Digital BW, The Print

Stan writes:

> ... another (a 1270) dedicated to black and white
> (loaded with hextone gray inks) for just that
> reason.

Do you need special driver software when you use special inks?  Do B&W inks
cause any problem with clogging?  Are they based on carbon pigments, or
what?

> I don't know whether you would call them "deep,
> rich" or not, but they have been good enough to
> satisfy judges of several competitions ...

Have you compared them to traditional darkroom prints (by expert printers)?
If so, how did they stand up?

The good inks do not clog any more than what you get in OEM cartridges.

There are some based on dyes, some on pigments, and some a mixture of both.
They all have their place --and their hard-core proponents as "the only
way."

Pigments on matte paper with a reasonably inexpensive printer can be
impereceptible from normal viewing distance.

Seth


=From: Anthony Atkielski [mailto:anthony@...] 
=
=Do you need special driver software when you use special inks? 
= Do B&W inks cause any problem with clogging?  Are they based 
=on carbon pigments, or what?
=

>Do B&W inks cause any problem with clogging?

It would certainly seem that way.   Hardly a day goes by on this 
forum where someone doesn't post about a clog. 

I've had an Epson 870, with the stock inks, since 2000 and I had one 
clog on it, which was a result of leaving it with the heads unparked 
for a MONTH.  It took 5 cleaning cycles to clear and I have never 
had a clog since then.

I've had an Epson 2200 with the stock inks since January and I've 
never had a clog.

The impression I get from people here is that clogs and frequent 
head cleanings, windexing, head removal for cleaning, etc, are par 
for the course with 3rd-party inks.   I've never received a straight 
answer here when I've asked why the 3rd-party ink makers can't get 
their stuff as clog-free as the Epson inks.

>>Do B&W inks cause any problem with clogging?

>...
>The impression I get from people here is that clogs and frequent
>head cleanings, windexing, head removal for cleaning, etc, are par
>for the course with 3rd-party inks.   ...

That is not my experience.

I've been printing third party inks for about 3 years.  The only 2 serious
clogs I've had involved interchanging and using old CIS systems.

My 7500 with MIS Ultra Tone B&W is so reliable that I don't even bother with
nozzle checks unless it has been sitting for many days without any
printing -- the nozzle checks are virtually always perfect.

That said, pigments do seem to require more head cleaning than dyes.  The
7500 and, no doubt, other printers that are made for pigments, have more
thorough cleaning procedures built into their firmware.  So, while I and
folks with 2200s may never have to do extra cleaning procedures, the
machines are probably doing them on their own.

We, of course, read about the clogs here, because this is where people who
are having problems go for help.  Also, I do expect Epson has put more R&D
into the issue and is probably ahead of the third-party vendors in this
regard.  However, with the possible exception of high-elevation,
low-humidity conditions, I suspect most of us are not having serious
clogging issues with third-party inks that are due to any major difference
between those and the Epson pigmented inks.

As to the subject line of whether today's inkjet prints are better than wet
prints, I sure would not go back, and I'll bet most of the people on this
list have no intention of going back to silver printing for most of their
work.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

> That is not my experience.
> ...with the possible exception of high-elevation,
> low-humidity conditions, I suspect most of us are not having serious
> clogging issues with third-party inks that are due to any major
difference between those and the Epson pigmented inks.

Same here.  I use an 870 with MIS inks and the few clogs I've had are
cured with a few cleaning cycles.  This past weekend I used it after
about 5 weeks of sitting, and it required 2 cleaning cycles. 
Sometimes I use it after 2 or 3 weeks sitting and require no cleaning.
 The clogs I do get are more frequent in winter when humidity is lower
(yes we have winter in Florida <g>).

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

At 07:58 AM 5/21/2003 -0700, paul.roark@... wrote:
>I sure would not go back, and I'll bet most of the people on this
>list have no intention of going back to silver printing for most of their
>work.


While i am sure this is true i have yet to talk to any serious B&W 
photographer that will tell me an inkjet print is better than a rich, 
well-printed fiber-based print. Lots of people have explained to me how it 
is easier, cheaper, "good enough", etc., but i dont hear the word 'better' 
very much.

For the record, i am doing way more digital output than wet darkroom these 
days too, but i still think that a well printed silver print still looks 
better than a well printed inkjet print. Anyone disagree? Maybe that will 
change, but for now......


-scott

http://www.Lanes.com


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

At 01:18 AM 5/21/2003, Anthony wrote:
>Stan writes:
> > ... another (a 1270) dedicated to black and white
> > (loaded with hextone gray inks) for just that
> > reason.
>
>Do you need special driver software when you use special inks?  Do B&W inks
>cause any problem with clogging?  Are they based on carbon pigments, or
>what?

