Digital BW, The Print

Forgive me if this has been asked before, I did a quick search and found only one 
comment.

Is any one switching back and forth with the epson color cartridges and either 
the quadtone or ultratone cardtridges with the 1280 printer?  

I would like to start getting higher quality black and whites, but also do alot of 
color work. MIS suggests that this is not a good idea, but I would like to hear 
from those that have maybe tried or are successfully doing so before I jump on 
the band wagon.

Thanks....

I find the easiest way is two dedicated printers. I have a 1280 with
quadtones for b&w work and a 890 with color inks. The 890 is like a
1280 but only does 8.5x11 and is available for around $150 (refurb
direct from Epson)It's just much easier and actually more economical
than swapping inks.  

I pretty much trust MIS (Bob Ziess who consults with Paul Roark)for
very good advice. I pretty much take them at their word. 

Bob Michaels

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "flashearth"
<flashgj@e...> wrote:
> Forgive me if this has been asked before, I did a quick search and
found only one 
> comment.
> 
> Is any one switching back and forth with the epson color cartridges
and either 
> the quadtone or ultratone cardtridges with the 1280 printer?  
> 
> I would like to start getting higher quality black and whites, but
also do alot of 
> color work. MIS suggests that this is not a good idea, but I would
like to hear 
> from those that have maybe tried or are successfully doing so before
I jump on 

> the band wagon.
> 
> Thanks....

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

From: flashearth [mailto:flashgj@...] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 5:23 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Switching between b/w and color??
 
Forgive me if this has been asked before, I did a quick search and found
only one 
comment.

Is any one switching back and forth with the epson color cartridges and
either 
the quadtone or ultratone cardtridges with the 1280 printer?  

I would like to start getting higher quality black and whites, but also
do alot of 
color work. MIS suggests that this is not a good idea, but I would like
to hear 
from those that have maybe tried or are successfully doing so before I
jump on 
the band wagon.

Thanks....
 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 
This would not be feasible at all.  It would only take a relative
handful of changes between color and b/w inksets to eat up the costs of
a new or refurbished 1280 and a quadtone setup.  You would simply waste
too much ink in the change itself, in addition to the ink that will
likely be lost due the extreme clogs you are sure to get in the
cartridges that are not being used at the time.  Besides the inevitable
ink loss, it would be a major pain in the butt.  Also, after a few
changes cross contamination would probably begin to be an issue.  Trust
me; this is not something you want to do.  If you want consistently good
results for b/w with the 1280 you need to dedicate the printer to the
task.
 
One other option would be the 2200 and the ImagePrint RIP.  This will
let you do awesome color and good b/w from the same inkset.  Although,
in my opinion the b/w from this setup, while very good, still does not
match Piezography (others have differing opinions).  I do my color
printing on the 2200 with UltraChromes and my b/w printing on a 1280,
using Piezography BW with Selenium Tone inks.  I could not be happier
with this setup.
 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


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

Thanks for your responses. 

I will go the dedicated printer route. Now I only have to decide if I should dedicate 
my 1280 to b/w and bite the bullet on a new 2200 for color work or just 
purchase another 1280 or.............

If you want archival color prints you are either stuck with the 2200 
or having two printers with 3rd party pigmented inks for twice the 
clogging:)

mark

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "flashearth" 
<flashgj@e...> wrote:
> Thanks for your responses. 
> 
> I will go the dedicated printer route. Now I only have to decide if 
I should dedicate 
> my 1280 to b/w and bite the bullet on a new 2200 for color work or 
just 
> purchase another 1280 or.............

flashearth wrote:

>Thanks for your responses. 
>
>I will go the dedicated printer route. Now I only have to decide if I should dedicate 
>my 1280 to b/w and bite the bullet on a new 2200 for color work or just 
>purchase another 1280 or.............
>
>  
>
I'd go with a refurbed 1280 and 3rd Party Pigments for now...  Then, 
down the line,  I'd probably find myself picking up whatever 8 color 
Ultrachrome Hi Gloss replacement (R800 class machine) for the 2200 comes 
out..

