Digital BW, The Print

I follow DigitalBlackandWhite forum, the piezography3000 forum and the
EpsonWideFormat forum and read all posts. I still do not have a feel for
a direct comparison of PiezographyBW with PiezoTones on an 1160 versus
the newest Paul Roark curves with MIS Ultra-Tones on an 1160. Has anyone
used both inksets with respective workflows in a way to make a direct
comparison in some way?

My  experience is that my daughter and I have used two 1160's set up
with MIS VM with a CIS for about a year with virtually no problem except
a rare clog when her printer sits idle in a North Carolina low humidity
environment. As an aside, I live in Mississippi and my printer never
clogs. I recently converted my daughter's 1160 to Ultra-Tones. The
Ultra-Tone prints are stunning to my eyes. Much, much better than the
older VM workflow. Her printer runs on a Mac and my printer runs on a
Windows PC. We print on EEM and Hahnemuhle Photo Rag 308.

I want to convert my 1160 to Ultra-Tones but I am hesitating slightly
thinking there might be something better out there (although I doubt
it). The grass is always greener. I do want to stay with the 1160 on the
Windows OS. I also have a 2200 set up with Image Print 5.5 which does a
wonderful job with color but for B&W I find that I prefer the prints
from my daughter's 1160 with the Roark Ultra-Tone workflow. I also think
that my sale B&W prints would be more permanent with a quadtone inkset
than with the Epson UltraChrome inkset with IP 5.5 which does apparntly
use the color inks.


Regards,

Bill Strong

Bill Strong's Coastal Images
http://www.phototour.com

_________________________________________________________
Bill Strong's Outgoing mail checked by Norton Antivirus 8

Bill, 
I am very surprised that you say the 1160 gives you better prints 
than the 2200/ Imageprint combo. I have a 1160 and a 2200 with the 
quadtone RIP_ and there is no doubt that the 2200 B/W prints are 
better using the 2200! 
If you look at teh peizography3000 group you will see a current 
thread dicussing print life comparing various inks. Whilst joe cone 
claims that his inks last longer, I believe that they do, surely we 
are splitting hairs when the worst case tests out at at least 65 
years for B/W prints using UC inks. So why worry about it?

Your web site is nicely presented, do you sell prints from it, or 
from another source? 

Sierra Gold--- In 
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Strong" 
<billstrong50@y...> wrote:
> I follow DigitalBlackandWhite forum, the piezography3000 forum and 
the
> EpsonWideFormat forum and read all posts. I still do not have a 
feel for
> a direct comparison of PiezographyBW with PiezoTones on an 1160 
versus
> the newest Paul Roark curves with MIS Ultra-Tones on an 1160. Has 
anyone
> used both inksets with respective workflows in a way to make a 
direct
> comparison in some way?
> 
> My  experience is that my daughter and I have used two 1160's set 
up
> with MIS VM with a CIS for about a year with virtually no problem 
except
> a rare clog when her printer sits idle in a North Carolina low 
humidity
> environment. As an aside, I live in Mississippi and my printer 
never
> clogs. I recently converted my daughter's 1160 to Ultra-Tones. The
> Ultra-Tone prints are stunning to my eyes. Much, much better than 
the
> older VM workflow. Her printer runs on a Mac and my printer runs 
on a
> Windows PC. We print on EEM and Hahnemuhle Photo Rag 308.
> 
> I want to convert my 1160 to Ultra-Tones but I am hesitating 
slightly
> thinking there might be something better out there (although I 
doubt
> it). The grass is always greener. I do want to stay with the 1160 
on the
> Windows OS. I also have a 2200 set up with Image Print 5.5 which 
does a
> wonderful job with color but for B&W I find that I prefer the 
prints
> from my daughter's 1160 with the Roark Ultra-Tone workflow. I also 
think
> that my sale B&W prints would be more permanent with a quadtone 
inkset
> than with the Epson UltraChrome inkset with IP 5.5 which does 
apparntly

> use the color inks.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Bill Strong
> 
> Bill Strong's Coastal Images
> http://www.phototour.com
> 
> _________________________________________________________
> Bill Strong's Outgoing mail checked by Norton Antivirus 8

Hi, ?Sierra

I would not say the results are better, just different in a way that I
like. The warm Ultra-Tone curve is much warmer than what I can get using
the tone adjustmant feature in IP. I think tonal transitions are at
least as good with Roark's curves. I actually print B&W using both
machines depending on the subject. As far as I am concerned, Image Print
is the only practical affordable way to go for accurate color on a 2200.
Are you using Quadtone RIP on the Mac with the 2200?