You can use special driver software, but it is not necessary. I use the 
Photoshop curves so generously supplied by Paul Roark (who has already 
responded to this thread). I'm using the VM inks from MIS along with their 
continuous inking system. In a little over a year, I have had two clogs 
that were not cleared by cleaning cycles. These required removing the 
cartridge from the printer and using a syringe to suck ink from the bottom 
of the cartridge. It took about five minutes and I was back in business 
again. These clogs both occurred after a hiatus in printing of several 
weeks. And I live in Utah where the humidity is very low year round. The 
inks are based on carbon pigment, but the pigment particles are orders of 
magnitude smaller than the inkjet nozzles.

> > I don't know whether you would call them "deep,
> > rich" or not, but they have been good enough to
> > satisfy judges of several competitions ...
>
>Have you compared them to traditional darkroom prints (by expert printers)?
>If so, how did they stand up?

Not personally, but the competitions they are entered in also have many 
entries by traditional darkroom printers.

Stan

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

At 08:08 AM 5/21/2003, you wrote:
>The impression I get from people here is that clogs and frequent
>head cleanings, windexing, head removal for cleaning, etc, are par
>for the course with 3rd-party inks.   I've never received a straight
>answer here when I've asked why the 3rd-party ink makers can't get
>their stuff as clog-free as the Epson inks.

Maybe because it is more in accordance with human nature to sound off when 
there is a problem. Satisfied customers seldom contact customer service to 
render praise. That said, I am certainly a satisfied customer of both 
Mediastreet (color pigment ink) and MIS (b&w pigment ink). I have had a few 
clogs in a little over a year, but nothing major. And I live in Utah where 
humidity is very low year-round. Of course, as my CIS and CFS systems age, 
I can expect to need to replace them, but maybe I'll move up to a 7600 or 
something by that time.

I don't know why the third-party inks clog more than the OEM inks, but it 
does seem to be true. On the other hand, if I don't print with my Photo 700 
or my 870 for several days (both are used as office printers, not photo 
printers, and both use the stock Epson inks), I wll have to run several 
cleaning cycles to get good nozzle checks. But you're right, they don't 
seem to actually clog as solid as the pigment inks.

Stan

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

--- scott lanes <scott@...> wrote:
> At 07:58 AM 5/21/2003 -0700, paul.roark@...
> wrote:
> >I sure would not go back, and I'll bet most of the
> people on this
> >list have no intention of going back to silver
> printing for most of their
> >work.
> 
> 
> While i am sure this is true i have yet to talk to
> any serious B&W 
> photographer that will tell me an inkjet print is
> better than a rich, 
> well-printed fiber-based print. Lots of people have
> explained to me how it 
> is easier, cheaper, "good enough", etc., but i dont
> hear the word 'better' 
> very much.
> 
> For the record, i am doing way more digital output
> than wet darkroom these 
> days too, but i still think that a well printed
> silver print still looks 
> better than a well printed inkjet print. Anyone
> disagree? Maybe that will 
> change, but for now......
> 
> 
> -scott
> 
> http://www.Lanes.com

hi scott
"Better" is a subjective term to be sure, but I for
one can say that in many cases I like ink jet prints
better than silver prints. I like the matte look and
feel, I like the greater dynamic range, I like the
subtle detail I can extract from my negatives. Nothing
against good silver, its great, but I see ink jet as a
new photographic medium. Just as we have had carbon,
platinum, salt prints, tintypes, photogravure, and so
forth, we now have carbon ink jet and I love it.
John E

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com

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

From: "scott lanes" <scott@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 12:06 PM
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: Ink-jet better than wet prints (was Digital
stuff)


> At 07:58 AM 5/21/2003 -0700, paul.roark@... wrote:
> >I sure would not go back, and I'll bet most of the people on this
> >list have no intention of going back to silver printing for most of their
> >work.
>
>
> While i am sure this is true i have yet to talk to any serious B&W
> photographer that will tell me an inkjet print is better than a rich,
> well-printed fiber-based print. Lots of people have explained to me how it
> is easier, cheaper, "good enough", etc., but i dont hear the word 'better'
> very much.
>
> For the record, i am doing way more digital output than wet darkroom these
> days too, but i still think that a well printed silver print still looks
> better than a well printed inkjet print. Anyone disagree? Maybe that will
> change, but for now......

Scott,

I stopped comparing them. It is like trying to compare platinum prints to
silver prints. They are different mediums and I like them all equally well.

That said, it can be a very hard transition from silver fiber to inkjet for
most photographers. Inkjet is not a replacement for silver and if you look
at it that way you are bound to be disappointed.

Also keep in mind that there are methods of printing on silver fiber from
digital files. Dan Burkholder's digital negative process, LightJet prints
and film recorders.

