Digital BW, The Print

The Luminous-Landscape review of Piezo printing stated that
the Piezo prints show more detail than the Epson driver prints.
It claimed that the Epson driver cannot take an input file of
more than 360 DPI. Feed it a higher resolution file and the data is
discarded by the driver.

Either my 1160 and Epson driver are very unusual, or this is one of those
urban myths.  In the Files>Message Related Files section of this forum I
have put a resolution test that shows that at least on my 1160 the Epson
driver does take advantage of information beyond the 360 dpi alleged limit,
and the Epson driver print very arguably is sharper than the Piezo print.

(The Files section is at the following URL:
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ .
Then go to the "Message Related Files" and see the "Piezo-Epson Resolution
Test.jpg" file.)

The limit of a 360 file is 7.2 lp/mm; the limit of a 720 file is 14.4 lp/mm.
These are what one gets with alternating one-pixel-wide black and white
lines in the respective files.  The test file I printed with both the Epson
driver and the Piezo driver was a 720 dpi resolution file with resolution
targets going up to the 14.4 lp/mm limit.  The file was printed with the
same 1160 after the heads were aligned.  LPM paper was used.

The print was then scanned at 1200 dpi.  No sharpening was done.  Some jpeg
artifacts are apparent, but the image shows the same basic information as
the original tiff file.

Because the Epson driver print shows some (limited) ability to resolve the
14.4 lp/mm target, it is clearly not throwing out information above the 360
dpi level.  At the 360 dpi level there would be no separation of the 14.4
lp/mm lines at all.  (By the way, my standard file resolution is 360 dpi
because it can readily resolve 7.2 lp/mm, which is more than the
generally-accepted 5 lp/mm limit of the human eye.  The comparison prints
I've done at 360 and 720 have at most what I would call a barely detectable
difference.  It's not worth the extra file size.)

Take a look at the resolution test file print and draw your own conclusions.

Maybe someone else has a system that reacts differently, but on my 1160
Piezo is simply not sharper than Epson.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

> (The Files section is at the following URL:
>  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ .
> Then go to the "Message Related Files" and see the "Piezo-Epson Resolution
> Test.jpg" file.)

Can I have the original file you printed out?  Using solid black ink to test
out a halftone system does not give you valid results, and any conclusions
you draw from this can not necessarily be applied to a halftone image!

> Maybe someone else has a system that reacts differently, but on my 1160
> Piezo is simply not sharper than Epson.

For an image that requires NO halftone!

I'm sorry, perhaps I'm not following the conversation, but this claim is
just so silly.  I have a dozen or more images on my wall done with both the
Epson halftone and the Piezo driver.  The Piezo system shows FAR FAR FAR
more detail than the Epson halftone driver for these images.

The Epson halftone driver has to use only ONE ink to make the grayscales.
The Piezo driver uses four.  It can, just on that alone, take up only 1/16th
the area to make the same tone as the Epson driver.

I am just stunned, Paul, that you are saying what I believe you are saying.
I am really hoping I just didn't follow the conversation, and I'm taking
what you said out of context.

Regards,

Austin

Austin,

I see no difference in the amount of detail or sharpness in prints 
using MIS VM with the Epson driver in side-by-side comparisons with 
Piezo. I see this in my own prints and in examples from others.

Technically I agree with you that you mono-ink print resolution may 
not corespond to 4 or 6 ink system resolution.

But regardless of the ins and outs of the drivers, the end results 
are equally excellent.

Martin

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Austin Franklin" 
<darkroom@i...> wrote:
> > (The Files section is at the following URL:
> >  
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/ .
> > Then go to the "Message Related Files" and see the "Piezo-Epson 
Resolution
> > Test.jpg" file.)
> 
> Can I have the original file you printed out?  Using solid black 
ink to test
> out a halftone system does not give you valid results, and any 
conclusions
> you draw from this can not necessarily be applied to a halftone 
image!
> 
> > Maybe someone else has a system that reacts differently, but on 
my 1160
> > Piezo is simply not sharper than Epson.
> 
> For an image that requires NO halftone!
> 
> I'm sorry, perhaps I'm not following the conversation, but this 
claim is
> just so silly.  I have a dozen or more images on my wall done with 
both the
> Epson halftone and the Piezo driver.  The Piezo system shows FAR 
FAR FAR
> more detail than the Epson halftone driver for these images.
> 
> The Epson halftone driver has to use only ONE ink to make the 
grayscales.
> The Piezo driver uses four.  It can, just on that alone, take up 
only 1/16th
> the area to make the same tone as the Epson driver.
> 
> I am just stunned, Paul, that you are saying what I believe you are 
saying.
> I am really hoping I just didn't follow the conversation, and I'm 
taking

> what you said out of context.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Austin

Please allow me to jump in this way...

Those »generally accepted 5lp/mm limit of the human eye« simply is a myth.
These measures were taken more than 100 years in the past testing just one
(!) 
human eye watching a resting object. They found a resp of about 9lp/mm this
way. 

I do not intend to blame people familiar to look one-eyed at artwork -
please forgive my being a bit ironically- but there actually exists the
option to use one´s both eyes for the same purpose. And there is a
big difference then. Resolution is very much higher, and it is enhanced in
addition by the constant scanning movements of the eyes called »tremor«.

The astronaut´s eyes are capable of discriminating trucks on the highways by
looking down from the orbit. This is possible only with a resp of more than
100 lp/mm of their human eyes.
A traditional photographer easily can discriminate between the resolution of
a paper for enlargements (ca.25lp/mm) and a contact paper like AZO
(ca.40lp/mm).
When you have doubts - there is scientific literature available on this
issue.

Like the human ear the human eye too can be made awaken and sharpened or
sent into sleep. As a teacher in Europe of workshops on both the digital and
the traditional fine print I am well aware about the differences. There are
beautiful prints possible using the inkjet but you can´t compare them with a
contact print from a large format negative on silver - this would be like
comparing apples with pears. There are simply different aestetics involved.
The hype however on going digital in my ears sometimes sounds like people
being happy to become blind.

My equipment is two Epson Photo 1200 (both with the MIS continouus inks
system) and a Color 3000. The inks are the MIS Quadtones and the Triton
system of the European Ink Company which give results as good as the best
Piezography prints by being much lower in price.

Thank you for listening

Burkhardt Kiegeland

www.lotusviewcamera.at



 




        Paul Roarke wrote

snip...
At the 360 dpi level there would be no separation of the 14.4lp/mm lines at
all.  (By the way, my standard file resolution is 360 dpi
because it can readily resolve 7.2 lp/mm, which is more than the
     generally-accepted 5 lp/mm limit of the human eye.

  snip... 


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

Yes, but that's printing with quad inks, right?  If so, then it is not the
same as printing with only black ink.  Perhaps that's our misunderstanding.
Are you using multiple inks, or one ink?  The Epson driver will print B&W
using only one ink, unless you are using color, which will print with
multiple inks.

The resolution should be the exact same no matter how many inks you use,
it's the amount of tonality you can represent with how many dots (in what
area) that is the difference.  With a single ink it takes more dots (area)
to represent a number of different shades, than with more different inks.

> Austin,
>
> I see no difference in the amount of detail or sharpness in prints
> using MIS VM with the Epson driver in side-by-side comparisons with
> Piezo. I see this in my own prints and in examples from others.
>
> Technically I agree with you that you mono-ink print resolution may
> not corespond to 4 or 6 ink system resolution.
>
> But regardless of the ins and outs of the drivers, the end results
> are equally excellent.
>
> Martin

> Resolution is very much higher, and it is enhanced in
> addition by the constant scanning movements of the eyes called \ufffdtremor\ufffd.

My understanding is the eye has two resolutions, simply because there are
two different systems in use.  One resolution is edge distinction (basically
black and white response) and the other is color.

I don't know about the precision of the old measurements (however
psychophysics from the turn of the century was typically very good);
however, there is no reason to believe that binocular vision would offer a
large advantage over monocular vision in two point determination.
Definitely not more than 5% unless the signal is severely degraded...which
these are not.

Robert (this time wearing my Cognitive Psychologist hat).



