Digital BW, The Print

Hi,

I've got a query for Roy and/or Paul, regarding the differences 
between the two variants of the UT7 inkset listed on MIS's website. 
These are described as the "Bowhaus Configuration", sold for use with 
QTR and IJC, and "Roark Configuration", sold for use with the Epson 
driver and Paul's curves. I'm intrigued that there are two inksets 
that are nearly, but not quite, the same. I know that one of Paul's 
goals was to create an "Easy B&W" inkset, and presumably that meant 
that the ink tones have to be made to fit in with the Epson driver's 
expectations. Is that what created the need for two separate sets? 
Roy, how hard would it be to use QTR with the "Roark Config" inks?

TIA

-= mike =-

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mike_nunan" 
<mike_nunan@h...> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I've got a query for Roy and/or Paul, regarding the differences 
> between the two variants of the UT7 inkset listed on MIS's website. 
> These are described as the "Bowhaus Configuration", sold for use with 
> QTR and IJC, and "Roark Configuration", sold for use with the Epson 
> driver and Paul's curves. I'm intrigued that there are two inksets 
> that are nearly, but not quite, the same. I know that one of Paul's 
> goals was to create an "Easy B&W" inkset, and presumably that meant 
> that the ink tones have to be made to fit in with the Epson driver's 
> expectations. Is that what created the need for two separate sets? 
> Roy, how hard would it be to use QTR with the "Roark Config" inks?
> 
> TIA
> 
> -= mike =-

Having two ink sets for the same basic idea is complicated.

Although I know the general idea of the new UT7 inks, I haven't
used or even seen them yet.  Certainly the major reason for this
new set is to be able to use the ordinary Epson driver and get some
variable tone control.   The seventh ink, light black, turns out to
make the Epson driver and its profiles quite complicated.  I think that
this in turn makes the ink set fairly Epson driver oriented.
Whether this is a problem or not I don't know, but it may make the
QTR profiles a little more difficult trying to mimic the Epson driver.

The other inkset is probably a simpler set if you are using QTR,
but of course then you must use it -- there's no Easy B&W workflow.

Roy

Hi Roy,

Thanks for that. Just so I know I've got the right end of the stick 
here, when you talk about "the other inkset" you mean the Bowhaus 
Config UT7 set, right? It's confusing looking at the MIS website, 
because they talk about both inksets on an equal footing, it's not 
clear that either one of them is a recent development. Looking at the 
traffic here, it seems as if UT7 (in any form) is a new thing.

Assuming I've understood that correctly, if I wanted to try QTR with 
Paul's UT7 inkset, then it would "just" =) be a matter of generating 
a suitable profile for your RIP. Given what I've just been reading in 
the thread on linearisation, it should be possible for me to get a 
pretty good result there if I have access to a densitometer, at least 
if I don't try to bring the toner inks into the equation. I'm just 
hedging here, really. If I'm going to spend out on a load of ink, it 
would be nice to know I had the option to revert to QTR if it turns 
out I don't like what the Epson driver produces.

Cheers,

-= mike =-

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Harrington" 
<roy@h...> wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mike_nunan" 
> <mike_nunan@h...> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I've got a query for Roy and/or Paul, regarding the differences 
> > between the two variants of the UT7 inkset listed on MIS's 
website. 
> > These are described as the "Bowhaus Configuration", sold for use 
with 
> > QTR and IJC, and "Roark Configuration", sold for use with the 
Epson 
> > driver and Paul's curves. I'm intrigued that there are two 
inksets 
> > that are nearly, but not quite, the same. I know that one of 
Paul's 
> > goals was to create an "Easy B&W" inkset, and presumably that 
meant 
> > that the ink tones have to be made to fit in with the Epson 
driver's 
> > expectations. Is that what created the need for two separate 
sets? 
> > Roy, how hard would it be to use QTR with the "Roark Config" inks?
> > 
> > TIA
> > 
> > -= mike =-
> 
> Having two ink sets for the same basic idea is complicated.
> 
> Although I know the general idea of the new UT7 inks, I haven't
> used or even seen them yet.  Certainly the major reason for this
> new set is to be able to use the ordinary Epson driver and get some
> variable tone control.   The seventh ink, light black, turns out to
> make the Epson driver and its profiles quite complicated.  I think 
that
> this in turn makes the ink set fairly Epson driver oriented.
> Whether this is a problem or not I don't know, but it may make the
> QTR profiles a little more difficult trying to mimic the Epson 
driver.

> 
> The other inkset is probably a simpler set if you are using QTR,
> but of course then you must use it -- there's no Easy B&W workflow.
> 
> Roy

Hi Mike,

Yes, there are two configurations.

The latest and most talked about is UT7 or also called the Roark
configuration -- this will work with the Epson driver.

The older one is under UT and also called Bowhaus or QuadToneRIP
configuration -- this requires one of the rips.

