Digital BW, The Print

Read a copy of 'Mastering Digital Printing' by Harald Johnson at Amazon.
Look at http://www.dpandi.com/ for more info.

Phil Morse

----- Original Message -----

 Okay, Now I'm Really Confused...

> I thought I was getting a handle on this digital printing stuff, but
> after reading this board for a few days, I think I'm completely
> lost.  As I mentioned in a previous post, I am making the move from
> wet to digital, and I'm not afraid to study and learn new
> technology.  I like to get myself completely up to speed on a new
> purchase before I pull out my wallet.  That said, are there any
> tutorial or informational sites out there on digital printing
> products and techniques?  I've read through Cone's website, and
> looked at other inkjet sites, but I'm looking for a clearinghouse of
> information to compare different techniques and technologies.  Also,
> if there are books published on this subject, that would be helpful
> as well.
>
> Thanks!

"Mastering Digital Printing" by Harald Johnson is outstanding, and
writes about all the inks and papers and CIS systems we use and discuss
on this board.

Jerry

nedbuntline2002 wrote:

> 
> I thought I was getting a handle on this digital printing stuff, but
> after reading this board for a few days, I think I'm completely
> lost.  As I mentioned in a previous post, I am making the move from
> wet to digital, and I'm not afraid to study and learn new
> technology.  I like to get myself completely up to speed on a new
> purchase before I pull out my wallet.  That said, are there any
> tutorial or informational sites out there on digital printing
> products and techniques?  I've read through Cone's website, and
> looked at other inkjet sites, but I'm looking for a clearinghouse of
> information to compare different techniques and technologies.  Also,
> if there are books published on this subject, that would be helpful
> as well.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> 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 "flames."
> - 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/

Ned (BTW, how's Wyatt these days?):  If I had it to do over again, I would
go to a workshop to get started instead of picking up info here and there,
some workable, some not.  You might check out Santa Fe Workshops
(http://www.sfworkshop.com/digital/index.cfm) or maybe Anderson Ranch or the
Maine schools.  If you can get some comfort that real photographers are
teaching, as opposed to some of the really tasteless stuff you can do with
Photoshop, you will save yourself much money and time.

Regards,

  --Ken Carney
    www.kencarney.com


----- Original Message -----
From: "nedbuntline2002" <NedBuntline@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 1:59 PM
Subject: [Digital BW] Okay, Now I'm Really Confused...


> I thought I was getting a handle on this digital printing stuff, but
> after reading this board for a few days, I think I'm completely
> lost.  As I mentioned in a previous post, I am making the move from
> wet to digital, and I'm not afraid to study and learn new
> technology.  I like to get myself completely up to speed on a new
> purchase before I pull out my wallet.  That said, are there any
> tutorial or informational sites out there on digital printing
> products and techniques?  I've read through Cone's website, and
> looked at other inkjet sites, but I'm looking for a clearinghouse of
> information to compare different techniques and technologies.  Also,
> if there are books published on this subject, that would be helpful
> as well.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> 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/
>
>
>

Ken Carney wrote:

"Ned (BTW, how's Wyatt these days?)"

Actually, it's Bill Cody and Texas Jack, but you're on the right 
track.  (He also knew Hickok, but only enough to get threatened at 
gunpoint to get out of his sight).

"If you can get some comfort that real photographers are teaching, as 
opposed to some of the really tasteless stuff you can do with 
Photoshop, you will save yourself much money and time."

The photography side, I've got down pretty good.  I've been doing 
large format work for years and my darkroom is pretty loaded.  One 
thing I don't intend to do is do stupid stuff with Photoshop.  I'm 
more of a purist in that sense and don't go for the fakery side.  I'm 
hoping to use Photoshop for the same things I do in the darkroom now 
(burning, dodging, cropping, toning, and maybe a little blemish 
removal).

I don't like to waste money, but time is okay.  Making a few mistakes 
in technique helps me learn.  The equipment side of things is what 
I'm looking at intently (to keep from wasting that money).

Ned,

I was in your shoes about this time last year. Then I realized that a 
good printer for B&W cost 1/5 the price for an enlarger and lense for 
4x5 negs (what I normally print).  Photo Rag, which is at the top of the 
cost for good printing paper, cost about 1/2 as much as the same size 
Oriental silver print paper. Not only that the cost including ink and 
paper to get a good print pales in comparsion to that of getting a good 
print in the darkroom. Not to mention you work out most of your tuning 
on the computer screen instead on sheets of paper. This doesn't even 
take into account the time doing this. I have to chuckle when people 
talk about printer X being to slow. Clearly they have never spent much 
time in a wet darkroom or it's been so long ago the memory is failing 
them:-).

It will take awhile to come up to speed - I'm still learning - but 
learning is half the fun. After all when it gets right down to it, it is 
about the image.

Enjoy
Truman

nedbuntline2002 wrote:

>I thought I was getting a handle on this digital printing stuff, but 
>after reading this board for a few days, I think I'm completely 
>lost.  As I mentioned in a previous post, I am making the move from 
>wet to digital, and I'm not afraid to study and learn new 
>technology.  I like to get myself completely up to speed on a new 
>purchase before I pull out my wallet.  That said, are there any 
>tutorial or informational sites out there on digital printing 
>products and techniques?  I've read through Cone's website, and 
>looked at other inkjet sites, but I'm looking for a clearinghouse of 
>information to compare different techniques and technologies.  Also, 
>if there are books published on this subject, that would be helpful 
>as well.
>
>Thanks!
>
>  
>

In a message dated 4/8/2003 6:30:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
tprevatt@... writes:
snip
> Photo Rag, which is at the top of the 
> cost for good printing paper, cost about 1/2 as much as the same size 
> Oriental silver print paper.
> snip.
Hey, I'd like to know where your buying your "photorag" 
16x20 50sheets Oriental 142.00 
17x22 50 sheets pf Photorag more like 240.00
My 5 years of buying top digital papers proved to be double the cost of 
silver paper. 
And don't tell me you meant the Flimsy 188gsm which I believe is still more 
than Silver paper.
Steve M.