Binocular vision (two eye vision) gives one

On 10/10/01 12:06 PM, "Burkhardt Kiegeland" <burkhardt@...>
wrote:

> Please allow me to jump in this way...
> 
> Those »generally accepted 5lp/mm limit of the human eye« simply is a myth.
> These measures were taken more than 100 years in the past testing just one
> (!) 
> human eye watching a resting object. They found a resp of about 9lp/mm this
> way. 
> 
> I do not intend to blame people familiar to look one-eyed at artwork -
> please forgive my being a bit ironically- but there actually exists the
> option to use one´s both eyes for the same purpose. And there is a
> big difference then. Resolution is very much higher, and it is enhanced in
> addition by the constant scanning movements of the eyes called »tremor«.
> 
> The astronaut´s eyes are capable of discriminating trucks on the highways by
> looking down from the orbit. This is possible only with a resp of more than
> 100 lp/mm of their human eyes.
> A traditional photographer easily can discriminate between the resolution of
> a paper for enlargements (ca.25lp/mm) and a contact paper like AZO
> (ca.40lp/mm).
> When you have doubts - there is scientific literature available on this
> issue.
> 
> Like the human ear the human eye too can be made awaken and sharpened or
> sent into sleep. As a teacher in Europe of workshops on both the digital and
> the traditional fine print I am well aware about the differences. There are
> beautiful prints possible using the inkjet but you can´t compare them with a
> contact print from a large format negative on silver - this would be like
> comparing apples with pears. There are simply different aestetics involved.
> The hype however on going digital in my ears sometimes sounds like people
> being happy to become blind.
> 
> My equipment is two Epson Photo 1200 (both with the MIS continouus inks
> system) and a Color 3000. The inks are the MIS Quadtones and the Triton
> system of the European Ink Company which give results as good as the best
> Piezography prints by being much lower in price.
> 
> Thank you for listening
> 
> Burkhardt Kiegeland
> 
> www.lotusviewcamera.at
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>       Paul Roarke wrote
> 
> snip...
> At the 360 dpi level there would be no separation of the 14.4lp/mm lines at
> all.  (By the way, my standard file resolution is 360 dpi
> because it can readily resolve 7.2 lp/mm, which is more than the
>    generally-accepted 5 lp/mm limit of the human eye.
> 
> snip... 
> 
> 
> [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
> 
> 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/
> 
> 

----------------------
Robert Morrison
rmorrison@...

310-397-2704

4131 Bledsoe Ave.
Los Angeles, CA 90066

I think you are probably right that the Epson driver prints black text with
black ink only. Paul's test should probably be to scale the density/opacity
of the type to 75% gray. Then send one to the Piezo and the other put
through his RGB/curves workflow. Hmm but even at that, one tone of ink is
still not a good test of across-the-board quality.

What if he superimposed white text over a step wedge? In that scenario the
edge of the type would be defined by the response of the system at each tone
along the way.

Todd

> Yes, but that's printing with quad inks, right?  If so, then it is not the
> same as printing with only black ink.  Perhaps that's our misunderstanding.
> Are you using multiple inks, or one ink?  The Epson driver will print B&W
> using only one ink, unless you are using color, which will print with
> multiple inks.
> 
> The resolution should be the exact same no matter how many inks you use,
> it's the amount of tonality you can represent with how many dots (in what
> area) that is the difference.  With a single ink it takes more dots (area)
> to represent a number of different shades, than with more different inks.
> 
>> Austin,
>> 
>> I see no difference in the amount of detail or sharpness in prints
>> using MIS VM with the Epson driver in side-by-side comparisons with
>> Piezo. I see this in my own prints and in examples from others.
>> 
>> Technically I agree with you that you mono-ink print resolution may
>> not corespond to 4 or 6 ink system resolution.
>> 
>> But regardless of the ins and outs of the drivers, the end results
>> are equally excellent.
>> 
>> Martin

Austin,

I am comparing quad and hextone MIS to quad and hextome Piezo prints 
side by side and do not see any difference in quality.

Martin

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Austin Franklin" 
<darkroom@i...> wrote:
> Yes, but that's printing with quad inks, right?  If so, then it is 
not the
> same as printing with only black ink.  Perhaps that's our 
misunderstanding.
> Are you using multiple inks, or one ink?  The Epson driver will 
print B&W
> using only one ink, unless you are using color, which will print 
with
> multiple inks.
> 
> The resolution should be the exact same no matter how many inks you 
use,
> it's the amount of tonality you can represent with how many dots 
(in what
> area) that is the difference.  With a single ink it takes more dots 
(area)
> to represent a number of different shades, than with more different 
inks.
> 
> > Austin,
> >
> > I see no difference in the amount of detail or sharpness in prints
> > using MIS VM with the Epson driver in side-by-side comparisons 
with
> > Piezo. I see this in my own prints and in examples from others.
> >
> > Technically I agree with you that you mono-ink print resolution 
may

> > not corespond to 4 or 6 ink system resolution.
> >
> > But regardless of the ins and outs of the drivers, the end results
> > are equally excellent.
> >
> > Martin

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Burkhardt Kiegeland 
<burkhardt@e...> wrote:

> My equipment is two Epson Photo 1200 (both with the MIS 
>continouus inks system) and a Color 3000. The inks are the 
>MIS Quadtones and the Triton system of the European Ink 
>Company which give results as good as the best Piezography 
>prints by being much lower in price



Servus Burckhardt, 

this is just for those who never heard about the Triton system:
4 cartridges Cone ink for the Epson 3000 are $  260,
4 (!) carts Triton ink are  $ ~ 190,
4  virgin carts plus 4x4 oz MIS FS  ink are $ 92

Even if you need only 3 carts for printing with the Triton system - 
you should compare the price of four carts, because obviously  3 
carts will not last as long as 4 carts do, no?

BTW, you didn´t tell which inks you use on which printer.

Herzliche Grüße aus dem Nachbarland
Ihr Bernd Langmack

Burkhardt,

I have never seen the numbers you mention before. Having seen a 
number of Morley Baer's 8x10 contact prints I certainly am not going 
to argue the beauty of that technique.

In the July/August issue of Photo Techniques a couple of letters 
appeared with responses from Phil Davis and Patrick Gainer of the 
magazine. Some things of interest that were reported was the 
resolving power of silver bromide paper which was measured at 80 
lp/mm using a contact printed test target. The same target used in an 
enlarger at a 1:1 ratio only gave 20 lp/mm.

Mr. Gainer reported that the calculated, theoretical limit of a 
perfect 300mm lens at f64 was 10 lp/mm.

In real world shooting conditions, given the limitations on the 
equipment through out the process, I have to say that achieving 100 
lp/mm, much less 400 lp/mm, on a print seems rather unlikely.

In any case, I think ultimately what is important is "sharpness" and 
not "acutance".

To quote Mr. Davis,

"In my humble opinion, discussion of anything other than sharpness 
are technobabble, because the average photographer has neither the 
necessary equipment, nor the knowledge to use it meaningfully. And, 
of course, arguments about "sharpness" (which depends entirely on 
individual perception or opinion), while valid enough, are more 
likely to irrate than educate."

In all honesty I have not found my inkjet prints to be lacking in 
sharpness in comparison to my silver prints made by enlargement from 
35mm, 6x7 and 4x5 negatives. Trying to make a comparison to my 
contact sheets is difficult due to their sized but I feel that there 
is not a profound difference there either.

Would you expand upon your experiences with the Triton inks. You are 
the first person to mention them on the list.

Martin Wesley

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Burkhardt Kiegeland 
<burkhardt@e...> wrote:
> Please allow me to jump in this way...
> 
> Those »generally accepted 5lp/mm limit of the human eye« simply is 
a myth.
> These measures were taken more than 100 years in the past testing 
just one
> (!) 
> human eye watching a resting object. They found a resp of about 
9lp/mm this
> way. 
> 
> I do not intend to blame people familiar to look one-eyed at 
artwork -
> please forgive my being a bit ironically- but there actually exists 
the
> option to use one´s both eyes for the same purpose. And there is a
> big difference then. Resolution is very much higher, and it is 
enhanced in
> addition by the constant scanning movements of the eyes 
called »tremor«.
> 
> The astronaut´s eyes are capable of discriminating trucks on the 
highways by
> looking down from the orbit. This is possible only with a resp of 
more than
> 100 lp/mm of their human eyes.
> A traditional photographer easily can discriminate between the 
resolution of
> a paper for enlargements (ca.25lp/mm) and a contact paper like AZO
> (ca.40lp/mm).
> When you have doubts - there is scientific literature available on 
this
> issue.
> 
> Like the human ear the human eye too can be made awaken and 
sharpened or
> sent into sleep. As a teacher in Europe of workshops on both the 
digital and
> the traditional fine print I am well aware about the differences. 
There are
> beautiful prints possible using the inkjet but you can´t compare 
them with a
> contact print from a large format negative on silver - this would 
be like
> comparing apples with pears. There are simply different aestetics 
involved.
> The hype however on going digital in my ears sometimes sounds like 
people
> being happy to become blind.
> 
> My equipment is two Epson Photo 1200 (both with the MIS continouus 
inks
> system) and a Color 3000. The inks are the MIS Quadtones and the 
Triton
> system of the European Ink Company which give results as good as 
the best
> Piezography prints by being much lower in price.
> 
> Thank you for listening
> 
> Burkhardt Kiegeland
> 
> www.lotusviewcamera.at
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
>         Paul Roarke wrote
> 
> snip...
> At the 360 dpi level there would be no separation of the 14.4lp/mm 
lines at

> all.  (By the way, my standard file resolution is 360 dpi
> because it can readily resolve 7.2 lp/mm, which is more than the
>      generally-accepted 5 lp/mm limit of the human eye.
> 
>   snip... 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Without attempting to reply to all comments, let me add a little more to my
first post.

