Digital BW, The Print

In his comparison of prints made using the Piezo system with those 
made using Epson drives and color inks, Michael Reichmann states 
that "what's also much more obvious when looking directly at the 
prints is that the Piezo prints show more detail. The Epson driver 
can not take an input file of more than 360 DPI. Feed it a higher 
resolution file and the data is discarded by the driver. A Piezo 
driven printer can take a much higher resolution file, and make use 
of it." Assuming that this is the case, then wouldn't the same 
condition and result apply (perhaps to differing degrees) to all 
inksets, including the various quadtone sets available, when used 
with the Epson driver rather than the Piezo driver? I guess what I'm 
wondering is just how much of a difference there is. And, yes, I'm 
sitting on the fence, Epson 1160 in hand, trying to decide whether I 
should fork over big bucks for Piezo software -- and run the risk of 
my now out-of-production printer breaking down and then having to buy 
_new_ software for the replacement printer, etc. -- or go with the 
MIS VM inkset, sweat out the paper-profile limitations...

Chris,

I have Piezo inks and software on a 1200 and MIS VM inks with Paul 
Roark's curves on a 1280. I do not see any difference in sharpness 
between the two with the 1280 printing at 1440 or 2880.

I don't know enough about the Epson driver to know if it really drops 
all data above 360 or not. I am a bit skeptical in that there does 
seem to be a slight difference between a 360 and 720 file although 
not visible at normal viewing distances.

I have also seen output from an 1160 using Piezo and MIS FS with the 
Epson driver and cannot tell them apart.

Martin Wesley




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Chris Hargens" <ldmr@c...> 
wrote:
> In his comparison of prints made using the Piezo system with those 
> made using Epson drives and color inks, Michael Reichmann states 
> that "what's also much more obvious when looking directly at the 
> prints is that the Piezo prints show more detail. The Epson driver 
> can not take an input file of more than 360 DPI. Feed it a higher 
> resolution file and the data is discarded by the driver. A Piezo 
> driven printer can take a much higher resolution file, and make use 
> of it." Assuming that this is the case, then wouldn't the same 
> condition and result apply (perhaps to differing degrees) to all 
> inksets, including the various quadtone sets available, when used 
> with the Epson driver rather than the Piezo driver? I guess what 
I'm 
> wondering is just how much of a difference there is. And, yes, I'm 
> sitting on the fence, Epson 1160 in hand, trying to decide whether 
I 
> should fork over big bucks for Piezo software -- and run the risk 
of 
> my now out-of-production printer breaking down and then having to 
buy 
> _new_ software for the replacement printer, etc. -- or go with the 
> MIS VM inkset, sweat out the paper-profile limitations...

Martin,

I have to agree with you on this one also. I have been doing test 
images from the 2000P with MIS VM and the 980 with the Piezo system, 
and even under magnification you can't tell them apart (except for 
the tone) as far as output goes.

One thing I did notice though, in normal tungsten lighting the Piezo 
print has a slight greenish tone, not a lot but you can detect it. 
Put it under normal daylight from a window that does not have direct 
sun coming through it (this will actually show the extreme of 
metamerism of any ink better than putting it in direct sunlight), and 
it is quite neutral, even losing some of the warmth. The MIS VM using 
the neutral cool curve is just that in normal tungsten lighting, but 
go to that same window as described above and it warms up and picks 
up the greenish tone. They actually reverse their appearance from 
normal tungsten lighting!

Anyone else see this happen?

Also, it seems as if the 980 may be a good Piezo printer if you are 
looking at smaller paper sizes. I haven't had an ink problem yet (5 
days so far) and don't see any signs of banding. The driver prints 
just like the Epson driver in terms of progression, but I haven't 
timed it yet. 

