Digital BW, The Print

Sue:

> A.  Getting custom profiles for various paper combinations. This alone
> probably won't get me the perfection I'm looking for. Completely 
> neutral
> please!!!

My experience confirms that it's virtually impossible to get "neutral" 
B&W by printing RGB, even with custom profiles. Several years ago, I 
had a Fuji Pictrography 4000 that had a calibrator to linearize it, an 
ideal situation for making a custom profile that should yield neutral 
B&W. At that time, Bruce Fraser, co-author of Real World Photoshop, 
made a custom profile for me. After extensive work on it, he concluded 
that "ICC profiles just aren't a good solution to achieve B&W prints 
without a color cast." He ended up making a PS adjustment curve that 
worked much better, but there were still some images that would never 
print neutral.

[You will find statements such as the review on the Luminous Landscape 
forum that state that the 2200 prints neutral B&W right out of the box; 
but don't believe it as this review seems to have been made someone who 
must be colorblind, or at least without the ability to judge what is a 
good B&W print.]


> B.  IP5 RIP - expensive (sort of) and mixed reviews for Mac as well as
> little documentation...ie "it's difficult." That scares me. I can't 
> handle
> endless toying with no support. Will still need the custom profiles.

First, don't even try using IP5 on System 9, on which it is kludgy 
owing to the operating system's lack of multi-tasking. On OSX, IP5 runs 
fine and is easy to use, just follow the instructions carefully about 
how to instal the printer and enter the encryption key, making sure 
that you select the correct connection-type (USB vs network). Also, 
make sure that Classic is not running when your using IP5. I'm here in 
Bangkok where I cannot just pick up the phone and call ColorByte. My 
problems were the ones I've just mentioned, and I got prompt responses 
by e-mail; and, on New Year's Eve, ColorByte telephoned me here in 
Bangkok to solve my problem, so the support they provided was 
outstanding. However, if you follow my foregoing suggestions, you 
should have no problems.

You will not need custom profiles with IP5 because their profiles are 
so accurate. Andrew Rodney, a well-known guru on these matters, stated 
on this forum that the IP5 profiles are better than he can make -- and 
his company makes custom profiles for clients. For color, I found the 
IP5 profiles even slightly better, with better shadow detail than the 
outstanding profiles that Bill Atkinson has made for the 9600/7600. [I 
use the 7600 which is similar to the 2200 in results].

So far I have printed mainly in color with IP5, but the little 
experience printing with IP5 so far has resulted in the following 
preliminary conclusions:

1. IP5 produces absolutely neutral B&W and, using Tint Picker, prints 
can be subtly toned for excellent results that are more attarctive than 
the un-toned prints.

2. I find the quality (in terms of dithering) and the gradation to 
equal PiezographyBW. But I should hasten to add that Robert Morrison, 
on this forum, finds that IP5 compresses the darkest tones somewhat 
more than either the monitor image or PiezoBW. I'll have to do some 
more B&W printing with IP5 before I have a firm conclusion on this. 
When I was deciding whether to buy IP5, Jon Cone wrote me a message in 
response to a question stating,  that he found "ImagePrint as every bit 
as good as PiezographyBW Pro24 which is why it was going to be the 
engine in Piezography2."

--Mitch/Bangkok

on 2/24/03 5:41 PM, Mitch Alland at malland@... wrote:

> My experience confirms that it's virtually impossible to get "neutral"
> B&W by printing RGB, even with custom profiles.

Mitch (et al), 

After more research and reading I believe that's right. That's what has
prompted me to think of Piezo. However at this point, for my commercial
work, a very good B/W print is what I need. IfI were doing B/W printing
right now for pleasure (I wish!) I'd want to play with the Piezo but I don't
have endless funds here!

> 1. IP5 produces absolutely neutral B&W and, using Tint Picker, prints
> can be subtly toned for excellent results that are more attarctive than
> the un-toned prints.

This sounds like what I've been hearing and may end up being my solution of
choice but am going to wait and see what Cone has coming up. I've read that
Piezo on the 1200 has had some issues with banding and clogging (?). Also to
address the cost of inks (Piezo vs. 2200) it may well be that the CIS breaks
out to a better deal by volume but considering I'm not going to be doing
masses of printing, the CIS is probably not a practical investment for me
right now. I'd rather get the versatility of the IP RIP over the potential
quality of the Piezo (which may or may not be negligible. I really do think
our individual experiences with our softwares, systems, printers and papers
etc. can be very different and of course subjective)

> [You will find statements such as the review on the Luminous Landscape
> forum that state that the 2200 prints neutral B&W right out of the box;
> but don't believe it as this review seems to have been made someone who
> must be colorblind, or at least without the ability to judge what is a
> good B&W print.]

Riiiight....I don't! I get a pretty decent neutral across the full length of
the grayscale with the premium Luster paper but I have the slight cyan/blue
cast. The rest of the papers I've tested (mostly Epson) have that lovely
subtle rainbowing in the midtones.I lean warmer in my B/W

> First, don't even try using IP5 on System 9, on which it is kludgy
> owing to the operating system's lack of multi-tasking. On OSX, IP5 runs
> fine and is easy to use, just follow the instructions carefully about
> how to instal the printer and enter the encryption key, making sure
> that you select the correct connection-type (USB vs network). Also,
> make sure that Classic is not running when your using IP5.

Would you be willing to share your valuable experience via emails regarding
setup if I do get the IP5 RIP? It sounds like we have a pretty similar
hardware setup. 

> When I was deciding whether to buy IP5, Jon Cone wrote me a message in
> response to a question stating,  that he found "ImagePrint as every bit
> as good as PiezographyBW Pro24 which is why it was going to be the
> engine in Piezography2."

Hmmm...

Thank-you kindly. Very helpful indeed!

Sue

Sue Tallon Photography
suetallon@...





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