16 bit vs 8 bit difference, Re Glen Mitchell´s posting
2004-01-04 by Julio Fernandez
Glen: Agree with your technical points and I am enlightened by your latin, now I know it is called the "Ipse dixit" fallacy otherwise known as name dropping in place of facts. Your points about posterization are alone a perfect reason for working with 16 bit files. Beyond that there are the questions that follow: Indeed the number of colours possible under 8 bits is mega smaller than in 16 bits and somehow the differences have to show. The question is when? For one thing does the color space used not have something do with whether you see the difference or not? I wonder then if using small color spaces like sRGB or Color Match will limit the number of colours and put many of those colors which actually reside in film and in 16 bit RGB files out of gamut anyway so that the small color space becomes the limiting factor? If so, as far as colour is concerned, would 16 bit files in small colour spaces look much different from 8 bit files in the same small colour spaces? By the same token, inkjet printers have a typically smaller color gamut than true photographic printers like a Lightjet. As I understand it, inkjets like the Epson 2200 can only print to 8 bit colour so in fact, 16 bit files are printed to 8 bit, is that true? If it were, the differences between 16 and 8 bit files printed in ink jets may not be readily evident, that has been my experience. Are there any other advantages in large bit files besides non-banding ? I think many of us wrestle with these questions and would appreciate your answer. Thanks. Message: 24 Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2004 01:35:38 -0000
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: "Glenn Mitchell" <gmitchel850@...>
Subject: Re: 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
It's discussed ad inifitum and ad nauseum because a small number of
people claim there is no perceptable difference between 8-bit and 16-
bit images. This just misleads people.
Let's debunk the idea of trotting out a name and saying so-and-so
has debunked the argument. That's a fallacious argument. It's a
textbook example of the ipse dixit ("he says so") fallacy.
So, let's leave names out and deal with the logic of their
argument . . . Give us the logic why you feel we should expect to
see no difference, after applying nonlinear edits to the image.
Here's my real world experience . . .
If you take an image and do no editing to it, except to convert to 8-
bits and print or make a Web image, you'll likely notice no
difference at all.
If you do edit your images, conversion to 8-bits can quickly lead to
posterization that will be evident even on a low-end monitor and
with an inexpensive ink jet printer. All you have is 256 values for
each channel, and you only have to compress/expand some of the
values on one of the channels to get non-continuous tones that
generate visible banding. Think of skin tones or flower petals. They
can quickly show signs of banding that look like splotches.
You can even get visible banding with 16-bit images. It's less
likely, but not impossible with extreme nonlinear transformations of
the information can. Information is not uniformly distributed in the
typical image, and it can be skewed in many images. So you can
compress/expand tones so there are discrete breaks in the data large
enough to be visible in a print even with 16-bits per channel. With
8-bits, it's quite easy to do it.
I do agree with the comment that BO printing is much less likely to
result in banding. My comments addressed color images more than BO
images. However, few people do BO printing with inkjet printers.
Instead, neutrals are typically generated by combinations of CMY
with B and sometimes b and sometimes even cmy. Typically, neutrals
greater than midtone have no B or b whatsover, and neutrals less
than midtone have progressively more B or b as you move towards
shadows.
Grayscale images that are not BO rely on localized contrast
differences in the color image to map into contrast differences in
the grayscale image. Working to increase those contrast differences
can result in visible banding even after grayscale conversion.
Cheers,
Mitch
Julio Fernandez
----- Original Message -----
From: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 8:44 PM
Subject: [Digital BW] Digest Number 2006
There are 25 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Re: Adjustment curves with Roark workflow-
From: "Editor P.O.V. Image Service" <editor@...>
2. Vs: Septone Ink Fade Test
From: "Ukko Heikkinen" <ukko.heikkinen@...>
3. UT - RC Print life
From: "Ed Mathews" <ed@...>
4. Re: scanning and image size
From: "Val Brunell" <vbrunell@...>
5. Re: Re: Clog from hell
From: ritab19106@...
6. Re[2]: leaving eboni black when printing color
From: Richard Sintchak <richcontaxg@...>
7. Re: scanning and image size
From: "sceptre12345" <am1000@...>
8. Blaine Cavena/Los Angeles/IBM is out of the office.
From: Blaine Cavena <becavena@...>
9. 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
From: "David Sinai" <dsinai@...>
10. RE: UT - RC Print life
From: "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...>
11. Humidity, was Clog from hell
From: "jim hayes" <jimhayes@...>
12. RE: 1280 Pizza Wheel marks on Semigloss
From: "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...>
13. Re: Re: scanning and image size
From: Wendel White <wendel@...>
14. Re: 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
From: "Glenn Mitchell" <gmitchel850@...>
15. RE: 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
From: "Paul D. DeRocco" <pderocco@...>
16. Re: 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
From: "Phil Rose" <pjrose@...>
17. Re[2]: OT Again: (sorry Martin) Photoshop scratch disk usage?
From: "Anthony G. Atkielski" <anthony@...>
18. Re: 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
From: "Anthony G. Atkielski" <anthony@...>
19. Re: Digest Number 2005
From: Levin Andy <alevin@...>
20. Re: 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
From: "David Sinai" <dsinai@...>
21. Re: 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
From: "Bob Michaels" <bob@...>
22. Re: 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
From: "J Michael Sullivan" <michael@...>
23. DYI 1160 Head Replacement
From: Cort Anderson <stats@...>
24. Re: 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
From: "Glenn Mitchell" <gmitchel850@...>
25. Re: DYI 1160 Head Replacement
From: "jim hayes" <jimhayes@...>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 05:13:53 -0500
From: "Editor P.O.V. Image Service" <editor@...>
Subject: Re: Adjustment curves with Roark workflow-
Steven,
Application of the curve should be the LAST thing one does b4 printing..
