Yahoo Groups archive
Thread
2003-03-19 by Jerry Olson
Jim you say you are getting dots in the higlights on a 2200 printer? I thought you were speaking of a 1280! I can't imagine the 2200 printer having ANY dots!!! > > They don't have the inkset set up for the 2200 do they? I was thinking > of trying them (they are the 4.35, alais "eboni" inkset right?) Yes, the inks are available in bulk or cartridges now. Jerry
2003-03-19 by jim hayes
I can compare 2200/IP5 (Windows) output to 1280/VM standard and see dots in highlights (Vm/1280 is continuous), or on Paul's stepwedge. But it is a matter of degree. They are really small, you have to be up close and comparing side by side. The shadows are a bit compressed as well. Somewhere around 96%-100% it is hard to tell the diff between 1% k patches. However, when I look at a print done on both 2200 and 1280 with VM, the IP5 print somehow looks sharper, but it's hard to describe how. I wouldn't advise anyone considering 2200/IP5/Epson UC to not try it out first for themselves. The demo may be available for IP5 but borrowing an 2200 might be an issue. So if MIS has "quad"(?) carts/ink for the 2200, then Paul has done curves for it or? Jim H. --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Jerry Olson <jerryolson@r...> wrote:
> Jim you say you are getting dots in the higlights on a 2200 printer? I > thought you were speaking of a 1280! I can't imagine the 2200 printer > having ANY dots!!! > > > > > > They don't have the inkset set up for the 2200 do they? I was thinking > > of trying them (they are the 4.35, alais "eboni" inkset right?) > > Yes, the inks are available in bulk or cartridges now. > > Jerry
2003-03-19 by Truman Prevatt
Jim, Are you sure that the "sharpness" you are seeing is not just more contrast? Truman jim hayes wrote: >I can compare 2200/IP5 (Windows) output to 1280/VM standard and see >dots in highlights (Vm/1280 is continuous), or on Paul's stepwedge. >But it is a matter of degree. They are really small, you have to be up >close and comparing side by side. > >The shadows are a bit compressed as well. Somewhere around 96%-100% it >is hard to tell the diff between 1% k patches. > >However, when I look at a print done on both 2200 and 1280 with VM, >the IP5 print somehow looks sharper, but it's hard to describe how. > >I wouldn't advise anyone considering 2200/IP5/Epson UC to not try it >out first for themselves. The demo may be available for IP5 but >borrowing an 2200 might be an issue. > >So if MIS has "quad"(?) carts/ink for the 2200, then Paul has done >curves for it or? >Jim H. > > > >--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Jerry Olson ><jerryolson@r...> wrote: > > >>Jim you say you are getting dots in the higlights on a 2200 printer? I >>thought you were speaking of a 1280! I can't imagine the 2200 printer >>having ANY dots!!! >> >> >> >> >>>They don't have the inkset set up for the 2200 do they? I was thinking >>>of trying them (they are the 4.35, alais "eboni" inkset right?) >>> >>> >>Yes, the inks are available in bulk or cartridges now. >> >>Jerry >> >> > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2003-03-20 by jim hayes
No I'm not sure. Hard to say as it's highly subjective. You might look at the prints and think the VM standard/1280 was sharper than the 2200/IP5. I did have the foresight to compare a print that has a sharp transistion in it- it jumps from maybe 75%k to maybe 30%k along an maybe 1/16 inch wide line. In the past I've had abrupt changes using VM depending on paper used; with IP5 it blends better. So if I was to base it on that alone, my guess is that IP5 is not more contrasty. Of course, since IP5 seems to compress those last few percent k values, you could make an arguement based on that that from 0 to 96%k it is more contrasty I guess. Or maybe that a coarser dot pattern might produce a sharper appearing image? Beats me... When I look at a visual gradation from 0 to 100%k IP5 has a very even transistion, except that last few %k already mentioned. This is on Photorag and Eclipse. Jim H. --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Truman Prevatt <tprevatt@m...> wrote: > Jim, > > Are you sure that the "sharpness" you are seeing is not just more contrast? > > Truman > > jim hayes wrote: > > >I can compare 2200/IP5 (Windows) output to 1280/VM standard and see > >dots in highlights (Vm/1280 is continuous), or on Paul's stepwedge. > >But it is a matter of degree. They are really small, you have to be up > >close and comparing side by side. > > > >The shadows are a bit compressed as well. Somewhere around 96%-100% it > >is hard to tell the diff between 1% k patches. > > > >However, when I look at a print done on both 2200 and 1280 with VM, > >the IP5 print somehow looks sharper, but it's hard to describe how. > > > >I wouldn't advise anyone considering 2200/IP5/Epson UC to not try it > >out first for themselves. The demo may be available for IP5 but > >borrowing an 2200 might be an issue. > > > >So if MIS has "quad"(?) carts/ink for the 2200, then Paul has done > >curves for it or? > >Jim H. > > > > > > > >--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Jerry Olson > ><jerryolson@r...> wrote: > > > > > >>Jim you say you are getting dots in the higlights on a 2200 printer? I > >>thought you were speaking of a 1280! I can't imagine the 2200 printer > >>having ANY dots!!! > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>>They don't have the inkset set up for the 2200 do they? I was thinking
