Digital BW, The Print

I recently purchased an Epson Stylus Photo 1280 printer and a set of UT2 inks.  Prior to 
this setup, I had been using an Epson Stylus Photo 870 with Lyson QuadBlack inks, and 
only very recently did I try the MIS Quadtone Variable Mix ink set with the 870.

The results from the Lyson inks were acceptable, but not quite "just exactly perfect." 
That's another story, as my question is really about the UT2 inks.

In the prints I've made with the UT2 inks, I've noticed, under a loupe and with the naked 
eye, obvious dot patterns in the highlights, similar to what one would expect when 
printing with black only.  The QVM and Lyson inks, on the other hand, do not show such a 
dot pattern in the highlights.

Is this normal for the UT2 inks?  I've printed stepwedges, and the dot pattern is quite 
visible in the 90% step and above.

In comparing the individual inks used in QVM and UT2, I believe I have an explanation:  it 
appears that UT2 does not have a light gray (toned or untoned) ink as QVM does.  No light 
gray would imply that the highlights in UT2 are made up of a darker gray, which would 
further imply that widely spaced dots would need to be used to make up for this.

Does this make sense?  I'm new to MIS inks and using Paul Roark's curves, so I'm willing to 
believe I am not doing something right; however.  I even printed with QuadToneRIP, but 
the results were the same.

And yes, I've checked that the print head is not clogged, and that I'm selecting "color" and 
not "black" in the Epson driver.  The 1280 is brand new, and has never even had a color 
cartridge in it-- I've been using the UT2 cartridges from the start.  Printing the MIS purge 
pattern shows that all inks are printing normally.

I would appreciate any comments or suggestions.  I've been lurking in this forum for a 
while, and the depth and breadth of knowledge here is fantastic.

Thanks,
Steve

Steve,

>... 1280 printer and a set of UT2 inks.  ...

>In the prints I've made with the UT2 inks, I've noticed, under a loupe 
>and with the naked eye, obvious dot patterns in the highlights, 

Under a loupe one might be able to see some dots on some papers under some
lighting conditions.  Looking at a test strip of PremierArt 205 under a
loupe, I see the paper texture and not dots, at least in reflected, overhead
light that is at a fair angle.  With another magnifier and more straight-on
light I might be able to distinguish the dots from the paper texture, but
it's not clear to me.  With back lighting I see some roughness, but it could
be the paper and not dots.  

Other papers might show more dots.

>...it appears that UT2 does not have a light gray (toned or untoned) ink 

The system uses a black ink, 2 dark gray inks (cool and warm carbon), and 3
lighter gray inks (cool, warm [carbon], and sepia).  Then there are 3
different dot sizes for each of these due to the variable-dot technology.  

The system is much like the OEM inks in the density distribution.  However,
the UT2 inks are very low gamut, thus giving them far less color contrast
than the color inks.

I'm sure you've checked the resolution and other settings.  

What paper, black ink, and media type setting are you using?

There are, of course, trade-offs between number and lightness of the inks,
and other factors.  The lighter inks in my previous efforts, for example,
tended to flood glossy papers.  The light inks often cause the worst
bronzing.  BO printing with the new neutral photo black mix, for example,
has less objectionable bronzing than the UT2 inkset.  In the R800 there are
no more light inks.

But, back to your issue, I can't tell what you're looking at.  Send me your
address off list and I'll mail one of the PA 205 UT2 Medium Warm test strips
I printed today.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Paul,

I'm printing on EEM with the Matte Paper setting (also tried Photo
Paper), both 1440 and 2880 dpi, with the neutral curve.  Also, I'm
using the Eboni black ink-- haven't tried photo black yet.

I'm going to make some scans tonight and post them on the web so you
can see exactly what I'm talking about-- I think a picture in this
case will really be worth a thousand words.

Thank you for your offer for the test strip.  I'll send you my address.