 
Keith Krebs

"Just some guy," and caretaker of the Multiverse's largest EPSON printer 
User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo 
Publications), at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSON_Printers/
 
"For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together 
guys"

 

****************************************************************
CONFIDENTIALITY & COPYRIGHT NOTICE:
This e-mail message, including attachments and contents, is \ufffd Copyright, 
Keith Krebs, 2001-2002, All Rights Reserved. It is expressly for the 
sole use of the intended recipient and may contain confidential and 
privileged information. Absent the express written authorization of the 
author, any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, transfer, or 
distribution is explicitly prohibited and taken at your own risk. If you 
are not, or are unsure whether you are, the intended recipient, please 
contact the sender immediately and destroy all copies of the original 
message. Violations will be prosecuted to the FULL extent allowed under 
applicable civil and criminal law. Imagery published or distributed in 
violation of these conditions shall be subject to a $1500/image 
liquidated damages charge, in addition to any applicable Copyright 
violation penalties.


****************************************************************
{ The P.O.V. Image Service Website is still at http://www.p-o-v-image.com/ }

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Editor P.O.V. 
Image Service" <editor@p...> wrote:
> Then down the line,  I'd probably find myself picking up whatever 8 
> color Ultrachrome Hi Gloss replacement (R800 class machine) for the
> 2200 comes out..

That day can't come soon enough!  I'm sick of bronzing.

I'd once assumed I'd wind up with two printers, one dedicated to b&w, 
the other to color.  

But it now appears I'll wind up with two printers, one dedicated to 
matte and the other to glossy--and, unless I'm willing to pay another 
$500 apiece for a RIP, neither of which will produce neutral, 
metamerism-free b&W!

Where does it end? ;)

Hmmm... as I consider this further, I wonder how the new 
ultrachrome "hi-gloss" inks used in the R800 will fare for matte 
prints.  If they pass that test, maybe one printer will accomplish 
useable prints on both types of paper.  If that's the case, why on 
earth didn't Epson make the new 4000 ultrachrome hi-gloss compatible, 
rather than producing another matte-only printing device?

Dan

Dan Honemann wrote:

>--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Editor P.O.V. 
>Image Service" <editor@p...> wrote:
>  
>
>>Then down the line,  I'd probably find myself picking up whatever 8 
>>color Ultrachrome Hi Gloss replacement (R800 class machine) for the
>>2200 comes out..
>>    
>>
>
>That day can't come soon enough!  I'm sick of bronzing.
>
>  
>
For a nice explanation of the "gloss optimizer" and how it works, try:

http://www.photo-i.co.uk/News/Nov03/Epsondata.htm

 
Keith Krebs

"Just some guy," and caretaker of the Multiverse's largest EPSON printer 
User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo 
Publications), at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSON_Printers/
 
"For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together 
guys"

What's wrong with the 2200? I get great B/W prints using QTR (free) 
using my Mac. I get great colour from it from either my PC system or 
the MAC. 
The extra black on the new epsons is only so that ink is not wasted 
on a cart change. something that I hardly ever do since I stick to 
matt papers. Why glossy? good prints should go under glass where 
glossy is not needed. Glossy is fine for small prints to give away, 
but hardly necessary for display.

Sierra Gold


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Editor P.O.V. 
Image Service" <editor@p...> wrote:
> Dan Honemann wrote:
> 
> >--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Editor 
P.O.V. 
> >Image Service" <editor@p...> wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>Then down the line,  I'd probably find myself picking up 
whatever 8 
> >>color Ultrachrome Hi Gloss replacement (R800 class machine) for 
the
> >>2200 comes out..
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >That day can't come soon enough!  I'm sick of bronzing.
> >
> >  
> >
> For a nice explanation of the "gloss optimizer" and how it works, 
try:
> 
> http://www.photo-i.co.uk/News/Nov03/Epsondata.htm
> 
>  
> Keith Krebs
> 
> "Just some guy," and caretaker of the Multiverse's largest EPSON 
printer 
> User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo 
> Publications), at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSON_Printers/
>  
> "For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks 
together 
> guys"

> From: flyfishingusa2002 [mailto:tflyfish@...]
>
> The extra black on the new epsons is only so that ink is not wasted
> on a cart change. something that I hardly ever do since I stick to
> matt papers.