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

I'd like to know where you are getting Oriental. The last time I checked 
Calumet it was about 2 bucks a sheet for 8x10!

Truman

sdmey4@... wrote:

>In a message dated 4/8/2003 6:30:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
>tprevatt@... writes:
>snip
>  
>
>>Photo Rag, which is at the top of the 
>>cost for good printing paper, cost about 1/2 as much as the same size 
>>Oriental silver print paper.
>>snip.
>>    
>>
>Hey, I'd like to know where your buying your "photorag" 
>16x20 50sheets Oriental 142.00 
>17x22 50 sheets pf Photorag more like 240.00
>My 5 years of buying top digital papers proved to be double the cost of 
>silver paper. 
>And don't tell me you meant the Flimsy 188gsm which I believe is still more 
>than Silver paper.
>Steve M.
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>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 "flames."
>- 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/ 
>
>
>
>  
>



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

> If I had it to do over again, I would
> go to a workshop to get started instead of picking up info here and there,
> some workable, some not.  You might check out Santa Fe Workshops
> (http://www.sfworkshop.com/digital/index.cfm) or maybe Anderson Ranch or
the
> Maine schools.  If you can get some comfort that real photographers are
> teaching, as opposed to some of the really tasteless stuff you can do with
> Photoshop, you will save yourself much money and time.

Good advice. I took a digital B&W printing workshop at Santa Fe Workshops
from George DeWolfe, who is a Camera Arts columnist and an expert on the
Piezography/Epson system of making prints. The workshop was essentially a
digital lab and printing class -- no shooting. I learned much more in that
week than I could have in several months on my own. You will learn much
about setting up your monitor and your color settings to make everything
work. You will also learn lots of Photoshop tricks geared toward black and
white images. Unless he has changed the workshop you will not learn any
other workflows besides the Piezography/Epson system. One downside of the
workshop was they did not have enough printers to service the printing
demand and the staff was not familiar with the workflow. Santa Fe Workshops
is Mac-based which will cause a bit of confusion for PC users who've never
been around Macs.

I think George is teaching this workshop again in 2003. Jean Miele (a noted
digital B&W photographer) will also teach a 2003 workshop which is a
combination of shooting and digital printing. Jean has most of his prints
done with Fuji equipment at NancyScans in NYC.

Jim Richey

An alternate suggestion:
If you're new to digital printing, whatever "system" you buy into will 
require time and a certain level of  proficiency with new tools to get 
great prints. Sometimes it's helpful to see examples of high quality at 
the outset, to give you something to shoot for while you're getting up 
to speed with all the new equipment. I don't know what part of the 
country you're in, but I'm sure many list members can recommend 
some of the few top quality print studios using quadtones. (Disclaimer: I 
operate one in NYC). So it might be worth having a print made by one 
of them. Then you can talk to that particular studio about what 
"system" they used to produce your print, and why.

I'm a big believer that the quality of information from any sourceÑ
book, web site, what have youÑis determined by the skill and 
experience of the person behind that source. If someone makes prints 
of an acceptable quality to you, that's who you want recommendations 
from. Best of luck.

Amadou Diallo
editions@...

In a message dated 04/08/2003 7:58:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
tprevatt@... writes:


> I'd like to know where you are getting Oriental. The last time I checked 
> Calumet it was about 2 bucks a sheet for 8x10!
> 
> Truman

Here ya go,Truman

> http://www.glazerscamera.com/products.src?Cat=3&Category=42&Brand=ORIENTAL&
> Key=&Action=Search&bx.x=11&bx.y=5
> Could'nt find any 8x10 sheets at Calumet's web site or Glazers.
> and The graded paper is about 25.00 more for 50 sheets of 16x20
> So we are at 175.00 for the Oriental Silver paper and a similar top digital 
> paper
> in a similair size is still at 240.00 on a sale day!
> Its pretty well know that good digital paper has always been higher priced 
> than silver paper, and its going to get worse.
> Wait tell you see the prices for the New Arches Infinity papers!!!! 
> If you think you saving money by going from wet darkrooms to digital,your 
> crazy!
> Steve M.




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

Thanks!

Truman

sdmey4@... wrote:

>In a message dated 04/08/2003 7:58:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
>tprevatt@... writes:
>
>
>  
>
>>I'd like to know where you are getting Oriental. The last time I checked 
>>Calumet it was about 2 bucks a sheet for 8x10!
>>
>>Truman
>>    
>>
>
>Here ya go,Truman
>
>  
>
>>http://www.glazerscamera.com/products.src?Cat=3&Category=42&Brand=ORIENTAL&
>>Key=&Action=Search&bx.x=11&bx.y=5
>>Could'nt find any 8x10 sheets at Calumet's web site or Glazers.
>>and The graded paper is about 25.00 more for 50 sheets of 16x20
>>So we are at 175.00 for the Oriental Silver paper and a similar top digital 
>>paper
>>in a similair size is still at 240.00 on a sale day!
>>Its pretty well know that good digital paper has always been higher priced 
>>than silver paper, and its going to get worse.
>>Wait tell you see the prices for the New Arches Infinity papers!!!! 
>>If you think you saving money by going from wet darkrooms to digital,your 
>>crazy!
>>Steve M.
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>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 "flames."
>- 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/ 
>
>
>
>  
>



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

> > So we are at 175.00 for the Oriental Silver paper and a similar top digital 
> > paper
> > in a similair size is still at 240.00 on a sale day!

