Digital BW, The Print

I don't mean to be provocative, but is IJC worth the cost and hassle
compared to the Piezo/R9 plug-in, the MIS-VM with curves, 2200 with a RIP or
other work flows? What are you gaining in terms of print quality for your
time and $$$?

Martin Wesley

You aren't even in the same ball park!  Profile any ink set you want...VM,
Piezotones, MIS FS...mix and match make a dual photo/matte black set...have
a cool and warm toner in the same set...anything you want Martin.  No silly
RBG curve non-sense.  Completely smooth breakless curves.  MIS screw up
again and send you an ink that is 5% off in density?...no problem 10 minutes
and you are up in running with a modified profile.  Did any one say split
toning?  Want to run quad in a 2200?

Any questions?

Robert

On 6/4/03 7:21 PM, "Martin Wesley" <mwesley250@...> wrote:

> I don't mean to be provocative, but is IJC worth the cost and hassle
> compared to the Piezo/R9 plug-in, the MIS-VM with curves, 2200 with a RIP or
> other work flows? What are you gaining in terms of print quality for your
> time and $$$?
> 
> Martin Wesley
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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/
> 
> 
>

You're talking features. Martin specifically asked about print quality. 
I have a report of lack of ability to print a sharp edge at the image 
border and an overall softness with IJC. I've seen the same thing with 
Gimp at the edges, so I'm wondering if it's inherent in the dithering.
All these features are impressive, if one needs them. But if someone is 
using an existing quad set that works well with the Piezo plugin (for 
example) on papers they are happy with, and has no need for these 
additional benifits, what are you gaining in terms of print quality for 
your time and $$$?
There's a question, again.
Another question.
More on topic, why would anyone go out and get an entire new computer, 
install an operationg system quickly becoming obsolete, instead of 
simply waiting for a version for for the platform they already own?
Another question.
Although I don't use them, if someone is making perfectly beautiful 
prints with RGB curves, why is it non-sense?
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Robert Morrison <
rmorrison@p...> wrote:

> You aren't even in the same ball park!  Profile any ink set you want...VM,
> Piezotones, MIS FS...mix and match make a dual photo/matte black set...have
> a cool and warm toner in the same set...anything you want Martin.  No silly
> RBG curve non-sense.  Completely smooth breakless curves.  MIS screw up
> again and send you an ink that is 5% off in density?...no problem 10 minutes
> and you are up in running with a modified profile.  Did any one say split
> toning?  Want to run quad in a 2200?
> 
> Any questions?
> 
> Robert
> 
> On 6/4/03 7:21 PM, "Martin Wesley" <mwesley250@e...> wrote:
> 
> > I don't mean to be provocative, but is IJC worth the cost and hassle
> > compared to the Piezo/R9 plug-in, the MIS-VM with curves, 2200 with a RIP or
> > other work flows? What are you gaining in terms of print quality for your
> > time and $$$?
> > 
> > Martin Wesley

Tyler and Martin-

At least in my case, this is not to replace piezo and curves that I 
use on my 1160s with MIS inks...this is for my new 2200...I'm not 
thrilled at all with Image print...total blockage in the 95-100 range 
in shadows, pretty good in highlights...plus the costs of maintaining 
IP look like they will be very high (they are working on a price 
model that is fine for an art shop with 6 graphic artists on a 
network sharing one big printer...my case is one photographer in a 
darkroom with 6 printers and one pc...I have to pay 6x what the art 
shop pays for the software and, more importantly, for maintenance.

If there is no other alternative, I may well stick with it, but it 
looks like I can buy an ibook and IJC and try it out for less than 
one license of IP.

Of course, if it does not print as well, it was a fool's errand, but 
not a bad gamble if it works.

cheers,

tom


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" 
<tyler@t...> wrote:
> You're talking features. Martin specifically asked about print 
quality. 
> I have a report of lack of ability to print a sharp edge at the 
image 
> border and an overall softness with IJC. I've seen the same thing 
with 
> Gimp at the edges, so I'm wondering if it's inherent in the 
dithering.
> All these features are impressive, if one needs them. But if 
someone is 
> using an existing quad set that works well with the Piezo plugin 
(for 
> example) on papers they are happy with, and has no need for these 
> additional benifits, what are you gaining in terms of print quality 
for 
> your time and $$$?
> There's a question, again.
> Another question.
> More on topic, why would anyone go out and get an entire new 
computer, 
> install an operationg system quickly becoming obsolete, instead of 
> simply waiting for a version for for the platform they already own?
> Another question.
> Although I don't use them, if someone is making perfectly beautiful 
> prints with RGB curves, why is it non-sense?
> Tyler
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Robert 
Morrison <
> rmorrison@p...> wrote:
> > You aren't even in the same ball park!  Profile any ink set you 
want...VM,
> > Piezotones, MIS FS...mix and match make a dual photo/matte black 
set...have
> > a cool and warm toner in the same set...anything you want 
Martin.  No silly
> > RBG curve non-sense.  Completely smooth breakless curves.  MIS 
screw up
> > again and send you an ink that is 5% off in density?...no problem 
10 minutes
> > and you are up in running with a modified profile.  Did any one 
say split
> > toning?  Want to run quad in a 2200?
> > 
> > Any questions?
> > 
> > Robert
> > 
> > On 6/4/03 7:21 PM, "Martin Wesley" <mwesley250@e...> wrote:
> > 
> > > I don't mean to be provocative, but is IJC worth the cost and 
hassle
> > > compared to the Piezo/R9 plug-in, the MIS-VM with curves, 2200 
with a RIP or
> > > other work flows? What are you gaining in terms of print 
quality for your

> > > time and $$$?
> > > 
> > > Martin Wesley

On 6/4/03 11:09 PM, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@...> wrote:

> You're talking features. Martin specifically asked about print quality.
 
>> Completely smooth breakless curves.