-Steve


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> Steve,
> 
> >... 1280 printer and a set of UT2 inks.  ...
> 
> >In the prints I've made with the UT2 inks, I've noticed, under a loupe 
> >and with the naked eye, obvious dot patterns in the highlights, 
> 
> Under a loupe one might be able to see some dots on some papers
under some
> lighting conditions.  Looking at a test strip of PremierArt 205 under a
> loupe, I see the paper texture and not dots, at least in reflected,
overhead
> light that is at a fair angle.  With another magnifier and more
straight-on
> light I might be able to distinguish the dots from the paper
texture, but
> it's not clear to me.  With back lighting I see some roughness, but
it could
> be the paper and not dots.  
> 
> Other papers might show more dots.
> 
> >...it appears that UT2 does not have a light gray (toned or
untoned) ink 
> 
> The system uses a black ink, 2 dark gray inks (cool and warm
carbon), and 3
> lighter gray inks (cool, warm [carbon], and sepia).  Then there are 3
> different dot sizes for each of these due to the variable-dot
technology.  
> 
> The system is much like the OEM inks in the density distribution. 
However,
> the UT2 inks are very low gamut, thus giving them far less color
contrast
> than the color inks.
> 
> I'm sure you've checked the resolution and other settings.  
> 
> What paper, black ink, and media type setting are you using?
> 
> There are, of course, trade-offs between number and lightness of the
inks,
> and other factors.  The lighter inks in my previous efforts, for
example,
> tended to flood glossy papers.  The light inks often cause the worst
> bronzing.  BO printing with the new neutral photo black mix, for
example,
> has less objectionable bronzing than the UT2 inkset.  In the R800
there are
> no more light inks.
> 
> But, back to your issue, I can't tell what you're looking at.  Send
me your
> address off list and I'll mail one of the PA 205 UT2 Medium Warm
test strips

> I printed today.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com

For anyone who is interested, I've posted some sample images that illustrate what I have 
tried to describe:

http://www.savagesteve.net/ut2

The stepwedge images show the dot patterns the best.

Again, I'm interested to know if this is just me (hardware problem, curve/driver problem, 
brain matter problem) or if this is normal.

-Steve


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen P. Veillette" 
<stephen@v...> wrote:

> 
> Paul,
> 
> I'm printing on EEM with the Matte Paper setting (also tried Photo
> Paper), both 1440 and 2880 dpi, with the neutral curve.  Also, I'm
> using the Eboni black ink-- haven't tried photo black yet.
> 
> I'm going to make some scans tonight and post them on the web so you
> can see exactly what I'm talking about-- I think a picture in this
> case will really be worth a thousand words.
> 
> Thank you for your offer for the test strip.  I'll send you my address.
> 
> -Steve
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
> <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > Steve,
> > 
> > >... 1280 printer and a set of UT2 inks.  ...
> > 
> > >In the prints I've made with the UT2 inks, I've noticed, under a loupe 
> > >and with the naked eye, obvious dot patterns in the highlights, 
> > 
> > Under a loupe one might be able to see some dots on some papers
> under some
> > lighting conditions.  Looking at a test strip of PremierArt 205 under a
> > loupe, I see the paper texture and not dots, at least in reflected,
> overhead
> > light that is at a fair angle.  With another magnifier and more
> straight-on
> > light I might be able to distinguish the dots from the paper
> texture, but
> > it's not clear to me.  With back lighting I see some roughness, but
> it could
> > be the paper and not dots.  
> > 
> > Other papers might show more dots.
> > 
> > >...it appears that UT2 does not have a light gray (toned or
> untoned) ink 
> > 
> > The system uses a black ink, 2 dark gray inks (cool and warm
> carbon), and 3
> > lighter gray inks (cool, warm [carbon], and sepia).  Then there are 3
> > different dot sizes for each of these due to the variable-dot
> technology.  
> > 
> > The system is much like the OEM inks in the density distribution. 
> However,
> > the UT2 inks are very low gamut, thus giving them far less color
> contrast
> > than the color inks.
> > 
> > I'm sure you've checked the resolution and other settings.  
> > 
> > What paper, black ink, and media type setting are you using?
> > 
> > There are, of course, trade-offs between number and lightness of the
> inks,
> > and other factors.  The lighter inks in my previous efforts, for
> example,
> > tended to flood glossy papers.  The light inks often cause the worst
> > bronzing.  BO printing with the new neutral photo black mix, for
> example,
> > has less objectionable bronzing than the UT2 inkset.  In the R800
> there are
> > no more light inks.
> > 
> > But, back to your issue, I can't tell what you're looking at.  Send
> me your
> > address off list and I'll mail one of the PA 205 UT2 Medium Warm
> test strips
> > I printed today.
> > 
> > Paul
> > www.PaulRoark.com

Steve,

I'd say that what you are seeing is in the ballpark of the differences.

I did a page of dots too:
http://harrington.com/dotscans/dotsdots.html

My 1270 UT2 vs 1160 VM is very similar.   The bottom line is that the VM
ink or the new UT-VM has a much lighter light-gray.   I think most people
would say to the naked eye both are "good enough" but if you get the loupe
out you will see the difference.