First, there was a specific allegation made in the Piezo review.  It claimed
that the Epson driver cannot utilize the information in an input file of
more than 360 DPI. Anything more that that would simply be discarded by the
driver.

This is demonstrably untrue.  The file I put in the forum's Files page shows
the utilization (barely, perhaps) of information beyond 360 dpi.  This print
was done using the usual MIS VM, RGB printing workflow.

Second, one can certainly debate what "sharpness" is.  Most of us have
probably followed the Modern/Popular Photography move to the Modulation
Transfer Function (MTF) as opposed to just the resolution figures.  The
optical companies' published MTF curves are great.  I wish I could measure
the MTF.  However, pure resolution -- the ability to separate black and
white lines -- is not irrelevant.  Popular Photography still uses it in many
tests, and it is something that most of us can relate to.  In my experience
it does correlate with the appearance of sharpness, even if the MTF might be
a more complete picture.  So, I think the posted file speaks for itself and
is relevant.

I also stick by the generally accepted 5 lp/mm visual resolution limit.
It's easy to test yourself.  I can't see more than 5 lp/mm.  However, as
Ctein and others have pointed out, even though most of us may not be able to
separate more than 5 lp/mm at normal viewing distance, we can detect edge
sharpness of closer to 30 lp/mm.  (The 30 lp/mm is Ctein's test result, as
best as I can remember.)

I have no idea how the inkjet output would measure up in edge sharpness, but
it would certainly not equal a good contact print.  However, most of us
don't to that.  My Epson 3000 16x20s are clearly sharper than my medium
format (Rollei/Zeiss/tripod/Tmax 100) traditionally-enlarged (Apo-Rodagon)
16x20s.

Having looked at a number of identical images that I've printed with both
the Piezo and Epson drivers, I must say in most cases I cannot see any
sharpness difference, even with a magnifier.  While the posted resolution
test would give the Epson driver a slight edge, I think if I could measure
MTF the Piezo driver would have an edge at certain frequencies due to dither
differences.  In that respect, I wonder if the newer drivers are actually
not as sharp as the old ones.  I suspect that hiding the micro-banding and
maximizing the MTF are diametrically opposed.  (My Piezo driver version is
the 511 update, 12/00.)

At any rate, I consider the drivers to be essentially equal in their ability
to deliver sharp results.  If the Epson dither lowers the technical MTF but
also hides the microbanding, I'd go with no microbanding -- which is the
original reason I started writing curves to print Piezo inks with the Epson
driver.  I suspect the Piezo drivers are going this direction also.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

> First, there was a specific allegation made in the Piezo review.
> It claimed
> that the Epson driver cannot utilize the information in an input file of
> more than 360 DPI. Anything more that that would simply be
> discarded by the
> driver.
>
> This is demonstrably untrue.

NOT demonstrated by your test pattern, that is not halftone.  The context
was halftone...not just black ink.

The fact is, when halftoning with the Epson driver and only one ink, it
takes up 16x more space to produce the same tones...given that, it would
only make sense that it has to limit the input resolution WHEN DOING
DITHERING/HALFTONING.

> Having looked at a number of identical images that I've printed with both
> the Piezo and Epson drivers, I must say in most cases I cannot see any
> sharpness difference, even with a magnifier.

IMAGES?  As in, grayscale or black/white (typically called lineart) only?
Printed with quad tone inks and the Epson driver, or just the black ink?

> At any rate, I consider the drivers to be essentially equal in
> their ability
> to deliver sharp results.

If you are basing this conclusion on the test image that you posted, your
conclusion is erroneous.

Austin, I'm not sure why you are focussing on halftoning with black ink
only, when it seems obvious that the tests were done with two different quad
systems (piezo and MIS VM).  Given that, I don't see what you are adding to
the discussion here.  Others have pointed out that a better comparison of
the two systems would include line pairs of varying densities (and now that
Paul has done a test w/ black on white, perhaps others can do some tests
with gray on gray and black on gray etc.)

From what I understand from your posts, it seems that you may be calling for
the same thing; if so, I suggest you say so, if not, then why don't you
propose another test that might clarify things.

Bill Morse
PhotoProspect
Cambridge, MA 


on 10/10/01 8:02 PM, Austin Franklin wrote:

...The context was halftone...not just black ink.

The fact is, when halftoning with the Epson driver and only one ink, it
takes up 16x more space to produce the same tones...given that, it would
only make sense that it has to limit the input resolution WHEN DOING
DITHERING/HALFTONING.

> Having looked at a number of identical images that I've printed with both
> the Piezo and Epson drivers, I must say in most cases I cannot see any
> sharpness difference, even with a magnifier.

IMAGES?  As in, grayscale or black/white (typically called lineart) only?
Printed with quad tone inks and the Epson driver, or just the black ink?





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

Austin,

Paul's test and posted results were done with all four MIS inks using his
curves and the Epson color driver in comparison to Piezo driver using all 4
Piezo inks. They are grayscale images printed as you would a photographic
image with 4 inks all in use. His tests meet the criteria you specified.

Martin


----- Original Message -----
From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 5:02 PM
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Piezography Review: Piezo v. Epson resolution


>
> > First, there was a specific allegation made in the Piezo review.
> > It claimed
> > that the Epson driver cannot utilize the information in an input file of
> > more than 360 DPI. Anything more that that would simply be
> > discarded by the
> > driver.
> >
> > This is demonstrably untrue.
>
> NOT demonstrated by your test pattern, that is not halftone.  The context
> was halftone...not just black ink.
>
> The fact is, when halftoning with the Epson driver and only one ink, it
> takes up 16x more space to produce the same tones...given that, it would
> only make sense that it has to limit the input resolution WHEN DOING
> DITHERING/HALFTONING.
>
> > Having looked at a number of identical images that I've printed with
both
> > the Piezo and Epson drivers, I must say in most cases I cannot see any
> > sharpness difference, even with a magnifier.
>
> IMAGES?  As in, grayscale or black/white (typically called lineart) only?
> Printed with quad tone inks and the Epson driver, or just the black ink?
>
> > At any rate, I consider the drivers to be essentially equal in
> > their ability
> > to deliver sharp results.
>
> If you are basing this conclusion on the test image that you posted, your
> conclusion is erroneous.
>
>
>
> 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
>
> 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/
>
>
>

Bill,

You make a good point here. The tests were run in full grayscale mode 
with the full ink sets in use. However, the results may be influenced 
by how the different drivers run the 100% black that was used. From 
some tests I did awhile back I believe that the Piezo driver may run 
some or all of the lighter inks all the way into 100% black.

The Epson driver may not do this and may have an advantage at this 
density that might not be there at 75%, 50% or 25%. Of course the 
test is defined as black lines on a white background so it would no 
longer be strictly comparable to other results

In the end though I still feel it is our perception of the final 
print that counts and the tests, while informative and interesting, 
should not be the deciding factor.