Keith Krebs
"Just some guy," caretaker of the Multiverse's largest EPSON printer
User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo
Publications), at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSON_Printers/
and the Multiverse's largest Canon printer User Community at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Canon-printers
"For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together
guys"
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 14:58:18 +0200
From: "Ukko Heikkinen" <ukko.heikkinen@...>
Subject: Vs: Septone Ink Fade Test
Hello Clayton
"The Septone/PhotoRag print of the Tech Print Exchange image has been
on my south facing windowsill for 125 days now, getting some direct
sunlight every day, as well as very bright indirect daylight all day."
I'd appreciate it very much if you let me know where you live and how long
the days are over there.
Ukko Heikkinen
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 08:54:53 -0500
From: "Ed Mathews" <ed@...>
Subject: UT - RC Print life
(I guess this might primarily be addressed to Paul, but I'll put it out
here on the forum in case anyone else wants to comment or might be
interested in the comments).
Does anyone have an educated guess as to how long the print life
might be using the new UT or UT2 inks on some of the more popular RC
papers? I'm thinking maybe Epson Premium Luster Photo paper or maybe
some of the Ilford papers. I assume it's really just limited to the
paper itself, since the ink is so stable, but I wonder if there might be
other factors involved like how the ink interacts with the specific
composition of the paper. If HP can make an RC-paper/dye-ink pairing
that lasts 73 years, should we automatically assume the UT carbon inks
will outlast that on any paper choice?
Thanks,
Ed
http://lightandsilver.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 14:21:27 -0000
From: "Val Brunell" <vbrunell@...>
Subject: Re: scanning and image size
Joseph: Regarding posterization...I believe the advice you are
getting regarding scanning at 4000 dpi at the input size is right.
Do your major tonal adjustments in 16-bit only. When upsizing to
11x14, do so in small increments (maybe 2-3 inches at a time.) It
only takes a minute to upsize in 5-6 increments using this method).
Finally, go easy on your sharpening. Hope this helps...Val
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ellery"
<ellery@p...> wrote:
> I would suggest scan in at the maximum optical resolution which in
this case
> is 4000dpi. For print purposes you would need a sent to printer
file of
> pixel dimension say 270 to 300 dpi multiple the length or breath
in inches.
> Despite what has been said in this and other forums there is a
difference in
> print quality when my printing files hit say 450dpi - from output
on an
> Epson EX (the printing time automatically become much longer).
>
>
> Suggest you scan and save that file as the original master and do
all work
> from copies of that - preserve the master unchange at all costs.
Lasersoft
> AI should help you navigate thru the scaning maze with a lot more
ease that
> if you had to do it all manually for a newbie.
>
> Work in PhotoShop and when you are done you can either use the
resize the
> image to either restrict the image to the print size (with the
resample off)
> and use what ever dpi is there. Or you could set the dpi to say
300 and use
> resample on and set size to 11 x14 inches. Question is would you
want to
> print in RGB or as a greyscale file - answer much depends on your
tastes and
> view light conditions.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joseph Robinson [mailto:joseph@h...]
> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 12:55 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] scanning and image size
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm new to the forum and have just started scanning some of my
35mm
> black and white images (taken on Kodak T400CN). I like to print
> final results at 11" x 14". The images so far show
> some "posterization" in them. I'm not sure of the solution, but
I
> think that part of my problem could be in scanning...
>
> Do people generally scan the images at the highest resolution the
> scanner supports with the dimensions of the image the size of the
> negative? Or is it better to scan at an "appropriate" resolution
> and have the image dimensions be 11" x 14"?
>
> I've been using the latter approach, scanning at 650dpi, setting
the
> image size at 11" x 14" and printing at 1440 dpi.
>
> I hope this isn't too silly of a question and I've given enough
> information for a response...
>
> (Technical details: Microtek ArtixScan 4000t scanner, LaserSoft
> Silverfast SE software, Epson 2200 printer.)
>
> Joseph
>
>
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other
resources as
> they are often being updated.
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you
wish to
> unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
this same
> page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier
messages to keep
> them short.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
flames.
> Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the
> membership without notice.
> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of
digital B&W
> printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be
removed from
> the membership.
> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules
and
> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group
Owner and
> Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the Files
section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW,
THE PRINT
> YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER"
AND
> "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU
> FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR
EXEMPLARY
> DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS,
> GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF
THE "OWNER" AND
> "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN
ADVISED OF THE
> POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE
INABILITY
> TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED
ACCESS TO OR
> ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR
CONDUCT OF ANY
> THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY
OTHER
> MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
---------
> --
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
of Service.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 09:44:05 EST
From: ritab19106@...
Subject: Re: Re: Clog from hell
Jim --
Thanks very much for your detailed instructions...very generous of you to
take the time to elaborate on all the steps. You seem VERY experienced.
Regards,
Rita Bernstein
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 07:17:46 -0800
From: Richard Sintchak <richcontaxg@...>
Subject: Re[2]: leaving eboni black when printing color
Saturday, January 3, 2004, 1:34:03 AM, you wrote:
EPOVIS> jerdiakiw wrote:
>>Does it make any difference if I leave eboni or matte black when
>>printing color?
>>jerry
>>
>>
EPOVIS> Eboni is the MIS Matte Black..
EPOVIS> Are you asking if it's ok to leave Eboni in a "2200/2100" when
printing
EPOVIS> color?
EPOVIS> Are you using the MIS GP's or the UC inkset for color?
EPOVIS> A bit more specificity would be helpful..
EPOVIS> Keith Krebs
Good questions Keith. I assumed he was printing BO with an Eboni
black cart and using Epson OEM UC color carts.
--
Best regards,
Richard mailto:richard@...
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 15:41:20 -0000
From: "sceptre12345" <am1000@...>
Subject: Re: scanning and image size
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Val Brunell"
<vbrunell@d...> wrote:
> Joseph: Regarding posterization...I believe the advice you are
> getting regarding scanning at 4000 dpi at the input size is right.
> Do your major tonal adjustments in 16-bit only. When upsizing to
> 11x14, do so in small increments (maybe 2-3 inches at a time.) It
> only takes a minute to upsize in 5-6 increments using this
method).