Roy

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen P. Veillette" 
<stephen@v...> wrote:
> 
> For anyone who is interested, I've posted some sample images that illustrate what I 
have 
> tried to describe:
> 
> http://www.savagesteve.net/ut2
> 
> The stepwedge images show the dot patterns the best.
> 
> Again, I'm interested to know if this is just me (hardware problem, curve/driver 
problem, 

> brain matter problem) or if this is normal.
> 
> -Steve
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen P. Veillette" 
> <stephen@v...> wrote:
> > 
> > Paul,
> > 
> > I'm printing on EEM with the Matte Paper setting (also tried Photo
> > Paper), both 1440 and 2880 dpi, with the neutral curve.  Also, I'm
> > using the Eboni black ink-- haven't tried photo black yet.
> > 
> > I'm going to make some scans tonight and post them on the web so you
> > can see exactly what I'm talking about-- I think a picture in this
> > case will really be worth a thousand words.
> > 
> > Thank you for your offer for the test strip.  I'll send you my address.
> > 
> > -Steve
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
> > <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> > > Steve,
> > > 
> > > >... 1280 printer and a set of UT2 inks.  ...
> > > 
> > > >In the prints I've made with the UT2 inks, I've noticed, under a loupe 
> > > >and with the naked eye, obvious dot patterns in the highlights, 
> > > 
> > > Under a loupe one might be able to see some dots on some papers
> > under some
> > > lighting conditions.  Looking at a test strip of PremierArt 205 under a
> > > loupe, I see the paper texture and not dots, at least in reflected,
> > overhead
> > > light that is at a fair angle.  With another magnifier and more
> > straight-on
> > > light I might be able to distinguish the dots from the paper
> > texture, but
> > > it's not clear to me.  With back lighting I see some roughness, but
> > it could
> > > be the paper and not dots.  
> > > 
> > > Other papers might show more dots.
> > > 
> > > >...it appears that UT2 does not have a light gray (toned or
> > untoned) ink 
> > > 
> > > The system uses a black ink, 2 dark gray inks (cool and warm
> > carbon), and 3
> > > lighter gray inks (cool, warm [carbon], and sepia).  Then there are 3
> > > different dot sizes for each of these due to the variable-dot
> > technology.  
> > > 
> > > The system is much like the OEM inks in the density distribution. 
> > However,
> > > the UT2 inks are very low gamut, thus giving them far less color
> > contrast
> > > than the color inks.
> > > 
> > > I'm sure you've checked the resolution and other settings.  
> > > 
> > > What paper, black ink, and media type setting are you using?
> > > 
> > > There are, of course, trade-offs between number and lightness of the
> > inks,
> > > and other factors.  The lighter inks in my previous efforts, for
> > example,
> > > tended to flood glossy papers.  The light inks often cause the worst
> > > bronzing.  BO printing with the new neutral photo black mix, for
> > example,
> > > has less objectionable bronzing than the UT2 inkset.  In the R800
> > there are
> > > no more light inks.
> > > 
> > > But, back to your issue, I can't tell what you're looking at.  Send
> > me your
> > > address off list and I'll mail one of the PA 205 UT2 Medium Warm
> > test strips
> > > I printed today.
> > > 
> > > Paul
> > > www.PaulRoark.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Harrington"
<roy@h...> 
wrote:
> 
> Steve,
> 
> I'd say that what you are seeing is in the ballpark of the
differences.
> 
> I did a page of dots too:
> http://harrington.com/dotscans/dotsdots.html
> 
> My 1270 UT2 vs 1160 VM is very similar.   The bottom line is that
the VM
> ink or the new UT-VM has a much lighter light-gray.   I think most
people
> would say to the naked eye both are "good enough" but if you get
the loupe
> out you will see the difference.
> 
> Roy

What are the UT-VM inks? Are these MIS? I see VW inks under their
QuadTone section, but 
not under their UT section.

>What are the UT-VM inks? Are these MIS?

The original UT inkset was an upgrade of the old MIS VM inkset.  It used the
same densities as the old one and worked reasonably well with the older
curves for most printers.

The old MIS VM inkset actually started life as my "Variable-Piezo" inkset
for my 1160.  MIS made a hextone version of it by simply moving the toner to
the M spot from the Y position, so that it could benefit from the light ink.
Then the toner and C inks were diluted for the light positions.