Martin

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Bill Morse <willym@b...> 
wrote:
> Austin, I'm not sure why you are focussing on halftoning with black 
ink
> only, when it seems obvious that the tests were done with two 
different quad
> systems (piezo and MIS VM).  Given that, I don't see what you are 
adding to
> the discussion here.  Others have pointed out that a better 
comparison of
> the two systems would include line pairs of varying densities (and 
now that
> Paul has done a test w/ black on white, perhaps others can do some 
tests
> with gray on gray and black on gray etc.)
> 
> From what I understand from your posts, it seems that you may be 
calling for
> the same thing; if so, I suggest you say so, if not, then why don't 
you
> propose another test that might clarify things.
> 
> Bill Morse
> PhotoProspect
> Cambridge, MA 
> 
> 
> on 10/10/01 8:02 PM, Austin Franklin wrote:
> 
> ...The context was halftone...not just black ink.
> 
> The fact is, when halftoning with the Epson driver and only one 
ink, it
> takes up 16x more space to produce the same tones...given that, it 
would
> only make sense that it has to limit the input resolution WHEN DOING
> DITHERING/HALFTONING.
> 
> > Having looked at a number of identical images that I've printed 
with both
> > the Piezo and Epson drivers, I must say in most cases I cannot 
see any
> > sharpness difference, even with a magnifier.
> 
> IMAGES?  As in, grayscale or black/white (typically called lineart) 
only?
> Printed with quad tone inks and the Epson driver, or just the black 
ink?

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

Where is the posted file, Martin...I can only find the black results.

Robert

On 10/10/01 6:32 PM, "Martin Wesley" <mwesley250@...> wrote:

> Austin,
> 
> Paul's test and posted results were done with all four MIS inks using his
> curves and the Epson color driver in comparison to Piezo driver using all 4
> Piezo inks. They are grayscale images printed as you would a photographic
> image with 4 inks all in use. His tests meet the criteria you specified.
> 
> Martin
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@...>
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 5:02 PM
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Piezography Review: Piezo v. Epson resolution
> 
> 
>> 
>>> First, there was a specific allegation made in the Piezo review.
>>> It claimed
>>> that the Epson driver cannot utilize the information in an input file of
>>> more than 360 DPI. Anything more that that would simply be
>>> discarded by the
>>> driver.
>>> 
>>> This is demonstrably untrue.
>> 
>> NOT demonstrated by your test pattern, that is not halftone.  The context
>> was halftone...not just black ink.
>> 
>> The fact is, when halftoning with the Epson driver and only one ink, it
>> takes up 16x more space to produce the same tones...given that, it would
>> only make sense that it has to limit the input resolution WHEN DOING
>> DITHERING/HALFTONING.
>> 
>>> Having looked at a number of identical images that I've printed with
> both
>>> the Piezo and Epson drivers, I must say in most cases I cannot see any
>>> sharpness difference, even with a magnifier.
>> 
>> IMAGES?  As in, grayscale or black/white (typically called lineart) only?
>> Printed with quad tone inks and the Epson driver, or just the black ink?
>> 
>>> At any rate, I consider the drivers to be essentially equal in
>>> their ability
>>> to deliver sharp results.
>> 
>> If you are basing this conclusion on the test image that you posted, your
>> conclusion is erroneous.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 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
>> 
>> 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/
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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
> 
> 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/
> 
> 

----------------------
Robert Morrison
rmorrison@...

310-397-2704

4131 Bledsoe Ave.
Los Angeles, CA 90066

Austin,

I just tried printing the pattern with a midtone gray, and both the Epson
and the Piezo drivers' performance dropped just slightly.  However, on my
system the Epson driver still looked better.  The relative performances
stayed the same.

Maybe my 1160 is just weird.  Why don't you try the test file I sent to you
and see what resolution you can get out of your Piezo driver.

Paul

Robert,

It is just the one file at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/Messa
ge%20Related%20Files/

(remember to cut and paste the URL if it wraps in the message.

It is B&W but printed from grayscale using the Epson RGB and Piezo 
drivers.

Martin

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Robert G. Morrison" 
<rmorrison@p...> wrote:
> Where is the posted file, Martin...I can only find the black 
results.
> 
> Robert
> 
> On 10/10/01 6:32 PM, "Martin Wesley" <mwesley250@e...> wrote:
> 
> > Austin,
> > 
> > Paul's test and posted results were done with all four MIS inks 
using his
> > curves and the Epson color driver in comparison to Piezo driver 
using all 4
> > Piezo inks. They are grayscale images printed as you would a 
photographic
> > image with 4 inks all in use. His tests meet the criteria you 
specified.
> > 
> > Martin
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@i...>
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y...>
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 5:02 PM
> > Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Piezography Review: Piezo v. Epson 
resolution
> > 
> > 
> >> 
> >>> First, there was a specific allegation made in the Piezo review.
> >>> It claimed
> >>> that the Epson driver cannot utilize the information in an 
input file of
> >>> more than 360 DPI. Anything more that that would simply be
> >>> discarded by the
> >>> driver.
> >>> 
> >>> This is demonstrably untrue.
> >> 
> >> NOT demonstrated by your test pattern, that is not halftone.  
The context
> >> was halftone...not just black ink.
> >> 
> >> The fact is, when halftoning with the Epson driver and only one 
ink, it
> >> takes up 16x more space to produce the same tones...given that, 
it would
> >> only make sense that it has to limit the input resolution WHEN 
DOING
> >> DITHERING/HALFTONING.
> >> 
> >>> Having looked at a number of identical images that I've printed 
with
> > both
> >>> the Piezo and Epson drivers, I must say in most cases I cannot 
see any
> >>> sharpness difference, even with a magnifier.
> >> 
> >> IMAGES?  As in, grayscale or black/white (typically called 
lineart) only?
> >> Printed with quad tone inks and the Epson driver, or just the 
black ink?
> >> 
> >>> At any rate, I consider the drivers to be essentially equal in
> >>> their ability
> >>> to deliver sharp results.
> >> 
> >> If you are basing this conclusion on the test image that you 
posted, your
> >> conclusion is erroneous.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 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
> >> 
> >> 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/
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 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
> > 
> > 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/

> > 
> > 
> 
> ----------------------
> Robert Morrison
> rmorrison@p...
> 
> 310-397-2704
> 
> 4131 Bledsoe Ave.
> Los Angeles, CA 90066

Paul,

If you have the time, can you scan the midtone gray results? I will 
post them and perhaps give everyone a first hand look.

Martin


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> Austin,
> 
> I just tried printing the pattern with a midtone gray, and both the 
Epson
> and the Piezo drivers' performance dropped just slightly.  However, 
on my
> system the Epson driver still looked better.  The relative 
performances
> stayed the same.
> 
> Maybe my 1160 is just weird.  Why don't you try the test file I 
sent to you

> and see what resolution you can get out of your Piezo driver.
> 
> Paul

> Austin, I'm not sure why you are focussing on halftoning with black ink
> only, when it seems obvious that the tests were done with two
> different quad
> systems (piezo and MIS VM).

What I read, it was not stated whether it was one ink or quad inks, all that
was said was using the Epson driver.  That's why I asked for a
clarification.  Go back and read what I wrote please.

I am not "focusing" on that, I was only asking what EXACTLY was done.  What
I was truly focusing on, was the use of a pure black/white lineart image to
test out grayscale performance.  That is not a valid test.

> Given that, I don't see what you are
> adding to
> the discussion here.

I don't understand why that matters...no offense meant, but because you
don't understand it, doesn't mean that I can't post, now does it? As well as
giving my opinion on the testing, I was also asking questions.  There was
insufficient information for ME, so I asked questions, as well as added some
VERY valid points on what I believe are misconducted tests.

>  Others have pointed out that a better comparison of
> the two systems would include line pairs of varying densities
> (and now that
> Paul has done a test w/ black on white, perhaps others can do some tests
> with gray on gray and black on gray etc.)

Er, no.  That is NOT a "better comparison", it is an invalid comparison.
Line pairs are only black and white, and that does not give any information
on the performance of a grayscale image.

> From what I understand from your posts, it seems that you may be
> calling for
> the same thing; if so, I suggest you say so, if not, then why don't you
> propose another test that might clarify things.

What I am "calling for", as you put it, is an accurate understanding of the
testing that was reported on this list that I responded to (not the web site
test), and the understanding that the tests, and the conclusions drawn,
were, in my opinion, erroneous.  And I gave an explanation as to why.

That is what I am "adding to this discussion", and perhaps you don't
understand what I said as well as my explanation.  That's fine if you don't.
As I do when I don't understand or question what someone else wrote, please
ask questions, and I will be more than happy to explain what I said.

Martin,

I now understand that the "test" was done with quad inks...but the image
that was used contains purely 0's and 255's, NO gray tones.  Paul send me
the image.  That is not a valid test of grayscale performance.

