Digital BW, The Print

Hello all,

I'm still a relative beginner at this but after 2 months I am 
getting some very satisfactory results.  Some background: I use an 
Epson 1160 with an MIS CFS loaded with MIS FS-N inks.  I have the 
Piezo driver and usually print with that as I have found in 
comparisons with the Epson driver (with Randall curve applied) the 
Piezo gives more dotless mid-tones and highlights.  Sometimes 
however some prints look better with the Randall curve (the Piezo 
tends to print darker).  So, with the less dots I have mostly used 
the Piezo driver and have been in awe of the smooth mid-tones in 
particular.  

But now I have printed an image that is showing me an amazing 
difference from the Piezo driver results to the Epson drive/randall 
curve results, and the Piezo is falling very flat in this instance.  
The image can be found here:

<http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=956273&size=lg>

as you can see we have some fairly fast and radical transition from 
severe highlights to almost pure black.  I printed the Piezo one 
first and as you can see there are obvious and very poor transition 
points to be seen around the highlights.  The result is awful and 
unacceptable output.  The Epson driver/Randall curve seems to have 
handled the transition in a much smoother and acceptable manner.

I have printed out two 21stepNew.jpg wedges using each driver since 
then and I cannot really see any fault with either of them (again 
though the Piezo prints darker shadows). They both look very good to 
my untrained and less-experienced eye.  So I am puzzled.

I am not showing this to try and put down the Piezo driver.  I am 
more asking if what I am finding here is typical or perhaps points 
to a problem with my method or process.  If I only printed with the 
Piezo I would think it has something to do with my printer, but from 
the Randall results we can see the printer has the ability to print 
just fine.  I have followed the set-up and workflow of both 
drivers/curves precisely.

Any suggestions on why I'm getting these results?

Thank you for any input and comment.

Regards,

Richard

This is one of those images where looking at a smooth grey ramp printed from
each profile (piezo or partitioned RGB workflow) will give you the key to
success.  If the ramp isn't completely smooth with no breaks in the area
that the gradient in your image is you are in trouble.  I like to look at
the ramp about about a 15 degree angle...you can really see if there are
bumps and whether signs of inks kicking in and out are there. My experience
with FS-N inks is that they were not well matched in density to the FS
inks...which were set up to use with the piezo driver.  I know that
Colorbyte was forced to generate completely different recipes and profiles
for imageprint for FS-N because they behaved so differently than FS. You
will see this to varying degrees depending on the profile that you use in
the piezo driver.  In some cases the profile for a particular paper is not
the best...you should experiment...but you can experiment with an
artifically generated file that is one inch wide and 10 inches long...that
you can print several times on a sheet.  Once you find the best profile for
your paper...you will almost certainly have success across images.  This is
not a piezo vs. RBG partitioned workflow issue...it is a quality off profile
issue.

I have no doubt that the profiles that I have for imageprint and the
piezotones could handle this image, they are completely smooth and show no
evidence of individual inks coming in and out.

Robert

PS  What paper and profile were you using in the piezo driver?

PPS  Really nice shot!

On 8/18/02 2:58 PM, "rich8155" <richard@...> wrote:

> Hello all,
> 
> I'm still a relative beginner at this but after 2 months I am
> getting some very satisfactory results.  Some background: I use an
> Epson 1160 with an MIS CFS loaded with MIS FS-N inks.  I have the
> Piezo driver and usually print with that as I have found in
> comparisons with the Epson driver (with Randall curve applied) the
> Piezo gives more dotless mid-tones and highlights.  Sometimes
> however some prints look better with the Randall curve (the Piezo
> tends to print darker).  So, with the less dots I have mostly used
> the Piezo driver and have been in awe of the smooth mid-tones in
> particular.  
> 
> But now I have printed an image that is showing me an amazing
> difference from the Piezo driver results to the Epson drive/randall
> curve results, and the Piezo is falling very flat in this instance.
> The image can be found here:
> 
> <http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=956273&size=lg>
> 
> as you can see we have some fairly fast and radical transition from
> severe highlights to almost pure black.  I printed the Piezo one
> first and as you can see there are obvious and very poor transition
> points to be seen around the highlights.  The result is awful and
> unacceptable output.  The Epson driver/Randall curve seems to have
> handled the transition in a much smoother and acceptable manner.
> 
> I have printed out two 21stepNew.jpg wedges using each driver since
> then and I cannot really see any fault with either of them (again
> though the Piezo prints darker shadows). They both look very good to
> my untrained and less-experienced eye.  So I am puzzled.
> 
> I am not showing this to try and put down the Piezo driver.  I am
> more asking if what I am finding here is typical or perhaps points
> to a problem with my method or process.  If I only printed with the
> Piezo I would think it has something to do with my printer, but from
> the Randall results we can see the printer has the ability to print
> just fine.  I have followed the set-up and workflow of both
> drivers/curves precisely.
> 
> Any suggestions on why I'm getting these results?
> 
> Thank you for any input and comment.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Richard
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other
> resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
> page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
> them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
> resources on the homepage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
>