> Finally, go easy on your sharpening. Hope this helps...Val
Val,
Why would one to upsize to 11x14, in increments yet, a 35mm negative
scanned at 4000dpi ?
In Photoshop, select Image Size, uncheck resample image and enter 11
for Height, if the image is horizontal. You have more than enough
resolution so that upsizing is not necessary.
Cheers,
Andre
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 09:05:00 -0700
From: Blaine Cavena <becavena@...>
Subject: Blaine Cavena/Los Angeles/IBM is out of the office.
I will be out of the office starting December 28, 2003 and will not return
until January 5, 2004.
I am on vacation with no access to email. I will be checking voicemail
daily.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 16:13:13 -0000
From: "David Sinai" <dsinai@...>
Subject: 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
Hi,
I recently scanned a 35 mm Tri X negative at 3200 DPI in 16 bit
mode. The image was of my daughter sitting on swing in the park in
daylight.
I was curious to see if the histogram of this file would be
different if the file was converted to 8 bit. After converting the
file to 8 bit, I reviewed the histogram and so no changes.
Shouldn't there be a different histogram once the file is converted
to 8 bit? Going from 16 bit to 8 bit means that the tonal range has
been reduced, correct?
More importantly, I could not detect any visible differences on the
screen when the image was in 8 bit vs. 16 bit. I decided to work
with the 8 bit file as there are more PS features available this way.
Should there be any discernable tonality differences on a print
created with a 16 bit file vs. 8 bit when printing with an Epson
2200 using the BO method?
I printed the 8 bit and the 16 bit file and saw no differences. Is
this what you would expect?
Everything I've read, says to stick with 16 bit.
Does the rule "Stay in 16 bit" apply when printing BO on Epson 2200?
Thanks,
David
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 09:19:56 -0800
From: "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...>
Subject: RE: UT - RC Print life
Ed,
>Does anyone have an educated guess as to how long the print life
>might be using the new UT or UT2 inks on some of the more popular RC
>papers? I'm thinking maybe Epson Premium Luster Photo paper or maybe
>some of the Ilford papers. ...
I'm one of the many wet darkroom B&W printers who got burned by the early,
over-optimistic claims of RC print stability. Despite early claims, they
turned brown and bronzed badly in many display situations. So, I have a
basic distrust of "RC" technology. I still believe that for the ultimate in
inkjet longevity, "carbon on cotton" is the safest bet (under glass or
protected someway).
That said, I have now heard and read enough to think that *maybe* the modern
RC/"barrier" papers can really be very long-lived -- a necessary ingredient
of my interest in medium.
First, Kodak, one of the companies burned by the early failures, has taken a
strong stand in favor of the technology. See
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/o3/O3wp4.jhtml#
1274467
for the details, but the basic story is that the problems of the early RC
papers were found and cured.
Kodak's current conclusion is: "The best scientific estimates of the
comparative life expectancy of RC and fiber-base prints show little
practical difference. Both will last for a very long time under reasonable
storage and display conditions."
Second, my chemist brother claims the "polyethylene" (the coating on the
paper) is a very broad category with many variations. Thus, the current RC
plastic coatings might be very different than the older ones. As we know
from the problems of plastic in the environment, it can last a very long
time and be very non-biodegradable -- much more so than cotton.
Third, and most important from a marketing point of view, Wilhelm tests --
both accelerated fading and paper life accelerated aging -- have shown the
Epson Premium RC papers to be very good. See
http://www.wilhelm-research.com/ at the "Epson 9600 (UltraChrome) link. On
page 3, Wilhelm lists the "B&W" display and dark storage ratings. Since the
UltraChrome "B&W" (not IP5) has much more color in it than the Ultra Tone
inks, the ratings of the UT & UT2 inksets would, I believe, be substantially
better than what is shown. (The carbon pigments are substantially more
stable than the color pigs -- the less color used, the longer the life.)
The Epson Premium Semigloss and Glossy prints framed with UV class have
display lives of >150 years. Only UltraSmooth exceeds this. The Premium
Semigloss and glossy papers have dark storage lives of >200 years, which is
how Wilhelm rates the best cotton papers.
Displayed without any protection, the Semigloss falls to a 74 year display
life. How much the PremierArt spray with its UV protection affects this
life is unknown. I'd guess that it would end up somewhere in between --
still not a shabby performance at all.
Note that the Epson Premium RC papers are the only ones where I've found the
internal paper appears to be neutral. Ilford and the cheaper Epson RC
papers test with my Abby acid test pen as having acidic internal fibers.
Ilford claims that it's Smooth RC papers have a life of at least 30 years.
In the real world, air pollution, oxidation, and physical damage are huge
factors. Encapsulation of the image in a way that protects if from these
factors may be more important than ultimate paper life for most of our work.
Despite what the conservators may want, in the real world the dry-mounted
silver prints (on acid-free board) are lasting longer than non-mounted
prints, apparently due to the barrier that the dry-mount tissue puts behind
the paper and the physical protection offered by the board.
So, right now, the potential of the sprayed Epson Premium Semigloss
RC/Barrier-paper print looks pretty good to me. (I've also recently
dry-mounted a few them, which appears to work very well.)
Paul
www.PaulRoark.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 17:24:08 -0000
From: "jim hayes" <jimhayes@...>
Subject: Humidity, was Clog from hell
As a disclaimer, I haven't been using my 1280 much in over a year. And
I was a light user when I did have the older MIS hextones installed.
The story is, I live in a very dry climate, and at high altitude. This
group has often debated in the past the effects of humidity and
altitude on clogs.
The pre-UT inks clogged almost every other day in my printer, even
after adding an humidifier.
I don't use UT inks now, but the Epson Ultrachrome ink in my 2200
almost never clog; I've had maybe 5 or 6 clogs a year.
Jim Hayes
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, ritab19106@a...
wrote:
> Jim --
>
> Thanks very much for your detailed instructions...very generous of
you to
> take the time to elaborate on all the steps. You seem VERY experienced.