This is not something I've gotten from the Piezo driver since the move to
Piezotone inks. Prior to that move the quality of the profiles was all over
the place with the old inks.  Many other papers...including some of my
favorites were not supported.  The results using other profiles were simply
not acceptable.  My screen match is flawless...that makes a big difference
in final output...allowing very, very fine tuning of hilight and shadow
detail.

Speaking of print quality...try to imagine a piezo print with a 2.5 dmax!
I'm looking at prints just like that now from my 2200...certainly not
somewhere I could get with the Piezo driver.  Likewise partitioned work
flows with the 1280 using the Ultratones appear to give a much poorer dmax
on RC papers because of 1280 inflow restrictions.  Driving the 2200 with
single channel control turns out to the ultimate solution for print quality.

All of the things I just described are "print quality" issues for me.
 
> I have a report of lack of ability to print a sharp edge at the image
> border and an overall softness with IJC.

Certainly not what I've seen.  Was the report...your testing or someone
else's?

> Another question.
> More on topic, why would anyone go out and get an entire new computer,
> install an operationg system quickly becoming obsolete, instead of
> simply waiting for a version for for the platform they already own?
> Another question.

That is perhaps a good question...although for me having a separate print
server is an incredibly valuable thing...just like having a dedicated
machine for scanning. It makes organizing my workflow much simpilier.
Admittedly, I wouldn't buy a machine that wasn't capable of running OSX at
this point...but IJC is working flawlessly for me on my print server running
OS9...however, its my understanding that the OSX version is coming soon.

> Although I don't use them, if someone is making perfectly beautiful
> prints with RGB curves, why is it non-sense?

Because it is convoluted workflow that makes fine tuning very difficult in
comparison to what they could be doing with Ink Jet Control. Partitioned
workflows had their time and place in the development of digital
printing...but in my opinion that time and place is gone...but of course
that is just my opinion...to each his/her own.  I know using a partitioned
workflow would be nonsense for me. What we are talking about here is the
ability to have fine control.  This is critical for print quality.

Robert

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

From: "Robert Morrison" <rmorrison@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 7:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: IJC on w2k ...older macs on PC network???


> You aren't even in the same ball park!  Profile any ink set you want...VM,
> Piezotones, MIS FS...mix and match make a dual photo/matte black
set...have
> a cool and warm toner in the same set...anything you want Martin.  No
silly
> RBG curve non-sense.  Completely smooth breakless curves.  MIS screw up
> again and send you an ink that is 5% off in density?...no problem 10
minutes
> and you are up in running with a modified profile.  Did any one say split
> toning?  Want to run quad in a 2200?
>
> Any questions?
>
Robert,

Well I was wondering if the end result is better than the other systems.

What you describe sounds really great but what do you need in terms of
instrumentation to build the profiles? Sorry if this is repetitive but since
it is a Mac only product I didn't follow the threads.

Martin

On 6/4/03 11:52 PM, "Martin Wesley" <mwesley250@...> wrote:

> What you describe sounds really great but what do you need in terms of
> instrumentation to build the profiles? Sorry if this is repetitive but since
> it is a Mac only product I didn't follow the threads.

A densitometer...and Ink Jet Control which currently only runs on Mac OS9 or
under classic on Mac OSX.  Your X-rite will work great for the densitometer.
I also use excel to track my progress during profiling but that is certainly
not required.  

Ink Jet control isn't for everybody...many users will be satisfied with the
free Open Printmaker application which runs IJC profiles made by other
people.  Antonis and I made some profiles on his 2200 on Saturday and then I
ran them on my equipment...they were ok...but certainly better after I made
a couple of readings and a minor tweak to exactly tune the profile into my
specific 2200...took about 15-20 minutes.  You don't have that capability
with Piezo...you are stuck with the average of Jon Cone's printers...which
he has many times admitted vary widely in performance...but for the power
user I think IJC is by far the most flexible tool out there and is giving me
the best prints I've ever gotten.  One thing that I've learned in the last
year is that print quality critically depends on accurate profiles...this is
particularly true for BW.

Robert

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

From: "Tom OConnell" <TomOC@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 11:27 PM
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: IJC on w2k ...older macs on PC network???


> Tyler and Martin-
>
> At least in my case, this is not to replace piezo and curves that I
> use on my 1160s with MIS inks...this is for my new 2200...I'm not
> thrilled at all with Image print...total blockage in the 95-100 range
> in shadows, pretty good in highlights...plus the costs of maintaining
> IP look like they will be very high (they are working on a price
> model that is fine for an art shop with 6 graphic artists on a
> network sharing one big printer...my case is one photographer in a
> darkroom with 6 printers and one pc...I have to pay 6x what the art
> shop pays for the software and, more importantly, for maintenance.

Tom,

That makes sense. I wouldn't do business with ColorByte at this point
myself. I paid  $500 for Imageprint on the promise they would support MIS-VM
and PiezoTone inks on the 1280 and they never delivered. Interesting that
the profiles they did manage produce for the PT inks were also completely
blocked up in the 95-100 range.
>
> If there is no other alternative, I may well stick with it, but it
> looks like I can buy an ibook and IJC and try it out for less than
> one license of IP.

Well there is still the 2200 version of the Septone inks and software yet to
come. If they manage to bring in the software at the plug-in price or even
double, it looks pretty appealing. I will show you the samples I have, if I
can make it to the Bay Area meeting.
>
> Of course, if it does not print as well, it was a fool's errand, but
> not a bad gamble if it works.

Sounds like it does the job from most reports but I haven't seen any
examples myself. The cross platform solution just sounded like a lot of
hassle. Mostly from the point of view of needing to learn your way around a
new OS but I guess you already have some Mac experience.

Martin

Robert,

I really didn't want to start a shooting match with my question. I just
wanted to know if the gains in print quality were significant enough to
justify the cost and work involved in a cross platform network. If the
benefits are there, I'm game myself. For anyone already on a Mac it would be
a natural to try out.