What you are asking about doing -- trying UT7 with Epson first
and then possibly moving to QTR is certainly possible.  The catch
is the "just make a profile".  To do that you have to look at the individual
inks for both color and density and come up with a plan of how they
might fit together to make a neutral tone throughout.  The plan is
a lot easier if you have all similar color grays and separate toners
to give the color.  With the different densities having different colors
its just a lot more difficult.

That said, most likely I'll end up making some UT7 profiles some
time.

Roy


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mike_nunan" 
<mike_nunan@h...> wrote:

> Hi Roy,
> 
> Thanks for that. Just so I know I've got the right end of the stick 
> here, when you talk about "the other inkset" you mean the Bowhaus 
> Config UT7 set, right? It's confusing looking at the MIS website, 
> because they talk about both inksets on an equal footing, it's not 
> clear that either one of them is a recent development. Looking at the 
> traffic here, it seems as if UT7 (in any form) is a new thing.
> 
> Assuming I've understood that correctly, if I wanted to try QTR with 
> Paul's UT7 inkset, then it would "just" =) be a matter of generating 
> a suitable profile for your RIP. Given what I've just been reading in 
> the thread on linearisation, it should be possible for me to get a 
> pretty good result there if I have access to a densitometer, at least 
> if I don't try to bring the toner inks into the equation. I'm just 
> hedging here, really. If I'm going to spend out on a load of ink, it 
> would be nice to know I had the option to revert to QTR if it turns 
> out I don't like what the Epson driver produces.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> -= mike =-
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Harrington" 
> <roy@h...> wrote:
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mike_nunan" 
> > <mike_nunan@h...> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > I've got a query for Roy and/or Paul, regarding the differences 
> > > between the two variants of the UT7 inkset listed on MIS's 
> website. 
> > > These are described as the "Bowhaus Configuration", sold for use 
> with 
> > > QTR and IJC, and "Roark Configuration", sold for use with the 
> Epson 
> > > driver and Paul's curves. I'm intrigued that there are two 
> inksets 
> > > that are nearly, but not quite, the same. I know that one of 
> Paul's 
> > > goals was to create an "Easy B&W" inkset, and presumably that 
> meant 
> > > that the ink tones have to be made to fit in with the Epson 
> driver's 
> > > expectations. Is that what created the need for two separate 
> sets? 
> > > Roy, how hard would it be to use QTR with the "Roark Config" inks?
> > > 
> > > TIA
> > > 
> > > -= mike =-
> > 
> > Having two ink sets for the same basic idea is complicated.
> > 
> > Although I know the general idea of the new UT7 inks, I haven't
> > used or even seen them yet.  Certainly the major reason for this
> > new set is to be able to use the ordinary Epson driver and get some
> > variable tone control.   The seventh ink, light black, turns out to
> > make the Epson driver and its profiles quite complicated.  I think 
> that
> > this in turn makes the ink set fairly Epson driver oriented.
> > Whether this is a problem or not I don't know, but it may make the
> > QTR profiles a little more difficult trying to mimic the Epson 
> driver.
> > 
> > The other inkset is probably a simpler set if you are using QTR,
> > but of course then you must use it -- there's no Easy B&W workflow.
> > 
> > Roy

Hi Roy,

It looks like there is some genuine confusion going on here with the 
terminology. Have a look at this page on the MIS website, about 
halfway down where under the UT7 heading:

http://www.inksupply.com/index.cfm?source=html/bwpage.html

As you can see, it clearly groups the Bowhaus config under UT7, 
whereas judging by your message below and many of the discussions in 
this group, it seems that most people regard UT7 as being Paul's 
inkset only. Maybe it's worth asking MIS to amend the page?

Thanks for the detail on the use of Paul's UT7 mix with QTR. As I 
said, I'm really just hedging. Probably the smartest move for me 
right now would be to purchase a set of UT7 cartridges and if I'm not 
happy then I can try your inkset in another set of cartridges before 
committing myself to a CFS system, which would be the eventual idea.

Cheers,

-= mike =-


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Harrington" 
<roy@h...> wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> 
> Yes, there are two configurations.
> 
> The latest and most talked about is UT7 or also called the Roark
> configuration -- this will work with the Epson driver.
> 
> The older one is under UT and also called Bowhaus or QuadToneRIP
> configuration -- this requires one of the rips.
> 
> What you are asking about doing -- trying UT7 with Epson first
> and then possibly moving to QTR is certainly possible.  The catch
> is the "just make a profile".  To do that you have to look at the 
individual
> inks for both color and density and come up with a plan of how they
> might fit together to make a neutral tone throughout.  The plan is
> a lot easier if you have all similar color grays and separate toners
> to give the color.  With the different densities having different 
colors
> its just a lot more difficult.
> 
> That said, most likely I'll end up making some UT7 profiles some
> time.
> 
> Roy
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "mike_nunan" 
> <mike_nunan@h...> wrote:
> > Hi Roy,
> > 
> > Thanks for that. Just so I know I've got the right end of the 
stick 
> > here, when you talk about "the other inkset" you mean the Bowhaus 
> > Config UT7 set, right? It's confusing looking at the MIS website, 
> > because they talk about both inksets on an equal footing, it's 
not 
> > clear that either one of them is a recent development. Looking at 
the 
> > traffic here, it seems as if UT7 (in any form) is a new thing.
> > 
<snip>