Martin

I think it depends on what aspect of photography
you're into. 85% to 90% of my work is copy and
restoration of old photos. I get much better results
from a digital process than I ever did with silver.
Especially with the originals that are so faded out or
have so much silver extrusion that copying with film
just makes a different kind of mess. The digital
prints on Photo rag 308 have almost a three
dimensional look. My clients love it. The biggest
problem I have is overcoming posterization with prints
that originally were high contrast and due to poor
processing the highlights are gone and the shadows are
thick with silver extrusion. But I can play with
curves and usually get around it. If it's beyond help
I can often shoot a copy neg and scan that. No way am
I ever going back to a smelly wet darkroom. 

Evelyn

> --- scott lanes <scott@...> wrote:
> > At 07:58 AM 5/21/2003 -0700,
> paul.roark@...
> > wrote:
> > >I sure would not go back, and I'll bet most of
> the
> > people on this
> > >list have no intention of going back to silver
> > printing for most of their
> > >work.
> > 

> > For the record, i am doing way more digital output
> > than wet darkroom these 
> > days too, but i still think that a well printed
> > silver print still looks 
> > better than a well printed inkjet print. Anyone
> > disagree? Maybe that will 
> > change, but for now......
> > 
> > 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com

What is silver extrusion?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Evelyn Grant" <ingamom@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 21, 2003 21:53
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: Ink-jet better than wet prints (was Digital
stuff)


> I think it depends on what aspect of photography
> you're into. 85% to 90% of my work is copy and
> restoration of old photos. I get much better results
> from a digital process than I ever did with silver.
> Especially with the originals that are so faded out or
> have so much silver extrusion that copying with film
> just makes a different kind of mess. The digital
> prints on Photo rag 308 have almost a three
> dimensional look. My clients love it. The biggest
> problem I have is overcoming posterization with prints
> that originally were high contrast and due to poor
> processing the highlights are gone and the shadows are
> thick with silver extrusion. But I can play with
> curves and usually get around it. If it's beyond help
> I can often shoot a copy neg and scan that. No way am
> I ever going back to a smelly wet darkroom.
>
> Evelyn
>
> > --- scott lanes <scott@...> wrote:
> > > At 07:58 AM 5/21/2003 -0700,
> > paul.roark@...
> > > wrote:
> > > >I sure would not go back, and I'll bet most of
> > the
> > > people on this
> > > >list have no intention of going back to silver
> > > printing for most of their
> > > >work.
> > >
>
> > > For the record, i am doing way more digital output
> > > than wet darkroom these
> > > days too, but i still think that a well printed
> > > silver print still looks
> > > better than a well printed inkjet print. Anyone
> > > disagree? Maybe that will
> > > change, but for now......
> > >
> > >
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> http://search.yahoo.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;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/
>
>
>

>... i have yet to talk to any serious B&W
>photographer that will tell me an inkjet print is better than a rich,
>well-printed fiber-based print. ...

I consider myself a rather experienced and serious B&W printer, and I think
my digital prints are better.

Admittedly, it's the digital process, not the inkjet that accounts for most
of this.  Not only in my old-photo work but even in straight landscapes, the
digital controls make a big difference to me.

I use carbon-pigment inkjet output, in part, because it is the best B&W
digital output I've found.  I messed with imagesetters and other
internegatives that I could make silver prints from, as well as color
digital output, but I found the direct inkjet to be preferable, even though
I do agree that the physical product is not perfect yet.

Related to the physical quality issue, while a properly-processed and toned
silver print is still probably the most lightfast and may have the nicest
appearance, at least if not under glass, there are some issues that make me
wonder if the inkjet print hasn't passed up the silver print in some
respects.  First, the proper processing of silver prints is tricky.  What we
thought was sufficient selenium toning, for example, turns out to be
inadequate.

Second, even if there is a clearly-understood, optimum process for
longevity, how does a buyer know the wet print has been so processed?  It
seems much less likely that processing errors will cause problems with
carbon on cotton prints.

Third, wet prints are on good, acid-free fiber paper, I assume.  However,
due to the processing, I believe it is impossible to buffer the wet-process
paper base.  When air and pollution attack even pure cotton cellulose, the
byproduct is acidic and will cause an eventual accelerating deterioration of
the paper.  With our inkjet prints, buffering is possible and may actually
cause the carbon on buffered cotton print to have a longer archival (dark
storage) life than a silver print.

So, I'm just not sure that I'd say the silver print is necessarily even
physically "better" at this point in time.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Stan McQueen 
<stan@s...> wrote:
> At 08:08 AM 5/21/2003, you wrote:
> >The impression I get from people here is that clogs and frequent
> >head cleanings, windexing, head removal for cleaning, etc, are par
> >for the course with 3rd-party inks.   I've never received a 
straight
> >answer here when I've asked why the 3rd-party ink makers can't get
> >their stuff as clog-free as the Epson inks.
> 
> Maybe because it is more in accordance with human nature to sound 
off when 
> there is a problem. Satisfied customers seldom contact customer 
service to 
> render praise. 

But plenty of people here and on the Photo.Net digital darkroom forum 
use stock Epson inks and I seldom hear THEM complaining about the 
clogs-from-hell.   Why wouldn't they complain just as much?