The Piezo system is more touchy about how you convert from RGB to 
grayscale though. If done right on a calibrated monitor you will 
print what you see. Do it wrong, and it isn't even close. If the 
image is an embedded grayscale that matches the current workspace 
though it is quite accurate. With the MIS VM, it always matches the 
screen coming from grayscale or using say the channel mixer to take 
an RGB to monochrome. And if I want to see the toning effects prior 
to printing the preview profile I made from Profiler RGB will get you 
close (I still haven't tweaked the first one I made yet).

Still playing with it all though.

Terry

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Martin Wesley" 
<mwesley250@e...> wrote:
> Chris,
> 
> I have Piezo inks and software on a 1200 and MIS VM inks with Paul 
> Roark's curves on a 1280. I do not see any difference in sharpness 
> between the two with the 1280 printing at 1440 or 2880.
> 
> I don't know enough about the Epson driver to know if it really 
drops 
> all data above 360 or not. I am a bit skeptical in that there does 
> seem to be a slight difference between a 360 and 720 file although 
> not visible at normal viewing distances.
> 
> I have also seen output from an 1160 using Piezo and MIS FS with 
the 
> Epson driver and cannot tell them apart.
> 
> Martin Wesley
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Chris Hargens" 
<ldmr@c...> 
> wrote:
> > In his comparison of prints made using the Piezo system with 
those 
> > made using Epson drives and color inks, Michael Reichmann states 
> > that "what's also much more obvious when looking directly at the 
> > prints is that the Piezo prints show more detail. The Epson 
driver 
> > can not take an input file of more than 360 DPI. Feed it a higher 
> > resolution file and the data is discarded by the driver. A Piezo 
> > driven printer can take a much higher resolution file, and make 
use 
> > of it." Assuming that this is the case, then wouldn't the same 
> > condition and result apply (perhaps to differing degrees) to all 
> > inksets, including the various quadtone sets available, when used 
> > with the Epson driver rather than the Piezo driver? I guess what 
> I'm 
> > wondering is just how much of a difference there is. And, yes, 
I'm 
> > sitting on the fence, Epson 1160 in hand, trying to decide 
whether 
> I 
> > should fork over big bucks for Piezo software -- and run the risk 
> of 
> > my now out-of-production printer breaking down and then having to 
> buy 
> > _new_ software for the replacement printer, etc. -- or go with 
the 
> > MIS VM inkset, sweat out the paper-profile limitations...

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "TerryR" <terryr1028@h...> 
wrote:

(snip)
> 
> One thing I did notice though, in normal tungsten lighting the 
Piezo 
> print has a slight greenish tone, not a lot but you can detect it. 
> Put it under normal daylight from a window that does not have 
direct 
> sun coming through it (this will actually show the extreme of 
> metamerism of any ink better than putting it in direct sunlight), 
and 
> it is quite neutral, even losing some of the warmth. The MIS VM 
using 
> the neutral cool curve is just that in normal tungsten lighting, 
but 
> go to that same window as described above and it warms up and picks 
> up the greenish tone. They actually reverse their appearance from 
> normal tungsten lighting!
> 
> Anyone else see this happen?

Terry,

YES, YES, YES and YES. I have remarked upon all of the above and it 
has been noted by others as well. I have to say that not all people 
see the Piezo metamerism. I think this is due to variations in degree 
with different printers/ink batches and to variations in individual 
color vision.

I have leaned toward the MIS VM since I view my prints almost 
exclusively by tungsten and halogen light.

> 
> Also, it seems as if the 980 may be a good Piezo printer if you are 
> looking at smaller paper sizes. I haven't had an ink problem yet (5 
> days so far) and don't see any signs of banding. The driver prints 
> just like the Epson driver in terms of progression, but I haven't 
> timed it yet. 

That is good to hear. It looks like it should be a workhorse of a 
printer.
> 
> The Piezo system is more touchy about how you convert from RGB to 
> grayscale though. If done right on a calibrated monitor you will 
> print what you see. Do it wrong, and it isn't even close. If the 
> image is an embedded grayscale that matches the current workspace 
> though it is quite accurate. With the MIS VM, it always matches the 
> screen coming from grayscale or using say the channel mixer to take 
> an RGB to monochrome. And if I want to see the toning effects prior 
> to printing the preview profile I made from Profiler RGB will get 
you 
> close (I still haven't tweaked the first one I made yet).

