Digital BW, The Print

I'm trying (desparately) to get decent separation in the 95% range of 
blacks.  I've tweaked my custom dot gain without much to show for 
it.  The shadows seem to block up on the print at 95-97% on up no 
matter what I do.  Is there another way to deal with this?  Is 
another inkset the only answer?  Or do I simply need to accept this 
and move on?  Or do I worry too much (:

Thanks -- Mark

Mark,

What method are you using to print with the UT inks in the 2200?  I'm 
using QTR with the UT inks in my 2200 and don't have a problem with 
blocked shadows.  Here are some density measurements for the UT inks in 
that range on EEM:
95% - 1.49
96% - 1.52
97% - 1.55
98% - 1.60
99% - 1.64
100% - 1.69

There are some QTR profiles for the UT inks in the 2200 Ultratone 
Profiles.sit file, in the QuadToneRIP 2.0 folder on my filesharing site 
if you want to try them:
http://homepage.mac.com/scho/FileSharing2.html

Carl

On Saturday, August 30, 2003, at 09:49  AM, markjamesfisher wrote:

> I'm trying (desparately) to get decent separation in the 95% range of
> blacks.  I've tweaked my custom dot gain without much to show for
> it.  The shadows seem to block up on the print at 95-97% on up no
> matter what I do.  Is there another way to deal with this?  Is
> another inkset the only answer?  Or do I simply need to accept this
> and move on?  Or do I worry too much (:
>
> Thanks -- Mark
>

Sounds encouraging.  At least I know it is possible! Unfortunately, I 
am on a PC so the QTR stuff won't help me much.  For reference, my 
settings are Profile: Custom Dot gain, intent: relative colormetric, 
paper: enhanced matte, gamma 1.8 (could this be it?), mode: 
photorealistic--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, 
Carl Schofield <scho@m...> wrote:
> Mark,
> 
> What method are you using to print with the UT inks in the 2200?  
I'm 
> using QTR with the UT inks in my 2200 and don't have a problem with 
> blocked shadows.  Here are some density measurements for the UT 
inks in 
> that range on EEM:
> 95% - 1.49
> 96% - 1.52
> 97% - 1.55
> 98% - 1.60
> 99% - 1.64
> 100% - 1.69
> 
> There are some QTR profiles for the UT inks in the 2200 Ultratone 
> Profiles.sit file, in the QuadToneRIP 2.0 folder on my filesharing 
site 
> if you want to try them:
> http://homepage.mac.com/scho/FileSharing2.html
> 
> Carl
> On Saturday, August 30, 2003, at 09:49  AM, markjamesfisher wrote:
> 
> > I'm trying (desparately) to get decent separation in the 95% 
range of
> > blacks.  I've tweaked my custom dot gain without much to show for
> > it.  The shadows seem to block up on the print at 95-97% on up no
> > matter what I do.  Is there another way to deal with this?  Is
> > another inkset the only answer?  Or do I simply need to accept 
this

> > and move on?  Or do I worry too much (:
> >
> > Thanks -- Mark
> >

Are you using curves to print with this inkset?

Chris Hargens

--- In 
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "markjamesfisher" 
<markjamesfisher@y...> wrote:
> Sounds encouraging.  At least I know it is possible! Unfortunately, 
I 
> am on a PC so the QTR stuff won't help me much.  For reference, my 
> settings are Profile: Custom Dot gain, intent: relative 
colormetric, 
> paper: enhanced matte, gamma 1.8 (could this be it?), mode: 
> photorealistic--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, 
> Carl Schofield <scho@m...> wrote:
> > Mark,
> > 
> > What method are you using to print with the UT inks in the 2200?  
> I'm 
> > using QTR with the UT inks in my 2200 and don't have a problem 
with 
> > blocked shadows.  Here are some density measurements for the UT 
> inks in 
> > that range on EEM:
> > 95% - 1.49
> > 96% - 1.52
> > 97% - 1.55
> > 98% - 1.60
> > 99% - 1.64
> > 100% - 1.69
> > 
> > There are some QTR profiles for the UT inks in the 2200 Ultratone 
> > Profiles.sit file, in the QuadToneRIP 2.0 folder on my 
filesharing 
> site 
> > if you want to try them:
> > http://homepage.mac.com/scho/FileSharing2.html
> > 
> > Carl
> > On Saturday, August 30, 2003, at 09:49  AM, markjamesfisher wrote:
> > 
> > > I'm trying (desparately) to get decent separation in the 95% 
> range of
> > > blacks.  I've tweaked my custom dot gain without much to show 
for
> > > it.  The shadows seem to block up on the print at 95-97% on up 
no