I agree with both you and Tyler on the RGB separation curve methods. I think
that you can get really top quality prints with those workflows but that it
is often an up hill battle in terms of achieving smooth tone ramps. Overall
I feel the Piezo/R9 plug-in has been more satisfying to work with and I
would expect that grayscale ink workflows that address the printer directly
rather than through the Epson driver are the preferred way to go.

Martin


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Robert Morrison" <rmorrison@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 11:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: IJC on w2k ...older macs on PC network???


> On 6/4/03 11:09 PM, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@...> wrote:
>
> > You're talking features. Martin specifically asked about print quality.
>
> >> Completely smooth breakless curves.
>
> This is not something I've gotten from the Piezo driver since the move to
> Piezotone inks. Prior to that move the quality of the profiles was all
over
> the place with the old inks.  Many other papers...including some of my
> favorites were not supported.  The results using other profiles were
simply
> not acceptable.  My screen match is flawless...that makes a big difference
> in final output...allowing very, very fine tuning of hilight and shadow
> detail.
>
> Speaking of print quality...try to imagine a piezo print with a 2.5 dmax!
> I'm looking at prints just like that now from my 2200...certainly not
> somewhere I could get with the Piezo driver.  Likewise partitioned work
> flows with the 1280 using the Ultratones appear to give a much poorer dmax
> on RC papers because of 1280 inflow restrictions.  Driving the 2200 with
> single channel control turns out to the ultimate solution for print
quality.
>
> All of the things I just described are "print quality" issues for me.
>
> > I have a report of lack of ability to print a sharp edge at the image
> > border and an overall softness with IJC.
>
> Certainly not what I've seen.  Was the report...your testing or someone
> else's?
>
> > Another question.
> > More on topic, why would anyone go out and get an entire new computer,
> > install an operationg system quickly becoming obsolete, instead of
> > simply waiting for a version for for the platform they already own?
> > Another question.
>
> That is perhaps a good question...although for me having a separate print
> server is an incredibly valuable thing...just like having a dedicated
> machine for scanning. It makes organizing my workflow much simpilier.
> Admittedly, I wouldn't buy a machine that wasn't capable of running OSX at
> this point...but IJC is working flawlessly for me on my print server
running
> OS9...however, its my understanding that the OSX version is coming soon.
>
> > Although I don't use them, if someone is making perfectly beautiful
> > prints with RGB curves, why is it non-sense?
>
> Because it is convoluted workflow that makes fine tuning very difficult in
> comparison to what they could be doing with Ink Jet Control. Partitioned
> workflows had their time and place in the development of digital
> printing...but in my opinion that time and place is gone...but of course
> that is just my opinion...to each his/her own.  I know using a partitioned
> workflow would be nonsense for me. What we are talking about here is the
> ability to have fine control.  This is critical for print quality.
>
> Robert
>
>
>
> 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/
>
>

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

From: "Robert Morrison" <rmorrison@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 12:08 AM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: IJC on w2k ...older macs on PC network???


> On 6/4/03 11:52 PM, "Martin Wesley" <mwesley250@...> wrote:
>
> > What you describe sounds really great but what do you need in terms of
> > instrumentation to build the profiles? Sorry if this is repetitive but
since
> > it is a Mac only product I didn't follow the threads.
>
> A densitometer...and Ink Jet Control which currently only runs on Mac OS9
or
> under classic on Mac OSX.  Your X-rite will work great for the
densitometer.
> I also use excel to track my progress during profiling but that is
certainly
> not required.
>
> Ink Jet control isn't for everybody...many users will be satisfied with
the
> free Open Printmaker application which runs IJC profiles made by other
> people.  Antonis and I made some profiles on his 2200 on Saturday and then
I
> ran them on my equipment...they were ok...but certainly better after I
made
> a couple of readings and a minor tweak to exactly tune the profile into my
> specific 2200...took about 15-20 minutes.  You don't have that capability
> with Piezo...you are stuck with the average of Jon Cone's printers...which
> he has many times admitted vary widely in performance...but for the power
> user I think IJC is by far the most flexible tool out there and is giving
me
> the best prints I've ever gotten.  One thing that I've learned in the last
> year is that print quality critically depends on accurate profiles...this
is
> particularly true for BW.
>
Robert,

Well our posts are crossing each other at this point!<G>

It sounds very good. The ability to close the loop and tweak profiles for
individual printers is very desirable. Printer to printer variation is much
larger than we realize and accounts for the wide range of success and
failure people report with grayscale ink printing. (Clogging as well as
print quality!)

I sincerely wish I could give it a spin. I guess my wife's ancient Mac
notebook with OS 5 or 6 and 8MB of RAM ($3,000+ in the early 90's!) would
not be worth retrieving from its current paperweight status.<G>

Would it be reasonable to put the printer on a true stand alone network
print server so that both the Windows and Mac boxes could share them
equally?

Thanks,
Martin

I'm not
> thrilled at all with Image print...total blockage in the 95-100 range
> in shadows, pretty good in highlights

Tom, just an observation from an old cynic...
IP was touted as being the holy grail by various folk here, then we started
seeing prints, horrible dither, compression as you talked about, trashing
OSs on install, non of this was acknowledged by its supporters until IJC
comes along. I would not invest anything until I'd had oneof my own files
printed by someone I trust. I nearly bit the bullet and bought IP until at
the last minute I saw a print and though 'is this what they are going on
bout//'

Julian

--- Julian Thomas <julianthomas@...> wrote:
> I'm not
> > thrilled at all with Image print...total blockage
> in the 95-100 range
> > in shadows, pretty good in highlights
> 
> Tom, just an observation from an old cynic...
> IP was touted as being the holy grail by various
> folk here, then we started
> seeing prints, horrible dither, compression as you
> talked about, trashing
> OSs on install, non of this was acknowledged by its
> supporters until IJC
> comes along. I would not invest anything until I'd
> had oneof my own files
> printed by someone I trust. I nearly bit the bullet
> and bought IP until at
> the last minute I saw a print and though 'is this
> what they are going on
> bout//'
> 
> Julian
> 
just thought i'd chime in
i too almost bought Imageprint then i saw a sample and
was glad i did. It had a weird cyan edging problem and
dithered high tones. So I got a 1200 with MIS-VM and I
like it quite a bit. For giggles I tried OPM on my
2200 and I am very impressed so far. I see no dots or
weird dither in any of the tones, it is all very
smooth. That's using Antonis' EAM curves at 70-80%
warm and 20-30% cool. I am going to do more prints to
make sure and then I think I am diving in. IJC seems
to allow the user control I have been looking for. The
MIS-VM curve system works well but fine tuning isn't
all that easy, the ability to create my own profiles
is very appealing. 
john Eckenrode

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com

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

From: "Tyler Boley" <tyler@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2003 8:09 AM
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: IJC on w2k ...older macs on PC
network???


