Digital BW, The Print

Here's how it happened, from start to beginning.  Please excuse the 
terseness, but I'm sure you've all heard it before so I'll try and be 
brief.  The question is at the end if you want to skip the crap.

-Bought 1280.  Loved it from the start, but paper choice and profiles 
sucked for "archival" color work.  B&W using color sucked more.

-Didn't like the idea of paying hundreds for Piezography or similar 
system, so never bought that.  Didn't know about MIS inks or similar 
things at the time.  I wish I had known about this forum!!!  

-2200 came out!  Reviews (not from Epson) talked about how wonderful 
the B&W output was.  No metarism apparantly, and anyway I had no idea 
what the hell that actually meant.  Had gray balancer - wonderful!

-Bought 2200.  Color work is excellent.  Can use favorite semi-gloss 
paper without it looking like crap, and it will last more than a year 
or two, so I can now give pictures away without feeling cheap.

-B&W not so good.  Getting neutral gray almost impossible even with 
gray balancer.  I start to quickly learn about metamerism in the same 
way that you learn very quickly about a rare disease you just 
caught.  I wasted about 100 bucks on paper and inks with Gray 
balancer and still am not there.

-Start looking into these RIPs.  Download PowerRIP demo (thanks 
Daniel).  Actually looks pretty damn good (I recommend trying it), 
but still is not there for me because I'm just really fussy.  0-10% 
looks fairly dotty.  Thought about IP5, but 500 bucks is a bit much.  
Metamerism still exists but it is VERY reduced over normal color 
B&W.  Can't say why - no flatbed scanner or microscope.

-Use BO mode.  Awful awful awful.  I agree with Peter that some 
people just can't see the dots.  That's great for them, but it really 
bugs me.  It just doesn't look smooth.  Not good enough.  Bah.

-I start to look over at my old 1280 sitting in the corner.  I never 
got round to selling it, and that would probably only get me about 
200 bucks.  Can't get Imageprint for 200 bucks, PowerRIP still 
doesn't cut it at that price.

So that's my history in B&W printing.  Thank God I live in Seattle 
and the thought of being outside taking pictures is just nowhere in 
my mind.  If I lived somewhere nice I'd feel bad that I have spent 
all this time on my "photography hobby" with nothing to show for it.

Why am bothering to tell you all this?  Well, I'm thinking about 
using the old 1280 with MIS VM inks and those Roark curves.  From 
reading other posts it seems like I might up and running in an 
evening or two, especially as I'm quite good with printing step 
wedges and messing around with curves.

Would anyone else recommend this as a good setup?  Anyone else had 
the same experience and gone back to the old, rejected Epson?

Thanks in advance!

   Matthew

> -Start looking into these RIPs.  Download PowerRIP demo (thanks 
> Daniel).  Actually looks pretty damn good (I recommend trying it), 
> but still is not there for me because I'm just really fussy.  0-10% 
> looks fairly dotty. 

Did you try printing in 2880dpi with PowerRIP? Unlike the Epson 
driver there is a big difference between 2880 and 1440 in PowerRIP. 
Still, the dithering pattern will be slightly more coarse than the 
Epson driver. I've heard that this is also the case with ImagePrint.

And yes, using 2880dpi will be really, really slow, so this is not a 
solution for someone who does volume-printing.

If you're curious about what a print with the two blacks look like 
you can try to assign a grayscale profile like Gray Gamma 1.8 when 
you print in Photoshop. Otherwise, leave it at 'Postscript color 
management'.