Peter wrote:

The impression I get from people here is that clogs and frequent
head cleanings, windexing, head removal for cleaning, etc, are par
for the course with 3rd-party inks.


Peter,

I think you're getting the wrong impression. If all of us using third party
inks without frequent clogging problems were to report our successes to the
list, I suspect you'd have a far different impression--and the list would
probably become unmanageable and far less useful.

In over two years of using MIS VM inks in a 1280/CIS setup, I've never had
even a moderately serious clog. And I often go for a week at a time without
printing.

Tom Keesling
Intelligent Design, Inc.

--- Anthony Atkielski <anthony@...> wrote:
> What is silver extrusion?
> 
Silver extrusion is when due to poor processing, the
silver in the paper begins to show through. It looks
like the silver is sitting on top of the image. This
is usually due to a lack of sufficient wash time with
no hypo clearing agent used. It takes years to happen.
It can be a challenge to minimize it with traditional
copy methods. Not too tough with digital.

Evelyn

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com

> But plenty of people here and on the Photo.Net digital darkroom forum 
> use stock Epson inks and I seldom hear THEM complaining about the 
> clogs-from-hell.   Why wouldn't they complain just as much?

I think it's important that you distinguish between the inks used and
the method used  to introduce them into the system. For example, none of
the BW printing methods require you to use a CIS, but many choose to do
so for practical reasons. Adding an external system to your printer with
additional parts is bound to have different problems associated with it
than a regular printer.

If all you want to do is to compare the stability of the inks themselves
you would need to compare cartridges prefilled with BW inks to original
cartridges. The assumption would also be that when the cartridges were
empty you threw them away and bought new ones, otherwise the refilling
techniques used would be introduced as a factor and it would no longer
be a fair comparison to originally manufactured cartridges.

If you introduce other factors into the equation it may very well not be
the BW inks themselves that are the problem, but the printing methods
used, and that is a risk the user chooses for themselves.

Both Piezography and MIS sells prefilled cartridges with a cost similar
to original cartridges, so you could choose that approach for maximum
safety. 

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no

I spent most of yesterday testing different versions of Gimp-Print and
QuadToneRIP with the UltraTones. I still can't get prints from
QuadToneRIP, but I'm getting good results with the latest development
version of Gimp-Print (4.13.14), 4 ink printing mode and Paul's 1290
curves. I had to modify the curve a little, but basically it looks
pretty good!

Problem is, on Ilford Smooth Pearl I get big, fat roller marks on the
print. It's from the exit rollers, I'm not talking about the pizza
wheels. I've tryied reducing the density of ink, but even on very low
densities the marks are visible. I get the samme effect on other papers,
like Epson Premium Glossy and Semigloss. They're not visible on matte
papers though.

I've tried removing them entirely, but the rollers and the pizza wheels
are connected in one big piece and I couldn't figure out how to get it
out of the printer, besides I got worried that I might ruin the printer,
so I put them back in place.

Any ideas on how to clean these rollers so they don't leave marks?

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no

Do a Google search on "pizza wheels" and 1280.  You should find plenty of
articles on how to remove the pizza wheels and some should also point out
how to take the roller portion out too.  At least this is what I found when
I went searching for my 1160.  Let us know if you find a cure for the
problem.  Others and I have reported difficulties with machine marks on the
print (mostly from pizza wheels) when using the Ultratones on the glossy and
semigloss surface papers.

Doug

I've searched many pages for this information, but I can't find anything
specific for the 2100 which seems to be different. I was kind of hoping
to keep them in place as well, but to clean the rollers so they don't
leave any marks. I don't know if that's even possible though...

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Doug Fisher [mailto:dougfisher@...] 
> Sent: 22. mai 2003 16:49
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Cleaning the exit rollers on a 2100
> 
> 
> Do a Google search on "pizza wheels" and 1280.  You should 
> find plenty of articles on how to remove the pizza wheels and 
> some should also point out how to take the roller portion out 
> too.  At least this is what I found when I went searching for 
> my 1160.  Let us know if you find a cure for the problem.  
> Others and I have reported difficulties with machine marks on 
> the print (mostly from pizza wheels) when using the 
> Ultratones on the glossy and semigloss surface papers.
> 
> Doug
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your 
> Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. 
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/uetFAA> /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 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/

>>but I can't find anything specific for the 2100 which seems to be
different. <<

Sorry about that.  I thought I read you had a 1290, so I suggested looking
for info. on the much more popular 1280 which is mechanically similar and
for which you can find a lot of info.

Doug

I've wrestled with this on my 2200 with a very weird twist. I observed
it on Photorag when printing out stepwedges. I tried to make it go
away using a few techniques, which I'll describe. But then, as I moved
my head (mine, not printhead) up and down under my OTT-lite, the
streaks moved! It turned out my progressive glasses created a tiny
difraction line which just looked like roller marks! So an oldish guy
is baffled again by his (progressive) bifocals!!<g>

Here are a couple thoughts though: my 2200 came with a odd looking
spatula and some cleaning sheets. The hard copy manual doesn't even
mention them or roller cleaning.