Isn't that only true of the 4000?

> Why glossy? good prints should go under glass where
> glossy is not needed. Glossy is fine for small prints to give away,
> but hardly necessary for display.

Glossy and semi-gloss papers give you denser blacks than matte papers. For
color, they have a wider gamut.

--

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@...

Keith wrote:

>For a nice explanation of the "gloss optimizer" and how it works, try:

>http://www.photo-i.co.uk/News/Nov03/Epsondata.htm 

Epson used essentially the same ad copy when it introduced the 2000P and the
2200 -- the same drawings about more even reflection, etc.  I'm not saying
this is not an advance, but we've heard this story and seen essentially the
same drawings before.  

I'm most interested in the new color pigs.  I'd love to have a good red and
blue that I could use to tone the carbon.  I assume the third party pigment
producers will be right behind Epson with these new colors.

I'm also most interested in the apparent lack of light inks.  With a 1.5
picoliter drop size available, I guess Epson finally feels it can drop the
watered-down inks.  I think the light inks are flooding the paper with
(expensive) water and glycol, to the detriment of print quality.  I was
never fan of the FS-E ink arrangement, and I think Cone has made a mistake
in going that route with his new Piezo ink order.  The old machines need
these light inks, but as drop size has decreased and resolution increased,
the need for the light inks has decreased radically.  I'm curious to see
what the C84 can do with its 5760 resolution.

On the other hand, if there is no light black, is metamerism going to show
its ugly head more?

I also worry about what the driver is going to do to my ability to control
the inks with the Epson driver.  Without a RIP, will we be able to control
the red and blue spots?  This may be a step forward for color but a step
backward for B&W.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Paul D. DeRocco wrote:

>>From: flyfishingusa2002 [mailto:tflyfish@...]
>>
>>The extra black on the new epsons is only so that ink is not wasted
>>on a cart change. something that I hardly ever do since I stick to
>>matt papers.
>>    
>>
>
>Isn't that only true of the 4000?
>  
>

Nope, the R800 as well..

CMY + RB + 2K's + Gloss Optimizer = 8 cartridge positions

>  
>
>>Why glossy? good prints should go under glass where
>>glossy is not needed. Glossy is fine for small prints to give away,
>>but hardly necessary for display.
>>    
>>
>
>Glossy and semi-gloss papers give you denser blacks than matte papers. For
>color, they have a wider gamut.
>
>  
>
Exactly...

 
Keith Krebs

"Just some guy," and caretaker of the Multiverse's largest EPSON printer 
User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo 
Publications), at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSON_Printers/
 
"For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together 
guys"

 

****************************************************************
CONFIDENTIALITY & COPYRIGHT NOTICE:
This e-mail message, including attachments and contents, is \ufffd Copyright, 
Keith Krebs, 2001-2002, All Rights Reserved. It is expressly for the 
sole use of the intended recipient and may contain confidential and 
privileged information. Absent the express written authorization of the 
author, any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, transfer, or 
distribution is explicitly prohibited and taken at your own risk. If you 
are not, or are unsure whether you are, the intended recipient, please 
contact the sender immediately and destroy all copies of the original 
message. Violations will be prosecuted to the FULL extent allowed under 
applicable civil and criminal law. Imagery published or distributed in 
violation of these conditions shall be subject to a $1500/image 
liquidated damages charge, in addition to any applicable Copyright 
violation penalties.


****************************************************************
{ The P.O.V. Image Service Website is still at http://www.p-o-v-image.com/ }

Paul,
with the 2200 you can get a denser black if you use a third party 
ink. I love the results that I get with the standard inks, I wish I 
could show you a print. The gamut might be a little better with 
glossy paper, but not much. In fact I find that the bronzing tends 
to dissapear using Epson Premium gloss after the print has been 
hanging for a while.
The Epson work around for bronzing appears to be to coat the areas 
of the print that it's likely to happen on...why not coat the whole 
print? It's a option, cost of course, Epson inks and consumables are 
very expensive, even here in the USA. What we really need is a low 
cost alternative. CIS on the 2200 is one alternative.