> >>>of trying them (they are the 4.35, alais "eboni" inkset right?) > >>> > >>> > >>Yes, the inks are available in bulk or cartridges now. > >> > >>Jerry > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2003-03-20 by Peter Nelson
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Jerry Olson <jerryolson@r...> wrote: > Jim you say you are getting dots in the higlights on a 2200 printer? I > thought you were speaking of a 1280! I can't imagine the 2200 printer > having ANY dots!!! That's a joke right? http://studio-nelson.com/inkjet/bw22001.htm http://studio-nelson.com/inkjet/bw22003.htm
2003-03-20 by Paul Roark
>... can someone explain WHY third-party inksets seem to >have much worse clogging problems than the Epson inks? >... I'm not sure I know all the factors, but here are a few that come to mind. Of course, all inkjets occasionally clog, but there are reasons you hear about them more here. Pigments clog more than dyes, and most people on this list use pigments. CISs cause clogs, and only third-party inks are used with them. I've never had a serious clog that was not the fault of a CIS. You hear from the people who are having trouble, and most people on this forum are using third-party inks. Third party papers tend to be dusty and cause clogs (according to Epson). People printing graphics are sensitive to the problem. My HP that is used for letters looks great for that, but it is seldom firing all of it's jets. It may be that Epson has marginally better base/carrier for its pigments. The Epson dye cartridges are often found to be excellent cleaning carts. The co-solvent base used in the PiezoBW inkset and the MIS FS and VM blacks are more volatile and can cause clogs. I'm not sure that the Epson inks would do much better in the clogging department if all the variables were equalized. I'd guess Epson would win such a contest, but not be much. Paul http://www.PaulRoark.com
2003-03-20 by Jerry Olson
On the design of CIS systems. Might it be better to use slightly larger ink tubing? Just a thought. Anyone know if a drop of photo flo might help the inks flo better? Or some other wetting agent that was more or less also an anti foam agent? Photo flo probably has too much foam to be useful with a moving cartridge. Jerry Paul Roark wrote:
> > >... can someone explain WHY third-party inksets seem to > >have much worse clogging problems than the Epson inks? > >... > > I'm not sure I know all the factors, but here are a few that come to mind. > > Of course, all inkjets occasionally clog, but there are reasons you hear > about them more here. > > Pigments clog more than dyes, and most people on this list use pigments. > > CISs cause clogs, and only third-party inks are used with them. I've never > had a serious clog that was not the fault of a CIS. > > You hear from the people who are having trouble, and most people on this > forum are using third-party inks. > > Third party papers tend to be dusty and cause clogs (according to Epson). > > People printing graphics are sensitive to the problem. My HP that is used > for letters looks great for that, but it is seldom firing all of it's jets. > > It may be that Epson has marginally better base/carrier for its pigments. > The Epson dye cartridges are often found to be excellent cleaning carts. > > The co-solvent base used in the PiezoBW inkset and the MIS FS and VM blacks > are more volatile and can cause clogs. > > I'm not sure that the Epson inks would do much better in the clogging > department if all the variables were equalized. I'd guess Epson would win > such a contest, but not be much. > > Paul > http://www.PaulRoark.com > > > 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;quot;flames.&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/
2003-03-20 by Jerry Olson
Nope, I can see absolutely NO dots on my 1280 at 1440 with Paul's curves, not anywhere! Jerry Peter Nelson wrote:
> > Jim you say you are getting dots in the higlights on a 2200 > printer? I > > thought you were speaking of a 1280! I can't imagine the 2200 > printer > > having ANY dots!!! > > That's a joke right? >
2003-03-20 by Robert Morrison