> > > matter what I do.  Is there another way to deal with this?  Is
> > > another inkset the only answer?  Or do I simply need to accept 
> this
> > > and move on?  Or do I worry too much (:
> > >
> > > Thanks -- Mark
> > >

I believe that Daniel Staver has a set of curves (modified 1290 curves 
by Paul Roark) that he has used with the UT inks in his 2100 printer.  
See:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/message/32930

On Saturday, August 30, 2003, at 11:59  AM, markjamesfisher wrote:

> Sounds encouraging.  At least I know it is possible! Unfortunately, I
> am on a PC so the QTR stuff won't help me much.  For reference, my
> settings are Profile: Custom Dot gain, intent: relative colormetric,
> paper: enhanced matte, gamma 1.8 (could this be it?), mode:
> photorealistic--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com,
> Carl Schofield <scho@m...> wrote:
>> Mark,
>>
>> What method are you using to print with the UT inks in the 2200?
> I'm
>> using QTR with the UT inks in my 2200 and don't have a problem with
>> blocked shadows.  Here are some density measurements for the UT
> inks in
>> that range on EEM:
>> 95% - 1.49
>> 96% - 1.52
>> 97% - 1.55
>> 98% - 1.60
>> 99% - 1.64
>> 100% - 1.69
>>
>> There are some QTR profiles for the UT inks in the 2200 Ultratone
>> Profiles.sit file, in the QuadToneRIP 2.0 folder on my filesharing
> site
>> if you want to try them:
>> http://homepage.mac.com/scho/FileSharing2.html
>>
>> Carl
>> On Saturday, August 30, 2003, at 09:49  AM, markjamesfisher wrote:
>>
>>> I'm trying (desparately) to get decent separation in the 95%
> range of
>>> blacks.  I've tweaked my custom dot gain without much to show for
>>> it.  The shadows seem to block up on the print at 95-97% on up no
>>> matter what I do.  Is there another way to deal with this?  Is
>>> another inkset the only answer?  Or do I simply need to accept
> this
>>> and move on?  Or do I worry too much (:
>>>
>>> Thanks -- Mark
>>>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls 
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish 
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting 
> this same page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to 
> keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject 
> header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the 
> various resources on the homepage.
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

I'm not quite sure what you mean.  I am using a custom dot gain curve 
that I tried to match a printed step wedge to the screen.  --- In 
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Hargens" 
<chargens@s...> wrote:
> Are you using curves to print with this inkset?
> 
> Chris Hargens
> 
> --- In 
> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "markjamesfisher" 
> <markjamesfisher@y...> wrote:
> > Sounds encouraging.  At least I know it is possible! 
Unfortunately, 
> I 
> > am on a PC so the QTR stuff won't help me much.  For reference, 
my 
> > settings are Profile: Custom Dot gain, intent: relative 
> colormetric, 
> > paper: enhanced matte, gamma 1.8 (could this be it?), mode: 
> > photorealistic--- In 
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, 
> > Carl Schofield <scho@m...> wrote:
> > > Mark,
> > > 
> > > What method are you using to print with the UT inks in the 
2200?  
> > I'm 
> > > using QTR with the UT inks in my 2200 and don't have a problem 
> with 
> > > blocked shadows.  Here are some density measurements for the UT 
> > inks in 
> > > that range on EEM:
> > > 95% - 1.49
> > > 96% - 1.52
> > > 97% - 1.55
> > > 98% - 1.60
> > > 99% - 1.64
> > > 100% - 1.69
> > > 
> > > There are some QTR profiles for the UT inks in the 2200 
Ultratone 
> > > Profiles.sit file, in the QuadToneRIP 2.0 folder on my 
> filesharing 
> > site 
> > > if you want to try them:
> > > http://homepage.mac.com/scho/FileSharing2.html
> > > 
> > > Carl
> > > On Saturday, August 30, 2003, at 09:49  AM, markjamesfisher 
wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I'm trying (desparately) to get decent separation in the 95% 
> > range of
> > > > blacks.  I've tweaked my custom dot gain without much to show 
> for
> > > > it.  The shadows seem to block up on the print at 95-97% on 
up 
> no
> > > > matter what I do.  Is there another way to deal with this?  Is
> > > > another inkset the only answer?  Or do I simply need to 
accept 

> > this
> > > > and move on?  Or do I worry too much (:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks -- Mark
> > > >

I am not sure exactly what you mean.  I did set up a custom dot gain 
curve to try to match a printed step wedge with the monitor.  I also 
tried to tweak it using real photos.  I am also using the gray 
balancer.