What image(s) are you talking about?  I was SPECIFICALLY talking about the
resolution chart that he posted the results of in a .jpg file in the files
list for this group.

Austin

> Austin,
>
> Paul's test and posted results were done with all four MIS inks using his
> curves and the Epson color driver in comparison to Piezo driver
> using all 4
> Piezo inks. They are grayscale images printed as you would a photographic
> image with 4 inks all in use. His tests meet the criteria you specified.
>
> Martin
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@...>
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 5:02 PM
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Piezography Review: Piezo v. Epson resolution
>
>
> >
> > > First, there was a specific allegation made in the Piezo review.
> > > It claimed
> > > that the Epson driver cannot utilize the information in an
> input file of
> > > more than 360 DPI. Anything more that that would simply be
> > > discarded by the
> > > driver.
> > >
> > > This is demonstrably untrue.
> >
> > NOT demonstrated by your test pattern, that is not halftone.
> The context
> > was halftone...not just black ink.
> >
> > The fact is, when halftoning with the Epson driver and only one ink, it
> > takes up 16x more space to produce the same tones...given that, it would
> > only make sense that it has to limit the input resolution WHEN DOING
> > DITHERING/HALFTONING.
> >
> > > Having looked at a number of identical images that I've printed with
> both
> > > the Piezo and Epson drivers, I must say in most cases I cannot see any
> > > sharpness difference, even with a magnifier.
> >
> > IMAGES?  As in, grayscale or black/white (typically called
> lineart) only?
> > Printed with quad tone inks and the Epson driver, or just the black ink?
> >
> > > At any rate, I consider the drivers to be essentially equal in
> > > their ability
> > > to deliver sharp results.
> >
> > If you are basing this conclusion on the test image that you
> posted, your
> > conclusion is erroneous.
> >
> >
> >
> > 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
> >
> > 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/
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> 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
>
> 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/
>
>

> The tests were run in full grayscale mode
> with the full ink sets in use. However, the results may be influenced
> by how the different drivers run the 100% black that was used. From
> some tests I did awhile back I believe that the Piezo driver may run
> some or all of the lighter inks all the way into 100% black.

I do not believe that if you have an image that only has 0's and 255's
(which is the test image that Paul used, and he sent me so I verified that
by looking at the data) that you should get ANY ink but black from ANY
system, or the system is flawed IMO.

> Austin,
>
> I just tried printing the pattern with a midtone gray, and both the Epson
> and the Piezo drivers' performance dropped just slightly.  However, on my
> system the Epson driver still looked better.  The relative performances
> stayed the same.
>
> Maybe my 1160 is just weird.  Why don't you try the test file I
> sent to you
> and see what resolution you can get out of your Piezo driver.
>
> Paul

Paul,

The test file you sent me only contains 0's and 255's.  That contains NO
grayscale information.  I really don't understand what valid conclusions one
can draw from this image that pertains to actual grayscale images, as
related to a system that is specifically designed TO print only grayscale.

Austin

Austin,

Try this quick test with Piezo inks. Creat a 1" square in photoshop 
and fill it with black. Print it using the Epson driver set to use 
black ink only. Print it again using the Piezo driver. To me the 
square printed with the Piezo driver looks a bit lighter which makes 
me wonder if the driver runs some of the lighter inks all the way 
into "0" density. Maybe it is a difference in the dither pattern. 
Maybe it's my eyes.

Let me know what you think.

Martin

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Austin Franklin" 
<darkroom@i...> wrote:
> 
> > The tests were run in full grayscale mode
> > with the full ink sets in use. However, the results may be 
influenced
> > by how the different drivers run the 100% black that was used. 
From
> > some tests I did awhile back I believe that the Piezo driver may 
run
> > some or all of the lighter inks all the way into 100% black.
> 
> I do not believe that if you have an image that only has 0's and 
255's
> (which is the test image that Paul used, and he sent me so I 
verified that
> by looking at the data) that you should get ANY ink but black from 
ANY
> system, or the system is flawed IMO.

Austin,

Just take the file I sent and in Photoshop reduce contrast and lighten the
image to make the black bars a mid-tone gray.  I kept the background white.

At any rate, if you want to see how the drivers do with a mid-tone gray, you
have everything you need to do it.

Paul

_____________

> Austin,
>
> I just tried printing the pattern with a midtone gray, and both the Epson
> and the Piezo drivers' performance dropped just slightly.  However, on my
> system the Epson driver still looked better.  The relative performances
> stayed the same.
>
> Maybe my 1160 is just weird.  Why don't you try the test file I
> sent to you
> and see what resolution you can get out of your Piezo driver.
>
> Paul

Paul,

The test file you sent me only contains 0's and 255's.  That contains NO
grayscale information.  I really don't understand what valid conclusions one
can draw from this image that pertains to actual grayscale images, as
related to a system that is specifically designed TO print only grayscale.

Austin

In my original post concerning the comparison of Piezo prints and 
Epson (driver) prints my chief concern was with what difference could 
be _perceived_ between prints made with the two drivers, given 
identical printing conditions. To be sure, "objective" tests require 
repeatable methods, but anecdotal accounts count for something too. 
If a dozen reputable people tell me that they can or can't perceive a 
difference in revealed detail between prints (MIS VM quadtones vs. 
Piezo quadtones) made by the two drivers, then I think it's worth 
paying attention. We can then go on an look for "objective" 
verification, along with some kind of explanation.



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Austin Franklin" 
<darkroom@i...> wrote:
> 
> > Austin,
> >
> > I just tried printing the pattern with a midtone gray, and both 
the Epson
> > and the Piezo drivers' performance dropped just slightly.  
However, on my
> > system the Epson driver still looked better.  The relative 
performances
> > stayed the same.
> >
> > Maybe my 1160 is just weird.  Why don't you try the test file I
> > sent to you
> > and see what resolution you can get out of your Piezo driver.
> >
> > Paul
> 
> Paul,
> 
> The test file you sent me only contains 0's and 255's.  That 
contains NO
> grayscale information.  I really don't understand what valid 
conclusions one
> can draw from this image that pertains to actual grayscale images, 
as
> related to a system that is specifically designed TO print only 
grayscale.
> 
> Austin

Oops. I just realized that I posted my message using my home 
computer's ID -- Flacita.

Chris Hargens




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., flacita33@h... wrote:
> In my original post concerning the comparison of Piezo prints and 
> Epson (driver) prints my chief concern was with what difference 
could 
> be _perceived_ between prints made with the two drivers, given 
> identical printing conditions. To be sure, "objective" tests 
require 
> repeatable methods, but anecdotal accounts count for something too. 
> If a dozen reputable people tell me that they can or can't perceive 
a 
> difference in revealed detail between prints (MIS VM quadtones vs. 
> Piezo quadtones) made by the two drivers, then I think it's worth 
> paying attention. We can then go on an look for "objective" 
> verification, along with some kind of explanation.
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Austin Franklin" 
> <darkroom@i...> wrote:
> > 
> > > Austin,
> > >
> > > I just tried printing the pattern with a midtone gray, and both 
> the Epson
> > > and the Piezo drivers' performance dropped just slightly.  
> However, on my
> > > system the Epson driver still looked better.  The relative 
> performances
> > > stayed the same.
> > >
> > > Maybe my 1160 is just weird.  Why don't you try the test file I
> > > sent to you
> > > and see what resolution you can get out of your Piezo driver.
> > >
> > > Paul
> > 
> > Paul,
> > 
> > The test file you sent me only contains 0's and 255's.  That 
> contains NO
> > grayscale information.  I really don't understand what valid 
> conclusions one
> > can draw from this image that pertains to actual grayscale 
images, 

> as
> > related to a system that is specifically designed TO print only 
> grayscale.
> > 
> > Austin

eMail me the square you made, and I'll print it out.  I have a 90x
microscope, as well as an XRite 810 densitometer.  I can tell exactly what
the printer is doing, and I'll let you know.  It will take me a day or so to
do the test.  I happen to have one 3000 setup with Piezo inks, and one 3000
setup with Epson inks, so I can make four test prints.

Pure black should only print using black ink.  Actually, it'll be better, I
think, to do this test using the Epson inks...since you'd see color if the
Piezo driver is in fact using any of the other inks, right?