>
> Regards,
>
> Rita Bernstein
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 09:28:10 -0800
From: "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...>
Subject: RE: 1280 Pizza Wheel marks on Semigloss
Richard,
>...
>I hit the Pizza Wheel problem right away, and found I had to remove
>them also.
I notice that while the InkJetArt removal recommendation works very well,
MIS recommends leaving them in, but putting a washer under the 2 screws that
hold the metal plate with the pizza wheels. This is said to reduce the
pressure enough to avoid the marks. It also, of course, would have the
advantage of keeping the wheels there, and those wheels are there for a
reason. Among other things, they keep the paper down so that it does not
hit the paper. Getting the washer under the screw on the right is
apparently a bit of a trick. I haven't tried this, but I can see where it
might be at least theoretically a superior approach.
>... wondering if you might have any suggestions or curves for Epson
>Gloss (semi or lustre) papers and the UT/UT-2 inkset that you're
>ready to share. ...
For the UT inkset, try Dirk's approach and curves.
I have curves for the UT2 inkset that work for all the Epson Premium papers
except the Semimatte, which appears to be quite different than the others.
I'll send them off list.
Paul
www.PaulRoark.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 12:36:23 -0500
From: Wendel White <wendel@...>
Subject: Re: Re: scanning and image size
Here is where I approach scanning differently. Andre's method is correct,
but I like to save the steps. I set the "output" size and resolution to the
maximum useful settings in my scanning software (assuming that it does not
exceed the hardware resolution of the scanner.) In my setup that would be
11" x 14" at 240ppi. There is a lot of discussion about the maximum useful
ppi (which I think varies based on the printing system, paper and print
size.) My goal is to minimize or eliminate any image resizing (except with
resample unchecked as Andre mentioned) to prevent any damage to the image
caused by interpolation.
Wendel
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Val Brunell"
> <vbrunell@d...> wrote:
>> Joseph: Regarding posterization...I believe the advice you are
>> getting regarding scanning at 4000 dpi at the input size is right.
>> Do your major tonal adjustments in 16-bit only. When upsizing to
>> 11x14, do so in small increments (maybe 2-3 inches at a time.) It
>> only takes a minute to upsize in 5-6 increments using this
> method).
>> Finally, go easy on your sharpening. Hope this helps...Val
>
> Val,
> Why would one to upsize to 11x14, in increments yet, a 35mm negative
> scanned at 4000dpi ?
>
> In Photoshop, select Image Size, uncheck resample image and enter 11
> for Height, if the image is horizontal. You have more than enough
> resolution so that upsizing is not necessary.
> Cheers,
> Andre
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 17:44:13 -0000
From: "Glenn Mitchell" <gmitchel850@...>
Subject: Re: 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
No. 8-bits per channel does not mean the tonal range is reduced in
any way.
8-bits per channel means you have 256 different values for
expressing the full tonal range of each channel. 12-bits per channel
gives you 4,096 values (most DSLRs, for example). 16-bits per
channel means you have 65,536 possible values.
More bits per channel means the tones in your image are more
continuous. Hence, the image is less likely to posterize when you
edit the image. (Nonlinear changes -- such as Levels, Curves,
Hue/Saturation adjustments, etc. -- compress parts of the histogram
and expand others, making it more likely you will see visible
posterization in your image where there are gaps in your histogram.
Until you start editing the image, the histogram for an 8-bit, 12-
bit, or 16-bit scan are likely to look similar. The mischief doesn't
begin until you start editing the image. ;)
I stay in 16-bits throughout when possible, and as long as possible
otherwise.
My RAW files are converted to a 16-bit PSD file. With Photoshop CS,
you can do nearly everything in terms of photo editing in 16-bit. If
you want to preserve the highest image quality, stick with 16-bits.
My master file flattens the working file, removes the alpha channels
(necessary, if you use ImagePrint RIP), and saves it as a TIFF.
My output files for the Epson 2200 are sharpened for printed output
and any final Curve adjustment is applied. This is when I convert to
8-bits. Sending a 16-bit file to the Epson 2200 printer (or the
ImagePrint RIP, in my case) gains you nothing in image quality. All
you get is an output files that's twice the size.
So, I wind up with:
1 RAW File (12-bits, compressed)
1 or more Photoshop working files: PSD with layers and channels (12-
bits, compressed)
1 Master file: TIFF flattened and sans channels (12-bits,
uncompressed)
1 or more Output files: TIFF (8-bits, uncompressed
If I use a RAW converter instead of Adobe Camera Raw II in PS CS,
then I also have:
1 Converted file: TIFF (12-bits, uncompressed)
I hope this helps!
Cheers,
Mitch
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 15
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 10:04:27 -0800
From: "Paul D. DeRocco" <pderocco@...>
Subject: RE: 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
> From: David Sinai [mailto:dsinai@...]
>
> Shouldn't there be a different histogram once the file is converted
> to 8 bit? Going from 16 bit to 8 bit means that the tonal range has
> been reduced, correct?
The tonal range is the same, so the histogram remains the same. The only
thing that's changed is the fineness of the steps. In 8-bit mode, each step
is only 1/256 of full scale. If you do a curve in 16-bit mode, you'll still
have a clean histogram, but if you do a curve in 8-bit mode, some of the
steps, which were 1/256 of full scale, will inevitably be turned into 1/128
of full scale, which will show up as missing lines (combing) in the
histogram. In some cases, this can correspond to faint but visible
posterization in the print.
If you have PS CS, you can stay in 16-bit mode to the end. If not, just make
sure you do your major curve adjustments in 16-bit mode, and do lesser
tweaks (e.g., sharpening) after converting to 8-bit.
--
Ciao, Paul D. DeRocco
Paul mailto:pderocco@...
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 16
Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 18:45:39 -0000
From: "Phil Rose" <pjrose@...>
Subject: Re: 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Glenn
Mitchell" <gmitchel850@y...> wrote:
>
> Until you start editing the image, the histogram for an 8-bit, 12-
> bit, or 16-bit scan are likely to look similar.