Richard:

Under a 10x loupe, I typically don't see any dots on the prints of 
stepwedges and/or ramps from 0% until about 40% on my 1160.  Could 
you please post high rez images of stepwedges and/or ramps you 
generate using both PiezoBW and 1160 RGB partitioned curve showing 
the dots?  

I know that there is varibility among 1160s, but to have dots in the 
highlights using the 1160 RGB partitioned curve is not typical.  Any 
possibility of noise?  Are you printing on EAM/EEM?

I'd be interested if others have observed dots in highlights as well.

Thanks.

Jeff Randall

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "rich8155" <richard@c...> 
wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> I'm still a relative beginner at this but after 2 months I am 
> getting some very satisfactory results.  Some background: I use an 
> Epson 1160 with an MIS CFS loaded with MIS FS-N inks.  I have the 
> Piezo driver and usually print with that as I have found in 
> comparisons with the Epson driver (with Randall curve applied) the 
> Piezo gives more dotless mid-tones and highlights.  Sometimes 
> however some prints look better with the Randall curve (the Piezo 
> tends to print darker).  So, with the less dots I have mostly used 
> the Piezo driver and have been in awe of the smooth mid-tones in 
> particular.  
> 
> But now I have printed an image that is showing me an amazing 
> difference from the Piezo driver results to the Epson drive/randall 
> curve results, and the Piezo is falling very flat in this 
instance.  
> The image can be found here:
> 
> <http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=956273&size=lg>
> 
> as you can see we have some fairly fast and radical transition from 
> severe highlights to almost pure black.  I printed the Piezo one 
> first and as you can see there are obvious and very poor transition 
> points to be seen around the highlights.  The result is awful and 
> unacceptable output.  The Epson driver/Randall curve seems to have 
> handled the transition in a much smoother and acceptable manner.
> 
> I have printed out two 21stepNew.jpg wedges using each driver since 
> then and I cannot really see any fault with either of them (again 
> though the Piezo prints darker shadows). They both look very good 
to 
> my untrained and less-experienced eye.  So I am puzzled.
> 
> I am not showing this to try and put down the Piezo driver.  I am 
> more asking if what I am finding here is typical or perhaps points 
> to a problem with my method or process.  If I only printed with the 
> Piezo I would think it has something to do with my printer, but 
from 

> the Randall results we can see the printer has the ability to print 
> just fine.  I have followed the set-up and workflow of both 
> drivers/curves precisely.
> 
> Any suggestions on why I'm getting these results?
> 
> Thank you for any input and comment.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Richard

Sunday, August 18, 2002, 4:52:53 PM, jrandall1149 wrote:

j> Richard:

j> Under a 10x loupe, I typically don't see any dots on the prints of 
j> stepwedges and/or ramps from 0% until about 40% on my 1160.  Could 
j> you please post high rez images of stepwedges and/or ramps you 
j> generate using both PiezoBW and 1160 RGB partitioned curve showing 
j> the dots?  

j> I know that there is varibility among 1160s, but to have dots in the 
j> highlights using the 1160 RGB partitioned curve is not typical.  Any 
j> possibility of noise?  Are you printing on EAM/EEM?

j> I'd be interested if others have observed dots in highlights as well.

j> Thanks.

j> Jeff Randall


Hi Jeff,

Thanks for your input.  The dots I have seen were not on the
stepwedges/ramps but on different prints.  When I was first starting
I printed using both the Piezo driver and Epson driver/Randall curve
and in a few it seemed in some of the mid-tone transition areas the
Piezo was smoother.  I'll dig up a couple examples of prints where I
saw this most evident and scan them as well.  I'll let you know.