Steve,

wouldn't it be fair to multiply 175 by at least two (=350). I don't know who 
would make 1 print in the darkroom and get it right the first time.  It's possible 
in digital, though.

Of course, it's still a scam that so-called "digital" paper should cost so much 
just for that  "precious" coat , even when no precious metals are involved. 



Antonis

You can't go wrong with a workshop with Geo. DeWolfe. He is the one 
that got me started in digital printing. I attended one of his 
workshops in Florida, Photofusion, and have never looked back. He 
teaches several workshops around the country. I don't remember his 
web address, maybe someone reading this has it, but you can check 
in "Camera Arts" I am sure it is in there.

Vinny
http://www.wulfsden.com




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Richey" 
<j.richey@s...> wrote:
> > If I had it to do over again, I would
> > go to a workshop to get started instead of picking up info here 
and there,
> > some workable, some not.  You might check out Santa Fe Workshops
> > (http://www.sfworkshop.com/digital/index.cfm) or maybe Anderson 
Ranch or
> the
> > Maine schools.  If you can get some comfort that real 
photographers are
> > teaching, as opposed to some of the really tasteless stuff you 
can do with
> > Photoshop, you will save yourself much money and time.
> 
> Good advice. I took a digital B&W printing workshop at Santa Fe 
Workshops
> from George DeWolfe, who is a Camera Arts columnist and an expert 
on the
> Piezography/Epson system of making prints. The workshop was 
essentially a
> digital lab and printing class -- no shooting. I learned much more 
in that
> week than I could have in several months on my own. You will learn 
much
> about setting up your monitor and your color settings to make 
everything
> work. You will also learn lots of Photoshop tricks geared toward 
black and
> white images. Unless he has changed the workshop you will not learn 
any
> other workflows besides the Piezography/Epson system. One downside 
of the
> workshop was they did not have enough printers to service the 
printing
> demand and the staff was not familiar with the workflow. Santa Fe 
Workshops
> is Mac-based which will cause a bit of confusion for PC users 
who've never
> been around Macs.
> 
> I think George is teaching this workshop again in 2003. Jean Miele 
(a noted
> digital B&W photographer) will also teach a 2003 workshop which is a
> combination of shooting and digital printing. Jean has most of his 
prints

> done with Fuji equipment at NancyScans in NYC.
> 
> Jim Richey

Hi,

---  "Vincent Orlando" <orlandovl@h...> wrote:
> 
> You can't go wrong with a workshop with Geo. DeWolfe. He is the one 

Any digital print workshop in Europe?

-richo-
http://piskoftak.sk/

Geo Dewolfe's web address
http://www.georgedewolfe.com/

Vinny
http://www.wulfsden.com



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Vincent 
Orlando" <orlandovl@h...> wrote:
> 
> You can't go wrong with a workshop with Geo. DeWolfe. He is the one 
> that got me started in digital printing. I attended one of his 
> workshops in Florida, Photofusion, and have never looked back. He 
> teaches several workshops around the country. I don't remember his 
> web address, maybe someone reading this has it, but you can check 
> in "Camera Arts" I am sure it is in there.
> 
> Vinny
> http://www.wulfsden.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Richey" 
> <j.richey@s...> wrote:
> > > If I had it to do over again, I would
> > > go to a workshop to get started instead of picking up info here 
> and there,
> > > some workable, some not.  You might check out Santa Fe Workshops
> > > (http://www.sfworkshop.com/digital/index.cfm) or maybe Anderson 
> Ranch or
> > the
> > > Maine schools.  If you can get some comfort that real 
> photographers are
> > > teaching, as opposed to some of the really tasteless stuff you 
> can do with
> > > Photoshop, you will save yourself much money and time.
> > 
> > Good advice. I took a digital B&W printing workshop at Santa Fe 
> Workshops
> > from George DeWolfe, who is a Camera Arts columnist and an expert 
> on the
> > Piezography/Epson system of making prints. The workshop was 
> essentially a
> > digital lab and printing class -- no shooting. I learned much 
more 
> in that
> > week than I could have in several months on my own. You will 
learn 
> much
> > about setting up your monitor and your color settings to make 
> everything
> > work. You will also learn lots of Photoshop tricks geared toward 
> black and
> > white images. Unless he has changed the workshop you will not 
learn 
> any
> > other workflows besides the Piezography/Epson system. One 
downside 
> of the
> > workshop was they did not have enough printers to service the 
> printing
> > demand and the staff was not familiar with the workflow. Santa Fe 
> Workshops
> > is Mac-based which will cause a bit of confusion for PC users 
> who've never
> > been around Macs.
> > 
> > I think George is teaching this workshop again in 2003. Jean 
Miele 
> (a noted
> > digital B&W photographer) will also teach a 2003 workshop which 
is a
> > combination of shooting and digital printing. Jean has most of 
his 

> prints
> > done with Fuji equipment at NancyScans in NYC.
> > 
> > Jim Richey

David Brooks at Shutterbug Magazine has suggested to me that perhaps the 
reason I don't see metamerism in my 1270 prints with MIS VM inks is that 
the inks are not 100% pigment. Can anyone comment on this?

Thanks,
Stan

================================
Photography by Stan McQueen
http://www.smcqueen.com

I've done a 5 day workshop with Dan Burkholder followed by 5 days with
George DeWolfe at the Calumet Institute at Salisbury. Although Dan's brief
was predictably mainly about digital negatives I found it to be the most
instructive week in my digital mono experience. So much of the care and
attention and adherence to good techniques that are so necessary for
successful digital negatives for platinum and especially silver transpose so
very well into conventional digital output and the disciplines learnt there
will stand me in good stead for a lifetime.