Cheers,

Barry
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul D. 
DeRocco" <pderocco@i...> wrote:
> > From: flyfishingusa2002 [mailto:tflyfish@c...]
> >
> > The extra black on the new epsons is only so that ink is not 
wasted
> > on a cart change. something that I hardly ever do since I stick 
to
> > matt papers.
> 
> Isn't that only true of the 4000?
> 
> > Why glossy? good prints should go under glass where
> > glossy is not needed. Glossy is fine for small prints to give 
away,
> > but hardly necessary for display.
> 
> Glossy and semi-gloss papers give you denser blacks than matte 
papers. For

> color, they have a wider gamut.
> 
> --
> 
> Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
> Paul                mailto:pderocco@i...

> From: flyfishingusa2002 [mailto:tflyfish@...]
>
> with the 2200 you can get a denser black if you use a third party ink.

I've tested the standard Epson Photo Black on Premium Luster and the Matte
Black on Enhanced Matte, and I can see that the matte isn't quite as
dense--so can my colorimeter. Whether they look better is subjective, of
course.

--

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@...

>Glossy and semi-gloss papers give you denser blacks than matte papers. 

In perfect lighting the RC/glossy blacks are impressive.  However, I find
that in normal, very imperfect lighting the increased reflections off the RC
surface gives the matte prints an edge.

The primary -- perhaps only -- difference in the depth of blacks between
these 2 types of paper is, from what I can tell, a matter of the reflection
differences.  Matte black reflects light in all directions; RC/glossy papers
are more like mirrors.  I personally don't like reflections interfering with
the image -- and this includes reflections from glass.  The highest dmax
I've ever measured with a pigment is a coated matte print -- Arches Hot
Press at that.  But, of course, as the coating increases dmax it is also
increasing the reflections.  It's a double edged sword.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Paul Roark wrote:

>I'm also most interested in the apparent lack of light inks.  With a 1.5
>picoliter drop size available, I guess Epson finally feels it can drop the
>watered-down inks.  I think the light inks are flooding the paper with
>(expensive) water and glycol, to the detriment of print quality.  I was
>never fan of the FS-E ink arrangement, and I think Cone has made a mistake
>in going that route with his new Piezo ink order.  The old machines need
>these light inks, but as drop size has decreased and resolution increased,
>the need for the light inks has decreased radically.  I'm curious to see
>what the C84 can do with its 5760 resolution.
>  
>
I think Jon has decided on that route for:

1)   Ease of customer support - he ends up with the same basic ink setup 
for a LOT of printers, old and new alike.  Unfortunately it risks being 
like th guy who made software that ran great on a 286 but didn't take 
advantage of a 386, who refused to upgrade the way it accessed memory. 
You get replaced by other offerings that better use the newly available 
hardware.

2)   The large installed base he has of people who paid a lot for his 
Piezo software and gear...  A revolt among early devotees wouldn't help 
him...


>On the other hand, if there is no light black, is metamerism going to show
>its ugly head more?
>  
>
My thoughts as well.

>I also worry about what the driver is going to do to my ability to control
>the inks with the Epson driver.  Without a RIP, will we be able to control
>the red and blue spots?  This may be a step forward for color but a step
>backward for B&W.
>  
>
Scary, I've been thinking along the same lines..  Not only that, I'm 
wondering how many printer profiling packages will need SERIOUS updating..

Which is why if/when I end up buying an R800 and 4000.. or perhaps just 
whatever replaces the 2200 (probably my optimal choice, as unless I 
become a print shop I really don't have a need for the 4000), I 
currently plan n using it for color pigment work only...