On 3/19/03 5:53 PM, "jim hayes" <jimhayes@...> wrote: > I did have the foresight to compare a print that has a sharp > transistion in it- it jumps from maybe 75%k to maybe 30%k along an > maybe 1/16 inch wide line. In the past I've had abrupt changes using > VM depending on paper used; with IP5 it blends better. So if I was to > base it on that alone, my guess is that IP5 is not more contrasty. Have you looked at step wedges/gray ramps for these two workflows? I don't know about the RGB workflow for VM, haven't used it, but I can say with absolute certainty after a lot of testing and densitometer readings that IP with the 2200 is no where close to an Ames curve. Shadow detail from 90 to 100% is completely non-existent. Transitions in midtones are very smooth with the 2200 and IP. Because of the shadows IP radically increases contrast (just like the epson driver). Apparently Colorbyte and Epson don't know that fine art photographers want shadow detail...correction Colorbyte knows...I've told them a dozen times, but they refuse to correct the problem. I've sent them hard data several time illustrating the problem and they refuse to work on it because "commercial photographers want punchy images". The idiotic part of this argument is that if a commericial photographer wants more contrast he/she just needs to add it in photoshop! Using another driver (Ink Jet Control) to run the 2200 you can get beautiful step wedges with just two inks (light black and black) that perfectly follow an Ames curve. They look very similar to Cone's Sepia Pieztones...however slightly warmer. The main problem with the 2200 that will effect some people, depending on the paper they use are dots in the hilights. While this isn't a problem with a paper like German Etching, it is with Photo Rag or smoother...and particularly glossy papers. IP helps to minimize this by adding photo cyan and photo magenta...but the cost is a significantly reduced tonal range. In the end the best solution seems to be the new Ultra-quad inkset...taking advantage of the advantages of the Ultrachromes...but putting them in a variable toned quad...of course if they don't turn out to clog our printers. The best results with this inkset will be with a 1280/1290 or with a 2200/7600/9600 because of dot size...ideally driven with a RIP like Ink Jet Control where you can build your own profiles. Robert
2003-03-20 by Peter Nelson
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Jerry Olson <jerryolson@r...> wrote: > Nope, I can see absolutely NO dots on my 1280 at 1440 with Paul's > curves, not anywhere! Dots have nothing to do with curves. Dot size is a function of the print head design. Don't forget that there are people who can't see the dots even using the default Epson driver and black only printing. We call these people presbyopic or hyperopic.
2003-03-20 by dsmithhfx
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@v...> wrote: > I'm not sure that the Epson inks would do much better in the clogging > department if all the variables were equalized. I'd guess Epson would win > such a contest, but not be much. Based on what I've read here, I think you're onto to something regarding Epson's proprietary solvent/ink formuations (their cartridge design may also be factor). Something they're not about to share with the 3d-party vendors (and is probly patented to boot, meaning no possiblity of reverse-engineering). It's an open secret that Epson's profit model (as are their competitors') is based on consumables, while the printers themselves are 'loss leaders' -- in the consumer space anyway. Whatever, the negative reports we keep getting here (admittedly dominated by a handful of posters) amount to a strong disincentive for anyone to invest in 3rd-party inks, cartridges and CIS systems, as they do not seem to reliably live-up to vendors' claims. That is going to have to change, or -- If only Epson would enter the 'quadtone' b+w space, and drop their prices a bit, they could probably recapture 100% of the consumables trade with little effort. But perhaps they are satisfied with 99%, and are quite happy with the profits those high prices ensure. Competition will have to come from other quarters.
2003-03-20 by jim hayes
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Nelson" <peter@s...> wrote: > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Jerry Olson > <jerryolson@r...> wrote: > > Jim you say you are getting dots in the higlights on a 2200 > printer? I > > thought you were speaking of a 1280! I can't imagine the 2200 > printer > > having ANY dots!!! > > That's a joke right? > > http://studio-nelson.com/inkjet/bw22001.htm > > http://studio-nelson.com/inkjet/bw22003.htm Okay, just to get it clear- MIS VM/Paul's workflow= highlights appear smooth, continous tone. 2200/IP5= dots in highlights, noticable but tiny. Acceptability will depend on individual taste. Jim H.