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Wesley [mailto:mwesley250@...]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 11:38 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Piezography Review: Piezo v. Epson resolution
>
>
> Austin,
>
> Try this quick test with Piezo inks. Creat a 1" square in photoshop
> and fill it with black. Print it using the Epson driver set to use
> black ink only. Print it again using the Piezo driver. To me the
> square printed with the Piezo driver looks a bit lighter which makes
> me wonder if the driver runs some of the lighter inks all the way
> into "0" density. Maybe it is a difference in the dither pattern.
> Maybe it's my eyes.
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
> Martin
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Austin Franklin"
> <darkroom@i...> wrote:
> >
> > > The tests were run in full grayscale mode
> > > with the full ink sets in use. However, the results may be
> influenced
> > > by how the different drivers run the 100% black that was used.
> From
> > > some tests I did awhile back I believe that the Piezo driver may
> run
> > > some or all of the lighter inks all the way into 100% black.
> >
> > I do not believe that if you have an image that only has 0's and
> 255's
> > (which is the test image that Paul used, and he sent me so I
> verified that
> > by looking at the data) that you should get ANY ink but black from
> ANY
> > system, or the system is flawed IMO.
>
>
>
> 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
>
> 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/
>
>

> In my original post concerning the comparison of Piezo prints and
> Epson (driver) prints my chief concern was with what difference could
> be _perceived_ between prints made with the two drivers, given
> identical printing conditions.

Epson driver using quad inks and a quad ink workflow, or Epson driver with
Epson inks?

> If a dozen reputable people tell me that they can or can't perceive a
> difference in revealed detail between prints (MIS VM quadtones vs.
> Piezo quadtones) made by the two drivers, then I think it's worth
> paying attention.

Of course, but it REALLY is important to see what image they are using as a
test, and understand exactly how the tests are being done.  Many erroneous
conclusions can be drawn from improperly done testing.  I'm not saying that
people's observations may not be entirely valid, but they may also not be...

These tests can be image limited, either by the scanner, camera, size of the
film or simply by the size of the output image.  In order to be a completely
"valid" test, everything has to be taken into account, and listed...it's
proper scientific method.  Again, that doesn't mean that people shouldn't go
with their own observations, as they should...but they should also
understand what it is they are testing.

If the image is the one that Paul used, then I dispute any conclusions drawn
using only that image.  If the image is one that is done with a high end
camera, developed well, contains a full range of tones, and has very high
detail...than that is a different story.  I'd actually prefer to use a few
different test cases with varying types of images to make the tests, IMO,
valid.

I have done tests with both Piezo and quad tone inks, and I found, on my
3000, that the Piezo system gives me better images.  Both from a tonality
prospective and in image detail.  I have literally made thousands of prints.
I have two Epson 3000s (as well as two 1160s), and had one of each setup
with Piezo and the other one with MIS.  I removed the MIS after it ran out
and installed the regular Epson inks, simply because I was happier with the
Piezo inks/driver, and I needed a color printer!

All my testing was done with Rollei and Hasselblad images, scanned with a
Leafscan, Plus-X, D-76 1:1 at 75F printed on an Epson 3000 on EHWM 12x12 on
a 13x19.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Austin Franklin" 
<darkroom@i...> wrote:
> eMail me the square you made, and I'll print it out.  I have a 90x
> microscope, as well as an XRite 810 densitometer.  I can tell 
exactly what
> the printer is doing, and I'll let you know.  It will take me a day 
or so to
> do the test.  I happen to have one 3000 setup with Piezo inks, and 
one 3000
> setup with Epson inks, so I can make four test prints.
> 
> Pure black should only print using black ink.  Actually, it'll be 
better, I
> think, to do this test using the Epson inks...since you'd see color 
if the
> Piezo driver is in fact using any of the other inks, right?

Austin,

I sent the file. I printed it just with the Piezo inks using each 
driver in turn. Using the Epson inks with the Piezo driver might be a 
quick check to see if any other colors are used by the driver to 
print density 0.

Martin

> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Martin Wesley [mailto:mwesley250@e...]
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 11:38 PM
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y...
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Piezography Review: Piezo v. Epson 
resolution
> >
> >
> > Austin,
> >
> > Try this quick test with Piezo inks. Creat a 1" square in 
photoshop
> > and fill it with black. Print it using the Epson driver set to use
> > black ink only. Print it again using the Piezo driver. To me the
> > square printed with the Piezo driver looks a bit lighter which 
makes
> > me wonder if the driver runs some of the lighter inks all the way
> > into "0" density. Maybe it is a difference in the dither pattern.
> > Maybe it's my eyes.
> >
> > Let me know what you think.
> >
> > Martin
> >
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Austin Franklin"
> > <darkroom@i...> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The tests were run in full grayscale mode
> > > > with the full ink sets in use. However, the results may be
> > influenced
> > > > by how the different drivers run the 100% black that was used.
> > From
> > > > some tests I did awhile back I believe that the Piezo driver 
may
> > run
> > > > some or all of the lighter inks all the way into 100% black.
> > >
> > > I do not believe that if you have an image that only has 0's and
> > 255's
> > > (which is the test image that Paul used, and he sent me so I
> > verified that
> > > by looking at the data) that you should get ANY ink but black 
from
> > ANY
> > > system, or the system is flawed IMO.
> >
> >
> >
> > 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
> >
> > 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/
> >
> >

Austin Franklin wrote:

> > These tests can be image limited, either by the scanner, camera, size of the
> film or simply by the size of the output image.  In order to be a completely
> "valid" test, everything has to be taken into account, and listed...it's
> proper scientific method.  Again, that doesn't mean that people shouldn't go
> with their own observations, as they should...but they should also
> understand what it is they are testing.
>
> If the image is the one that Paul used, then I dispute any conclusions drawn
> using only that image.  If the image is one that is done with a high end
> camera, developed well, contains a full range of tones, and has very high
> detail...than that is a different story.  I'd actually prefer to use a few
> different test cases with varying types of images to make the tests, IMO,
> valid.
>
> I have done tests with both Piezo and quad tone inks, and I found, on my
> 3000, that the Piezo system gives me better images.  Both from a tonality
> prospective and in image detail.  I have literally made thousands of prints.
> I have two Epson 3000s (as well as two 1160s), and had one of each setup
> with Piezo and the other one with MIS.  I removed the MIS after it ran out
> and installed the regular Epson inks, simply because I was happier with the
> Piezo inks/driver, and I needed a color printer!
>
> All my testing was done with Rollei and Hasselblad images, scanned with a
> Leafscan, Plus-X, D-76 1:1 at 75F printed on an Epson 3000 on EHWM 12x12 on
> a 13x19.
>

But Austin,
I don't understand why your test is any more valid than the aforementioned ones? Can you please explain?

Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography




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

> I have done tests with both Piezo and quad tone inks, and I found, on my
> 3000, that the Piezo system gives me better images.  Both from a tonality
> prospective and in image detail.  I have literally made thousands of prints.
> I have two Epson 3000s (as well as two 1160s), and had one of each setup
> with Piezo and the other one with MIS.  I removed the MIS after it ran out
> and installed the regular Epson inks, simply because I was happier with the
> Piezo inks/driver, and I needed a color printer!
> 
> All my testing was done with Rollei and Hasselblad images, scanned with a
> Leafscan, Plus-X, D-76 1:1 at 75F printed on an Epson 3000 on EHWM 12x12 on
> a 13x19.

The ink separation curves you use for the MIS inks in the 3000 will be very
important to how sharp and smooth your results will be with that printer. If
you are going to do a series of comparative tests (I think you said you were
in another post) you need to take that factor into account. More
specifically, you must consider that Paul's tests on his 1160 used his
curves with the MIS VM inkset, so as you'd be using a different printer
model than him, a different inkset (I'm assuming you're using the original
MIS formulation) and a different workflow, whatever your results, it should
bare little to no relationship to Paul's results.

Todd

The Triton neutral is in my Epson Color 3000, the MIS in the 1200. My 2nd
1200 is equipped  with the MIS archival color inks.

Burkhardt Kiegeland


Servus Burckhardt, 

this is just for those who never heard about the Triton system:
4 cartridges Cone ink for the Epson 3000 are $  260,
4 (!) carts Triton ink are  $ ~ 190,
4  virgin carts plus 4x4 oz MIS FS  ink are $ 92

Even if you need only 3 carts for printing with the Triton system -
you should compare the price of four carts, because obviously  3
carts will not last as long as 4 carts do, no?

BTW, you didn´t tell which inks you use on which printer.