Mark

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Hargens" 
<chargens@s...> wrote:
> Are you using curves to print with this inkset?
> 
> Chris Hargens
> 
> --- In 
> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "markjamesfisher" 
> <markjamesfisher@y...> wrote:
> > Sounds encouraging.  At least I know it is possible! 
Unfortunately, 
> I 
> > am on a PC so the QTR stuff won't help me much.  For reference, 
my 
> > settings are Profile: Custom Dot gain, intent: relative 
> colormetric, 
> > paper: enhanced matte, gamma 1.8 (could this be it?), mode: 
> > photorealistic--- In 
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, 
> > Carl Schofield <scho@m...> wrote:
> > > Mark,
> > > 
> > > What method are you using to print with the UT inks in the 
2200?  
> > I'm 
> > > using QTR with the UT inks in my 2200 and don't have a problem 
> with 
> > > blocked shadows.  Here are some density measurements for the UT 
> > inks in 
> > > that range on EEM:
> > > 95% - 1.49
> > > 96% - 1.52
> > > 97% - 1.55
> > > 98% - 1.60
> > > 99% - 1.64
> > > 100% - 1.69
> > > 
> > > There are some QTR profiles for the UT inks in the 2200 
Ultratone 
> > > Profiles.sit file, in the QuadToneRIP 2.0 folder on my 
> filesharing 
> > site 
> > > if you want to try them:
> > > http://homepage.mac.com/scho/FileSharing2.html
> > > 
> > > Carl
> > > On Saturday, August 30, 2003, at 09:49  AM, markjamesfisher 
wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I'm trying (desparately) to get decent separation in the 95% 
> > range of
> > > > blacks.  I've tweaked my custom dot gain without much to show 
> for
> > > > it.  The shadows seem to block up on the print at 95-97% on 
up 
> no
> > > > matter what I do.  Is there another way to deal with this?  Is
> > > > another inkset the only answer?  Or do I simply need to 
accept 

> > this
> > > > and move on?  Or do I worry too much (:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks -- Mark
> > > >

Mark,

Are you using the MIS Ultratone inks or the Epson OEM Ultrachrome inks?

Carl

On Saturday, August 30, 2003, at 12:43  PM, markjamesfisher wrote:

> I am not sure exactly what you mean.  I did set up a custom dot gain
> curve to try to match a printed step wedge with the monitor.  I also
> tried to tweak it using real photos.  I am also using the gray
> balancer.
>
> Mark
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Hargens"
> <chargens@s...> wrote:
>> Are you using curves to print with this inkset?
>>
>> Chris Hargens
>>
>> --- In
>> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "markjamesfisher"
>> <markjamesfisher@y...> wrote:
>>> Sounds encouraging.  At least I know it is possible!
> Unfortunately,
>> I
>>> am on a PC so the QTR stuff won't help me much.  For reference,
> my
>>> settings are Profile: Custom Dot gain, intent: relative
>> colormetric,
>>> paper: enhanced matte, gamma 1.8 (could this be it?), mode:
>>> photorealistic--- In
> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com,
>>> Carl Schofield <scho@m...> wrote:
>>>> Mark,
>>>>
>>>> What method are you using to print with the UT inks in the
> 2200?
>>> I'm
>>>> using QTR with the UT inks in my 2200 and don't have a problem
>> with
>>>> blocked shadows.  Here are some density measurements for the UT
>>> inks in
>>>> that range on EEM:
>>>> 95% - 1.49
>>>> 96% - 1.52
>>>> 97% - 1.55
>>>> 98% - 1.60
>>>> 99% - 1.64
>>>> 100% - 1.69
>>>>
>>>> There are some QTR profiles for the UT inks in the 2200
> Ultratone
>>>> Profiles.sit file, in the QuadToneRIP 2.0 folder on my
>> filesharing
>>> site
>>>> if you want to try them:
>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/scho/FileSharing2.html
>>>>
>>>> Carl
>>>> On Saturday, August 30, 2003, at 09:49  AM, markjamesfisher
> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm trying (desparately) to get decent separation in the 95%
>>> range of
>>>>> blacks.  I've tweaked my custom dot gain without much to show
>> for
>>>>> it.  The shadows seem to block up on the print at 95-97% on
> up
>> no
>>>>> matter what I do.  Is there another way to deal with this?  Is
>>>>> another inkset the only answer?  Or do I simply need to
> accept
>>> this
>>>>> and move on?  Or do I worry too much (:
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks -- Mark
>>>>>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor  
> ---------------------~-->
> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
> Printer at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US &  
> Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/l.m7sD/LIdGAA/qnsNAA/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/
>
>