Yahoo Groups archive

Digital BW, The Print

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC

Thread

UT inks, 1280 vs. 2200

UT inks, 1280 vs. 2200

2003-10-11 by Matthew Born

Hi Tom, 
Thanks for your thoughts. Admittedly, I'm comparing apples to oranges to
some extent: different ink sets and different drivers. But I'm comparing the
two machines at what I consider to be their best B&W-specific arrangement,
not necessarily just an out-of-the-box from Epson comparison. I realize many
consider the pricier rips the way to go, but I am intrigued by IJC's
potential (not to mention OPM's price) and am kind of sitting in that camp
on the 2200 right now. The 2200 was driven by OPM, which does not have user
adjustable output for the dpi. Judging by the speed, though, it's pretty
clearly going at the 1440 setting. The image itself is 720dpi and 16bit.
There are no alignment issues on the 1280 -- I very carefully aligned it,
using a loupe to make the best choices, right before I ran out these prints.
Paul's note with the curves for the UT set say he saw no difference, at
least on EEM, using the 2880 setting on the 1280, and his judgment on that
matter is good enough for me. Besides, even if the additional dpi made up
the difference, the extra time and ink cost (at 2880 vs. 1440) still makes
it a poorer choice. Frankly, I'm leaning towards reversing my setup; using
the postscript software to run the 1280 for my design work, and using the
2200 as my B&W photo printer. One of these days, there'll be empty
cartridges for the 2200 available, and somebody a lot smarter than I will
develop good curves using IJC and an inkset like the UT ones. That would
make a mean B&W machine. Hey, Paul has lots of free time on his hands :)

Cheers,
Matthew Born

On 10/11/03 5:52 AM, "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com"
<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> I assume your dpi settings were the same on both.  What was your dpi?  I have
> a 2880x1440 printer.  The 1280 is 2880x720.  I was always under the impression
> that the slight difference in dpi would not be visible in most situations
> (maybe someone has done some subjective testing on this).  Is it possible that
> you have some alignment issues with the 1280?
> 
> Tom Baker

Re: [Digital BW] UT inks, 1280 vs. 2200

2003-10-11 by Carl Schofield

Matthew,

You can purchase a set of carts for the 2200 that are loaded with the 
UT inkset from MIS.  I posted a couple of months ago with info on 
curves for QTR using the UT inks in the 2200 here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/message/34084
Also, Bowhaus has developed some IJC/OPM profiles for MIS to use with 
the UT inks in the 2200.

Carl
Show quoted textHide quoted text
On Saturday, October 11, 2003, at 08:41  AM, Matthew Born wrote:

> Hi Tom,
> Thanks for your thoughts. Admittedly, I'm comparing apples to oranges 
> to
> some extent: different ink sets and different drivers. But I'm 
> comparing the
> two machines at what I consider to be their best B&W-specific 
> arrangement,
> not necessarily just an out-of-the-box from Epson comparison. I 
> realize many
> consider the pricier rips the way to go, but I am intrigued by IJC's
> potential (not to mention OPM's price) and am kind of sitting in that 
> camp
> on the 2200 right now. The 2200 was driven by OPM, which does not have 
> user
> adjustable output for the dpi. Judging by the speed, though, it's 
> pretty
> clearly going at the 1440 setting. The image itself is 720dpi and 
> 16bit.
> There are no alignment issues on the 1280 -- I very carefully aligned 
> it,
> using a loupe to make the best choices, right before I ran out these 
> prints.
> Paul's note with the curves for the UT set say he saw no difference, at
> least on EEM, using the 2880 setting on the 1280, and his judgment on 
> that
> matter is good enough for me. Besides, even if the additional dpi made 
> up
> the difference, the extra time and ink cost (at 2880 vs. 1440) still 
> makes
> it a poorer choice. Frankly, I'm leaning towards reversing my setup; 
> using
> the postscript software to run the 1280 for my design work, and using 
> the
> 2200 as my B&W photo printer. One of these days, there'll be empty
> cartridges for the 2200 available, and somebody a lot smarter than I 
> will
> develop good curves using IJC and an inkset like the UT ones. That 
> would
> make a mean B&W machine. Hey, Paul has lots of free time on his hands 
> :)
>
> Cheers,
> Matthew Born

Re: [Digital BW] UT inks, 1280 vs. 2200

2003-10-12 by Tom Baker

So, still no definitive answer as to why the 1280 resolution seems poorer?  
 