Been there, but with the 2000P. After that fiasco I've
been afraid to try the 2200. BO has dots that drive me
crazy. My clients weren't thrilled with it either.
Right now I'm running 3 1280 printers from my PC. One
with the Piezo driver and original inks that I now
have to buy from Sundance. But they give me no trouble
and make beautiful prints. The second 1280 I use with
MIS VMS ink with Roark's and Kreb's curves. I tried
the Cone Carbon Sepia ink but there's nothing remotely
sepia about them. And my 3rd 1280 is making color
prints and doing my other general printing. I say go
for the MIS setup, it's relatively inexpensive and I
was making sepia prints in less than 2 hours. I would
never think of giving up my 1280s.
Evelyn 
--- "carlislematthew <carlislematthew@...>"
<carlislematthew@...> wrote:> 
> -Didn't like the idea of paying hundreds for
> Piezography or similar 
> system, so never bought that.  Didn't know about MIS
> inks or similar 
> things at the time.  I wish I had known about this
> forum!!!  
> 
> > Why am bothering to tell you all this?  Well, I'm
> thinking about 
> using the old 1280 with MIS VM inks and those Roark
> curves.  From 
> reading other posts it seems like I might up and
> running in an 
> evening or two, especially as I'm quite good with
> printing step 
> wedges and messing around with curves.
> 
> Would anyone else recommend this as a good setup? 
> Anyone else had 
> the same experience and gone back to the old,
> rejected Epson?
> 
> Thanks in advance!
> 
>    Matthew
> 
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Send Flowers for Valentine's Day
http://shopping.yahoo.com

Yes, I tried 2880dpi.  I'm not too dissapointed with it, but I think 
that I can probably buy a decent amount of MIS ink for 200 bucks and 
get REALLY good output.  I feel like PowerRIP gets me 90% of where I 
want to be.

I think that PowerRIP is a good solution, but I wasn't happy enough 
with initial results to go further into testing.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "danielstaver 
<daniel@p...>" <daniel@p...> wrote:
> > -Start looking into these RIPs.  Download PowerRIP demo (thanks 
> > Daniel).  Actually looks pretty damn good (I recommend trying 
it), 
> > but still is not there for me because I'm just really fussy.  0-
10% 
> > looks fairly dotty. 
> 
> Did you try printing in 2880dpi with PowerRIP? Unlike the Epson 
> driver there is a big difference between 2880 and 1440 in PowerRIP. 
> Still, the dithering pattern will be slightly more coarse than the 
> Epson driver. I've heard that this is also the case with ImagePrint.
> 
> And yes, using 2880dpi will be really, really slow, so this is not 
a 

> solution for someone who does volume-printing.
> 
> If you're curious about what a print with the two blacks look like 
> you can try to assign a grayscale profile like Gray Gamma 1.8 when 
> you print in Photoshop. Otherwise, leave it at 'Postscript color 
> management'.

Also, whenever I see people talk about MIS VM inks, I never see 
mention of metamerism.  Is this because it does not exist???  Please 
say yes.  :)

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "carlislematthew 
<carlislematthew@h...>" <carlislematthew@h...> wrote:
> Here's how it happened, from start to beginning.  Please excuse the 
> terseness, but I'm sure you've all heard it before so I'll try and 
be 
> brief.  The question is at the end if you want to skip the crap.
> 
> -Bought 1280.  Loved it from the start, but paper choice and 
profiles 
> sucked for "archival" color work.  B&W using color sucked more.
> 
> -Didn't like the idea of paying hundreds for Piezography or similar 
> system, so never bought that.  Didn't know about MIS inks or 
similar 
> things at the time.  I wish I had known about this forum!!!  
> 
> -2200 came out!  Reviews (not from Epson) talked about how 
wonderful 
> the B&W output was.  No metarism apparantly, and anyway I had no 
idea 
> what the hell that actually meant.  Had gray balancer - wonderful!
> 
> -Bought 2200.  Color work is excellent.  Can use favorite semi-
gloss 
> paper without it looking like crap, and it will last more than a 
year 
> or two, so I can now give pictures away without feeling cheap.
> 
> -B&W not so good.  Getting neutral gray almost impossible even with 
> gray balancer.  I start to quickly learn about metamerism in the 
same 
> way that you learn very quickly about a rare disease you just 
> caught.  I wasted about 100 bucks on paper and inks with Gray 
> balancer and still am not there.
> 
> -Start looking into these RIPs.  Download PowerRIP demo (thanks 
> Daniel).  Actually looks pretty damn good (I recommend trying it), 
> but still is not there for me because I'm just really fussy.  0-10% 
> looks fairly dotty.  Thought about IP5, but 500 bucks is a bit 
much.  
> Metamerism still exists but it is VERY reduced over normal color 
> B&W.  Can't say why - no flatbed scanner or microscope.
> 
> -Use BO mode.  Awful awful awful.  I agree with Peter that some 
> people just can't see the dots.  That's great for them, but it 
really 
> bugs me.  It just doesn't look smooth.  Not good enough.  Bah.
> 
> -I start to look over at my old 1280 sitting in the corner.  I 
never 