Additionally Dan is a great hard working teacher with a wicked sense of
humour that makes the week so interesting, instructive, and lacking in
hot-air and waffle. Dan was such a hard act to follow that it's probably
slightly unfair on George but that second week with him, although
interesting, fell well short of the first with Dan.

So if you see a Burkholder workshop, especially of a reasonable length where
you have time to divert the attention from negatives, I can thoroughly
recommend it.

Adrian Joyner
Clevedon
England

-----Original Message-----
From: Vincent Orlando [mailto:orlandovl@...] 
Sent: 09 April 2003 13:55
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Okay, Now I'm Really Confused/G.Dewolfe address...



Geo Dewolfe's web address
http://www.georgedewolfe.com/

Vinny
http://www.wulfsden.com



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Vincent 
Orlando" <orlandovl@h...> wrote:
> 
> You can't go wrong with a workshop with Geo. DeWolfe. He is the one
> that got me started in digital printing. I attended one of his 
> workshops in Florida, Photofusion, and have never looked back. He 
> teaches several workshops around the country. I don't remember his 
> web address, maybe someone reading this has it, but you can check 
> in "Camera Arts" I am sure it is in there.
> 
> Vinny
> http://www.wulfsden.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Jim Richey"
> <j.richey@s...> wrote:
> > > If I had it to do over again, I would
> > > go to a workshop to get started instead of picking up info here
> and there,
> > > some workable, some not.  You might check out Santa Fe Workshops
> > > (http://www.sfworkshop.com/digital/index.cfm) or maybe Anderson
> Ranch or
> > the
> > > Maine schools.  If you can get some comfort that real
> photographers are
> > > teaching, as opposed to some of the really tasteless stuff you
> can do with
> > > Photoshop, you will save yourself much money and time.
> > 
> > Good advice. I took a digital B&W printing workshop at Santa Fe
> Workshops
> > from George DeWolfe, who is a Camera Arts columnist and an expert
> on the
> > Piezography/Epson system of making prints. The workshop was
> essentially a
> > digital lab and printing class -- no shooting. I learned much
more 
> in that
> > week than I could have in several months on my own. You will
learn 
> much
> > about setting up your monitor and your color settings to make
> everything
> > work. You will also learn lots of Photoshop tricks geared toward
> black and
> > white images. Unless he has changed the workshop you will not
learn 
> any
> > other workflows besides the Piezography/Epson system. One
downside 
> of the
> > workshop was they did not have enough printers to service the
> printing
> > demand and the staff was not familiar with the workflow. Santa Fe
> Workshops
> > is Mac-based which will cause a bit of confusion for PC users
> who've never
> > been around Macs.
> > 
> > I think George is teaching this workshop again in 2003. Jean
Miele 
> (a noted
> > digital B&W photographer) will also teach a 2003 workshop which
is a
> > combination of shooting and digital printing. Jean has most of
his 
> prints
> > done with Fuji equipment at NancyScans in NYC.
> > 
> > Jim Richey


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Get
a FREE REFINANCE QUOTE - click here!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/2CXtTB/ca0FAA/i5gGAA/ucIolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

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/

Stan,

You wrote:

>David Brooks at Shutterbug Magazine has suggested to me that
>perhaps the reason I don't see metamerism in my 1270 prints
>with MIS VM inks is that the inks are not 100% pigment. ...

Not all pigments are significantly affected by metamerism.  Also, dyes are
not free from it.  The Lyson quads, for example, are, I believe, afflicted
with the problem even though they are dye based.

As it turns out, the MIS VM inks appear not to be pure pigment.  The black
used to make the grays (the old MIS Archival black) probably does have some
dye in it.  However, that has nothing to do with the lack of metamerism.
The new MIS Ultra Tone B&W inkset is pure pigment and does not have any
significant metamerism problem.

I suspect the reason many associate metamerism with pigments could be that
the Epson pigments are badly affected by it, perhaps due to the resin
coating on the particles.  It may also be the case that the color third
party pigments have some metamerism.  However, I don't think I've ever seen
a significant problem with carbon black pigments, which is mostly what the
MIS pigment-base quads are.

In fact, the yellow pigment is the one ink that is usually blamed for most
of the metamerism problem with color pigments.  With the MIS VM and Ultra
Tone inksets, carbon is the base pigment, and the toners are composed of
cyan and magenta -- there is no yellow pigment in them.  (The VM-S does have
yellow in the toner.)

I hope this helps.  (And I wish magazine writers would spend more time
learning what the quad inks are all about.  It's still the only way to get
top notch digital B&W output at a reasonable price.)

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

How prices rise! Last box of 8x10 oriental seagull fiber paper I bought 
was 29 dollars for a hundred sheet box!

Jerry



sdmey4@... wrote:

> In a message dated 04/08/2003 7:58:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
> tprevatt@... writes:
> 
> 
> 
>>I'd like to know where you are getting Oriental. The last time I checked 
>>Calumet it was about 2 bucks a sheet for 8x10!
>>
>>Truman
> 
> 
> Here ya go,Truman
> 
> 
>>http://www.glazerscamera.com/products.src?Cat=3&Category=42&Brand=ORIENTAL&
>>Key=&Action=Search&bx.x=11&bx.y=5
>>Could'nt find any 8x10 sheets at Calumet's web site or Glazers.
>>and The graded paper is about 25.00 more for 50 sheets of 16x20
>>So we are at 175.00 for the Oriental Silver paper and a similar top digital 
>>paper
>>in a similair size is still at 240.00 on a sale day!
>>Its pretty well know that good digital paper has always been higher priced 
>>than silver paper, and its going to get worse.
>>Wait tell you see the prices for the New Arches Infinity papers!!!! 
>>If you think you saving money by going from wet darkrooms to digital,your 
>>crazy!
>>Steve M.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 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 "flames."
> - 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/ 
> 
> 
>

I'm in the Philadelphia area and I do get to New York now and then (I 
was in Ridgefield, New Jersey just today).