2003-03-20 by jim hayes
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Robert Morrison <rmorrison@p...> wrote: > Have you looked at step wedges/gray ramps for these two workflows? > > I don't know about the RGB workflow for VM, haven't used it, but I can say > with absolute certainty after a lot of testing and densitometer readings > that IP with the 2200 is no where close to an Ames curve. Shadow detail > from 90 to 100% is completely non-existent. Transitions in midtones are > very smooth with the 2200 and IP. You'd be more of an expert Robert, but yes, as I posted, on Paul's step wedge the 95-100% by 1% section blends into each other, and distinctions are hard to see (this is 2200/IP5). When I put the 95% step next to the 100%k step there is somewhat a diff. And I can just barely see a diff between 95 and 96%k but I have to look REAL hard. Therefore I concluded that 96-100%k WAS compressed. On previous wedges done with Paul's VM curves the 95-100% k was more defined. I haven't compared 1%k squares from 90 to 95%k but I can see a definite diff between 90 and 95%k strip. That's about the extent of my observations. I know on my prints I have had some shadow dropout, yes. <snip> > > Using another driver (Ink Jet Control) to run the 2200 you can get beautiful > step wedges with just two inks (light black and black) that perfectly follow > an Ames curve. They look very similar to Cone's Sepia Pieztones...however > slightly warmer. Are you saying these are in effect Sepia toned and can't get any colder? > > The main problem with the 2200 that will effect some people, depending on > the paper they use are dots in the hilights. While this isn't a problem > with a paper like German Etching, it is with Photo Rag or smoother...and > particularly glossy papers. Yes, I'm about calibrated with you there. Eclipse and photorag (to a lesser degree) I find tolerable w /IP5. I don't use glossy but I bet I would have problems with the dots if I did. IP helps to minimize this by adding photo cyan > and photo magenta...but the cost is a significantly reduced tonal range. > > In the end the best solution seems to be the new Ultra-quad inkset...taking > advantage of the advantages of the Ultrachromes...but putting them in a > variable toned quad...of course if they don't turn out to clog our printers. That's my problem of course. If anyone will clog I will.<g> I really would like to try Paul's new 4.35 setup in my now idle 1280. I think I might wait another week-month to see how it performs in this vein. Jim H. > The best results with this inkset will be with a 1280/1290 or with a > 2200/7600/9600 because of dot size...ideally driven with a RIP like Ink Jet
> Control where you can build your own profiles. > > Robert
2003-03-20 by Robert Morrison
On 3/20/03 11:56 AM, "jim hayes" <jimhayes@...> wrote: > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Robert Morrison > <rmorrison@p...> wrote: > >> Have you looked at step wedges/gray ramps for these two workflows? >> >> I don't know about the RGB workflow for VM, haven't used it, but I > can say >> with absolute certainty after a lot of testing and densitometer readings >> that IP with the 2200 is no where close to an Ames curve. Shadow detail >> from 90 to 100% is completely non-existent. Transitions in midtones are >> very smooth with the 2200 and IP. > > You'd be more of an expert Robert, but yes, as I posted, on Paul's > step wedge the 95-100% by 1% section blends into each other, and > distinctions are hard to see (this is 2200/IP5). When I put the 95% > step next to the 100%k step there is somewhat a diff. And I can just > barely see a diff between 95 and 96%k but I have to look REAL hard. > Therefore I concluded that 96-100%k WAS compressed. On previous wedges > done with Paul's VM curves the 95-100% k was more defined. > > I haven't compared 1%k squares from 90 to 95%k but I can see a > definite diff between 90 and 95%k strip. That's about the extent of my > observations. I know on my prints I have had some shadow dropout, yes. > Following an Ames curve for either Gamma 1.8 or 2.2, the visual difference between 95% and 100% should be very large and easy to see...it is not with IP. Likewise the 90% to 95% transitions should be much larger than than they are with Imageprint. This is easy to measure...something I have done repeatedly for both their 2200 profiles and also their profiles for the 7000 with the Piezotones...they simply don't get it. > > <snip> > >> >> Using another driver (Ink Jet Control) to run the 2200 you can get > beautiful >> step wedges with just two inks (light black and black) that > perfectly follow >> an Ames curve. They look very similar to Cone's Sepia > Pieztones...however >> slightly warmer. > > Are you saying these are in effect Sepia toned and can't get any colder? No, you just add cyan and magenta to make them cooler...just like IP5 does. The problem with IP5 is that you can't get warmer (without switching to full color inks). Interestingly the shadows are still compressed...but much less so with IP5's color profiles. Robert
2003-03-20 by jimdesu
> >> Using another driver (Ink Jet Control) to run the 2200 you can Do you have a URL for where this driver comes from? Running a Google search on "Ink Jet Control" is uninformative. Thanks, James
2003-03-20 by Robert Morrison
Its still in beta, but you can get more information by emailing ijc@.... One thing that you should know is that initially it will be Mac only...but I believe they have plans for a Windows version. Robert
On 3/20/03 12:31 PM, "jimdesu" <jimdesu@...> wrote: >>>> Using another driver (Ink Jet Control) to run the 2200 you can > Do you have a URL for where this driver comes from? Running a Google > search on "Ink Jet Control" is uninformative. > > Thanks, > > James > > > > > 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;quot;flames.&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/ > > >
2003-03-21 by bob_michaels
I'll say that I've used MIS FSN-E and VM inks with various curves in my 1280 and they certainly live up to any claims made for them. I've seem too many prints and talked to too many people to belive your comment is the norm. Users just don't post notes here saying "my stuff is super and I'm making very good prints with no problems" Bob Michaels Apopka FL --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "dsmithhfx" <dsmithhfx@y...> wrote:
> > Whatever, the negative reports we keep getting here (admittedly > dominated by a handful of posters) amount to a strong disincentive > for anyone to invest in 3rd-party inks, cartridges and CIS systems, > as they do not seem to reliably live-up to vendors' claims. That is > going to have to change, or --