Oh, and yes, for now all I've been printing on is EAM.

Best regards,
 Richard  

mailto:richard@...

Sunday, August 18, 2002, 4:31:09 PM, Robert Morrison wrote:

RM> This is one of those images where looking at a smooth grey ramp printed from
RM> each profile (piezo or partitioned RGB workflow) will give you the key to
RM> success.  If the ramp isn't completely smooth with no breaks in the area
RM> that the gradient in your image is you are in trouble.  I like to look at
RM> the ramp about about a 15 degree angle...you can really see if there are
RM> bumps and whether signs of inks kicking in and out are there.

Thanks for this suggestion Robert.  As I mentioned I only just got
started in this and I've been printing out stepwedges and to me they
have looked pretty darn impressive.  This time I printed on out using both
drivers and although small differences can be seen they are slight.
UNTIL I took your suggestion of looking at the stepwedge print at an
angle!  Now I can see exactly where some breaks can be seen.  The
Epson driver/Randall curve looks much smoother but I can still see a
slight "bump" in the smoothness at about 60%.  For the Piezo driver
stepwedge print I can see "bumps" at 75, 55 and 25%.  Ever so slight
but definitely evident when looking at the angle.  Looking back at
my print out I can see this is about where the breaks in tone are
appearing.

So, I should be having smooth stepwedges, no?  What can one do (or
should one do) to try to improve on this smoothness, or lack of?

RM> My experience
RM> with FS-N inks is that they were not well matched in density to the FS
RM> inks...which were set up to use with the piezo driver.  I know that
RM> Colorbyte was forced to generate completely different recipes and profiles
RM> for imageprint for FS-N because they behaved so differently than FS. You
RM> will see this to varying degrees depending on the profile that you use in
RM> the piezo driver.

I first tried quadtones using MIS FS carts, twice.  I did not like the
warm tone so much so when I ordered a CFS I got the FS-N inks.  So far
I really like their tone better.  When using the Piezo driver I use it
at Unsupported ink and for the EAM profile, the paper I am printing
on.

RM> In some cases the profile for a particular paper is not
RM> the best...you should experiment...but you can experiment with an
RM> artifically generated file that is one inch wide and 10 inches long...that
RM> you can print several times on a sheet.  Once you find the best profile for
RM> your paper...you will almost certainly have success across images.  This is
RM> not a piezo vs. RBG partitioned workflow issue...it is a quality off profile
RM> issue.

I should start trying some other paper profiles just to see the
differences and what I get.  Any suggestions off the bat? (For FS-N
inks on EAM, that is.)

RM> I have no doubt that the profiles that I have for imageprint and the
RM> piezotones could handle this image, they are completely smooth and show no
RM> evidence of individual inks coming in and out.

I'm considering trying the PiezoTones Selenium when my FS-N bottles get
low.  And later I'll be considering some options with other profiles
as well..

RM> Robert

RM> PS  What paper and profile were you using in the piezo driver?

As I mention above, EAM and the Piezo EAM profile with Unsupported ink
selected.

RM> PPS  Really nice shot!

Thanks.  The entire image can be seen here:

<http://www.contaxg.com/document.php?id=6463&full=1>


Best regards,
 Richard  

mailto:richard@...

Hi Richard,

I don't know if my situation is at all related to yours, but I had the
identical results on an image two weeks ago. That image also had a rapid,
dramatic tonal transition from black to white.

I realized that in a rush I had forgotten to select an ICQ profile before
printing. The results were just that radical. Severe "clumping" of the
tones, etc. After scratching my head for a few minutes and then loading the
right ICQ, the print came out with a beautiful tonal transition.

Printing with an Epson 9000/PiezoBW Pro24/Hahnemühle Photo Rag 308.

Jon

PS. Very nice photograph...