> You're talking features. Martin specifically asked about print
quality.
> I have a report of lack of ability to print a sharp edge at the
image
> border and an overall softness with IJC. I've seen the same
thing with
> Gimp at the edges, so I'm wondering if it's inherent in the
dithering.
> All these features are impressive, if one needs them. But if
someone is
> using an existing quad set that works well with the Piezo
plugin (for
> example) on papers they are happy with, and has no need for
these
> additional benifits, what are you gaining in terms of print
quality for
> your time and $$$?
> There's a question, again.
> Another question.
> More on topic, why would anyone go out and get an entire new
computer,
> install an operationg system quickly becoming obsolete, instead
of
> simply waiting for a version for for the platform they already
own?
> Another question.
> Although I don't use them, if someone is making perfectly
beautiful
> prints with RGB curves, why is it non-sense?
> Tyler

Tyler,

having a PC, the Wasatch SoftRip and an Epson 9000 I decided to
use that setup for Ultratone VM inks. One of the decisions in
curve control was whether the greys should be used to their full
100 % in each curve separation or let the next one take it over
at 90 %. I think much of the softness, lack of small detail is a
result of the right setting in that part of the curves and
related to the dithering quality of the driver. If the dithering
quality is excellent then you better end the curve early and let
the next grey take it partly over with low percentage ink and the
good dithering. The 90-100 % dithering is always harder to
control than any dithering in the 0-30 % part. It is also a
compromise on ink amount and the length of the greyramp covered
by one grey. The Wasatch doesn't have such a good dithering and
then the good compromise is harder to find. I still have to tweak
that part better as I see the problems you describe.

The work on the SoftRip neutral settings that I have done is as
follows: the magenta channel with the toner remains straight,
that channel is linearised (M+m in one calibration curve),
separation curves made for the YCcK channel greys and then an
overall linearisation with a greyramp without the toner printed
(as that one already was linearised), returned to the curves to
tweak them till the linearisation curve is almost straight, the
last linearisation curve is three times used: in the Y,Cc,K
channels. The greyramp with the toner checked for the
straightness in another linearisation curve measurement but that
one is only for control, I wish that Wasatch will give me that
extra feature of an overall linearisation that measures more
samples than the one that is used for one channel linearisation.
Now I use the 17 samples for the 4 = YCcK channels and that is
just 4 per channel, not enough. I could tweak the separation
curves of course but that probably introduces more problems than
it solves. The inklimit is set at 90% and the total made 60%
lighter (Wasatch units). that gives some slack for the other
curves.

Next to the fact that I still can use the old setup I have a
driver now that can be linearised (more or less, hope on better),
a good start for the other warmer, colder curves as that can be
done with the total curves and the toner (Mm) curve. The driver
is on another XP system and I throw
a simple straight CMYK 0-100% conversion of a greyscale file on
it that is made with a PS action. Yesterday evening I got a small
application that a friend has made which converts a 16 bit
greyscale tiff into a plain 16 bit CMYK tiff (it has to be
changed to LZW compression in default as that will make the files
much smaller). The SoftRip eats that and I hope it makes a
difference in the output though I'm not sure yet. Using the
application just before the RIP makes the transport on the
network easier and editing is done in the greyscale image on
another system.

In the process I made a linearisation target that is dedicated to
the Ultratone VM inks driven by the Wasatch. I have used
Spectrocam readings as my Gretag densitometer is not reliable at
higher Dmax anymore and the SoftRip is compatible with the
Spectrocam.

Another approach that is possible is the use of Paul's VM curves
cnverted to RGB profiles and the Wasatch paper-ink settings
adapted to the Epson driver. The Wasatch SoftRip can be made into
an RGB device though it is CMYK in default. That would allow
printing straight from a greyscale but I find it less transparent
and I guess that I can get more in this way.

Not a cheap solution of course but the RIP was there already for
other reasons. If there's a port to Windows of one of the
dedicated B&W drivers or Gimp-print itself then I think it should
be nice if it became the default driver for Qimage. The
combination of that print software with it's versatile
interpolation routines etc with a driver that is more transparent
and with good dithering will beat many RIPs around. I've used
Paul's curves on Qimage and the Epson driver and I see no
problems with the interpolation nor sharpness settings of that
software. The lower black D is then the only thing left to be
changed in my opinion and a Gimp-print port is the answer.

Ernst

> I have a report of lack of ability to print a sharp edge at the
image
> border and an overall softness with IJC.

I'm kinda talking off the top of my head, since I have barely
used OPM yet, and haven't ponied up for IJC, but ...

Following the threads I gather that OPM is nowhere near as good
at re-sampling images as is the Epson driver.  Therefore, for
best results, you need to re-sample the image to an output
resolution of 720dpi in Photoshop before sending it to OPM.  Also,
having a 16-bit grayscale seems to help.

Speculatively, John

> A densitometer...and Ink Jet Control which currently only runs on
Mac OS9 or
> under classic on Mac OSX.  Your X-rite will work great for the
densitometer.

This is a quite a request ...

But could Robert, or other knowledgeable person, perhaps post a
list of readily available densitometers (for example, the ones
currently available at eBay) along with recommendations about
their suitability for use with IJC ?