Herzliche Grüße aus dem Nachbarland
Ihr Bernd Langmack





Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT

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

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
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .




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

Martin,

thank you for comment. Here are the benchmark data of an 80 years old Zeiss
Tessar 4.5/300mm. I hope the date dont mess up during transport to this
list...

angle off-axis: 0    5   10   15   20   25  _28_  30   degrees

     f/4.5    80   60   40   15    8   30   12    0   lines/mm
     f/22     65   60   50   35   20   50   30    6   lines/mm
     f/64     25   25   25   25   25   25   20   15   lines/mm

Actually Mr. Gainer´s figure is not correct. The theoretical limit of a
perfect lens is 22lp/mm at zero degrees. BTW - lp/mm in classical
photography is always pairs of lines!
I run into this issue by preparing an article on the new Gigabitfilm which
was published recently in PhotoVision. This film provides a resolution of
900lp/mm at a contrast of 1:1000. In this context I was taught about the
more recent data cncerning the resolution of the human eye. And of course I
was stunned to learn that the old figure of 9-10lp/mm was gained by
Helmholtz and others by imposing a test setting which is far from the actual
behaviour of our eyes. Helmholtz, one of the most famous scientist 100 years
ago has said that he would hand back the human eye to it´s creator because
it is so bad. He was wrong.
More recent research has shown that using both eyes elements 10times finer
are resolved. This is even more enhanced by the tremor.

In my praxis I am interested in a sharpness which gives me the finest
possible detail and a smooth tonality. In consequence I ended with large
negatives of 8x10" and bigger which are contact printed, not enlarged.
Having made direct comparing between 8x10" contact prints and high
resolution scans of the same subjects which were inkjet printed then in size
8x10" using Piezography as well as other inks by implementing all kinds of
curves provided by the friendly members of several mailing lists I came to
the conclusions posted in my message.

Of course I can enhance sharpness by unsharp masking in Photoshop - but this
results in a somewhat coarser tonality.

Anothet test I made was aput printing resolution. I scanned an 8x10"
negative at 300, 360, 480 and 600dpi. The prints 300 and 360dpi showed less
sharpness than the 480dpi, the best result was with 600 dpi. Printer here
was the Epson 3000 equipped with the Triton system.

The Trition system works using 3 carts containing 3 different blacks. Part
of the system is a set of tables designed for different papers. The tables
are free.
The fine tuning of the print is done in grayscale mode. After that the image
has to be changed into indicated colors where the table is applied.
The results are very nice and definitely of the same quality as the best
Piezography prints. No dots, no banding, just perfect for an inkjet print.
The Triton inks are available for all Epson printers in neutral tone and
warm tone. They last 50 years under normal exhibition conditions - depending
of course on the paper. Unfortunately Triton does not offer bulk inks.

Burkhardt Kiegeland





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

Austin, and all!

I personally would be surprised if 100% black printed with just black on
Piezo. This is because I guess that the starting point for Piezo is a
theoretical range from Pure-black to pure paper-white (in terms of
half-toning / dithering patterns). The profile will then set 'end-points'
along the 'line of theoretically available tones' that could well (for
ink-limits or whatever) mean that more than 'just black' is used. Going back
several months, having a theoretical range of tones rather larger than 255
is great... because it does give the system flexibility to profile for
different media and still leave  - let's stay on the safe side >100
distinguishable tones.

Also, I think there may have been some evidence from the past where someone
had problems with just black ink (100%), but converting to 99% (presumably
introducing a second grey into the dither) helped get rid of the patterns
altogether. Of course... _that_ would imply that there was just black in
100% :) This may be a profile related.

I'll be interested to hear your results...

Unfortunately, I think your comparison test will be interesting, but not
representative of 1290 performance - in this respect, I believe the more
modern printers favour the development of 'non-Piezo' quad products that use
the Epson driver. I agree with you that printing line patterns is not the
best way to test a quad-printing 'technology'. That's not to say I don't
still Love Piezo, just that the newer printers give alternatives something
of a chanve to catch-up(!). OK I know that is a personal-taste related point
:)

FWIW, Piezo is FANTASTIC for smooth tone changes (IMO) and I can not speak
for MIS alternatives. However, we should all appreciate that some resampling
is going on, probably in both workflows, and that probably (possibly) both
are using some kind of bicubic interpolation (I think Piezo is described as
using 'stochastic error diffusion'. In other words, hard-edges will be
softened... it is inevitable, just print some text under Piezo and you will
see. In a black-on-white example, I believe the effect is bot great... but
works perfectly in con-tone images.

Final thought. Piezo only ever prints in graphics mode. It is _possible_ I
believe for the Epson driver to print in graphics and text modes at once.
This may effect results, but that's a big maybe. However, to me, a logical
conclusion to be drawn from 'interpolation' is that at some point, data is
'added' by Piezo... and probably the Epson driver too...
...we just don't know how much data can be 'added' successfully by each
system, or where it's effectiveness cuts-off (in the way it is _programmed_)
unless someone has internal details I don't know of.

Lighten up everyone! Can we keep this non-tribal if possible?

Best,
Nij

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Austin Franklin [mailto:darkroom@...]
>
> eMail me the square you made, and I'll print it out.  I have a 90x
> microscope, as well as an XRite 810 densitometer.  I can tell exactly what
> the printer is doing, and I'll let you know.  It will take me a
> day or so to
> do the test.  I happen to have one 3000 setup with Piezo inks,
> and one 3000
> setup with Epson inks, so I can make four test prints.
>
> Pure black should only print using black ink.  Actually, it'll be
> better, I
> think, to do this test using the Epson inks...since you'd see color if the
> Piezo driver is in fact using any of the other inks, right?

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Burkhardt Kiegeland 
<burkhardt@e...> wrote:
> 
> The Trition system works using 3 carts containing 3 different 
blacks. Part
> of the system is a set of tables designed for different papers. The 
tables
> are free.
> The fine tuning of the print is done in grayscale mode. After that 
the image
> has to be changed into indicated colors where the table is applied.
> The results are very nice and definitely of the same quality as the 
best
> Piezography prints. No dots, no banding, just perfect for an inkjet 
print.

Hi Burkhardt,
this is interesting to me, because Triton was the first archival ink 
system I tried out - and AFAIK then only one available here in 
Germany. While I got good and dotless results on my older 760, the 
1160 showed horrible tone gradation, visible white banding and had 
clogged nozles all the time. 

Fearing the worst I nevertheless gave MIS Full Spectrum a try and I 
can already say that on my 1160 it gives very good results: 
practically invisible dots, it looks (to my eyes) sharper than the 
Triton on my 760 - and with the CIS installed it´s much less 
expensive than the Triton carts.

Which Printer do you use with Triton?

Greetings from Berlin,

Bernhard

> But Austin,
> I don't understand why your test is any more valid than the
> aforementioned ones? Can you please explain?
>
> Harvey Ferdschneider
> partner, SKID Photography

Which tests?  Are you talking about my conclusion to use Piezo, or the
proposed tests to determine if Piezo prints with pure black ink?

If you are talking about my tests between MIS and Piezo, they were done
using many different REAL images (not pure black test patterns that are not
indicative of the performance of a grayscale printing system) and put on a
board, with appropriate lighting and viewed for weeks.

It, of course, is entirely subjective as to which tones or images one
"likes" better. There was tonal detail in the Piezo prints that I felt was
rendered "better" (had visibly more tonal and contrast detail) than with the
Epson driver and quad inks.

If you are talking about the test to determine if Piezo prints with pure
black or not, that is a relatively simple test, and is entirely different
than an image quality test.  Having densitometer readings and being able to
look at the images with a 90x microscope should reveal what is going on.
This is NOT a grayscale image quality test, but an ink test, and using a
solid test pattern of pure black is the only way to do this.  Again, this is
NOT an image quality test, like the tests that were done using line patterns
were, entirely different testing.

Which "tests" were you referring to?