> got round to selling it, and that would probably only get me about 
> 200 bucks.  Can't get Imageprint for 200 bucks, PowerRIP still 
> doesn't cut it at that price.
> 
> So that's my history in B&W printing.  Thank God I live in Seattle 
> and the thought of being outside taking pictures is just nowhere in 
> my mind.  If I lived somewhere nice I'd feel bad that I have spent 
> all this time on my "photography hobby" with nothing to show for it.
> 
> Why am bothering to tell you all this?  Well, I'm thinking about 
> using the old 1280 with MIS VM inks and those Roark curves.  From 
> reading other posts it seems like I might up and running in an 
> evening or two, especially as I'm quite good with printing step 
> wedges and messing around with curves.
> 
> Would anyone else recommend this as a good setup?  Anyone else had 
> the same experience and gone back to the old, rejected Epson?
> 
> Thanks in advance!
> 
>    Matthew

For: danielstaver

> Still, the dithering pattern will be slightly more coarse than the
> Epson driver. I've heard that this is also the case with ImagePrint.

You may have heard this, but I'm using the 7600 with ImagePrint and 
with the Epson driver together with the Atkinson profiles. The 
dithering pattern is NOT coarser with IP; and IP has more shadow detail 
and smoother gradation. Also, I have made one print with IP that I also 
have printed with the PiezographyBW driver on the 1160: the IP print is 
just as smooth.

--Mitch/Bangkok

Don't worry, I have yet to see an actual print made from ImagePrint,
so I don't actually know what I'm talking about.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mitch Alland
<malland@x> wrote:

> For: danielstaver
> 
> > Still, the dithering pattern will be slightly more coarse than the
> > Epson driver. I've heard that this is also the case with ImagePrint.
> 
> You may have heard this, but I'm using the 7600 with ImagePrint and 
> with the Epson driver together with the Atkinson profiles. The 
> dithering pattern is NOT coarser with IP; and IP has more shadow detail 
> and smoother gradation. Also, I have made one print with IP that I also 
> have printed with the PiezographyBW driver on the 1160: the IP print is 
> just as smooth.
> 
> --Mitch/Bangkok

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "carlislematthew
<carlislematthew@h...>" <carlislematthew@h...> wrote:
> Yes, I tried 2880dpi.  I'm not too dissapointed with it, but I think 
> that I can probably buy a decent amount of MIS ink for 200 bucks and 
> get REALLY good output.  I feel like PowerRIP gets me 90% of where I 
> want to be.

I can understand that. I think if I had an extra printer sitting
around I would spend the money on inks for that instead of a RIP for
the 2200 as well.

Haven't yet seen a quad-print myself, but I asked Clayton, who has one
of my PowerRIP-prints, what he thought about it in comparison. He said
it was slightly more coarse but still looked good, so I think your
statement about the prints being 90% of the way there are a pretty
good description of what I'm getting - if dotless quad-prints are your
goal that is.

Sadly, I think at $289 it's the lowest cost solution to getting near
metamerism-free prints on the 2200 so far. Maybe the Epson RIP will
change that, but I've yet to hear anything positive about it.

Just out of curiosity, how much metamerism were you still able to see?
I personally can't see much, maybe a slight shift in tone in daylight,
but I find it very hard to tell. Haven't tried sunlight yet, not much
of that in Norway at the moment...

Matt, been using this setup for years. It's excellent.

Jerry

> Would anyone else recommend this as a good setup?  Anyone else had
> the same experience and gone back to the old, rejected Epson?
> 
> Thanks in advance!
> 
>    Matthew
>

I use the 1280 with MIS/VM/Roark Curves, right out of the box, so to speak. Works great. Highly recommended. Use the MIS CIS, a bit fussy to set up but works well.