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Amadou Diallo" 
<amadiallo2001@y...> wrote:
> An alternate suggestion:
> If you're new to digital printing, whatever "system" you buy into 
will 
> require time and a certain level of  proficiency with new tools to 
get 
> great prints. Sometimes it's helpful to see examples of high 
quality at 
> the outset, to give you something to shoot for while you're getting 
up 
> to speed with all the new equipment. I don't know what part of the 
> country you're in, but I'm sure many list members can recommend 
> some of the few top quality print studios using quadtones. 
(Disclaimer: I 
> operate one in NYC). So it might be worth having a print made by 
one 
> of them. Then you can talk to that particular studio about what 
> "system" they used to produce your print, and why.
> 
> I'm a big believer that the quality of information from any sourceÑ
> book, web site, what have youÑis determined by the skill and 
> experience of the person behind that source. If someone makes 
prints 
> of an acceptable quality to you, that's who you want 
recommendations 

> from. Best of luck.
> 
> Amadou Diallo
> editions@d...

I'm in the Philadelphia area and I do get to New York now and then (I 
was in Ridgefield, New Jersey just today).



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Amadou Diallo" 
<amadiallo2001@y...> wrote:
> An alternate suggestion:
> If you're new to digital printing, whatever "system" you buy into 
will 
> require time and a certain level of  proficiency with new tools to 
get 
> great prints. Sometimes it's helpful to see examples of high 
quality at 
> the outset, to give you something to shoot for while you're getting 
up 
> to speed with all the new equipment. I don't know what part of the 
> country you're in, but I'm sure many list members can recommend 
> some of the few top quality print studios using quadtones. 
(Disclaimer: I 
> operate one in NYC). So it might be worth having a print made by 
one 
> of them. Then you can talk to that particular studio about what 
> "system" they used to produce your print, and why.
> 
> I'm a big believer that the quality of information from any sourceÑ
> book, web site, what have youÑis determined by the skill and 
> experience of the person behind that source. If someone makes 
prints 
> of an acceptable quality to you, that's who you want 
recommendations 

> from. Best of luck.
> 
> Amadou Diallo
> editions@d...

Alan Zinn wrote:

>Regarding metamerism,   virtually all colorants - paints, inks, dies - look 
>different under different light.   A water color painting (which contains 
>both pigment and dye) or litho print won't look exactly the same under 
>every light source.   It would seem that full color ink jet images would be 
>no different than with other media. It is only with attempts to create 
>monochrome from CMYK inks that it becomes a problem. Or is it a 
>problem?  Do we see ANY picture outside a gallery in it's ideal light? I 
>don't see how  that ever can be corrected given all the paper, ink, dye 
>variables. It seems to me that a more workable solution, with regard to 
>gallery display at least, would be to correct for two types of light 
>sources like film.  There could be a warm light or cool light set of inks 
>or adjustments.
>
>
>  
>
Metamerism is NOT simply looking different under different lighting or a 
predictable color cast brought on by differing source lighting.. That's 
a given optical phenomenon...

Metamerism is the tendency of different colorants to respond differently 
under different lighting conditions, leading to optical color crossovers 
and inconsistent color casts under differential lighting..

Let's get what we are talking about clear first, before we posit 
solutions...
Keith

 

"Just some guy," and caretaker of the Multiverse's largest EPSON printer 
User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo 
Publications), at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSONx7x_Printers/
 
"For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together 
guys"

 




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

At 08:58 AM 4/9/03 -0700, you wrote:
>Stan,
>
>You wrote:
>
> >David Brooks at Shutterbug Magazine has suggested to me that
> >perhaps the reason I don't see metamerism in my 1270 prints
> >with MIS VM inks is that the inks are not 100% pigment. ...
>
>Not all pigments are significantly affected by metamerism.  Also, dyes are
>not free from it.  The Lyson quads, for example, are, I believe, afflicted
>with the problem even though they are dye based.
>
>As it turns out, the MIS VM inks appear not to be pure pigment.  The black
>used to make the grays (the old MIS Archival black) probably does have some
>dye in it.  However, that has nothing to do with the lack of metamerism.
>The new MIS Ultra Tone B&W inkset is pure pigment and does not have any
>significant metamerism problem.
>
>I suspect the reason many associate metamerism with pigments could be that
>the Epson pigments are badly affected by it, perhaps due to the resin
>coating on the particles.  It may also be the case that the color third
>party pigments have some metamerism.  However, I don't think I've ever seen
>a significant problem with carbon black pigments, which is mostly what the
>MIS pigment-base quads are.
>
>In fact, the yellow pigment is the one ink that is usually blamed for most
>of the metamerism problem with color pigments.  With the MIS VM and Ultra
>Tone inksets, carbon is the base pigment, and the toners are composed of
>cyan and magenta -- there is no yellow pigment in them.  (The VM-S does have
>yellow in the toner.)
>
>I hope this helps.  (And I wish magazine writers would spend more time
>learning what the quad inks are all about.  It's still the only way to get
>top notch digital B&W output at a reasonable price.)
>
>Paul
>http://www.PaulRoark.com
Paul,

Regarding metamerism,   virtually all colorants - paints, inks, dies - look 
different under different light.   A water color painting (which contains 
both pigment and dye) or litho print won't look exactly the same under 
every light source.   It would seem that full color ink jet images would be 
no different than with other media. It is only with attempts to create 
monochrome from CMYK inks that it becomes a problem. Or is it a 
problem?  Do we see ANY picture outside a gallery in it's ideal light? I 
don't see how  that ever can be corrected given all the paper, ink, dye 
variables. It seems to me that a more workable solution, with regard to 
gallery display at least, would be to correct for two types of light 
sources like film.  There could be a warm light or cool light set of inks 
or adjustments.

