Digital BW, The Print

Colin,

Yes, that is what bronzing is.  And, yes, it is very evident on the glossy 
and semi papers with the 2200.  These results occur with the color inks and 
Photo Black.

Bronzing does not occur on the matte papers -- color or B+W.

I have not seen any B+W prints on the gloss or semi papers but perhaps 
someone else can answer.

Helene 


> My apologies for the cross post below with the ArchivalColor group 
> but the effect noted below, if common, concerns me for B&W printing 
> and color.
> 
> In a `Printer Supplement" to the British weekly "Amateur 
> Photographer" a few weeks ago, Damien Demolder (DD) reviewed the 
> Epson 2100 (2200 in the US).  He wrote "Another noticeable aspect of 
> the inks on this paper is the differences in surface textures between 
> areas that are occupied by ink and those that are not.  Patches with 
> dense deposits are far more glossy than patches where the printer has 
> laid no ink.  The resultant effect is uneven and distracting. … Inked 
> areas glow…while un-inked areas are flat … noticeable when the prints 
> are viewed from an angle…Overall, the effect is somewhat 
> unsatisfactory. … I'm not keen on the print surface once ink has 
> landed on the paper."  
> 
> (The paper was Epson's Glossy Photo Weight which he says is the only 
> gloss surface compatible with the ink system.)
> 
> Apparently the effect does not disappear when framed behind glass.
> 
> Is this "bronzing"?  I have read no comparable comments elsewhere, 
> has anyone observed the phenomenon upon which DD remarked?  Does it 
> occur with B&W prints?  I'm cross posting to the digital black and 
> white list for comments on this.
> 



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

On 9/18/02 9:39 AM, "grdglass@..." <grdglass@...> wrote:

> Colin,
> 
> Yes, that is what bronzing is.  And, yes, it is very evident on the glossy
> and semi papers with the 2200.  These results occur with the color inks and
> Photo Black.
> 
> Bronzing does not occur on the matte papers -- color or B+W.
> 
> I have not seen any B+W prints on the gloss or semi papers but perhaps
> someone else can answer.
> 
> Helene 


Helene,

Perhaps it's a subtle difference but I don't think what Colin is describing
is in fact bronzing.  I print on Lustre and Glossy from my 9600 using photo
black ink.  While there is a difference in reflectivity in the darkest
blacks I do not see any real bronzing.  The reason it's called 'bronzing' is
that when it occurs there is also a tonal shift, not just a difference in
the reflectivity of the various colors/densities of the ink.   I've used
inks/papers that do really 'bronze' and once you've seen it it's
unmistakable.  Perhaps the 2200 is different enough from the 9600 to be
producing the effect but I doubt it.

Lawrence


----------------------------------
Lawrence W. Smith Photography
http://www.lwsphoto.com
lsmith@...
----------------------------------

> Perhaps it's a subtle difference but I don't think what Colin is describing
> is in fact bronzing.  I print on Lustre and Glossy from my 9600 using photo
> black ink.  While there is a difference in reflectivity in the darkest
> blacks I do not see any real bronzing.  The reason it's called 'bronzing' is
> that when it occurs there is also a tonal shift, not just a difference in
> the reflectivity of the various colors/densities of the ink.   I've used
> inks/papers that do really 'bronze' and once you've seen it it's
> unmistakable.  Perhaps the 2200 is different enough from the 9600 to be
> producing the effect but I doubt it.

I agree with Lawrence that this effect is not bronzing. Bronzing is in fact
a noticable "bronze" shift in tone in the shadow areas when the print is
held at a certain angle to the light.

What this article is describing is the same effect my 2000P pig's display on
gloss and semi gloss paper. When the ink density is low enough that a lot of
paper surface shows thru, the paper surface is different than the inked
surface in the denser areas. When the print is viewed directly it isn't
noticable. When the print is angled a slight bit you see the difference in
those areas and it is objectionable to me. The light reflects off the inked
surface differently than the paper surface in the highlights, with minimal
dot in the highlights, more paper surface is evident... it almost looks like
patches. This is another reason I was not happy with gloss/semi gloss papers
for the older pig printer.

Carolyn

Lawrence,

I am coming to the realization that the 2200 is different, in more ways than 
one, from the 7600/9600, especially since the 7600/9600 custom profiles 
cannot be used on the 2200.  I will dig out my samples printed by Epson for 
all three models to refresh my memory on whether there was a color shift or 
only a reflectivity shift.

Helene  


> Perhaps it's a subtle difference but I don't think what Colin is describing
> is in fact bronzing.  I print on Lustre and Glossy from my 9600 using photo
> black ink.  While there is a difference in reflectivity in the darkest
> blacks I do not see any real bronzing.  The reason it's called 'bronzing' 
> is
> that when it occurs there is also a tonal shift, not just a difference in
> the reflectivity of the various colors/densities of the ink.   I've used
> inks/papers that do really 'bronze' and once you've seen it it's
> unmistakable.  Perhaps the 2200 is different enough from the 9600 to be
> producing the effect but I doubt it.
> 



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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., grdglass@a... wrote:
> Lawrence,
> 
> I am coming to the realization that the 2200 is different, in more 
ways than 
> one, from the 7600/9600, especially since the 7600/9600 custom 
profiles 
> cannot be used on the 2200.  I will dig out my samples printed by 
Epson for 
> all three models to refresh my memory on whether there was a color 
shift or 
> only a reflectivity shift.
> 
> Helene  
> 
> 
> > Perhaps it's a subtle difference but I don't think what Colin is 
describing
> > is in fact bronzing.  I print on Lustre and Glossy from my 9600 
using photo
> > black ink.  While there is a difference in reflectivity in the 
darkest
> > blacks I do not see any real bronzing.  The reason it's 
called 'bronzing' 
> > is
> > that when it occurs there is also a tonal shift, not just a 
difference in
> > the reflectivity of the various colors/densities of the ink.   
I've used
> > inks/papers that do really 'bronze' and once you've seen it it's
> > unmistakable.  Perhaps the 2200 is different enough from the 9600 
to be
> > producing the effect but I doubt it.
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Helene, Antonis and Lawrence,

Apologies for this belated response to the surface effects reported 
using the Epson 2100/2200.  The phenomenon, whether technically 
bronzing or not, does exist and is remarked upon on both sides of the 
pond.  However the reaction against the effect seems stronger in the 
British weekly Amateur Photographer, maybe because the magazine's 
general readership may seek glossy finishes.  In the 7 September 
issue a different reviewer compares the 2100 with the Canon S9000 and 
again refers to the effect and refers to it as "a bronzing or 
chroming effect".

I guess I will wait until I have seen some real life prints before 
deciding which way to go – and from where to order it having regard 
to warranty issues and price, Euros or otherwise!

Thank you all for your contributions.

Colin