Epson hid this procedure in the online manual, at least in Win 2000.
Here is how I get there:

click on "Epson printer Information center Icon---->Reference
guide---->Problem solver---->Print quality problems---->Printer
rollers leave unwanted marks on your documents"

Intuitive, huh?

They have some drawings of how to use the spatula and some
instructions on what buttons to press to get the cleaning sheets to
slowly run through the printer- it's a special sequence and it
advances the paper slowly, but faster than a normal print, in a
jerking manner I think I recall. They say not to use anything stronger
than water.

I experimented with wedging a plastic paper clip from the output tray
between the spring loaded sheet metal edge that carries the wheels and
rollers and the printer sheet metal bed. Shine a flashlight up the
output tray and if the 2100 is like the 2200 you will see a gap
running the length of the output between two pieces of sheet metal-
both pieces are well above the rollers. If you put the apex of a
plastic paper clip clip(biggest sized one, mine is triangular) with a
thickness of 1.6mm (1/16 inch), you will pry open that gap, and also
raise the rollers a little. Put the clip on the extreme left so that
you can put larger paper through. I never tried bigger than 8 1/2
wide, but you may be able to get 13 inch through if you're clever
without it hitting your wedge. Of course anything will do for a wedge,
I just had plastic clips handy and I could remove them easily.

Since I never used glossy, and never really had a problem, I have to
offer this as merely a novel suggestion, YMMV. You do have to be
careful that the metal plate is not wedged so high that the carriage
will not crash into it. I looked into counterbalancing the spring
(look carefully at left edge of the sheet metal plate at the square
hole)but could see no way of instaling something without running risk
of carriage hitting it.

-------
personal note-

After reading Martin's post about netiquete I see one point brought up
is signing full names and possibly posting URL. Since I've never done
either, well, okay, just remember site is > a year out of date (I'm
doing some color now), and while I highly, highly respect getting
great tonal quality and large neg size I have to sacrifice it for the
montaging freedom (i.e. I have to drop from 16 bit early in the
workflow in order to combine images in pshop and I need lots of raw
material to choose from--->35mm film or digtal). With these excuses in
mind, here is what I've been doing when I haven't been fixing clogs:

Jim Hayes 

http://www.frii.com/~jimhayes

(nice pix of me roughing it in wilds of Colorado some few years ago
with beat Mamiya C330 on bio page) 







--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Staver"
<daniel@p...> wrote:

> I spent most of yesterday testing different versions of Gimp-Print and
> QuadToneRIP with the UltraTones. I still can't get prints from
> QuadToneRIP, but I'm getting good results with the latest development
> version of Gimp-Print (4.13.14), 4 ink printing mode and Paul's 1290
> curves. I had to modify the curve a little, but basically it looks
> pretty good!
> 
> Problem is, on Ilford Smooth Pearl I get big, fat roller marks on the
> print. It's from the exit rollers, I'm not talking about the pizza
> wheels. I've tryied reducing the density of ink, but even on very low
> densities the marks are visible. I get the samme effect on other papers,
> like Epson Premium Glossy and Semigloss. They're not visible on matte
> papers though.
> 
> I've tried removing them entirely, but the rollers and the pizza wheels
> are connected in one big piece and I couldn't figure out how to get it
> out of the printer, besides I got worried that I might ruin the printer,
> so I put them back in place.
> 
> Any ideas on how to clean these rollers so they don't leave marks?
> 
> --
> Daniel Staver
> http://daniel.staver.no

At 3:47 PM +0000 5/22/03, jim hayes wrote:
>[snip] ... as I moved my head (mine, not printhead) up and down 
>under my OTT-lite, the streaks moved! It turned out my progressive 
>glasses created a tiny difraction line which just looked like roller 
>marks! So an oldish guy is baffled again by his (progressive) 
>bifocals!!<g> [snip]


But "progressive" lenses - specifically polarized SOLA/Sola's or 
Varilux - have been recommended to me, both for viewing the screen 
and for other close but variable-distance viewing, not just of prints 
but also of something being photographed from a short distance away, 
topographic maps on the screen of a notebook computer in the 
passenger seat, etc.

So I'd appreciate any advice about any or all of this, especially 
since both with and without my old glasses, I found the entries in 
the Photoshop palettes dismayingly small on Apple's LCDs on a recent 
visit to an Apple Store.

I had assumed I could change the resolution to make the palettes' 
entries larger and more legible. But was told Adobe hadn't provided 
for that and shown that on LCD displays that just makes the palettes' 
entries fuzzy as well as larger.