One reason for this is that Photoshop's histogram display
provides inadequate resolution to see many of the contunuity
gaps. There's a free plug-in available to use with Photoshop that
allows you to view histgrams at increased resolution (4 or 5
times more than the 256 levels of PS's built-in histogram
function):
http://www.reindeergraphics.com/free.shtml#widehisto
This plug-in also shows the histogram for saturation, hue and
luminance mode, as well as RGB .
Phil
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 17
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 19:59:21 +0100
From: "Anthony G. Atkielski" <anthony@...>
Subject: Re[2]: OT Again: (sorry Martin) Photoshop scratch disk usage?
Editor P.O.V. Image Service writes:
> The reason Adobe has used it's own scratch file system has been to avoid
> precisely the RAM size limitations.
The reason Adobe uses its own scratch file system and memory management
is that the old Mac OS had such poor memory management that Photoshop
couldn't work otherwise--and even though OS X and recent versions of
Windows are fully capable of managing memory more effectively than
Photoshop, Adobe has never wanted to spend the money to fix its
memory-management code. I still have trouble with Photoshop (5.x) under
XP because of this.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 18
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 20:05:39 +0100
From: "Anthony G. Atkielski" <anthony@...>
Subject: Re: 16 Bit vs. 8 Bit for BO
David Sinai writes:
> I was curious to see if the histogram of this file would be
> different if the file was converted to 8 bit. After converting the
> file to 8 bit, I reviewed the histogram and so no changes.
The histogram only shows data with 256 levels, so you can't see any
difference between 8-bit and 16-bit modes with the histogram. To show
the 16-bit data, you'd need a histogram 65,536 pixels wide, which
obviously is not practical. In 16-bit mode, every pixel you see
horizontally in the histogram is actually the sum of 256 different
levels (256 x 256 = 65,536 levels).
> Shouldn't there be a different histogram once the file is converted
> to 8 bit?
It would be nice, but as explained above, it wouldn't fit on the screen.
> Going from 16 bit to 8 bit means that the tonal range has
> been reduced, correct?
Yes.
> More importantly, I could not detect any visible differences on the
> screen when the image was in 8 bit vs. 16 bit.
In black and white, very few monitors can show any difference. And you
must be in at least a 32-bit color mode to even be able to hold any
difference in display memory (and that's still smaller than the 48-bit
mode you'd need to show full 16-bit images).
> I decided to work with the 8 bit file as there are more PS
> features available this way.
But there is also less data.
The advantage to 16-bit mode is that you have far more headroom for
modifications. For example, if you need to drastically change the
curves in the image, you can do so in 16-bit mode with almost no loss of
quality, whereas you'll get serious posterization in 8-bit mode,
particularly after multiple operations, since the effect is cumulative.
> Should there be any discernable tonality differences on a print
> created with a 16 bit file vs. 8 bit when printing with an Epson
> 2200 using the BO method?
No. The advantage to 16-bit is in the extra data you have for
manipulation. You don't need to stay in 16-bit mode once you are
finished retouching and adjusting the image, and you can store it in
8-bit mode if you want (just remember, once you move it to 8-bit mode,
you won't have as much data if you ever decide to modify it again).
> I printed the 8 bit and the 16 bit file and saw no differences. Is
> this what you would expect?
Yes.
> Everything I've read, says to stick with 16 bit.
As long as you are adjusting or retouching the image and/or you expect
to do so in the future, 16-bit is better than 8-bit. For actually
printing the image and archiving it, though, it doesn't matter, since no
display or print device can really resolve more than 256 levels, anyway.
> Does the rule "Stay in 16 bit" apply when printing BO on Epson 2200?
No. It doesn't apply for any kind of printer or display. None of them
can come close to resolving 65,536 different gray levels.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 19
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 11:52:44 -0800
From: Levin Andy <alevin@...>
Subject: Re: Digest Number 2005
On Saturday, January 3, 2004, at 02:45 AM,
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com wrote:
> There are 22 messages in this issue.
>
> Topics in this digest:
>
> 1. Re: Clog from hell
> From: Tim Goodwin <tgvoz@...>
> 2. How much Ink in a 2200 cartridge?
> From: "Don" <elixirs4me@...>
> 3. Re: Black Ink Problem Using MIS GP Ink
> From: "chaofeng" <twohorses123@...>
> 4. Re: Re: Black Ink Problem Using MIS GP Ink
> From: "Editor P.O.V. Image Service" <editor@...>
> 5. Re: How to get Gretag Eye-One Match to work w/ QTR?
> From: Carl Schofield <scho@...>
> 6. Re: Re: Black Ink Problem Using MIS GP Ink
> From: "Editor P.O.V. Image Service" <editor@...>
> 7. Re: Clog from hell
> From: "jim hayes" <jimhayes@...>
> 8. Re: Black Ink Problem Using MIS GP Ink
> From: "chaofeng" <twohorses123@...>
> 9. Re: How much Ink in a 2200 cartridge?
> From: "John Vitollo" <jvlist@...>
> 10. OT Again: (sorry Martin) Photoshop scratch disk usage?
> From: "Steven Karafyllakis" <steve@...>
> 11. Adjustment curves with Roark workflow-
> From: "Steven Karafyllakis" <steve@...>
> 12. Re: doubled sided 5x7 coated watercolour paper?
> From: Sam McCandless <samcc@...>
> 13. RE: OT Again: (sorry Martin) Photoshop scratch disk usage?
> From: "Paul D. DeRocco" <pderocco@...>
> 14. RE: How much Ink in a 2200 cartridge?
> From: "Daniel Staver" <daniel@...>
> 15. scanning and image size
> From: "Joseph Robinson" <joseph@...>
> 16. Re: Adjustment curves with Roark workflow-
> From: "Chris Hargens" <chargens@...>
> 17. RE: scanning and image size
> From: "Paul D. DeRocco" <pderocco@...>
> 18. RE: scanning and image size
> From: "ellery" <ellery@...>
> 19. Re: 1280 Pizza Wheel marks on Semigloss
> From: "richard_h95050" <richardh@...>
> 20. Re: Computer Mechanics - upgrading RAM with XP?