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Burkhardt Kiegeland 
<burkhardt@e...> wrote:
> 
> 
> Martin,
> 
> thank you for comment. Here are the benchmark data of an 80 years 
old Zeiss
> Tessar 4.5/300mm. I hope the date dont mess up during transport to 
this
> list...
> 
> angle off-axis: 0    5   10   15   20   25  _28_  30   degrees
> 
>      f/4.5    80   60   40   15    8   30   12    0   lines/mm
>      f/22     65   60   50   35   20   50   30    6   lines/mm
>      f/64     25   25   25   25   25   25   20   15   lines/mm
> 
> Actually Mr. Gainer´s figure is not correct. The theoretical limit 
of a
> perfect lens is 22lp/mm at zero degrees. BTW - lp/mm in classical
> photography is always pairs of lines!
> I run into this issue by preparing an article on the new 
Gigabitfilm which
> was published recently in PhotoVision. This film provides a 
resolution of
> 900lp/mm at a contrast of 1:1000. In this context I was taught 
about the
> more recent data cncerning the resolution of the human eye. And of 
course I
> was stunned to learn that the old figure of 9-10lp/mm was gained by
> Helmholtz and others by imposing a test setting which is far from 
the actual
> behaviour of our eyes. Helmholtz, one of the most famous scientist 
100 years
> ago has said that he would hand back the human eye to it´s creator 
because
> it is so bad. He was wrong.
> More recent research has shown that using both eyes elements 
10times finer
> are resolved. This is even more enhanced by the tremor.

Burkhardt,

Thank you for the additional information and clarification. You 
jogged my memory and I recalled seeing your Gigabit film article. I 
had not read it in detail but did go back to it after your post 
above. A very interesting film indeed and a very thorough evaluation 
on your part. I find it interesting that PhotoVision, which takes an 
anti-digital stance, would be the only review I have seen of a film 
seemingly aimed (perhaps in name only) toward a film-to-scanner 
workflow. 

I recommend the article to those who may have missed it. Photo Vision 
is sold by Barnes & Noble, at least in my area:

www.photovisionmagazine.com

For information on Gigabit films:
www.gigabitfilm.de/

Having settled on Ilford FP4+ and TMax 400 with pyro development 
years ago I am reluctant to spend time experimenting with new films. 
The increased shadow detail does sound very appealing though. In your 
article you mention that Lotus would be a distributor for Gigabit 
films but I did not find it on your website. Is this something in 
progress or have your plans changed? Have you moved to this new film 
yourself since writing the article?

> 
> In my praxis I am interested in a sharpness which gives me the 
finest
> possible detail and a smooth tonality. In consequence I ended with 
large
> negatives of 8x10" and bigger which are contact printed, not 
enlarged.
> Having made direct comparing between 8x10" contact prints and high
> resolution scans of the same subjects which were inkjet printed 
then in size
> 8x10" using Piezography as well as other inks by implementing all 
kinds of
> curves provided by the friendly members of several mailing lists I 
came to
> the conclusions posted in my message.

I would agree with you on theory alone. An original 11x14 negative 
contact printed on to silver paper is going to suffer less loss of 
information than the same negative going through the optics of a 
scanner, the data acquisition hardware and software, output through 
the printer driver, etc. to make an 11X14 inkjet print. Or the same 
negative passed through an optical enlarger to make an 11X14 print. 
The old run of degradation each time information is reproduced is 
still true.

My favorite and standard print size has always been 11x14 but I have 
never had the resources or the resolve to work with a camera that 
size. I salute you and hope to have the chance to see some of your 
images first hand some day.

Do you feel that writer to Photo Techniques who reported a 80 lp/mm 
resolution for contact printing on Ilford Multigrade IV RC vs. 20 
lp/mm was correct in the amount of resolution lost in an optical 
enlarging system? 

I ask because the recent medium format scanners have given results of 
60 lp/mm, which is lower than the silver paper resolution in contact 
printing but perhaps greater than what could be achieved with an 
optical enlarger system.

> 
> Of course I can enhance sharpness by unsharp masking in Photoshop - 
but this
> results in a somewhat coarser tonality.
> 
> Anothet test I made was aput printing resolution. I scanned an 8x10"
> negative at 300, 360, 480 and 600dpi. The prints 300 and 360dpi 
showed less
> sharpness than the 480dpi, the best result was with 600 dpi. 
Printer here
> was the Epson 3000 equipped with the Triton system.
> 
> The Trition system works using 3 carts containing 3 different 
blacks. Part
> of the system is a set of tables designed for different papers. The 
tables
> are free.
> The fine tuning of the print is done in grayscale mode. After that 
the image
> has to be changed into indicated colors where the table is applied.
> The results are very nice and definitely of the same quality as the 
best
> Piezography prints. No dots, no banding, just perfect for an inkjet 
print.
> The Triton inks are available for all Epson printers in neutral 
tone and
> warm tone. They last 50 years under normal exhibition conditions - 
depending
> of course on the paper. Unfortunately Triton does not offer bulk 
inks.

The use of three inks is very reasonable and it has been noted in the 
past that three shades of gray would be sufficient. My great 
frustration is that I cannot see a sample of the Triton prints. I am 
glad to hear that there is yet another option available. I know Lotus 
in Austria distributes the film. Are there any US distributors?

Thank you,
Martin Wesley

On Thu, 11 Oct 2001 03:37:50 -0000,
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com wrote:

Hi Martin,
Some time ago at: http://www.inkjetmall.com/store/piezography-preview.html
there was in illustration indicating that the Piezo driver does nor run the
3 lighter inks  all the way into "0' density.
This link is not available anymore but I have got the html page in my
archive so I will send it to you offline.
Would be interested to know what you think. 
Also  am wondering why this image has dissapeared from the inkjetmall site.

Jo Brunenberg
http://www.jobrunenberg.com
-----------------------------
>  Austin,
>  Try this quick test with Piezo inks. Creat a 1" square in photoshop 
>  and fill it with black. Print it using the Epson driver set to use 
>  black ink only. Print it again using the Piezo driver. To me the 
>  square printed with the Piezo driver looks a bit lighter which makes 
>  me wonder if the driver runs some of the lighter inks all the way 
>  into "0" density. Maybe it is a difference in the dither pattern. 
>  Maybe it's my eyes.

>  Let me know what you think.
>  
>  Martin






_______________________________________________________
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/



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

Jo,

I never saw that one and would like to take a look if you would send 
it to me off list. 

I don't know why they would have taken it down. All my trials have 
been with the 6-color ink set and perhaps that works differently than 
the 4-color.

I have just observed the difference but really don't know why it is 
there. It might be caused by something other than running lighter 
colors into the 100% black.

Martin

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Jo Brunenberg <jobnl@e...> 
wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2001 03:37:50 -0000,
> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y... wrote:
> 
> Hi Martin,
> Some time ago at: http://www.inkjetmall.com/store/piezography-
preview.html
> there was in illustration indicating that the Piezo driver does nor 
run the
> 3 lighter inks  all the way into "0' density.
> This link is not available anymore but I have got the html page in 
my
> archive so I will send it to you offline.
> Would be interested to know what you think. 
> Also  am wondering why this image has dissapeared from the 
inkjetmall site.
> 
> Jo Brunenberg
> http://www.jobrunenberg.com
> -----------------------------
> >  Austin,
> >  Try this quick test with Piezo inks. Creat a 1" square in 
photoshop 
> >  and fill it with black. Print it using the Epson driver set to 
use 
> >  black ink only. Print it again using the Piezo driver. To me the 
> >  square printed with the Piezo driver looks a bit lighter which 
makes 
> >  me wonder if the driver runs some of the lighter inks all the 
way 
> >  into "0" density. Maybe it is a difference in the dither 
pattern. 

> >  Maybe it's my eyes.
> 
> >  Let me know what you think.
> >  
> >  Martin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________________
> Send a cool gift with your E-Card
> http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Martin,

the Gigabitfilm available at Lotus View Camera. Best you contact Maja, she
runs
the business, at mlandis@....
During writing the article I did a lot of work with the Gigabitfilm, but now
I am back at the real large format, which means my 8x10" and 12x20"
cameras...

The figures mentioned in Photo Techniques I can´t comnment without having
read the article. On the other hand most papers for printing photographs are
in the 25-30lp/mm range, with the exception of Kodak´s AZO which definitely
is much »sharper«.

I´m just back from teaching a workshop for inkjet printing. The participants
did collect experience in scanning, editing and printing using inks made by
Triton and MIS and Piezo and got very nice results. Finally we did compare
the prints with 8x10" and 8x20" contact prints made on AZO. Everybody agreed
that the contact prints simply represent a different (higher) level of
sharpness and tonality - no surprise.

Mr. Ludwig of the Gigabit company hosts some very interesting written
material on resolution and print quality on his website. He is in the
process of translating this stuff into English language.

Burkhardt Kiegeland


www.lotusviewcamera.at




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