Indeed I have seen Jon Cone's latest xenon lamp longevity figures and I
agree that for practical purposes it is splitting hairs; however, I hope
one day to be able to display/sell prints in a place like The Gallery
For Fine Photography on Royal Street in New Orleans and I think I need
every possible advantage to convince the gallery that my prints are
worthy. (I realize this is an impossible dream but it gives me something
to strive for.)

Thank you for the compliment about my site. I have been selling prints
for about 8 months at Bay Crafts in Bay St Louis, Mississippi and in a
gallery here in Hattiesburg.  I have sold only three on the internet;
however, many people are familiar with Phototour and they ask me about
prints and I send them to one of the galleries. The image quality of my
print sales internet pages is poor. I am working to correct that. I am
embarrassed to show it after seeing the sites of some of the members
here.

Regards,
Bill
 
___________________________________________________________________ 
Bill, 
I am very surprised that you say the 1160 gives you better prints 
than the 2200/ Imageprint combo. I have a 1160 and a 2200 with the 
quadtone RIP_ and there is no doubt that the 2200 B/W prints are 
better using the 2200! 
If you look at teh peizography3000 group you will see a current 
thread dicussing print life comparing various inks. Whilst joe cone 
claims that his inks last longer, I believe that they do, surely we 
are splitting hairs when the worst case tests out at at least 65 
years for B/W prints using UC inks. So why worry about it?

Your web site is nicely presented, do you sell prints from it, or 
from another source? 

Sierra Gold--- In 

_________________________________________________________
Bill Strong's Outgoing mail checked by Norton Antivirus 8

Bill,
I am using a Mac and a PC. All of my printing I am transfering to the MAC because of 
the better results that I am getting. I  find that for color on my 2200 the results are 
great using the standard Epson profiles on Epson Paper. I am transfering my pofiling 
system to the Mac, but it's hard to see how I can get any better! 
For B/W I am using Carl's curves and they seem to give me anything from a very warm 
print to a very cool print. The neutral is just that, neutral. I have a tough time to see 
any visable difference between the HPR and the EEM. I guess one might last a bit 
longer. The HPR is available in a thicker paper, but that doesn't seem all that 
necessary when the prints are matted.
Quadtone RIP for the Mac is very tough to beat at the price. Once again I thank all of 
those who's work has made it possible. I for one would be happy to pay for it!

Barry (Sierra Gold)

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Strong" 
<billstrong50@y...> wrote:

> Hi, ?Sierra
> 
> I would not say the results are better, just different in a way that I
> like. The warm Ultra-Tone curve is much warmer than what I can get using
> the tone adjustmant feature in IP. I think tonal transitions are at
> least as good with Roark's curves. I actually print B&W using both
> machines depending on the subject. As far as I am concerned, Image Print
> is the only practical affordable way to go for accurate color on a 2200.
> Are you using Quadtone RIP on the Mac with the 2200?
> 
> Indeed I have seen Jon Cone's latest xenon lamp longevity figures and I
> agree that for practical purposes it is splitting hairs; however, I hope
> one day to be able to display/sell prints in a place like The Gallery
> For Fine Photography on Royal Street in New Orleans and I think I need
> every possible advantage to convince the gallery that my prints are
> worthy. (I realize this is an impossible dream but it gives me something
> to strive for.)
> 
> Thank you for the compliment about my site. I have been selling prints
> for about 8 months at Bay Crafts in Bay St Louis, Mississippi and in a
> gallery here in Hattiesburg.  I have sold only three on the internet;
> however, many people are familiar with Phototour and they ask me about
> prints and I send them to one of the galleries. The image quality of my
> print sales internet pages is poor. I am working to correct that. I am
> embarrassed to show it after seeing the sites of some of the members
> here.
> 
> Regards,
> Bill
>  
> ___________________________________________________________________ 
> Bill, 
> I am very surprised that you say the 1160 gives you better prints 
> than the 2200/ Imageprint combo. I have a 1160 and a 2200 with the 
> quadtone RIP_ and there is no doubt that the 2200 B/W prints are 
> better using the 2200! 
> If you look at teh peizography3000 group you will see a current 
> thread dicussing print life comparing various inks. Whilst joe cone 
> claims that his inks last longer, I believe that they do, surely we 
> are splitting hairs when the worst case tests out at at least 65 
> years for B/W prints using UC inks. So why worry about it?
> 
> Your web site is nicely presented, do you sell prints from it, or 
> from another source? 
> 
> Sierra Gold--- In 
> 
> _________________________________________________________
> Bill Strong's Outgoing mail checked by Norton Antivirus 8