AZ

For: Alan Zinn

> Regarding metamerism,   virtually all colorants - paints, inks, dies - 
> look
> different under different light.

Yes, all prints look different in different type of light -- but that 
is simply a fact stemming from the physics of light, not metamerism. 
Metamerism relates to the phenomenon of colors changing in their 
relationship to each other, although there may be a better and more 
precise definiton than my statement. An example: a black a white print 
without metamerism will have a different tone viewed under different 
types of light: warmer under tungsten and and cooler under fluorescent; 
a b&w print with metamerism would have a color cast in certain tones 
under one light and a different color cast in those tones under another 
type of light.

--Mitch/Potomac, MD

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Alan Zinn 

> Regarding metamerism,   virtually all colorants - paints,
> inks, dies - look different under different light.   
> A water color painting (which contains both pigment 
> and dye) or litho print won't look exactly the same under 
> every light source.

I disagree that this is a significant issue with most 
artwork.  My wife and I are art collectors (and I'm 
an artist and photographer).  We have oil, acrylic, and
watercolor paintings, as well as monochrome intaglio 
prints and stone-plate lithographs that are over 100 
years old.    Some of these are displayed in rooms with
incandescent(halogen) lights, some under fluorescents,
and some under daylight (in my north-facing studio - not
direct sunlight).    I've never seen any significant color
shift between these different light sources.  When it gets
dark out and I turn on the lights in my studio they don't
shift.

So I don't think the inkjet inks can be let off the hook 
that easily.

> I don't see how  that ever can be corrected given all
> the paper, ink, dye variables. 

The RIPs do a good job.   See:
http://studio-nelson.com/inkjet/bw22001.htm

At 11:36 AM 4/10/03 -0400, you wrote:


>Alan Zinn wrote:
>
> >Regarding metamerism,   virtually all colorants - paints, inks, dies - look
> >different under different light.   A water color painting (which contains
> >both pigment and dye) or litho print won't look exactly the same under
> >every light source.   It would seem that full color ink jet images would be
> >no different than with other media. It is only with attempts to create
> >monochrome from CMYK inks that it becomes a problem. Or is it a
> >problem?  Do we see ANY picture outside a gallery in it's ideal light? I
> >don't see how  that ever can be corrected given all the paper, ink, dye
> >variables. It seems to me that a more workable solution, with regard to
> >gallery display at least, would be to correct for two types of light
> >sources like film.  There could be a warm light or cool light set of inks
> >or adjustments.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>Metamerism is NOT simply looking different under different lighting or a
>predictable color cast brought on by differing source lighting.. That's
>a given optical phenomenon...
>
>Metamerism is the tendency of different colorants to respond differently
>under different lighting conditions, leading to optical color crossovers
>and inconsistent color casts under differential lighting..
>
>Let's get what we are talking about clear first, before we posit
>solutions...
>Keith
>
>  Keith,

Keith,

Please elucidate then sir.  What do you mean "respond" and  "optical color 
crossovers" ?  The way you put it,  it seems that in the final analysis the 
effect is the same.  How for example do watercolor inks and dyes differ 
from ink jet colorants with regard to color shifts?  Is it due to  the way 
the materials are laid down on the surface i.e. little dots?   Are you 
saying that each image will exhibit a different degree of objectionable 
shift with the same inks depending on the density of the tones?

AZ



Build a Lookaround!
The Lookaround Book.
http://www.panoramacamera.us

At 02:26 PM 4/10/2003, Keith wrote:
> >Metamerism is the tendency of different colorants to respond differently
> >under different lighting conditions, leading to optical color crossovers
> >and inconsistent color casts under differential lighting..

My friend's black and white prints, printed on his 2200, look magenta under 
fluorescent and green under sunlight, but neutral under tungsten. (I may 
have the magenta and green reversed, I can't remember.) Is this metamerism?

Stan

===========================
Photography by Stan McQueen
http://www.smcqueen.com

At 05:19 PM 4/10/03 +0000, you wrote:
>--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Alan Zinn
>
> > Regarding metamerism,   virtually all colorants - paints,
> > inks, dies - look different under different light.
> > A water color painting (which contains both pigment
> > and dye) or litho print won't look exactly the same under
> > every light source.
>
>I disagree that this is a significant issue with most
>artwork.  My wife and I are art collectors (and I'm
>an artist and photographer).  We have oil, acrylic, and
>watercolor paintings, as well as monochrome intaglio
>prints and stone-plate lithographs that are over 100
>years old.    Some of these are displayed in rooms with
>incandescent(halogen) lights, some under fluorescents,
>and some under daylight (in my north-facing studio - not
>direct sunlight).    I've never seen any significant color
>shift between these different light sources.  When it gets
>dark out and I turn on the lights in my studio they don't
>shift.
>
>So I don't think the inkjet inks can be let off the hook
>that easily.
>
> > I don't see how  that ever can be corrected given all
> > the paper, ink, dye variables.
>
>The RIPs do a good job.   See:
>http://studio-nelson.com/inkjet/bw22001.htm

Peter,

Thanks for the URL.

Of course the mind adjusts to the light in a home or office environment 
where the lighting is mixed or dim. Objectively the color has to appear 
different depending on the illumination.  One wouldn't want normal 
household bulbs or cool florescent bulbs or a mix in a gallery or studio.

According to your helpful web page I learned that metamerism  has to do 
with adjacency of individual specs of color  in both the spatial and hue 
dimensions.    If the printer driver favors a certain color dot or pattern 
metamerism is more severe.  Reminds me of tiny Albers squares and the 
simultaneous contrast phenomenon.  Did I get that right?

AZ

Alan wrote:

>Regarding metamerism,   virtually all colorants -
>paints, inks, dies - look different under different light. ...