Thanks, John

P.S.  On eBay now:  XRite 320TR, DTP32, 890, 348,308, 361T, ...

I shouldn't have openned my mouth, but I did so I'll try to be
clearer. Like Julian, I'm cynical about the Next Big Deal. The lists
started as a way for people with niche interests to come together and
help each other, they have become another marketing outlet. Please
don't take that as an acusation, it's just an observation.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Robert Morrison
<rmorrison@p...> wrote:
> On 6/4/03 11:09 PM, "Tyler Boley" <tyler@t...> wrote:
> 
> > You're talking features. Martin specifically asked about print
quality.
>  
> >> Completely smooth breakless curves.
> 
> This is not something I've gotten from the Piezo driver since the
move to
> Piezotone inks.

I agree there are many who have had problems with the transition, and
some profiles were off from the beginning for other people. However
there are many who have had no problem at all and they are making
beautiful prints with the new ink and the old system. I would submitt
that if you have no sharp transitions, reversals, or flat spots, that
you will be able to customize your workflow and get linear output and
get... 
> very, very fine tuning of hilight and shadow
> detail.

This is just a guess, but I imagine there are some input values that
do output to acurate 90%-100% output from ImagePrint, and even that
problem could be overcome.

> Speaking of print quality...try to imagine a piezo print with a 2.5
dmax!

As you say, this is a print quality issue to you, and I know it is for
others. To me it is not, as long as Dmax is not too weak. If you are
of the silver print esthetic this is an issue. I'm far exceeding
platinum dmax now, and actually a printing system with a very high
density range makes me print too dark and destroy the particular feel
I want. So in generally accepted terms, you are right that is an image
quality issue, but not universally.

> > I have a report of lack of ability to print a sharp edge at the image
> > border and an overall softness with IJC.
> 
> Certainly not what I've seen.  Was the report...your testing or someone
> else's?

Sorry, but I can't repeat the problem. This was with GimpPrint, which
IJC is based on. Since my earlier tests I've upgraded both GimpPrint
and Ghostscript versions and can't duplicate it quickly here now. This
problem with IJC was told to me by a high end printer whose opinion I
absolutely trust. He uses the Pro24 RIP currently, and has a critical
eye for sharpness, and told me he had this problem with IJC. So it's
iffy, I mostly brought it up to see if any other IJC users would
comment on it.

snip...
> That is perhaps a good question...although for me having a separate
print
> server is an incredibly valuable thing..

I understand that, and also that many higher end users and shops have
many boxes for many uses. Others, like myself, try to minimize that
approach because of cost. I'm just saying that for many users, adding
the cost of another system has to be factored in. If I were them, and
getting decent prints currently, I'd wait for a windows version. For
myself, I'll wait for an OSX version, but for now it supports no
printers I use.

> > Although I don't use them, if someone is making perfectly beautiful
> > prints with RGB curves, why is it non-sense?
> 
> Because it is convoluted workflow that makes fine tuning very
difficult in
> comparison to what they could be doing with Ink Jet Control.

I agree, but it can work, and is affordable. As I suggested, given the
same materials working well on both, is there really some magic image
quality difference?

> Partitioned
> workflows had their time and place in the development of digital
> printing...but in my opinion that time and place is gone...

Because you can evidently afford to easily move on, some can't.

>but of course
> that is just my opinion...to each his/her own.  I know using a
partitioned
> workflow would be nonsense for me. What we are talking about here is the
> ability to have fine control.  This is critical for print quality.

Actually, a truly partitioned workflow is the ultimate control, and
that is what you're really doing with IJC anyway. I agree that for
99.99% of users, dinking with partitioning is silly (by the way, don't
you still have to come up with your own partitioning curves with IJC?
Hmm?).
A high degree of control is very possible in RGB and CMYK with
partitioning, better control is happening every day.
Lastly, there has been a lot of knocking of canned profiles while
discussing this product. Canned profiles have been very successful for
many many users in a number of situations. The Atkesen color profiles
are just one example. Some users with unusual printers can't use them
well. Other users like you and me will trust none but our own. But to
rule them out as fatally flawed is over the top, and I'd bet the
majority of users out there will make wonderful prints with them and
be happy campers.
Tyler

Great idea.

I'd love to see such a list of recommendations too, but could we change the 
subject line so this new thread is easier to follow?

BTW, thanks to everyone who contributed to the thread on IJC and older 
macs. It's been great.(And thanks also to the guys who took time to 
straighten me out on dual-platform Zip disc usage.)

Thanks again, he says making lots of notes...

David

At 05:11 PM 6/5/03 +0000, you wrote:

> > A densitometer...and Ink Jet Control which currently only runs on
>Mac OS9 or
> > under classic on Mac OSX.  Your X-rite will work great for the
>densitometer.
>
>This is a quite a request ...
>
>But could Robert, or other knowledgeable person, perhaps post a
>list of readily available densitometers (for example, the ones
>currently available at eBay) along with recommendations about
>their suitability for use with IJC ?
>
>Thanks, John
>
>P.S.  On eBay now:  XRite 320TR, DTP32, 890, 348,308, 361T, ...
>
>
>
>
>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/


David Jackson
Project Assistant
First Year Experience Program

201A Alcee Fortier Building
Monday - Friday, 8:30 - 5

Voice: (504) 865-5264
Fax:    (504) 862-8455
Email: lagniap@...
Web:   http://www.tulane.edu/~lagniap/

John,

it's not so much about "how  good" OPM is at resampling: it just doesn't  at all! 
It  sends to the printer whatever gray tiff you open as is. 

So, you are correct, the closer to 720 the file is, the better. You may not see a 
big difference past, say 400-500 dpi, but will certainly see pixelation if you 
send a 360 dpi image. The same image printed through the Epson driver will 
print smoothly. In that sense, there is an extra step that one needs to take if 
their files are below 400 dpi (at 100% final print size).