Jeffrey
http://www.happyeyeball.com

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: carlislematthew <carlislematthew@...> 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 11:19 PM
  Subject: [Digital BW] 2200 for color & 1280 for B&W


  Here's how it happened, from start to beginning.  Please excuse the 
  terseness, but I'm sure you've all heard it before so I'll try and be 
  brief.  The question is at the end if you want to skip the crap.

  -Bought 1280.  Loved it from the start, but paper choice and profiles 
  sucked for "archival" color work.  B&W using color sucked more.

  -Didn't like the idea of paying hundreds for Piezography or similar 
  system, so never bought that.  Didn't know about MIS inks or similar 
  things at the time.  I wish I had known about this forum!!!  

  -2200 came out!  Reviews (not from Epson) talked about how wonderful 
  the B&W output was.  No metarism apparantly, and anyway I had no idea 
  what the hell that actually meant.  Had gray balancer - wonderful!

  -Bought 2200.  Color work is excellent.  Can use favorite semi-gloss 
  paper without it looking like crap, and it will last more than a year 
  or two, so I can now give pictures away without feeling cheap.

  -B&W not so good.  Getting neutral gray almost impossible even with 
  gray balancer.  I start to quickly learn about metamerism in the same 
  way that you learn very quickly about a rare disease you just 
  caught.  I wasted about 100 bucks on paper and inks with Gray 
  balancer and still am not there.

  -Start looking into these RIPs.  Download PowerRIP demo (thanks 
  Daniel).  Actually looks pretty damn good (I recommend trying it), 
  but still is not there for me because I'm just really fussy.  0-10% 
  looks fairly dotty.  Thought about IP5, but 500 bucks is a bit much.  
  Metamerism still exists but it is VERY reduced over normal color 
  B&W.  Can't say why - no flatbed scanner or microscope.

  -Use BO mode.  Awful awful awful.  I agree with Peter that some 
  people just can't see the dots.  That's great for them, but it really 
  bugs me.  It just doesn't look smooth.  Not good enough.  Bah.

  -I start to look over at my old 1280 sitting in the corner.  I never 
  got round to selling it, and that would probably only get me about 
  200 bucks.  Can't get Imageprint for 200 bucks, PowerRIP still 
  doesn't cut it at that price.

  So that's my history in B&W printing.  Thank God I live in Seattle 
  and the thought of being outside taking pictures is just nowhere in 
  my mind.  If I lived somewhere nice I'd feel bad that I have spent 
  all this time on my "photography hobby" with nothing to show for it.

  Why am bothering to tell you all this?  Well, I'm thinking about 
  using the old 1280 with MIS VM inks and those Roark curves.  From 
  reading other posts it seems like I might up and running in an 
  evening or two, especially as I'm quite good with printing step 
  wedges and messing around with curves.

  Would anyone else recommend this as a good setup?  Anyone else had 
  the same experience and gone back to the old, rejected Epson?

  Thanks in advance!

     Matthew



  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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


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

> I feel like PowerRIP gets me 90% of where I want to be.
> 
> I think that PowerRIP is a good solution, but I wasn't happy enough 
> with initial results to go further into testing.

Can you give some more info on PowerRIP, please ?  

I found the website.  Looks like you can download a demo with a
watermark (ala. Vuescan) and then buy it for $289 or so.

How exactly does it address the "B&W printing on the 2200" issue ?

Did I hear that it allows use of the 2 black ink cartridges (including
the "Light Black") ?  And this looks somewhat sepia-toned, right ?

Does it allow 7-color B&W prints with less metamerism than the stock
Epson driver ?

Thanks, John

> How exactly does it address the "B&W printing on the 2200" issue ?

It prints using mainly the two blacks and cools down the print with
small amounts og magenta and cyan. The result is a very neutral print
with minimal color shifts and metamerism.
 
> Did I hear that it allows use of the 2 black ink cartridges (including
> the "Light Black") ?  And this looks somewhat sepia-toned, right ?

That's also a possibility. If you select 'Gray gamma 1.8' or a similar
grayscale profile as the output profile when printing from photoshop
it will use only the two blacks. That will look like a sepia-toned image.