I pretty much agree on the 2880 situation.  (I'm still trying to figure out why there are 5760 printers showing up.)  I can always see the difference between 1440 and 2880 with a lupe.  And, I can usually see the difference visually, without a lupe.  But, other than some of the canvas I ocassionally print (2880), I believe that the 1440 4pass, and 1440 8pass, is more pleasing than the 2880 prints of the same image.  I'm not sure that the 2880 uses more ink than the 1440 4pass or the 1440 8pass, but I always let the image quality be the determining factor.
 
A question for Paul:  Are there instances with the MIS inks where a 2880 setting produces visually superior prints to 1440?
 
THX
 
Tom Baker

Matthew Born <mborn@...> wrote:
Hi Tom, 
Thanks for your thoughts. Admittedly, I'm comparing apples to oranges to
some extent: different ink sets and different drivers. But I'm comparing the
two machines at what I consider to be their best B&W-specific arrangement,
not necessarily just an out-of-the-box from Epson comparison. I realize many
consider the pricier rips the way to go, but I am intrigued by IJC's
potential (not to mention OPM's price) and am kind of sitting in that camp
on the 2200 right now. The 2200 was driven by OPM, which does not have user
adjustable output for the dpi. Judging by the speed, though, it's pretty
clearly going at the 1440 setting. The image itself is 720dpi and 16bit.
There are no alignment issues on the 1280 -- I very carefully aligned it,
using a loupe to make the best choices, right before I ran out these prints.
Paul's note with the curves for the UT set say he saw no difference, at
least on EEM, using the 2880 setting on the 1280, and his judgment on that
matter is good enough for me. Besides, even if the additional dpi made up
the difference, the extra time and ink cost (at 2880 vs. 1440) still makes
it a poorer choice. Frankly, I'm leaning towards reversing my setup; using
the postscript software to run the 1280 for my design work, and using the
2200 as my B&W photo printer. One of these days, there'll be empty
cartridges for the 2200 available, and somebody a lot smarter than I will
develop good curves using IJC and an inkset like the UT ones. That would
make a mean B&W machine. Hey, Paul has lots of free time on his hands :)

Cheers,
Matthew Born

On 10/11/03 5:52 AM, "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com"
<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

> I assume your dpi settings were the same on both.  What was your dpi?  I have
> a 2880x1440 printer.  The 1280 is 2880x720.  I was always under the impression
> that the slight difference in dpi would not be visible in most situations
> (maybe someone has done some subjective testing on this).  Is it possible that
> you have some alignment issues with the 1280?
> 
> Tom Baker


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


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

RE: [Digital BW] UT inks, 1280 vs. 2200

2003-10-12 by Paul Roark

Tom,

I have not been following this thread, but noticed a question.  First, note
that when I say that I don't see any significant difference in 1440 and 2880
printing on matte paper, I'm speaking of normal viewing distance.  I don't
doubt that the 2880 is better under a loupe, but the differences on matte
paper seem not worth the lower print speed.

>...(I'm still trying to figure out why there are 5760
>printers showing up.)

With RC paper and color inks, I think that there could be visible
differences between 2880 and 5760.  (I'm hoping the cheap quad that I'm
going to try to tame with carbon inks and a "no-workflow" approach has a
workable 7560 resolution.  I think with a quad and no partitioning, it might
make a big difference in quality.)

>...
>A question for Paul:  Are there instances with the MIS inks
>where a 2880 setting produces visually superior prints to 1440?

Yes -- RC papers come to mind.  There is a significant difference between
1440 and 2880 on those glossy papers.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com
__________________________________________________________
Matthew Born <mborn@...> wrote:
Hi Tom,
Thanks for your thoughts. Admittedly, I'm comparing apples to oranges to
some extent: different ink sets and different drivers. But I'm comparing the
two machines at what I consider to be their best B&W-specific arrangement,
not necessarily just an out-of-the-box from Epson comparison. I realize many
consider the pricier rips the way to go, but I am intrigued by IJC's
potential (not to mention OPM's price) and am kind of sitting in that camp
on the 2200 right now. The 2200 was driven by OPM, which does not have user
adjustable output for the dpi. Judging by the speed, though, it's pretty
clearly going at the 1440 setting. The image itself is 720dpi and 16bit.
There are no alignment issues on the 1280 -- I very carefully aligned it,
using a loupe to make the best choices, right before I ran out these prints.
Paul's note with the curves for the UT set say he saw no difference, at
least on EEM, using the 2880 setting on the 1280, and his judgment on that
matter is good enough for me. Besides, even if the additional dpi made up
the difference, the extra time and ink cost (at 2880 vs. 1440) still makes
it a poorer choice. Frankly, I'm leaning towards reversing my setup; using
the postscript software to run the 1280 for my design work, and using the
2200 as my B&W photo printer. One of these days, there'll be empty
cartridges for the 2200 available, and somebody a lot smarter than I will
develop good curves using IJC and an inkset like the UT ones. That would
make a mean B&W machine. Hey, Paul has lots of free time on his hands :)