As for the 16 vs 8 bit....  it definitely likes the 16bits better (it was originally built 
that way) , but an 8bit 720 dpi file will be just fine.

Just to clarify: this is not about scanning resolutions and extracting info from 
the original etc - it's just about matching device dots to pixels.

Antonis

> Following the threads I gather that OPM is nowhere near as good
> at re-sampling images as is the Epson driver.  Therefore, for
> best results, you need to re-sample the image to an output
> resolution of 720dpi in Photoshop before sending it to OPM.  Also,
> having a 16-bit grayscale seems to help.
> 
> Speculatively, John

Finally! I managed to get rid of those damn exit roller marks when
printing on glossy papers with my 2100.

I did exactly what the manual says not to do and used some mild
dishwashing detergent diluted in water to wash both the exit rollers and
the thick rollers that are just below the exit rollers. I think it was
important to clean both as the top rollers seemed to pick up dirt and
dust from the ones below.

I used the cleaning spatula that comes with the 2100, dipped it into the
soap water and squeezed it before washing the rollers. After getting all
the rollers wet I would run a cleaning sheet through the printer which
had the double effect of drying the rollers and rotating them so I could
get them clean on all sides. I repeated this procedure about six or
seven times, after which the rollers were visibly cleaner.

I've run some test sheets of Ilford Smooth Pearl through my printer now,
and I can't see roller marks anywhere.

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

Hello Daniel,

>Finally! I managed to get rid of those damn exit roller marks 
>when printing on glossy papers with my 2100.
> 
>...I repeated this procedure about six or seven times, after 
>which the rollers were visibly cleaner.

Excellent news, thanks for the report.  I'll definitely file this away
for future reference.

Regards,
Clayton


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

Excellent! For my own reference, can you describe the kind of
detergent used? You mean "dishwashing liquid" right? "Dishwashing
detergent" is the stuff I think of as being put in dishwashers.

Any special ingredients you avoided/included in your brand? How dilute
a solution with water? Did you change the dilution towards more water
as you got toward your final seventh cleaning? Did you wipe across all
the rollers from insde bed  quickly and feed sheet? Or from output
tray since bottom rollers may be easier to get to that way? That would
only cover a small part of the roller perimeter.

Sorry for all the questions, Daniel. Lately I'm wondering if the
rollers can also leave tiny white dots/fibers from flakings from
previous paper transport which then might get pressed down onto paper
as it dries. Just a theroy- which may mean I'll use your procedure,
hence all the detailed questions. It could be coming from flaking from
the existing sheet as well.
Jim H.


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

> Finally! I managed to get rid of those damn exit roller marks when
> printing on glossy papers with my 2100.
> 
> I did exactly what the manual says not to do and used some mild
> dishwashing detergent diluted in water to wash both the exit rollers and
> the thick rollers that are just below the exit rollers. I think it was
> important to clean both as the top rollers seemed to pick up dirt and
> dust from the ones below.
> 
> I used the cleaning spatula that comes with the 2100, dipped it into the
> soap water and squeezed it before washing the rollers. After getting all
> the rollers wet I would run a cleaning sheet through the printer which
> had the double effect of drying the rollers and rotating them so I could
> get them clean on all sides. I repeated this procedure about six or
> seven times, after which the rollers were visibly cleaner.
> 
> I've run some test sheets of Ilford Smooth Pearl through my printer now,
> and I can't see roller marks anywhere.
> 
> --
> Daniel Staver
> http://daniel.staver.no

Greetings: Excuse the  slight OFF topic question,,,,  I'm looking for 
a place to purchase 100 matts 8"x10" outside dimensions with the 
window at 6"x8"...  Any suggestions??
   To get back on topic I use a 1200 with MIS Vm hex ink with no 
problems,  If I haven't used it for a few days all it takes is a 
cleaning or two and away I go...
  regards Larry

Hi Jim,

First of all, I apologize for making such a bold statement about the
problem being completely gone. It turns out I was wrong. It's much
better, but not gone completely. Low density prints are good now, but
the problem is still there to some degree when I move into higher
densities.

When I made my first test-prints on Ilford Smooth Pearl after cleaning
the density was set to 0.9 in QuadToneRIP, but when I went up to 1.4 or
1.5 the problem started to appear again.

I'm beginning to suspect it's not a printer problem, but an ink problem.
A print with only original Epson Photo Black and Light black has no
roller marks, even at very high densities. But as soon as I add
Ultratone magenta position toner inks to the mix I get the roller marks
again. I'm wondering whether it's something caused by rinsing my
cartridges with water. Maybe residual water in the cartridges is causing
the ink to dry slower.

You're right, it's dishwashing liquid, not detergent. I'm afraid the
brand name of my Norwegian dishwashing liquid isn't going to help you
very much though, but the name is Zalo. It's the kind of green soap
liquid you use when washing dishes. I used one drop mixed with one cup
of water.

I cleaned both the top and bottom rollers from the output tray and also
the top rollers from inside the printer. I only cleaned the ones at the
exit, not those further into the printer. Today I found that the easiest
way is to feed a paper through the printer and hold the spatula between
the top and bottom rollers from the output tray while the paper is
moving into the printer since both rollers will be rotating.

I need to make lots of prints this weekend, so I'm back to using matte
inks and paperrs. I'll do more experiments with this when time allows.