> I'm still a relative beginner at this but after 2 months I am
> getting some very satisfactory results.  Some background: I use an
> Epson 1160 with an MIS CFS loaded with MIS FS-N inks.  I have the
> Piezo driver and usually print with that as I have found in
> comparisons with the Epson driver (with Randall curve applied) the
> Piezo gives more dotless mid-tones and highlights.  Sometimes
> however some prints look better with the Randall curve (the Piezo
> tends to print darker).  So, with the less dots I have mostly used
> the Piezo driver and have been in awe of the smooth mid-tones in
> particular.  
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Richard Sintchak 
<richard@c...> wrote:
> Sunday, August 18, 2002, 4:52:53 PM, jrandall1149 wrote:
> 
> j> Richard:
> 
> j> Under a 10x loupe, I typically don't see any dots on the prints 
of 
> j> stepwedges and/or ramps from 0% until about 40% on my 1160.  
Could 
> j> you please post high rez images of stepwedges and/or ramps you 
> j> generate using both PiezoBW and 1160 RGB partitioned curve 
showing 
> j> the dots?  
> 
> j> I know that there is varibility among 1160s, but to have dots in 
the 
> j> highlights using the 1160 RGB partitioned curve is not typical.  
Any 
> j> possibility of noise?  Are you printing on EAM/EEM?
> 
> j> I'd be interested if others have observed dots in highlights as 
well.
> 
> j> Thanks.
> 
> j> Jeff Randall
> 
> 
> Hi Jeff,
> 
> Thanks for your input.  The dots I have seen were not on the
> stepwedges/ramps but on different prints.  When I was first starting
> I printed using both the Piezo driver and Epson driver/Randall curve
> and in a few it seemed in some of the mid-tone transition areas the
> Piezo was smoother.  I'll dig up a couple examples of prints where I
> saw this most evident and scan them as well.  I'll let you know.
> 
> Oh, and yes, for now all I've been printing on is EAM.
> 
> Best regards,
>  Richard  
> 
> mailto:richard@c...

Richard:

If the highlights in the stepwedges and ramps were dotless using the 
1160 RGB Partitioned curves, but actual prints showed dots, I then 
suspect some kind of noise or very high frequency non-uniform tone. 

BTW, the bump you reported seeing in the ramp at about 60% is where 
the Epson driver automatically kicks in the black ink.  I can barely 
see it on my printed ramps, however it has been on my long-range 
radar to improve.  If it is a current problem, you can try tweaking 
the red curve. 

Good Luck.

Jeff Randall

on 8/18/2002 5:04 PM, DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com at
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com wrote:

> But now I have printed an image that is showing me an amazing
> difference from the Piezo driver results to the Epson drive/randall
> curve results, and the Piezo is falling very flat in this instance.
> The image can be found here:
> 
> <http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=956273&size=lg>

Rich,

I'm using the 1160 with the original piezo inks.  I have a "fog" picture
which I found to have quite good transitions.  It was unprintable using
color inks with the epson driver, the profiles could not handle the
gradients smoothly enough.

I might guess that the MIS inks are not an exact enough match to the piezo
inks and profiles and that creates the transition problems.  I am very
impressed with the good print though.


-Bruce

Visit my website at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~smthopr

Tony Terlicki wrote regarding the 1160 RGB partitioned curve:

<snip>
>The 100% patch has very good dmax at about 1.54 according to my 
>densitometer but the 95% patch then drops off quite quickly to 1.32 
>with 90% at 1.17. <snip>


Tony:

I am surprised that you measured such a large drop in density between 
100 and 90%. Bob Morrison used his spectrophotometer/densitometer to 
measure the ink densities of stepwedges and found densities of 1.63 @ 
100%, 1.55 @ 95%, and 1.46 @ 90%. No one else has reported such a 
large dropoff. Note: Bob's measurments and plots of density vs 
grayscale are contained in the profile_make2.pdf document at Files> 
Ink Sets> MIS> MIS FS.

Are you using a standalone spectrophotometer/densitometer, or are you 
using the readout tool on a scanned image of the printed stepwedge? 
If using standalone hardware, are you sure it is properly 
calibrated? Typical max densities of MIS FS K ink on EAM/EEM range 
from 1.6+ to 1.7. I suspect something is amiss with your setup or 
methodology.

Jeff Randall