That dismayed me because I'd like to replace my old desktop with a 
new dual-display notebook and use the notebook's LCD display for the 
palettes. For the image, I thought I'd use Sony's Artisan Color 
Reference monitor. It's a CRT but at less than 21 inches diagonally I 
don't think it would accomodate both the palettes and a near 
life-size image to be printed as large as 11 x 14.

So I'm hoping for an eyeglasses upgrade which will make Photoshop 
palettes on a notebook's LCD display legible for me. Hopefully 
without also making non-existant roller marks legible for me!

Thanks for any help with this.

Sam

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Sam A.
McCandless" <samcc@v...> wrote:
> At 3:47 PM +0000 5/22/03, jim hayes wrote:
> >[snip] ... as I moved my head (mine, not printhead) up and down 
> >under my OTT-lite, the streaks moved! It turned out my progressive 
> >glasses created a tiny difraction line which just looked like roller 
> >marks! So an oldish guy is baffled again by his (progressive) 
> >bifocals!!<g> [snip]
> 
> 
> But "progressive" lenses - specifically polarized SOLA/Sola's or 
> Varilux - have been recommended to me, both for viewing the screen 
> and for other close but variable-distance viewing, not just of prints 
> but also of something being photographed from a short distance away, 
> topographic maps on the screen of a notebook computer in the 
> passenger seat, etc.
> 
> So I'd appreciate any advice about any or all of this, especially 
> since both with and without my old glasses, I found the entries in 
> the Photoshop palettes dismayingly small on Apple's LCDs on a recent 
> visit to an Apple Store.
> 

Sam,

Don't worry about it much. I had an 18 watt "vison-saver" model
OTT-Lite trained on a step wedge uniform shadow area from about 6
inches or so away. And I could barely see the "fake" lines. Of course
it upset me at the time, as I didn't want ANY marks on my photorag. I
just discount them now when they pop up- they are really at the limit
of vision, viewing under ideal conditions, at the right obtuse angle.
My glasses have two of them built in each lens I think.

I chose a Zeiss glass(!) version of progresive lenses, but I'ld
probably go plastic Varilux if I had to do again, simply from safety
aspect.

I think there may be more problems looking through a camera viewfinder
than anything else like a monitor.
Jim Hayes

Thanks for the tip Jim! I've looked at that documentation dozens of
times, specifically looking for hints on how to use that spatula sponge
that comes with the printer... Guess your eyes are better than mine <g>

Unfortunately the cleaning procedure didn't help with the roller marks.
I think the ultratones just aren't compatible with my printer and glossy
papers, because the ink density seems to be correct, and I've used the
same paper just fine with original 2100 inks. I might try using original
Epson Photo Black and Light Black while using ultratones for the rest of
the inks, but I'm out of original inks at the moment so I'll save that
experiment for later. I also print mostly on matte papers, so it's no
big deal. Just would be nice to be able to print on everything... 

As for your tip about lifting the plate with the rollers, am I
understanding you correctly that you're lifting the part of the plate
that's inside the printer to the left? I think this is very helpful for
the pizzal wheel tracks, but it doesn't seem to do much for the exit
rollers. Useful information though, thanks!