> As you can see, it clearly groups the Bowhaus config under UT7, 
> whereas judging by your message below and many of the discussions in 
> this group, it seems that most people regard UT7 as being Paul's 
> inkset only. Maybe it's worth asking MIS to amend the page?

It seems they've renamed their inksets so that both configurations for
the 2200 are now called UT7. The Bowhaus configuration used to be called
just UT while the Roark configuration was announced as UT7, which is why
most people here think of that as being Paul's inkset only.

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no

Hi Daniel,

Thanks for the info, but this is getting worse not better =(

I thought UT was the predecessor to UT2, and therefore was a 6-ink 
set that's older than either the Bowhaus inkset for the 2200 or 
Paul's UT7 inkset. MIS still list it as an option for the 1280:

http://www.inksupply.com/index.cfm?source=html/ut1280.html

Ah well, it's not really an issue to me right now anyway, although it 
would seem sensible to get things straight once and for all -- this 
area is pretty confusing for newbies as it is, without throwing extra 
uncertainty into the mix.

-= mike =-

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Staver" 
<daniel@p...> wrote:
> > As you can see, it clearly groups the Bowhaus config under UT7, 
> > whereas judging by your message below and many of the discussions 
in 
> > this group, it seems that most people regard UT7 as being Paul's 
> > inkset only. Maybe it's worth asking MIS to amend the page?
> 
> It seems they've renamed their inksets so that both configurations 
for
> the 2200 are now called UT7. The Bowhaus configuration used to be 
called
> just UT while the Roark configuration was announced as UT7, which 
is why

> most people here think of that as being Paul's inkset only.
> 
> --
> Daniel Staver
> http://daniel.staver.no

> I thought UT was the predecessor to UT2, and therefore was a 6-ink 
> set that's older than either the Bowhaus inkset for the 2200 or 
> Paul's UT7 inkset. MIS still list it as an option for the 1280:

I know, it's just plain confusing... However, the only important thing
you need to know is that the Roark configuration of the UT7 inkset is
the latest and greatest, and should be the one to get once it's
available. It should give you the same advantages as the Bowhaus
configuration in a QTR setup, but will also work with the standard Epson
drivers and curves, or even without any curves at all.

I'm planning to ditch my UT1 setup and use UT7 when it's available as
well. I have some images that would look nice in sepia, and I will also
enjoy doing some glossy printing again.

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Staver" 
<daniel@p...> wrote:
> > I thought UT was the predecessor to UT2, and therefore was a 6-
ink 
> > set that's older than either the Bowhaus inkset for the 2200 or 
> > Paul's UT7 inkset. MIS still list it as an option for the 1280:
> 
> I know, it's just plain confusing... 

The UT inkset is the only variable tone inkset from MIS available for 
the Epson 1160. So please do not discount it yet.

Cheers,
Andre

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Andre" 
<am1000@v...> wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel 
Staver" 
> <daniel@p...> wrote:
> > > I thought UT was the predecessor to UT2, and therefore was a 6-
> ink 
> > > set that's older than either the Bowhaus inkset for the 2200 or 
> > > Paul's UT7 inkset. MIS still list it as an option for the 1280:
> > 
> > I know, it's just plain confusing... 
> 
> The UT inkset is the only variable tone inkset from MIS available 
for 
> the Epson 1160. So please do not discount it yet.
> 
> Cheers,
> Andre

I just went to the MIS web site and can now see how the many 
different inksets may be confusing. Why so many inksets ? And why are 
they keeping the old QuadTone familly inksets ?

Cheers,
Andre

I have alerted MIS about the confusion.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com
____________

-----Original Message-----
From: mike_nunan [mailto:mike_nunan@...] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 12:19 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: UT7 inkset differences for QTR vs. Paul's workflow

Hi Roy,

It looks like there is some genuine confusion going on here with the 
terminology. Have a look at this page on the MIS website, about 
halfway down where under the UT7 heading:

http://www.inksupply.com/index.cfm?source=html/bwpage.html

As you can see, it clearly groups the Bowhaus config under UT7, 
whereas judging by your message below and many of the discussions in 
this group, it seems that most people regard UT7 as being Paul's 
inkset only. Maybe it's worth asking MIS to amend the page?
...
(snip)