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

> -----Original Message-----
> From: jim hayes [mailto:jimhayes@...] 
> Sent: 6. juni 2003 16:58
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Exit roller marks finally gone on my 2100
> 
> 
> Excellent! For my own reference, can you describe the kind of 
> detergent used? You mean "dishwashing liquid" right? 
> "Dishwashing detergent" is the stuff I think of as being put 
> in dishwashers.
> 
> Any special ingredients you avoided/included in your brand? 
> How dilute a solution with water? Did you change the dilution 
> towards more water as you got toward your final seventh 
> cleaning? Did you wipe across all the rollers from insde bed  
> quickly and feed sheet? Or from output tray since bottom 
> rollers may be easier to get to that way? That would only 
> cover a small part of the roller perimeter.
> 
> Sorry for all the questions, Daniel. Lately I'm wondering if 
> the rollers can also leave tiny white dots/fibers from 
> flakings from previous paper transport which then might get 
> pressed down onto paper as it dries. Just a theroy- which may 
> mean I'll use your procedure, hence all the detailed 
> questions. It could be coming from flaking from the existing 
> sheet as well. Jim H.
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel 
> Staver" <daniel@p...> wrote:
> > Finally! I managed to get rid of those damn exit roller marks when 
> > printing on glossy papers with my 2100.
> > 
> > I did exactly what the manual says not to do and used some mild 
> > dishwashing detergent diluted in water to wash both the 
> exit rollers 
> > and the thick rollers that are just below the exit rollers. 
> I think it 
> > was important to clean both as the top rollers seemed to 
> pick up dirt 
> > and dust from the ones below.
> > 
> > I used the cleaning spatula that comes with the 2100, 
> dipped it into 
> > the soap water and squeezed it before washing the rollers. After 
> > getting all the rollers wet I would run a cleaning sheet 
> through the 
> > printer which had the double effect of drying the rollers 
> and rotating 
> > them so I could get them clean on all sides. I repeated 
> this procedure 
> > about six or seven times, after which the rollers were visibly 
> > cleaner.
> > 
> > I've run some test sheets of Ilford Smooth Pearl through my printer 
> > now, and I can't see roller marks anywhere.
> > 
> > --
> > 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/ySSFAA> /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/

Larry,

have you looked at light impressions? They custom cut.

http://www.lightimpressionsdirect.com/servlet/OnlineShopping



Antonis





--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Larry Ostrom 
<ostrom@r...> wrote:

> Greetings: Excuse the  slight OFF topic question,,,,  I'm looking for 
> a place to purchase 100 matts 8"x10" outside dimensions with the 
> window at 6"x8"...  Any suggestions??
>    To get back on topic I use a 1200 with MIS Vm hex ink with no 
> problems,  If I haven't used it for a few days all it takes is a 
> cleaning or two and away I go...
>   regards Larry

>>But as soon as I add Ultratone magenta position toner inks to the mix I
get the roller marks
again.<<

FWIW, from my experience I think this is just a characteristic of the MIS
Ultratone inks on non-matte surface.  They do not dry "enough" right after
printing to prevent damage from handling by the printer feeding mechanism.
The higher the density, the more likely the problem.

Doug

First one statement about using matte papers instead of glossy: it
should work for you of course, but I'm trying to solve a problem with
my prints right now that resembles flaking (white specks and fibers on
print), and I examined my 2200 for debris.

I'm worried because I find white specks on both upper and lower exit
rollers. An idea I'm entertaining is that the rollers deposit the
white specks after the ink is laid down and about dry. Sort of a
"reverse flaking" where specks are stuck on- not removed with abrasion.

Just an idea though. No basis yet in fact, haven't tested out the notion.


Doug Fishers post inplies that it's not water in the cart but the
density of the ink causing slower drying. Therefore sticking with
Epson ink should clear the problem. This will not be an acceptable
solution though I know.

Like I posted before about my own printer mechanical issues, the
further away I get from what Epson intended (CIS, non-Epson carts/ink,
non-Epson approved paper etc), the more trouble I have. Even following
the narrow course there are problems.

No Zalo in US. But I get the idea- my notion is that what the soap is
doing (or glycerol?) is creating just a tiny bit of surfactant
power..."sticky water". One drop to a cup of water is a small amount
so this is what I'm guessing. But it is only a wild hunch. So whatever
stuff has gotten onto the roller is lifted off.

Of course it could just be washing it, breaking down the deposit like
soap does.

I'm also wondering about if the cleaning sheet has any action. If it
gets damp enough from wetting the roller on top, the sheet might clean
the roller on bottom. Again wild guessing. Your approach through the
output tray sounds more complete a solution.
Jim H. 



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

> Hi Jim,
> 
> First of all, I apologize for making such a bold statement about the
> problem being completely gone. It turns out I was wrong. It's much
> better, but not gone completely. Low density prints are good now, but
> the problem is still there to some degree when I move into higher
> densities.
> 
> When I made my first test-prints on Ilford Smooth Pearl after cleaning
> the density was set to 0.9 in QuadToneRIP, but when I went up to 1.4 or
> 1.5 the problem started to appear again.
> 
> I'm beginning to suspect it's not a printer problem, but an ink problem.
> A print with only original Epson Photo Black and Light black has no
> roller marks, even at very high densities. But as soon as I add
> Ultratone magenta position toner inks to the mix I get the roller marks
> again. I'm wondering whether it's something caused by rinsing my
> cartridges with water. Maybe residual water in the cartridges is causing
> the ink to dry slower.
> 
> You're right, it's dishwashing liquid, not detergent. I'm afraid the
> brand name of my Norwegian dishwashing liquid isn't going to help you
> very much though, but the name is Zalo. It's the kind of green soap
> liquid you use when washing dishes. I used one drop mixed with one cup
> of water.
> 
> I cleaned both the top and bottom rollers from the output tray and also
> the top rollers from inside the printer. I only cleaned the ones at the
> exit, not those further into the printer. Today I found that the easiest
> way is to feed a paper through the printer and hold the spatula between
> the top and bottom rollers from the output tray while the paper is
> moving into the printer since both rollers will be rotating.
> 
> I need to make lots of prints this weekend, so I'm back to using matte
> inks and paperrs. I'll do more experiments with this when time allows.
> 
> --
> Daniel Staver
> http://daniel.staver.no 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: jim hayes [mailto:jimhayes@f...] 
> > Sent: 6. juni 2003 16:58
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Exit roller marks finally gone on my 2100
> > 
> > 
> > Excellent! For my own reference, can you describe the kind of 
> > detergent used? You mean "dishwashing liquid" right? 
> > "Dishwashing detergent" is the stuff I think of as being put 
> > in dishwashers.
> > 
> > Any special ingredients you avoided/included in your brand? 
> > How dilute a solution with water? Did you change the dilution 
> > towards more water as you got toward your final seventh 
> > cleaning? Did you wipe across all the rollers from insde bed  
> > quickly and feed sheet? Or from output tray since bottom 
> > rollers may be easier to get to that way? That would only 
> > cover a small part of the roller perimeter.
> > 
> > Sorry for all the questions, Daniel. Lately I'm wondering if 
> > the rollers can also leave tiny white dots/fibers from 
> > flakings from previous paper transport which then might get 
> > pressed down onto paper as it dries. Just a theroy- which may 
> > mean I'll use your procedure, hence all the detailed 
> > questions. It could be coming from flaking from the existing 
> > sheet as well. Jim H.
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel 
> > Staver" <daniel@p...> wrote:
> > > Finally! I managed to get rid of those damn exit roller marks when 
> > > printing on glossy papers with my 2100.
> > > 
> > > I did exactly what the manual says not to do and used some mild 
> > > dishwashing detergent diluted in water to wash both the 
> > exit rollers 
> > > and the thick rollers that are just below the exit rollers. 
> > I think it 
> > > was important to clean both as the top rollers seemed to 
> > pick up dirt 
> > > and dust from the ones below.
> > > 
> > > I used the cleaning spatula that comes with the 2100, 
> > dipped it into 
> > > the soap water and squeezed it before washing the rollers. After 
> > > getting all the rollers wet I would run a cleaning sheet 
> > through the 
> > > printer which had the double effect of drying the rollers 
> > and rotating 
> > > them so I could get them clean on all sides. I repeated 
> > this procedure 
> > > about six or seven times, after which the rollers were visibly 
> > > cleaner.
> > > 
> > > I've run some test sheets of Ilford Smooth Pearl through my printer 
> > > now, and I can't see roller marks anywhere.
> > > 
> > > --
> > > 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/ySSFAA> /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/