Cheers,
Matthew Born

On 10/11/03 5:52 AM, "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com"
<DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

> I assume your dpi settings were the same on both.  What was your dpi?  I
have
> a 2880x1440 printer.  The 1280 is 2880x720.  I was always under the
impression
> that the slight difference in dpi would not be visible in most situations
> (maybe someone has done some subjective testing on this).  Is it possible
that
> you have some alignment issues with the 1280?
>
> Tom Baker


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


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



Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- Include your full name with your message.
- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames
- Complete your Yahoo profile.
- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

What is the "Cone Driver"?

2003-10-12 by gendem

Hi all, subject says it all.  What is the "Cone
Driver" referred to on the MIS site, and where can I
get it?  I'm about to order a 1280 cartridge for my
photo 900 to see if it works (if it doesn't then I
return the 900 and get a 1280), and it says I need a
cone driver to make it work.  Thanks.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

Re: What is the "Cone Driver"?

2003-10-12 by Jeff Randall

The "Cone Driver" is a for sale b/w system (and it's not 
inexpensive).  

Go to www.inkjetmall.com  Look under PiezographyBW.

If you want to use the Epson driver, you will need to get the MIS FS-
E or MIS FSN-E inksets or the MIS VM or UT inksets.  All of these 
require you to follow a specific workflow (check the MIS site) -- 
these inksets are NOT plug & play.  

Jeff Randall  


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, gendem 
<gendem@y...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> Hi all, subject says it all.  What is the "Cone
> Driver" referred to on the MIS site, and where can I
> get it?  I'm about to order a 1280 cartridge for my
> photo 900 to see if it works (if it doesn't then I
> return the 900 and get a 1280), and it says I need a
> cone driver to make it work.  Thanks.
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

Re: What is the "Cone Driver"?

2003-10-12 by Johnny Eades

I too asked that same question before. With the older type of 
PiezographyBW a Cone Driver (product of conetech systems) was needed, 
however the new system of PiezographyBW does not require a separate 
printer driver in order to work properly. The printer driver that 
came with your printer will do the job just fine.Check and see if 
your printer is supported though. They have advanced to using paper 
profiles to get the same result as with the older system. Mine is on 
the way to me now and I am excited over getting it. It did ccost 
$150, but any program that will open a grayscale image can use it. 
I'll keep the board and/or you updated when I get it.

Your friend in photography,

Johnny Eades

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, gendem 
<gendem@y...> wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> Hi all, subject says it all.  What is the "Cone
> Driver" referred to on the MIS site, and where can I
> get it?  I'm about to order a 1280 cartridge for my
> photo 900 to see if it works (if it doesn't then I
> return the 900 and get a 1280), and it says I need a
> cone driver to make it work.  Thanks.
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

RE: [Digital BW] What is the "Cone Driver"?

2003-10-12 by Martin Wesley

* -----Original Message-----
* From: gendem [mailto:gendem@...] 
* Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 7:25 AM
* To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
* Subject: [Digital BW] What is the "Cone Driver"?
* 
* 
* Hi all, subject says it all.  What is the "Cone
* Driver" referred to on the MIS site, and where can I
* get it?  I'm about to order a 1280 cartridge for my
* photo 900 to see if it works (if it doesn't then I
* return the 900 and get a 1280), and it says I need a
* cone driver to make it work.  Thanks.
* 
The "Cone driver" is usually called the "Piezo plug-in". This was developed
by Sundance/R9 and marketed by ConeTech or Inkjetmall to be used in
conjunction with the original Sundance/Piezo inks.