Without attempting to get into the physics of metamerism, ... I agree.

I always try to be careful to qualify my statements about "metamerism" with
some word like "significant" or "problematic."  I simply take the prints and
samples of ink I'm looking at under different light sources and see if I
like the way they look.  Do they look appropriate given the light source?
If there is an obvious and objectionable green in daylight and magenta in
other light, then the metamerism is a problem for me.

I was hoping that the X-Rite spectrophotometer would be able to measure the
effect (as the company representative claimed), but it doesn't (or I don't
know how to operate the instrument).  The "light source" settings one can
make in the software show no difference in readings even with the worst
Epson Archival "B&W" prints.

The VM-S inkset, which has the most obvious metamerism of the quad inksets I
work with, also doesn't have what I'd call "objectionable" metamerism.  With
the sepia or light sepia curve there is a lot of yellow pigment in the
print, and this is usually said to be the source of most of the problematic
metamerism.  However, there is also a lot of magenta in the toner.  When I
view one of the sepia prints with tungsten light, it is very warm.  When I
turn the print toward daylight, it shifts significantly, but it appears to
simply get more neutral.  I suspect there is so much magenta in the mix that
what would have been seen as a green shift if the print were neutral, is
simply hidden by all the magenta.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com
_____________________________________

-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Zinn [mailto:AZinn@...]
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2003 9:15 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Metamerism and MIS VM Inks


At 08:58 AM 4/9/03 -0700, you wrote:
>Stan,
>
>You wrote:
>
> >David Brooks at Shutterbug Magazine has suggested to me that
> >perhaps the reason I don't see metamerism in my 1270 prints
> >with MIS VM inks is that the inks are not 100% pigment. ...
>
>Not all pigments are significantly affected by metamerism.  Also, dyes are
>not free from it.  The Lyson quads, for example, are, I believe, afflicted
>with the problem even though they are dye based.
>
>As it turns out, the MIS VM inks appear not to be pure pigment.  The black
>used to make the grays (the old MIS Archival black) probably does have some
>dye in it.  However, that has nothing to do with the lack of metamerism.
>The new MIS Ultra Tone B&W inkset is pure pigment and does not have any
>significant metamerism problem.
>
>I suspect the reason many associate metamerism with pigments could be that
>the Epson pigments are badly affected by it, perhaps due to the resin
>coating on the particles.  It may also be the case that the color third
>party pigments have some metamerism.  However, I don't think I've ever seen
>a significant problem with carbon black pigments, which is mostly what the
>MIS pigment-base quads are.
>
>In fact, the yellow pigment is the one ink that is usually blamed for most
>of the metamerism problem with color pigments.  With the MIS VM and Ultra
>Tone inksets, carbon is the base pigment, and the toners are composed of
>cyan and magenta -- there is no yellow pigment in them.  (The VM-S does
have
>yellow in the toner.)
>
>I hope this helps.  (And I wish magazine writers would spend more time
>learning what the quad inks are all about.  It's still the only way to get
>top notch digital B&W output at a reasonable price.)
>
>Paul
>http://www.PaulRoark.com
Paul,

Regarding metamerism,   virtually all colorants - paints, inks, dies - look
different under different light.   A water color painting (which contains
both pigment and dye) or litho print won't look exactly the same under
every light source.   It would seem that full color ink jet images would be
no different than with other media. It is only with attempts to create
monochrome from CMYK inks that it becomes a problem. Or is it a
problem?  Do we see ANY picture outside a gallery in it's ideal light? I
don't see how  that ever can be corrected given all the paper, ink, dye
variables. It seems to me that a more workable solution, with regard to
gallery display at least, would be to correct for two types of light
sources like film.  There could be a warm light or cool light set of inks
or adjustments.

AZ




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
"flames."
- 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/

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Alan Zinn 

> According to your helpful web page I learned that metamerism
> has to do with adjacency of individual specs of color in 
> both the spatial and hue dimensions.    If the printer
> driver favors a certain color dot or pattern metamerism
> is more severe.  Reminds me of tiny Albers squares and the 
> simultaneous contrast phenomenon.  Did I get that right?

No.

The adjacency has nothing to do with it.  If you read
carefully you'll see that the discussion of dot patterns
was in the section describing dithering, not metamerism.

Metamerism results from the fact that light sources do not
produce smooth output at all wavelengths and pigments do not
reflect light equally at all wavelengths.  Both exhibit 
spectral peaks and valleys.   If the peak reflectance 
wavelength of a pigment happens to fall in between two
emission peaks of a light source the result will be reduced
intensity for whatever color that pigment is supposed to 
represent. 

Many science museums (e.g., the one we have here in Boston)
have metamerism displays.   At the Boston one they have
two light boxes with light that looks (to the eye) to be the
same.   They also have a basket of colored chips.  Some of the 
chips look the same in both boxes.   But some of the chips
change dramatically, for instance they have one that looks
yellow in one box which looks almost black in the other.

You can do this yourself with LEDs.  LEDs have VERY narrow
spectral output -  only a few nanometers.  You can make two
lightboxes with "white" light by combining Red, Green and
Blue LEDs - but use ones from different manufacturers so
they have slightly different spec's.  Then find various
colored objects and compare them in both boxes.  Most things
will look the same but some will shift dramatically.  I've
done this and it's fun (if you're a science nerd like me).

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Stan McQueen 
<stan@s...> wrote:

> My friend's black and white prints, printed on his 2200,
> look magenta under fluorescent and green under sunlight,
> but neutral under tungsten. (I may have the magenta and
> green reversed, I can't remember.) Is this metamerism?

Yes, and that is the usual pattern with the 2200 - magenta
under flurescent and green under daylight.