If you use 'Postscript color management' it will print with all of the
inks except yellow of which it uses very little or none at all. At
least I can't see any yellow with my 8x loupe.

> Does it allow 7-color B&W prints with less metamerism than the stock
> Epson driver ?

Yes. There is much less metamerism than with the Epson driver. I can't
see any metamerism at all, Matthew reported that he saw a little, but
nowhere near that of the epson driver. When I hold two prints out the
window in daylight the Epson print looks like it was painted green,
while the PowerRIP print still looks fairly neutral to my eyes. If you
decide to try it out I would be very interested to hear about your
perception on this.

Remember to print at 2880 dpi. It will be really slow, but unlike the
Epson driver there is a big difference in quality.

I saw very little metamerism with PowerRIP, but part of that is that I 
didn't look too hard as it didn't quite go far enough for me.  Having said 
that, I didn't have to look hard AT ALL for metamerism with standard color 
B&W printing so that in itself is a good sign.

From memory, the un-tweaked 21 step wedge looked very neutral (perhaps 
slightly cool?) in daylight, and perhaps slightly warm under tungsten.  I 
would have to agree with you that there is very little metamerism with 
PowerRIP.

Please take the information above with a big grain (perhaps a rock) of salt. 
  Everyone, download a demo for free and try it out.  It prints "PowerRip" 
in the middle of the page and it can be confusing to set up, but it's worth 
a try!!!!

  Matthew

>Message: 8
>    Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 11:38:03 -0000
>    From: "danielstaver <daniel@...>" <daniel@...>
>Subject: Re: 2200 for color & 1280 for B&W
>
>--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "carlislematthew
><carlislematthew@h...>" <carlislematthew@h...> wrote:
> > Yes, I tried 2880dpi.  I'm not too dissapointed with it, but I think
> > that I can probably buy a decent amount of MIS ink for 200 bucks and
> > get REALLY good output.  I feel like PowerRIP gets me 90% of where I
> > want to be.
>
>I can understand that. I think if I had an extra printer sitting
>around I would spend the money on inks for that instead of a RIP for
>the 2200 as well.
>
>Haven't yet seen a quad-print myself, but I asked Clayton, who has one
>of my PowerRIP-prints, what he thought about it in comparison. He said
>it was slightly more coarse but still looked good, so I think your
>statement about the prints being 90% of the way there are a pretty
>good description of what I'm getting - if dotless quad-prints are your
>goal that is.
>
>Sadly, I think at $289 it's the lowest cost solution to getting near
>metamerism-free prints on the 2200 so far. Maybe the Epson RIP will
>change that, but I've yet to hear anything positive about it.
>
>Just out of curiosity, how much metamerism were you still able to see?
>I personally can't see much, maybe a slight shift in tone in daylight,
>but I find it very hard to tell. Haven't tried sunlight yet, not much
>of that in Norway at the moment...
>


_________________________________________________________________
Overloaded with spam? With MSN 8, you can filter it out 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail&pgmarket=en-gb&XAPID=32&DI=1059

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mitch Alland 
<malland@x> wrote:
> You may have heard this, but I'm using the 7600 with ImagePrint and 
> with the Epson driver together with the Atkinson profiles.

I have heard that the 7600 with IP produces significantly different 
output than the 2200 with IP.  

Can anyone confirm (or deny) this?

Thanks,
Dan

I hope you will find this this posting appropriate and interesting. I have a
new version of my web site http://blacktowns.org and a new book based on my
current exhibition. The exhibit contains 70 inkjet prints ranging from 22" x
28" to 22" x 44" all printed on the Epson 7000 with MIS-FS inks on Royal
Renaissance (Photo-Rag), with Colorbyte's ImagePrint RIP. There are also 4
pieces 20" x 144" that are 360 views based on QTVR's.

The book is "Small Towns, Black Lives" with essays by Charles Ashley
Stainback (guest curator for the exhibition), Deborah Willis, Stedman Graham
and Clement A. Price and is available at Amazon.

I am not a regular contributor to this forum (although I have added my
thoughts from time to time) but, as an avid lurker I have gathered lots of
useful information from the group. Thanks.

Wendel