Digital BW, The Print

Hi,
I'm a big fan of BO printing because it works,and because I prefer to 
snap the shutter instead of sitting in front a computer making 
tweaks.  As an engineer I get sick of tweaking! 

In the same vein, I've seen custom color printer profiles using 
Gretag equipment which provides quite neutral B&W prints, and it's 
nearly as easy as hitting the Print button.  My local shop will 
profile 6 papers for $250.  So you get results at fair price with no 
hassle.  I'm wondering what y'all think of this approach as compared 
to other seemingly more complicated options, an albeit,I guess better 
results, but at what cost in time...? 

These are 2 are easy methods that cover 90% of my digital B&W 
printing needs, and the other 10% I take to my local darkroom -- 
still the best yet in my opinion...   

Thanks in advance,
Steve B

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "brinkker2000" 
<stevebrink@m...> wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm a big fan of BO printing because it works,and because I prefer 
to 
> snap the shutter instead of sitting in front a computer making 
> tweaks.  As an engineer I get sick of tweaking! 

I'm also an engineer (in image processing, no less!) and I agree with 
you that tweaking is for anal retentives.

That said, I did a disturbing experiment with BO printing.  I 
personally find the dots and mid-tone coarseness annoying but many 
people don't.  So I preinted some BO images and also printed some 
REALLY TINY text - just at the limit of what someone with good close-
up vision can see.  I asked people to evaluate the images and also to 
read the text.   I did this experiment on two groups of subjects:  co-
workers (scientists and engineers) and a group of musician friends of 
my wife (a pianist).

There was no difference between the groups - both had some people who 
liked the BO printing and some who founds the dots/coarseness 
annoying.   But here's the thing:  The people who DIDn"T like it were 
the ones who could read the text - the people who DID like it could 
NOT read the text.   The experiment confirmed what I have long 
suspected -  that people who like BO printing don't have good closeup 
vision.  A new pair of glasses could ruin some previously nice 
prints. 

I still think BO printing is good for REALLY BIG prints that are 
viewed from a distance.   But I don't think it's a general solution 
for prints of all sizes.


> In the same vein, I've seen custom color printer profiles using 
> Gretag equipment which provides quite neutral B&W prints, and it's 
> nearly as easy as hitting the Print button.  My local shop will 
> profile 6 papers for $250.  So you get results at fair price with 
no 
> hassle.  I'm wondering what y'all think of this approach as 
compared 
> to other seemingly more complicated options, an albeit,I guess 
better 
> results, but at what cost in time...? 

Profiles can't fix metamerism because they can't change the driver's 
selection of inks.

> From: brinkker2000 [mailto:stevebrink@...]
>
> I'm a big fan of BO printing because it works,and because I prefer to
> snap the shutter instead of sitting in front a computer making
> tweaks.  As an engineer I get sick of tweaking!
>
> In the same vein, I've seen custom color printer profiles using
> Gretag equipment which provides quite neutral B&W prints, and it's
> nearly as easy as hitting the Print button.  My local shop will
> profile 6 papers for $250.  So you get results at fair price with no
> hassle.  I'm wondering what y'all think of this approach as compared
> to other seemingly more complicated options, an albeit,I guess better
> results, but at what cost in time...?

The problem with printing B&W using color inks, with a custom profile and
standard printer driver, is that many color inks (e.g., Epson 2200) are
metameric. Also, even with the best equipment, some printers (again, the
2200) don't profile perfectly anyway, so the profile needs tweaking. If the
$250 includes that tweaking, then it may be worth it, but if it's just an
automatically generated profile, then it may not be.

--

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@...

Peter, that's an interesting test and good observations. I may try 
something similar...   You might have something -- I started wearing 
reading glasses 6 months ago because I am reading to much tiny text!

However, custom profiles may not fully address the metamerism issue, 
they certainly help! 

Steve B 


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Nelson" 
<pnweb@s...> wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "brinkker2000" 
> <stevebrink@m...> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I'm a big fan of BO printing because it works,and because I 
prefer 
> to 
> > snap the shutter instead of sitting in front a computer making 
> > tweaks.  As an engineer I get sick of tweaking! 
> 
> I'm also an engineer (in image processing, no less!) and I agree 
with 
> you that tweaking is for anal retentives.
> 
> That said, I did a disturbing experiment with BO printing.  I 
> personally find the dots and mid-tone coarseness annoying but many 
> people don't.  So I preinted some BO images and also printed some 
> REALLY TINY text - just at the limit of what someone with good 
close-
> up vision can see.  I asked people to evaluate the images and also 
to 
> read the text.   I did this experiment on two groups of subjects:  
co-
> workers (scientists and engineers) and a group of musician friends 
of 
> my wife (a pianist).
> 
> There was no difference between the groups - both had some people 
who 
> liked the BO printing and some who founds the dots/coarseness 
> annoying.   But here's the thing:  The people who DIDn"T like it 
were 
> the ones who could read the text - the people who DID like it could 
> NOT read the text.   The experiment confirmed what I have long 
> suspected -  that people who like BO printing don't have good 
closeup 
> vision.  A new pair of glasses could ruin some previously nice 
> prints. 
> 
> I still think BO printing is good for REALLY BIG prints that are 
> viewed from a distance.   But I don't think it's a general solution 
> for prints of all sizes.
> 
> 
> > In the same vein, I've seen custom color printer profiles using 
> > Gretag equipment which provides quite neutral B&W prints, and 
it's 
> > nearly as easy as hitting the Print button.  My local shop will 
> > profile 6 papers for $250.  So you get results at fair price with 
> no 
> > hassle.  I'm wondering what y'all think of this approach as 
> compared 
> > to other seemingly more complicated options, an albeit,I guess 
> better 
> > results, but at what cost in time...? 
> 
> Profiles can't fix metamerism because they can't change the 
driver's 
> selection of inks.