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: jim hayes [mailto:jimhayes@...] 
> Sent: 22. mai 2003 17:47
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Cleaning the exit rollers on a 2100
> 
> 
> I've wrestled with this on my 2200 with a very weird twist. I 
> observed it on Photorag when printing out stepwedges. I tried 
> to make it go away using a few techniques, which I'll 
> describe. But then, as I moved my head (mine, not printhead) 
> up and down under my OTT-lite, the streaks moved! It turned 
> out my progressive glasses created a tiny difraction line 
> which just looked like roller marks! So an oldish guy is 
> baffled again by his (progressive) bifocals!!<g>
> 
> Here are a couple thoughts though: my 2200 came with a odd 
> looking spatula and some cleaning sheets. The hard copy 
> manual doesn't even mention them or roller cleaning.
> 
> Epson hid this procedure in the online manual, at least in 
> Win 2000. Here is how I get there:
> 
> click on "Epson printer Information center Icon---->Reference
> guide---->Problem solver---->Print quality problems---->Printer
> rollers leave unwanted marks on your documents"
> 
> Intuitive, huh?
> 
> They have some drawings of how to use the spatula and some 
> instructions on what buttons to press to get the cleaning 
> sheets to slowly run through the printer- it's a special 
> sequence and it advances the paper slowly, but faster than a 
> normal print, in a jerking manner I think I recall. They say 
> not to use anything stronger than water.
> 
> I experimented with wedging a plastic paper clip from the 
> output tray between the spring loaded sheet metal edge that 
> carries the wheels and rollers and the printer sheet metal 
> bed. Shine a flashlight up the output tray and if the 2100 is 
> like the 2200 you will see a gap running the length of the 
> output between two pieces of sheet metal- both pieces are 
> well above the rollers. If you put the apex of a plastic 
> paper clip clip(biggest sized one, mine is triangular) with a 
> thickness of 1.6mm (1/16 inch), you will pry open that gap, 
> and also raise the rollers a little. Put the clip on the 
> extreme left so that you can put larger paper through. I 
> never tried bigger than 8 1/2 wide, but you may be able to 
> get 13 inch through if you're clever without it hitting your 
> wedge. Of course anything will do for a wedge, I just had 
> plastic clips handy and I could remove them easily.
> 
> Since I never used glossy, and never really had a problem, I 
> have to offer this as merely a novel suggestion, YMMV. You do 
> have to be careful that the metal plate is not wedged so high 
> that the carriage will not crash into it. I looked into 
> counterbalancing the spring (look carefully at left edge of 
> the sheet metal plate at the square hole)but could see no way 
> of instaling something without running risk of carriage hitting it.
> 
> -------
> personal note-
> 
> After reading Martin's post about netiquete I see one point 
> brought up is signing full names and possibly posting URL. 
> Since I've never done either, well, okay, just remember site 
> is > a year out of date (I'm doing some color now), and while 
> I highly, highly respect getting great tonal quality and 
> large neg size I have to sacrifice it for the montaging 
> freedom (i.e. I have to drop from 16 bit early in the 
> workflow in order to combine images in pshop and I need lots 
> of raw material to choose from--->35mm film or digtal). With 
> these excuses in mind, here is what I've been doing when I 
> haven't been fixing clogs:
> 
> Jim Hayes 
> 
> http://www.frii.com/~jimhayes
> 
> (nice pix of me roughing it in wilds of Colorado some few 
> years ago with beat Mamiya C330 on bio page) 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel 
> Staver" <daniel@p...> wrote:
> > I spent most of yesterday testing different versions of 
> Gimp-Print and 
> > QuadToneRIP with the UltraTones. I still can't get prints from 
> > QuadToneRIP, but I'm getting good results with the latest 
> development 
> > version of Gimp-Print (4.13.14), 4 ink printing mode and 
> Paul's 1290 
> > curves. I had to modify the curve a little, but basically it looks 
> > pretty good!
> > 
> > Problem is, on Ilford Smooth Pearl I get big, fat roller 
> marks on the 
> > print. It's from the exit rollers, I'm not talking about the pizza 
> > wheels. I've tryied reducing the density of ink, but even 
> on very low 
> > densities the marks are visible. I get the samme effect on other 
> > papers, like Epson Premium Glossy and Semigloss. They're 
> not visible 
> > on matte papers though.
> > 
> > I've tried removing them entirely, but the rollers and the pizza 
> > wheels are connected in one big piece and I couldn't figure 
> out how to 
> > get it out of the printer, besides I got worried that I 
> might ruin the 
> > printer, so I put them back in place.
> > 
> > Any ideas on how to clean these rollers so they don't leave marks?
> > 
> > --
> > Daniel Staver
> > http://daniel.staver.no
> 
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your 
> Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. 
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/uetFAA> /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 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/

Yes I stand corrected. The rollers don't swing upward, just the pizza
wheels when you wedge up the plate in the manner I described. I now
remember I was worrying about both wheel and roller marks at the time.

When I cleaned my rollers using the method Epson describes with water,
nothing big happened either. But my rollers really weren't dirty, as I
said my glasses were creating the illusion of a problem<g>. Doh...

There was one other trick I now remember though that may really work
for your Ilford paper. Slow the print transport down. In my imageprint
RIP the only way I can do this is choose 2880 instead of 1440 for dpi.
But the Epson driver (Windows version at least) allows you to insert a
time delay of a number of seconds (I think maybe 1 to 15, it was some
time ago I looked) after each head pass. I never saw this option for
1160 or 1280 but just my 2200 Epson RIP. I'm sure it's buried deep
under some "advanced" button somewhere in the print dialouge.

You might try that although it would certainly take forever to spit
out a print. But it would give the ink time to dry and roller marks
would be less of an issue.
Jim Hayes


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Staver"
<daniel@p...> wrote:
<snip>