It functions as an export plug-in used inside Photoshop. It requires an ink
set with specific densities of gray ink and provides profiles for about 50
different inkjet papers. It works with PiezoTone Warm, Cool, Selenium and
Carbon Sepia ink sets, MIS's Full Spectrum and Full Spectrum Neutral (not
the E set) and Sundance Warm and Neutral ink sets.

The business relationship between ConeTech and Sundance/R9 ended quite some
time ago. ConeTech has continues to sell the Piezo version of the plug-in
while working on a new software system that uses standard printer drivers
and printer profiles. As far as I know it is not yet been released for
shipment but if you buy a copy of the Piezo plug-in now they promise an copy
of the new software when it is released.

http://www.inkjetmall.com/index.html

In the meantime Sundance and R9, operating as bwguys.com, sell a newer
version of the plug-in called "Image Export BW" that supports a larger range
of papers and supports Mac OSX as well.

http://www.bwguys.com/

Both pieces of software sell for $150 which is a real bargain for the
friendly user interface and smooth tonal curves you get. If you want to go
this route I would be inclined to buy from bwguys since they appear to be
continuing to develop and support the product. $150 may sound like a lot but
you have to keep it in perspective. $150 is less than 35 sheets of 13x19
Photo Rag 308 gsm. The big cost in digital B&W printing is paper.

Martin Wesley
http://www.carolyn.cc/Guests/MartinWesley/pages/MW_01.html
http://www.borderless-photos.de/guests.html

Re: [Digital BW] What is the "Cone Driver"?

2003-10-13 by Johnny Eades

The new software is on the market and mine should arrive Tuesday the 
14th. I am anxous to get started on it, but I'll have to return the 
inkset I ordered from MIS because I forgot the Cone driver is not 
needed with the new software; just the epson printer driver. Also one 
nice feature of the software is that the grayscale image can be 
opened with any other program and printed from it if you don't have 
Adobe Photoshop. 

your friend in photography,

Johnny Eades


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Martin Wesley" 
<mwesley250@e...> wrote:
> 
> 
> * -----Original Message-----
> * From: gendem [mailto:gendem@y...] 
> * Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 7:25 AM
> * To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> * Subject: [Digital BW] What is the "Cone Driver"?
> * 
> * 
> * Hi all, subject says it all.  What is the "Cone
> * Driver" referred to on the MIS site, and where can I
> * get it?  I'm about to order a 1280 cartridge for my
> * photo 900 to see if it works (if it doesn't then I
> * return the 900 and get a 1280), and it says I need a
> * cone driver to make it work.  Thanks.
> * 
> The "Cone driver" is usually called the "Piezo plug-in". This was 
developed
> by Sundance/R9 and marketed by ConeTech or Inkjetmall to be used in
> conjunction with the original Sundance/Piezo inks.
> 
> It functions as an export plug-in used inside Photoshop. It 
requires an ink
> set with specific densities of gray ink and provides profiles for 
about 50
> different inkjet papers. It works with PiezoTone Warm, Cool, 
Selenium and
> Carbon Sepia ink sets, MIS's Full Spectrum and Full Spectrum 
Neutral (not
> the E set) and Sundance Warm and Neutral ink sets.
> 
> The business relationship between ConeTech and Sundance/R9 ended 
quite some
> time ago. ConeTech has continues to sell the Piezo version of the 
plug-in
> while working on a new software system that uses standard printer 
drivers
> and printer profiles. As far as I know it is not yet been released 
for
> shipment but if you buy a copy of the Piezo plug-in now they 
promise an copy
> of the new software when it is released.
> 
> http://www.inkjetmall.com/index.html
> 
> In the meantime Sundance and R9, operating as bwguys.com, sell a 
newer
> version of the plug-in called "Image Export BW" that supports a 
larger range
> of papers and supports Mac OSX as well.
> 
> http://www.bwguys.com/
> 
> Both pieces of software sell for $150 which is a real bargain for 
the
> friendly user interface and smooth tonal curves you get. If you 
want to go
> this route I would be inclined to buy from bwguys since they appear 
to be
> continuing to develop and support the product. $150 may sound like 
a lot but
> you have to keep it in perspective. $150 is less than 35 sheets of 
13x19
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> Photo Rag 308 gsm. The big cost in digital B&W printing is paper.
> 
> Martin Wesley
> http://www.carolyn.cc/Guests/MartinWesley/pages/MW_01.html
> http://www.borderless-photos.de/guests.html

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.