Hello Steve,

>In the same vein, I've seen custom color printer profiles using 
>Gretag equipment which provides quite neutral B&W prints, 

From reading reports in this forum I get the impression that any
system that mixes color inks in with the black will have some degree
of metamerism, with the least going to systems that omit the yellow
ink.  Some people aren't bothered by the slight shifts or color casts.
You'd have to decide that for yourself.

Another concern is whether there will be some shift over time due to
the color inks changing sooner than the black.  I am not convinced
that it won't be a problem, and is one reason I prefer to stick with
carbon ink only for now.  Some people say "Well, it won't happen in my
lifetime".  Maybe so, but then again I have seen a Septone print,
supposedly of the newer generation of carbon inks with just a tiny bit
of color pigment used for toning, show signs of fading on my
windowsill test after 125 days, while right beside it is an Eboni BO
print with no signs of fading at now over 180 days.

It's also a matter of principle with me that I don't want to sell
someone a print that might self-destruct after I die and am not able
to replace it.  I don't have delusions of grandeur that my photos will
become valuable art works, but I do portraits and it is quite possible
that a portrait will be handed down for generations in a family.  I
want to be confident and truthful in saying that my photos will last
at least 100 years with proper care.  Right now using carbon ink
without any color pigments is the only thing that gives me that
confidence.  

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" 
<cj@c...> wrote:
> Hello Steve,
> 
> >In the same vein, I've seen custom color printer profiles using 
> >Gretag equipment which provides quite neutral B&W prints, 
> 
> From reading reports in this forum I get the impression that any
> system that mixes color inks in with the black will have some 
degree
> of metamerism, 

. . . 

I agree with everything Clayton said.

I wish people who say that good profiles correct or reduce 
metamerism would suggest how.   Three possibilities come to mind:

1.  They don't know what metamerism is and are confusing it with a 
color cast.

2.  They just don't SEE metamerism.   Some people just aren't 
sensitive to subtle shifts in color.    My wife doesn't see 
metamerisms unless they are really blatant like the ones they have 
in some science museums (Boston Museum of Science has/had a good 
metamerism exhibit).    On the other hand, my wife is a musician and 
she can hear defects in other musicians' playing that are blissfully 
UNapparent to me, a non-musician.

3.  They haven't tested it.

4.  Profilers really DO fix it through some mechanism I can't 
imagine.  If so, would someone please suggest such a mechanism?

Yes, I agree with you and Clayton's comments. I should have 
originally specified color casts as opposed to metamerism issues.   
The custom profiles do remove color casts.  Concerning metamerism the 
4000 prints in daylight and a light box (5000 K I believe) showed 
little difernce with my eyeballs so it's subjective.  And, thats  
what I like about the option of using both methods, you can alway's 
fully eliminate metamerism with BO. 
Steve B  

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Nelson" 
<pnweb@s...> wrote:
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton 
Jones" 
> <cj@c...> wrote:
> > Hello Steve,
> > 
> > >In the same vein, I've seen custom color printer profiles using 
> > >Gretag equipment which provides quite neutral B&W prints, 
> > 
> > From reading reports in this forum I get the impression that any
> > system that mixes color inks in with the black will have some 
> degree
> > of metamerism, 
> 
> . . . 
> 
> I agree with everything Clayton said.
> 
> I wish people who say that good profiles correct or reduce 
> metamerism would suggest how.   Three possibilities come to mind:
> 
> 1.  They don't know what metamerism is and are confusing it with a 
> color cast.
> 
> 2.  They just don't SEE metamerism.   Some people just aren't 
> sensitive to subtle shifts in color.    My wife doesn't see 
> metamerisms unless they are really blatant like the ones they have 
> in some science museums (Boston Museum of Science has/had a good 
> metamerism exhibit).    On the other hand, my wife is a musician 
and 
> she can hear defects in other musicians' playing that are 
blissfully 

> UNapparent to me, a non-musician.
> 
> 3.  They haven't tested it.
> 
> 4.  Profilers really DO fix it through some mechanism I can't 
> imagine.  If so, would someone please suggest such a mechanism?