> From: "Anthony G. Atkielski" <anthony@...>
> 21. Re: OT Again: (sorry Martin) Photoshop scratch disk usage?
> From: "Editor P.O.V. Image Service" <editor@...>
> 22. Re: leaving eboni black when printing color
> From: "Editor P.O.V. Image Service" <editor@...>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 17:33:21 -0500
> From: Tim Goodwin <tgvoz@...>
> Subject: Re: Clog from hell
>
> Never mind, I was able to find detailed instructions on this method at;
>
> http://home.att.net/~arwomack01/#ClogCleanning
>
> Thanks anyway
> Tim
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 00:09:43 -0000
> From: "Don" <elixirs4me@...>
> Subject: How much Ink in a 2200 cartridge?
>
> I've been to the Epson site and can't find out how many mls of ink are
> actually in a 2200 cartridge. Can anybody help me out here or point
> me to a xource that can? Thanks in advance...
>
> Ol' Don in Broken Arrow
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 00:14:44 -0000
> From: "chaofeng" <twohorses123@...>
> Subject: Re: Black Ink Problem Using MIS GP Ink
>
> Thanks for sharing your experience. Do you use the cartridge ink or
> the CFS ink? MIS has one web page saying the cartridge black ink is
> universal black, but another web page saying it's black for matte
> only. Obviously if you order CFS ink, there are clear labels to tell
> you if the black is PK (Photo Black), or MK (Universal Black) or K
> (Matte Eboni Black).
>
> Don't know if they send me the wrong fill of the black in the
> cartridge.
>
> chao
>
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Edward Wiseman"
> <pahts@c...> wrote:
>> I'm using the same setup as yours with the "universal black", and
> I'm very happy with the results..especially with Epson's"matte"
> or "lustre" finished papers..I'm sure you would have much better
> results on "glossy" with thier "PK" type black, but you would lose
> lots of D-Max on your Matte finished papers..The same issues exist
> with Epson's own "Ultrachrome", but they don't even offer
> a "universal" black.....I guess you can't have your "K"ake and eat it
> too!!
>>
>> Eddie Wiseman
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: chaofeng
>> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>> Sent: Friday, January 02, 2004 3:39 PM
>> Subject: [Digital BW] Black Ink Problem Using MIS GP Ink
>>
>>
>> I found people in this group are very knowledgeable on MIS
> products.
>> So I'd like to ask your advice on the problem I experienced when
> use
>> MIS GP black ink. I ordered the GP ink cartridge for my epson
> 1280
>> recently. I got good results on matt paper but had bad results
> when
>> printing on glossy paper (epson premium glossy, luster and
> permajet
>> oyster paper). On those glossy-based prints, when I tilt the
> print, I
>> can see the reflection of the black portions are so odd that they
>> dont' seem to be part of the print. In other words, all other
> colors
>> are melted naturally into the paper but the black portions are
> like
>> something that are separately patched on and not the integral to
> the
>> whole print. I was wondering if this is so called "solarizing
>> effect". Any of you have used MIS GP inks? What are your
>> experiences, particularly for printing on glossy paper? MIS
> claims
>> that the black ink in the cartridge is Universal Black that works
> on
>> both glossy and matte. But my result is clearly unsatisfactory.
>> Should I use their Photo Black (PK) instead? If so, will I have
> good
>> results for matte printing?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other
> resources as they are often being updated.
>>
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>>
>> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you
> wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by
> visiting this same page.
>>
>> Please follow these basic guidelines:
>> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier
> messages to keep them short.
>> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed
> from the membership without notice.
>> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of
> digital B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may
> be removed from the membership.
>> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules
> and guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the
> group Owner and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines"
> in the Files section:
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>>
>> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW,
> THE PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT
> THE "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP
> SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
> SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT
> LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER
> INTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL
> BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
> SUCH DAMAGES), RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE
> THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR
> ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT
> OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv)
> ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/
>>
>> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>>
>> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.
>>
>>
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 18:51:11 -0500
> From: "Editor P.O.V. Image Service" <editor@...>
> Subject: Re: Re: Black Ink Problem Using MIS GP Ink
>
> chaofeng wrote:
>
>> Thanks for sharing your experience. Do you use the cartridge ink or
>> the CFS ink? MIS has one web page saying the cartridge black ink is
>> universal black, but another web page saying it's black for matte
>> only. Obviously if you order CFS ink, there are clear labels to tell
>> you if the black is PK (Photo Black), or MK (Universal Black) or K
>> (Matte Eboni Black).
>>
>> Don't know if they send me the wrong fill of the black in the
>> cartridge.
>>
>>
>
> Yes, there are three different MIS GP Black Inks..
>
> K - Eboni Matte Black - Pure Pigment - Bronzing on Glossy/RC Papers -
> Meant for Matte Paper ONLY
>
> PK -Photo Black - Pure Pigment - Significantly Reduced dMax on Matte
> Papers - Meant for Glossy/Luster Papers ONLY
>
> MK - Universal Black - Hybrid dye & Pigment - Works on Glossy OR Matte
> Papers _ Has reduced printlife by virtue of the dye component
>
> 1280 Cartridges (ARC-T007-UTK
> <http://www.inksupply.com/additem.cfm?itemid=ARC-T007-UTK> or
> ARC-T007-UPK <http://www.inksupply.com/additem.cfm?itemid=ARC-T007-UPK>
> ) are by default, unless special ordered, filled with the Eboni Matte
> Black or the Photo Black. The "U" in the product designation is NOT an
> indication that this is a Universal Black Cartridge.. A Universal
> Black
> cartridge would be designated "ARC-T007-UMK"
>
> If you go to the MIS page at:
> <http://www.inksupply.com/index.cfm?source=html/ultratone.html>
>
> and click on the 1280 Black cartridges, you will see that they are
> pre-filled with either the Eboni Matte Black or the Photo Black.. A
> Universal Black Cartridge for the 1280 would be a special order item..