Could you elaborate on this a bit? Are you using the Profiler RGB 
built profile with Photoshop's Softproof function?

Thanks,

Martin



> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Martin Wesley" 
> <mwesley250@e...> wrote:
> > Chris,
> > 
> > I have Piezo inks and software on a 1200 and MIS VM inks with 
Paul 
> > Roark's curves on a 1280. I do not see any difference in 
sharpness 
> > between the two with the 1280 printing at 1440 or 2880.
> > 
> > I don't know enough about the Epson driver to know if it really 
> drops 
> > all data above 360 or not. I am a bit skeptical in that there 
does 
> > seem to be a slight difference between a 360 and 720 file 
although 
> > not visible at normal viewing distances.
> > 
> > I have also seen output from an 1160 using Piezo and MIS FS with 
> the 
> > Epson driver and cannot tell them apart.
> > 
> > Martin Wesley
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Chris Hargens" 
> <ldmr@c...> 
> > wrote:
> > > In his comparison of prints made using the Piezo system with 
> those 
> > > made using Epson drives and color inks, Michael Reichmann 
states 
> > > that "what's also much more obvious when looking directly at 
the 
> > > prints is that the Piezo prints show more detail. The Epson 
> driver 
> > > can not take an input file of more than 360 DPI. Feed it a 
higher 
> > > resolution file and the data is discarded by the driver. A 
Piezo 
> > > driven printer can take a much higher resolution file, and make 
> use 
> > > of it." Assuming that this is the case, then wouldn't the same 
> > > condition and result apply (perhaps to differing degrees) to 
all 
> > > inksets, including the various quadtone sets available, when 
used 
> > > with the Epson driver rather than the Piezo driver? I guess 
what 
> > I'm 
> > > wondering is just how much of a difference there is. And, yes, 
> I'm 
> > > sitting on the fence, Epson 1160 in hand, trying to decide 
> whether 
> > I 
> > > should fork over big bucks for Piezo software -- and run the 
risk 
> > of 
> > > my now out-of-production printer breaking down and then having 
to 

> > buy 
> > > _new_ software for the replacement printer, etc. -- or go with 
> the 
> > > MIS VM inkset, sweat out the paper-profile limitations...

Martin,

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Martin Wesley" 
<mwesley250@e...> wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "TerryR" 
<terryr1028@h...> 
> wrote:


<BIG SNIP>

And if I want to see the toning effects prior 
> > to printing the preview profile I made from Profiler RGB will get 
> you 
> > close (I still haven't tweaked the first one I made yet).
> 
> Could you elaborate on this a bit? Are you using the Profiler RGB 
> built profile with Photoshop's Softproof function?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Martin

Martin,

What I did was use Profiler RGB to create a preview only profile. You 
turn it on using the softproof function. When Pauls curves are 
applied, you see the print as it will print with the toning intact 
(no funky colors covering your image!). I really need to tweak it 
some more, I only made the one profile using the default settings 
when generating the profile, but it is close. You need to turn it 
back off though before you print if you are following Pauls workflow 
(I think, never really tested that part of it). I was hoping that it 
could be used to help generate the curves for the different papers as 
well, but as I said I think it will need a little more work to serve 
that purpose well.

I think Todd tried it, but didn't have much luck, he thought that 
maybe his scanner wasn't doing the job. I really wanted to make the 
profile available here, but Colorvision has that whole licensing 
issue. I use an Epson 1600 to create my profiles with at this point. 
Paul uses the same scanner, but he ends up with settings that are far 
from mine for comparable scans - so I don't know if there is that big 
of a spread in these scanners, or if it has more to do with the 
driver, he is using a much older version than mine.

Terry