Digital BW, The Print

Hi,
I wondered if there is any chance of the UT2 inks being made to work on the 1200. Has anyone tried this?

thanks,
Richard
--
http://smallfield.vze.com
http://photos.smallfield.vze.com

   "We first make our habits, and then our habits make us."
   --John Dryden

Richard,

>... any chance of the UT2 inks being made to work on the 1200. ...

That would be an interesting test.  I'm afraid the 1200 is about the same
technology as the 7500 in terms of non-variable and fairly large dot size.
(Is this right? About 7 or 8 picoliter non-variable?)

It would be a lot simpler to test the inks on a 1200 than a 7500, however.
So, if someone is game, I might see if MIS will send a sample.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul 
Roark" <paul.roark@v...> wrote:

>That would be an interesting test.  I'm afraid the 1200 is about 
>the same technology as the 7500 in terms of non-variable and 
>fairly large dot size.(Is this right? About 7 or 8 picoliter 
>non-variable?)

For the record, the Epson 1200 is a 6-picoliter, variable-dot 
printer, which (even though I haven't had one for a while now) 
makes it viable for serious printing in this realm, to say the least.

- Barrett

I just loaded my first set of UT carts in my 1280 and now I'm feeling 
left behind again. Could someone tell me why I need throw all this out 
and got to UT2?  Advantages, disadvantages?

Truman

Truman,

>I just loaded my first set of UT carts in my 1280 and now I'm feeling 
>left behind again.

You're not alone in your frustration.  MIS, for example, ...

Also, if its just a cart, when it's done try the UT2 and see which one you
like the best.

Part of it is the digital world and the speed things move.  Another part of
it is that there is not such thing as a final product for me.  There is yet
another inkset recipe in the fader now.  

>Could someone tell me why I need throw all this out and got to UT2?  

The UT inkset is a very good one.  There is no reason to throw it out.

The UT2 inkset came out of several different projects -- dual toner inkset
(sepia and cold), easy printing/no curves (C82 and 1280/890), and RC
printing.  I found I could combine them into one inkset.

The dual toner aspect is easy to understand.  I wanted to get back to sepia.
I used the VMS most of the time in quads, but the idea of adding cold toner
to the base warm carbon inks to first cool them, and then adding a strong
sepia toner to get all the way back to sepia is clearly not the most
lightfast way to make a sepia print.  Dual toners is a better way.  With
respect to color pigments, the fewer used the better.

The disadvantage is that there are 2 toners in there.  When no curve is used
there is more color pigment than the ideal -- least needed to get the tone.
With curves I essentially exclude the toner(s) that are not wanted so it's
not such a problem.  I will probably still print with curves most of the
time.

The easy printing required with no curves just happened when the dual toners
were added and the cool offset the sepia.  With 2 toners I had to abandon
the lightest gray ink.  This meant that the Epson driver did the crossovers.
Of course, it didn't "just" happen.  I balanced the toners so that the range
that I could get with the sliders was that used by most people on the most
popular papers, while still getting the right tones with the curves.

The disadvantage is that with older printers the lack of the lightest gray
is going to increase the chances of dots. Also, even with the 1280, when
curves are used I recommend 1440 with High Speed off.

However, I think the light gray curves were often the source of difficulty
for people who wanted to change curves.  So the resulting UT2 curves are
much easier.

The RC problem with UT is that it uses too much light ink, flooding some
papers and causing more bronzing. (Note that Epson's latest printers are
dropping the light inks entirely.)  Also some RC papers go too magenta in
the shadows.  The UT2 inkset was the first I designed that abandoned the
quads.  The previous inksets were really quad inksets that were just adapted
to hextone printers.  UT2 is hextone from the ground up, and the 2 cold
toners are different ratios of color pigments to account for the different
tones that papers get in their shadows. 

I hope this helps.  If you print just matte paper and don't want sepia, the
UT inkset might actually be a bit smoother, at least in theory.  It is the
inkset that is staying in my 7500.

Hope this helps.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

I'm interested but unfortunately my 1200 has had a partial clog on the light 
cyan nozzle for several months now so I'm afraid I wouldn't be a reliable 
tester.

I've had good results with the MIS VM inks but if the UT2 inks won't work with 
a 1200 I don't think I'll bother with having mine serviced.

If I get the clog out I'll let you know. I'd love to give them a try.

Hopefully someone has a chance to test them.

Bryan



<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> Richard,
> 
> >... any chance of the UT2 inks being made to work on the 1200. ...
> 
> That would be an interesting test.  I'm afraid the 1200 is about
the same
> technology as the 7500 in terms of non-variable and fairly large
dot size.
> (Is this right? About 7 or 8 picoliter non-variable?)
> 
> It would be a lot simpler to test the inks on a 1200 than a 7500,
however.

> So, if someone is game, I might see if MIS will send a sample.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com