Ernst, I'm sorry this went right by me at first

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Ernst Dinkla" <
E.Dinkla@c...> wrote:
...
> use that setup for Ultratone VM inks. One of the decisions in
> curve control was whether the greys should be used to their full
> 100 % in each curve separation or let the next one take it over
> at 90 %. I think much of the softness, lack of small detail is a
> result of the right setting in that part of the curves and
> related to the dithering quality of the driver. If the dithering
> quality is excellent then you better end the curve early and let
> the next grey take it partly over with low percentage ink and the
> good dithering. The 90-100 % dithering is always harder to
> control than any dithering in the 0-30 % part.

The driver I use seems jumpier in the 90-100% areas, but I was unaware 
possible of dithering problems. Also, with some inks and papers, mottle 
and 
bleeding will result with a RIP that can pour ink down, that can 
certainly effect resolution.

>It is also a
> compromise on ink amount and the length of the greyramp covered
> by one grey. The Wasatch doesn't have such a good dithering and
> then the good compromise is harder to find. I still have to tweak
> that part better as I see the problems you describe.

There are actually many different variants possible with quad 
partitioning, it can get overwhelming.  A long smooth overlap between 
grays can be good and 
help with single channel banding in one situation, but maybe not take 
full advantage of a different printer. I think limiting each color is 
generally a good 
thing for many reasons, though I tend not to do it unless I have to (I 
use a large dot printer). One good reason is that I find paper batches 
vary more in 
where that critical mottle/bleed point is than in other ways, probably 
from coating variation. If you are not approaching that point, paper 
batches will look 
similar (I find). I'm right at that point, and have gotten some 
unusable batches.

> The work on the SoftRip neutral settings that I have done is as
> follows:

I'm not familiar with the inkset, but I'll try to follow. The only part 
I don't get is how you remain somewhat linear overall when introducing 
the toner. Do 
you have to go back to the CcYK curves and rework them to a lower gamma 
to make up for the addition of a given amount the toner? Mm sounds easy 
enough, it's just one channel. More or less M out of PS will take care 
of that since the Mm is linearized in the RIP right? But I don't know 
how you can 
have overall (but still linear) density control of CcYK. The blending 
options in OPM/IJC, the new R9 RIP, and the new Cone seem attractive in 
this regard.

> is on another XP system and I throw
> a simple straight CMYK 0-100% conversion of a greyscale file on
> it that is made with a PS action. Yesterday evening I got a small
> application that a friend has made which converts a 16 bit
> greyscale tiff into a plain 16 bit CMYK tiff (it has to be
> changed to LZW compression in default as that will make the files
> much smaller).

This is interesting. So you send it a full on 400% CMYK file and do all 
of the partitioning in the RIP?

...
> In the process I made a linearisation target that is dedicated to
> the Ultratone VM inks driven by the Wasatch. I have used
> Spectrocam readings as my Gretag densitometer is not reliable at
> higher Dmax anymore and the SoftRip is compatible with the
> Spectrocam.

I still use my Spectrocam for everything. One day it will explode and 
that will be that.  I've not seen the problems others have reported, 
though I'm not going 
for, or measuring Dmax's higher than pigment K on art papers.

> Another approach that is possible is the use of Paul's VM curves
> cnverted to RGB profiles and the Wasatch paper-ink settings
> adapted to the Epson driver. The Wasatch SoftRip can be made into
> an RGB device though it is CMYK in default. That would allow
> printing straight from a greyscale but I find it less transparent
> and I guess that I can get more in this way.

That's an interesting idea too. I wonder how well it would mimic the 
Epson driver. But you're right, it's more convoluted and you have less 
ultimate control.

Qimage sounds very interesting, and I wish there was a Mac version. Are 
you saying it limits black D?
That is the current problem with Gimp-print. I'm told the next release 
will allow much higher density, I find it too low right now. Roy's work 
with it is really 
great and still progressing, my testing with it is way behind. They 
need to get that density up though, for it to compete with other 
options.
Tyler