>
>
>
> Keith Krebs
>
> "Just some guy," caretaker of the Multiverse's largest EPSON printer
> User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo
> Publications), at:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSON_Printers/
> and the Multiverse's largest Canon printer User Community at:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Canon-printers
> "For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks
> together
> guys"
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 19:48:30 -0500
> From: Carl Schofield <scho@...>
> Subject: Re: How to get Gretag Eye-One Match to work w/ QTR?
>
> i1 Match will not work. You need to download MeasureTool (part of the
> ProfileMaker Pro package) from the GM site (see link in documentation).
>
> On Friday, January 2, 2004, at 04:28 PM, J Michael Sullivan wrote:
>
>> Dear List,
>>
>> Anyone know if "Eye-One Match" can be made to work with the 21-step
>> wedges that
>> come supplied with QTR 2.0 beta 9?
>>
>> Note that Eye-One Match is different than the Gretag "Measure Tool"
>> mentioned in
>> the documentation
>>
>> The reason I ask is that "Match" does not see the 21-step wedge files
>> supplied with
>> QTR.
>>
>> MJS
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other
>> resources as they are often being updated.
>>
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>>
>> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish
>> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
>> this same page.
>>
>> Please follow these basic guidelines:
>> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to
>> keep them short.
>> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
>> flames. Hostile, aggressive or argumentative users may be removed from
>> the membership without notice.
>> - Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital
>> B&W printing. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be
>> removed from the membership.
>> - By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and
>> guidelines, and to abide by the actions and decisions of the group
>> Owner and Moderators. See "Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines" in the
>> Files section:
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>>
>> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE
>> PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE "OWNER"
>> AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE
>> LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,
>> CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
>> DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE
>> LOSSES (EVEN IF THE "OWNER" AND "MODERATORS" OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT
>> YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES),
>> RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW,
>> THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF
>> YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD
>> PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER
>> MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>> ---------------------~-->
>> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
>> Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US &
>> Canada.
>> http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
>> http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/ucIolB/TM
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ~->
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>>
>> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
>> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2004 19:13:24 -0500
> From: "Editor P.O.V. Image Service" <editor@...>
> Subject: Re: Re: Black Ink Problem Using MIS GP Ink
>
> The standard MIS GP black for 1270/1280 cartridges was, AFAIK, the
> same
> as the Eboni Black.. although, I do see where on another page
> <http://www.inksupply.com/index.cfm?source=html/arcgpcarts.html> they
> say the standard black with the GP Inks is the Universal Matte Black..
> aggghghh!
>
> They really need to standardize the part numbers to eliminate
> confusion.. You're not the ONLY one going through this, my head is
> beginning to hurt whenever I start ordering pre-filled black
> cartridges.. They even say on the GP page to pay close attention to the
> lettering of the black cartridges, but then go on to not use that
> lettering system for the pre-filled 1280 series GP cartridges...
> sheesh!
>
> I would really prefer that they simply use the same part number and
> lettering system for all the UT/GP blacks..
>
> In any case, the photo black cartridges should work best on
> Glossy/Luster papers..
>
> In any event, we now see what Paul was indicating about them needing to
> consolidate offerings and (IMHO) standardize the product SKU numbers..
>
> You may well have gotten Universal Black in the cartridges, although
> the
> bronzing would indicate elsewise. The best thing is to call MIS
> directly and sort this all out..
>
> I've also got some MIS GP K cartridges ready to go.. It'll be
> interesting to see which black they are, as I already have the UT K
> and PK.
>
>
> Keith Krebs
>
> "Just some guy," caretaker of the Multiverse's largest EPSON printer
> User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo
> Publications), at:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSON_Printers/
> and the Multiverse's largest Canon printer User Community at:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Canon-printers
> "For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks
> together
> guys"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 01:19:51 -0000
> From: "jim hayes" <jimhayes@...>
> Subject: Re: Clog from hell
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, ritab19106@a...
> wrote:
>> Jim --
>>
>> I was interested in your suggestions, since I have suffered quite a
>> few
>> "clogs from hell." I have not tried your suggestion #1 (putting
> windex on parking
>> pad) and was wondering if you would elaborate on it. I assume you
> press the
>> cartridge changing button to move the head to the left, thus giving
> you access
>> to the parking pad?
>
> Yes.
>
> Do you then inject windex with a syringe or do you place
>> a windex-soaked towel on the pad?
>
> Pull the stem out of the squirt trigger of the bottle of windex. Put
> your finger over one end. Dip the other end in the windex bottle.
> Release and press your finger over the end until the end dipped in the
> windex draws up a column 3/8 inch to 1/2 inch, which you hold in place
> with your finger on other end.
>
> Transfer the end of the stem to the parking pad and let it drop across
> the pad a drop at a time, you should get roughly 3-5 drops. Discard
> any remainder in the column in stem. Try not to drop any outside the
> pad.
>
> I never used eyedroppers but they might work too.
>
> If you can get some FOAM swabs (not cotton)from Radio Shack you can
> moisten them with windex and swab off the rubber perimeter of the pad
> very lightly, so as not to dislodge it. This is extra credit.
>
> The pad should not be soaked so it is swimming in windex. Just a few
> drops to wet it. Foam swabs can also remove excess windex- just touch
> the pad with a dry swab. Return the carriage and turn the off button.
> Let it sit 6-12 hours.
>
>
>
>>
>> Also, I have become very sparing in the running of cleaning cycles
> because of
>> my fear of approaching the maximum allowable number before the
> printer has a
>> nervous breakdown and requires pad replacement. I know one can
> reset the
>> counter, but I fear that I might end up with saturated pads spilling
> ink all over
>> my desk. Do you have any insights about the wisdom of that strategy
> as well?
>
>
> I heard of only one case where the printer, an 1160, turned off for
> this reason. Paul Roark, after many, many cart changes/ cleanings/ ink
> experiments once told me his 1160 shut down. I think he simply had it
> reset, I'm not sure. I seem to recall he had lots of use on it...