> 
> As for your tip about lifting the plate with the rollers, am I
> understanding you correctly that you're lifting the part of the plate
> that's inside the printer to the left? I think this is very helpful for
> the pizzal wheel tracks, but it doesn't seem to do much for the exit
> rollers. Useful information though, thanks!
> 
> --
> Daniel Staver
> http://daniel.staver.no 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: jim hayes [mailto:jimhayes@f...] 
> > Sent: 22. mai 2003 17:47
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Cleaning the exit rollers on a 2100
> > 
> > 
> > I've wrestled with this on my 2200 with a very weird twist. I 
> > observed it on Photorag when printing out stepwedges. I tried 
> > to make it go away using a few techniques, which I'll 
> > describe. But then, as I moved my head (mine, not printhead) 
> > up and down under my OTT-lite, the streaks moved! It turned 
> > out my progressive glasses created a tiny difraction line 
> > which just looked like roller marks! So an oldish guy is 
> > baffled again by his (progressive) bifocals!!<g>
> > 
> > Here are a couple thoughts though: my 2200 came with a odd 
> > looking spatula and some cleaning sheets. The hard copy 
> > manual doesn't even mention them or roller cleaning.
> > 
> > Epson hid this procedure in the online manual, at least in 
> > Win 2000. Here is how I get there:
> > 
> > click on "Epson printer Information center Icon---->Reference
> > guide---->Problem solver---->Print quality problems---->Printer
> > rollers leave unwanted marks on your documents"
> > 
> > Intuitive, huh?
> > 
> > They have some drawings of how to use the spatula and some 
> > instructions on what buttons to press to get the cleaning 
> > sheets to slowly run through the printer- it's a special 
> > sequence and it advances the paper slowly, but faster than a 
> > normal print, in a jerking manner I think I recall. They say 
> > not to use anything stronger than water.
> > 
> > I experimented with wedging a plastic paper clip from the 
> > output tray between the spring loaded sheet metal edge that 
> > carries the wheels and rollers and the printer sheet metal 
> > bed. Shine a flashlight up the output tray and if the 2100 is 
> > like the 2200 you will see a gap running the length of the 
> > output between two pieces of sheet metal- both pieces are 
> > well above the rollers. If you put the apex of a plastic 
> > paper clip clip(biggest sized one, mine is triangular) with a 
> > thickness of 1.6mm (1/16 inch), you will pry open that gap, 
> > and also raise the rollers a little. Put the clip on the 
> > extreme left so that you can put larger paper through. I 
> > never tried bigger than 8 1/2 wide, but you may be able to 
> > get 13 inch through if you're clever without it hitting your 
> > wedge. Of course anything will do for a wedge, I just had 
> > plastic clips handy and I could remove them easily.
> > 
> > Since I never used glossy, and never really had a problem, I 
> > have to offer this as merely a novel suggestion, YMMV. You do 
> > have to be careful that the metal plate is not wedged so high 
> > that the carriage will not crash into it. I looked into 
> > counterbalancing the spring (look carefully at left edge of 
> > the sheet metal plate at the square hole)but could see no way 
> > of instaling something without running risk of carriage hitting it.
> > 
> > -------
> > personal note-
> > 
> > After reading Martin's post about netiquete I see one point 
> > brought up is signing full names and possibly posting URL. 
> > Since I've never done either, well, okay, just remember site 
> > is > a year out of date (I'm doing some color now), and while 
> > I highly, highly respect getting great tonal quality and 
> > large neg size I have to sacrifice it for the montaging 
> > freedom (i.e. I have to drop from 16 bit early in the 
> > workflow in order to combine images in pshop and I need lots 
> > of raw material to choose from--->35mm film or digtal). With 
> > these excuses in mind, here is what I've been doing when I 
> > haven't been fixing clogs:
> > 
> > Jim Hayes 
> > 
> > http://www.frii.com/~jimhayes
> > 
> > (nice pix of me roughing it in wilds of Colorado some few 
> > years ago with beat Mamiya C330 on bio page) 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel 
> > Staver" <daniel@p...> wrote:
> > > I spent most of yesterday testing different versions of 
> > Gimp-Print and 
> > > QuadToneRIP with the UltraTones. I still can't get prints from 
> > > QuadToneRIP, but I'm getting good results with the latest 
> > development 
> > > version of Gimp-Print (4.13.14), 4 ink printing mode and 
> > Paul's 1290 
> > > curves. I had to modify the curve a little, but basically it looks 
> > > pretty good!
> > > 
> > > Problem is, on Ilford Smooth Pearl I get big, fat roller 
> > marks on the 
> > > print. It's from the exit rollers, I'm not talking about the pizza 
> > > wheels. I've tryied reducing the density of ink, but even 
> > on very low 
> > > densities the marks are visible. I get the samme effect on other 
> > > papers, like Epson Premium Glossy and Semigloss. They're 
> > not visible 
> > > on matte papers though.
> > > 
> > > I've tried removing them entirely, but the rollers and the pizza 
> > > wheels are connected in one big piece and I couldn't figure 
> > out how to 
> > > get it out of the printer, besides I got worried that I 
> > might ruin the 
> > > printer, so I put them back in place.
> > > 
> > > Any ideas on how to clean these rollers so they don't leave marks?
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Daniel Staver
> > > http://daniel.staver.no
> > 
> > 
> > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> > ---------------------~--> Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your 
> > Online Answer To Life's Important Questions. 
> > http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/uetFAA> /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 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/

>> But it would give the ink time to dry and roller marks would be less of
an issue.<<

FWIW, I have aimed a high volume fan down into the area where the printer
head moves and the paper is exposed to the ink in order to try and get it to
speed up the drying.  Unfortunately, it didn't do any good.  I doubt the
minimal extra time of the slower 2880 print speed will work but it couldn't
hurt to try.

Doug