See my website for a discussion of this:
http://studio-nelson.com/inkjet/bw22001.htm

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Peter 
Nelson" <peter@s...> wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Stan 
McQueen 
> <stan@s...> wrote:
> 
> > My friend's black and white prints, printed on his 2200,
> > look magenta under fluorescent and green under sunlight,
> > but neutral under tungsten. (I may have the magenta and
> > green reversed, I can't remember.) Is this metamerism?
> 
> Yes, and that is the usual pattern with the 2200 - magenta
> under flurescent and green under daylight.
> 
> See my website for a discussion of this:
> http://studio-nelson.com/inkjet/bw22001.htm

Peter,

Very nice write up about inks and dithering an all.  A minor
nitpick is that you show how 2 inks give more gray values.
Quite true, but its even more dramatic than that -- the 2x2
pattern can give 15 possible grays without overprint .  And
with overprint lots more than that although you will get many
duplicates by then.  One of the crucial issues if how much
lighter the light ink is.  I think most light inks are quite a
bit lighter than 50%.

Roy

I see some of the thread involved cost comparisons.  If it hasn't already
been mentioned, digital will always be much more expensive than the
darkroom, at least from the equipment side.  Most everything you buy in the
digital world will have a short technology life, as opposed to that $5,000
enlarger/lenses that will be working well after we're all dead.  Same with
cameras - you can buy a good 4x5 field outfit for around $5K, as opposed to
$5K for a digital camera that will be obsolete in a year.  My preference is
clearly digital, but it does come with a cost.  A possible exception might
be platinum printing  - the material cost for a 20x24 pt print will get your
attention, especially when the first couple don't turn out right.  Yeoww!

Regards,

  --Ken Carney
    www.kencarney.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "nedbuntline2002" <NedBuntline@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2003 7:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Okay, Now I'm Really Confused...


I'm in the Philadelphia area and I do get to New York now and then (I
was in Ridgefield, New Jersey just today).



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Amadou Diallo"
<amadiallo2001@y...> wrote:
> An alternate suggestion:
> If you're new to digital printing, whatever "system" you buy into
will
> require time and a certain level of  proficiency with new tools to
get
> great prints. Sometimes it's helpful to see examples of high
quality at
> the outset, to give you something to shoot for while you're getting
up
> to speed with all the new equipment. I don't know what part of the
> country you're in, but I'm sure many list members can recommend
> some of the few top quality print studios using quadtones.
(Disclaimer: I
> operate one in NYC). So it might be worth having a print made by
one
> of them. Then you can talk to that particular studio about what
> "system" they used to produce your print, and why.
>
> I'm a big believer that the quality of information from any source\ufffd
> book, web site, what have you\ufffdis determined by the skill and
> experience of the person behind that source. If someone makes
prints
> of an acceptable quality to you, that's who you want
recommendations
> from. Best of luck.
>
> Amadou Diallo
> editions@d...



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/

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Harrington" 


> Very nice write up about inks and dithering an all.  A minor
> nitpick is that you show how 2 inks give more gray values.
> Quite true, but its even more dramatic than that -- the 2x2
> pattern can give 15 possible grays without overprint .
 
How do you figure?  I think you counted duplicates.  Say we call 
black "1" and gray "0.5".    I say the possible values are 0, 0.5,
1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, and 4.     Don't forget there are several 
different patterns that add up to 1.5 or 2.5. 

>                  One of the crucial issues if how much
> lighter the light ink is.  I think most light inks are quite a
> bit lighter than 50%.

That only helps a little - it eliminates the duplicates 
resulting from two 0.5's adding up to a 1, i.e., 1.5,  
2.5 and 3 in the prior example.   Say we called gray 0.3.
Then you get 0, 0.3, 1, 1.3, 1.6, 1.9, 2, 2.3, 2.6, 3, 3.3,
and 4.  The downside is that the new values are nonlinear.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Peter 
Nelson" <peter@s...> wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roy 
Harrington" 
> 
> 
> > Very nice write up about inks and dithering an all.  A minor
> > nitpick is that you show how 2 inks give more gray values.
> > Quite true, but its even more dramatic than that -- the 2x2
> > pattern can give 15 possible grays without overprint .
>  
> How do you figure?  I think you counted duplicates.  Say we call 
> black "1" and gray "0.5".    I say the possible values are 0, 0.5,
> 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, and 4.     Don't forget there are several 
> different patterns that add up to 1.5 or 2.5. 
> 
> >                  One of the crucial issues if how much
> > lighter the light ink is.  I think most light inks are quite a
> > bit lighter than 50%.
> 
> That only helps a little - it eliminates the duplicates 
> resulting from two 0.5's adding up to a 1, i.e., 1.5,  
> 2.5 and 3 in the prior example.   Say we called gray 0.3.
> Then you get 0, 0.3, 1, 1.3, 1.6, 1.9, 2, 2.3, 2.6, 3, 3.3,
> and 4.  The downside is that the new values are nonlinear.

.25 works pretty well 0, .25, .5 , .75, 1, 1.25, 1.50, 1.75, 2.0,
2.25, 2.5, 3.0, 3.25, 4.0.

But the 2x2 example is simplified anyway - with a real dithering
system the number of combinations for 2 inks is many more
that for 1 ink.  The results are much better than twice as
good.  The difference between a black-only print and a
black/light black print is very dramatic.

Roy

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Harrington" 
<roy@h...> wrote:

> But the 2x2 example is simplified anyway - with a real dithering
> system the number of combinations for 2 inks is many more
> that for 1 ink.  The results are much better than twice as
> good.  The difference between a black-only print and a
> black/light black print is very dramatic.


Of course.  I used to write inkjet printer dithering
algorithms for my job in the 80's.  (today I write
image processing software).  I just chose a 2x2 example
to illustrate the concept to people who are unfamiliar
with it.