>
> The pad getting saturated stories I have heard come from people using
> CIS/CFS (bulk ink feeders) who have set the height of the bottles
> improperly, and discover that overnight 16 oz of ink has drained into
> their printers!!
>
> There may be other stories but I haven't been watching this group as
> much lately.
>
> I suppose it could happen with heavy usage. But I wouldn't worry about
> it too much, IMHO.
>
> Jim Hayes
>
>
>>
>> Thanks very much.
>>
>> Rita Bernstein
>>
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 01:59:42 -0000
> From: "chaofeng" <twohorses123@...>
> Subject: Re: Black Ink Problem Using MIS GP Ink
>
> While MIS is still enjoying the long holidays (they are closed until
> Jan. 5), there are people like you trying to help me for MIS
> problems. Great thanks!
>
> I'll call MIS on Monday to sort this puzzle out. If my cartridge is
> Universal Black, then my last hope is PK and I hope they have a
> cartridge version for me to try before I commite to the CFS.
>
> Will let you know what I find out.
>
> Thanks again.
>
> chao
>
>
>
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Editor P.O.V.
> Image Service" <editor@p...> wrote:
>> The standard MIS GP black for 1270/1280 cartridges was, AFAIK, the
> same
>> as the Eboni Black.. although, I do see where on another page
>> <http://www.inksupply.com/index.cfm?source=html/arcgpcarts.html>
> they
>> say the standard black with the GP Inks is the Universal Matte
> Black..
>> aggghghh!
>>
>> They really need to standardize the part numbers to eliminate
>> confusion.. You're not the ONLY one going through this, my head is
>> beginning to hurt whenever I start ordering pre-filled black
>> cartridges.. They even say on the GP page to pay close attention to
> the
>> lettering of the black cartridges, but then go on to not use that
>> lettering system for the pre-filled 1280 series GP cartridges...
> sheesh!
>>
>> I would really prefer that they simply use the same part number and
>> lettering system for all the UT/GP blacks..
>>
>> In any case, the photo black cartridges should work best on
>> Glossy/Luster papers..
>>
>> In any event, we now see what Paul was indicating about them
> needing to
>> consolidate offerings and (IMHO) standardize the product SKU
> numbers..
>>
>> You may well have gotten Universal Black in the cartridges,
> although the
>> bronzing would indicate elsewise. The best thing is to call MIS
>> directly and sort this all out..
>>
>> I've also got some MIS GP K cartridges ready to go.. It'll be
>> interesting to see which black they are, as I already have the UT K
> and PK.
>>
>>
>> Keith Krebs
>>
>> "Just some guy," caretaker of the Multiverse's largest EPSON
> printer
>> User Community (highly recommended by Vogon Poets and MegaDodo
>> Publications), at:
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/EPSON_Printers/
>> and the Multiverse's largest Canon printer User Community at:
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Canon-printers
>> "For the rest of you out there, the secret is to bang the rocks
> together
>> guys"
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 03:29:36 -0000
> From: "John Vitollo" <jvlist@...>
> Subject: Re: How much Ink in a 2200 cartridge?
>
> "Don" wrote:
>> I've been to the Epson site and can't find out how many mls of ink are
>> actually in a 2200 cartridge.
>
> This page might tell you:
>
> http://www.jondokken.com/Epson2200/a2200Epson.htm
>
> Or this one:
>
> http://www.anestoday.com/epson2200/intro.htm
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 04:27:53 -0000
> From: "Steven Karafyllakis" <steve@...>
> Subject: OT Again: (sorry Martin) Photoshop scratch disk usage?
>
> Both PS 7 and CS seem unwilling to use more than 4G of scratch disk;
> I started with 8G on this installation, split it into two 4G and
> still I get "scratch disks full" notices when only one partition
> reaches its limit. Any others having this problem? Any solutions?
>
> Thanks
>
> Steve Karafyllakis
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2004 04:47:58 -0000
> From: "Steven Karafyllakis" <steve@...>
> Subject: Adjustment curves with Roark workflow-
>
> I just (after a year of on-off use) got around to testing wether
> placing an adjustment curve above or below Paul's partition curves
> makes a difference. Did someone mention this and I missed it
> completely? It makes a huge difference, at least on this test/image!
> Placing the adj. below the part. curve produced lower contrast,
> posterization, and a very obvious blue shift in the midtones (Ultra-
> tone VM inks). The very same curve above the partition curves
> produced what I expected: neutral tone, good contrast, a smooth
> ramp. As they say...
>
> Steve Karafyllakis
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 20:37:32 -0800
> From: Sam McCandless <samcc@...>
> Subject: Re: doubled sided 5x7 coated watercolour paper?
>
> At 11:06 AM -0700 1/2/04, Tim Atherton wrote:
>> Does anyone know of anyone doing one of the coated watercolour
>> papers pre-cut to 5x7?
>
> I did some of the two-sided Eclipse in that size in my 1160s, Tim,
> but cut it down myself. Not sure that's what you meant, nor that
> Eclipse is considered to be a watercolor paper. In any case, it fed
> well, printed nicely on both sides, and did better than I'd hoped in
> the the Christmas mail when I used it as a postcard.
> --
> Sam
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
> _______________________________________________________________________
> _
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 22:45:54 -0800
> From: "Paul D. DeRocco" <pderocco@...>
> Subject: RE: OT Again: (sorry Martin) Photoshop scratch disk usage?
>
>> From: Steven Karafyllakis [mailto:steve@...]
>>
>> Both PS 7 and CS seem unwilling to use more than 4G of scratch disk;
>> I started with 8G on this installation, split it into two 4G and
>> still I get "scratch disks full" notices when only one partition
>> reaches its limit. Any others having this problem? Any solutions?
>
> I suspect the limit is actually 2GB per file, since on Windows
> applications
> have to use a whole different API to do random access on files larger
> than
> that size--and weren't able to do so at all prior to (I think) Windows
> 2000.
>
> --
>
> Ciao, Paul D. DeRocco
> Paul mailto
(Message over 64 KB, truncated)