 
Keith Krebs

"Just some guy," and caretaker of the Multiverse's largest EPSON printer 
User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo 
Publications), at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSON_Printers/
 
"For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together 
guys"

Barry  -
 
Are there objective tests to support you statement:  "with the 2200 you can get a denser black if you use a third party ink."  In practice, with high quality prints from two ink sets, Ultrachrome inks viewed side by side with '3rd party' inks, there is no visual difference in DMax. 
 
I have not compared 2200 prints in this manner, only 9600 Ultrachrome with the 3rd party inks on 'other' printers.
 
Tom Baker
 

flyfishingusa2002 <tflyfish@...> wrote:
Paul,
with the 2200 you can get a denser black if you use a third party 
ink. I love the results that I get with the standard inks, I wish I 
could show you a print. The gamut might be a little better with 
glossy paper, but not much. In fact I find that the bronzing tends 
to dissapear using Epson Premium gloss after the print has been 
hanging for a while.
The Epson work around for bronzing appears to be to coat the areas 
of the print that it's likely to happen on...why not coat the whole 
print? It's a option, cost of course, Epson inks and consumables are 
very expensive, even here in the USA. What we really need is a low 
cost alternative. CIS on the 2200 is one alternative.

Cheers,

Barry
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul D. 
DeRocco" <pderocco@i...> wrote:
> > From: flyfishingusa2002 [mailto:tflyfish@c...]
> >
> > The extra black on the new epsons is only so that ink is not 
wasted
> > on a cart change. something that I hardly ever do since I stick 
to
> > matt papers.
> 
> Isn't that only true of the 4000?
> 
> > Why glossy? good prints should go under glass where
> > glossy is not needed. Glossy is fine for small prints to give 
away,
> > but hardly necessary for display.
> 
> Glossy and semi-gloss papers give you denser blacks than matte 
papers. For
> color, they have a wider gamut.
> 
> --
> 
> Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
> Paul                mailto:pderocco@i...


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
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]

flyfishingusa2002 wrote:

>What's wrong with the 2200? I get great B/W prints using QTR (free) 
>using my Mac. I get great colour from it from either my PC system or 
>the MAC. 
>
Um.. And you're expecting people to buy a Mac or Linux system to get 
good b/w with QTR? or pay mucho $$ for ImagePrint?

>The extra black on the new epsons is only so that ink is not wasted 
>on a cart change. something that I hardly ever do since I stick to 
>matt papers. Why glossy? good prints should go under glass where 
>glossy is not needed. Glossy is fine for small prints to give away, 
>but hardly necessary for display.
>  
>
Depends on your target market...

One area that's obvious is B&W headshots, or B&W prints for portfolio... 
Many times ppl (models, actors, etc.) want only glossies..  Remember, 
not ALL digital B&W is fine-art.

 
Keith Krebs

"Just some guy," and caretaker of the Multiverse's largest EPSON printer 
User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo 
Publications), at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSON_Printers/
 
"For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together 
guys"

> From: Paul Roark [mailto:paul.roark@...]
>
> In perfect lighting the RC/glossy blacks are impressive.  However, I find
> that in normal, very imperfect lighting the increased reflections
> off the RC surface gives the matte prints an edge.

I like matte for that reason, too. However, the very shine that causes
interfering reflections with viewing a glossy image at certain angles make
it possible to avoid that reflected light by merely viewing from a different
angle. Probably the best viewing situation is to have a couple lights
illuminating the print from 45 degrees, with darkness behind you.
Unfortunately, that's not generally practical.

> The primary -- perhaps only -- difference in the depth of blacks between
> these 2 types of paper is, from what I can tell, a matter of the
> reflection
> differences.  Matte black reflects light in all directions;
> RC/glossy papers are more like mirrors.

I guess my CM2C colorimeter sees more light reflected from matte paper
because the LEDs illuminate at an angle and the sensors pick up (I believe)
along a perpendicular axis.

--

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@...

Paul, you wrote:

> On the other hand, if there is no light black, is metamerism
going to show
> its ugly head more?

The reduction of metamerism is by extending the black generation.
That can be done with an extra k ink but also with smaller K
droplets.

Ernst