - the former seems a bit more refined), and 
okay results on Lumijet Gallery Gloss, save for the fact that I can 
no longer stand the meager weight of most Lumijet paper (EAM 
spoiled me). 

I haven't experienced the metamerism issues others have cited 
Lyson's QB Neutral for (which I've seen as a result of setting up 
an Epson 2000P with Epson inks for a client). The only (relatively 
minor) issues surround scanning - I shoot mostly Ilford XP2 
Super in 35mm, and scan with a Minolta QuickScan 35 Plus film 
scanner via VueScan; Sometimes I get dazzling results in my 
prints (up to 11x17" as of now...working on 13x19"), and 
sometimes I miss my personal "mark".  As I may have 
mentioned before here, by b/w aesthetics are fairly 
straightforward: absolutely no "textured" paper, and tones as 
reasonably close to "neutral" as possible - my b/w sensibility is 
for the present, not some fanciful concept of the past, and my 
foray into digital printing is much less about "escaping" the 
traditional darkroom as it is surmounting the relative diffiuclty - in 
my case, anyway - of setting one up at this time. I happen to like 
the conventional darkroom, and try to work in one whenever I 
can, but I decided a while back that the lack of my own facilities 
wouldn't stop me from producing quality prints.

I think that what has been carved out by most everyone 
participating on this list is something vibrantly in-progress; 
nothing is truly nailed down yet, but then again that fact adds 
vibrancy to our endeavors. I'm simply trying to work on what 
makes sense to me in terms of presenting my work to others for 
their approval or rejection; Discovering this group has helped a 
good deal in sussing out certain things for me, yet reinforced the 
fact that there is more than one way to get to a desired result  via 
this relatively new medium. I think I've found a formula that works 
*for me*, but it's great to listen - and occasionally debate - with 
others who find something else.

 - Barrett