This inkset, on a 1280, produced the smoothest highlights I'd ever measured
with my scanner at 1600 dpi (using the histogram standard deviation tool to
get an objective measure).

The UT inkset is still sold by MIS.

I would stay away from the old MIS VM inkset.  Those old pigs warmed up and
faded considerably more than the UT family of inks.  I wish they were off
the market. 

The UT2 inkset came out of a project that had several goals.  One was to get
better glossy printing.  As you can see from another thread here, the glossy
materials are maturing into what some of use think is the closest thing to
the air-dried silver prints we used to make.  In fact, I think they are now
visually better than the old silver prints.  However, the UT inkset did a
poor job on glossy papers.  One of the reasons was due to the inks being too
light.  They flood the surface and cause much more roughness than do denser
inks.

So, if ultimate smoothness under a loupe with matte paper is the goal, then
the UT (aka UT-1) inkset might be what you'd want.  Those light inks,
however, will exclude you from top notch glossy printing, which may be a
huge part of the future of this medium.

Note also that the UT-1 inkset curves are more difficult to tweak, it cannot
do sepia printing, and it cannot use the Glop to control the bronzing on
glossy (Premium Semimatte included) papers.

So, it's a matter of compromising the various characteristics.  At any
normal viewing distance I doubt many would be able to tell the difference
between the inksets in terms of smoothness.

Hope this helps.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 


________________________________

-----Original Message-----
From: lambonick [mailto:BMWNick@...] 
Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2005 12:28 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] UT2 inks and dots in highlights



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Harrington"
<roy@h...> 
wrote:
> 
> Steve,
> 
> I'd say that what you are seeing is in the ballpark of the
differences.
> 
> I did a page of dots too:
> http://harrington.com/dotscans/dotsdots.html
> 
> My 1270 UT2 vs 1160 VM is very similar.   The bottom line is that
the VM
> ink or the new UT-VM has a much lighter light-gray.   I think most
people
> would say to the naked eye both are "good enough" but if you get
the loupe

> out you will see the difference.
> 
> Roy

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@v...> 
wrote:
> >What are the UT-VM inks? Are these MIS?
> 
> The original UT inkset was an upgrade of the old MIS VM inkset.  It used the
> same densities as the old one and worked reasonably well with the older
> curves for most printers.
> 
> The old MIS VM inkset actually started life as my "Variable-Piezo" inkset
> for my 1160.  MIS made a hextone version of it by simply moving the toner to
> the M spot from the Y position, so that it could benefit from the light ink.
> Then the toner and C inks were diluted for the light positions.
> 
> This inkset, on a 1280, produced the smoothest highlights I'd ever measured
> with my scanner at 1600 dpi (using the histogram standard deviation tool to
> get an objective measure).
> 
> The UT inkset is still sold by MIS.
> 
> I would stay away from the old MIS VM inkset.  Those old pigs warmed up and
> faded considerably more than the UT family of inks.  I wish they were off
> the market. 
> 
> The UT2 inkset came out of a project that had several goals.  One was to get
> better glossy printing.  As you can see from another thread here, the glossy
> materials are maturing into what some of use think is the closest thing to
> the air-dried silver prints we used to make.  In fact, I think they are now
> visually better than the old silver prints.  However, the UT inkset did a
> poor job on glossy papers.  One of the reasons was due to the inks being too
> light.  They flood the surface and cause much more roughness than do denser
> inks.
> 
> So, if ultimate smoothness under a loupe with matte paper is the goal, then
> the UT (aka UT-1) inkset might be what you'd want.  Those light inks,
> however, will exclude you from top notch glossy printing, which may be a
> huge part of the future of this medium.
> 
> Note also that the UT-1 inkset curves are more difficult to tweak, it cannot
> do sepia printing, and it cannot use the Glop to control the bronzing on
> glossy (Premium Semimatte included) papers.
> 
> So, it's a matter of compromising the various characteristics.  At any
> normal viewing distance I doubt many would be able to tell the difference
> between the inksets in terms of smoothness.
> 
> Hope this helps.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com 
> 

Thanks Paul,

I'm not sure this actually answers my question, unless I am too dense to read between the 
lines! I was initially confused because Roy's reference was to a UT-VM inkset, but from 
both your answer and the MIS website, it seems there is no UT-VM inkset, that the 2 terms 
are mutually exclusive. Unless by UT-VM he means the UT inks, which I understand from 
your message grew out of the VM inkset.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "lambonick" <BMWNick@i...> 
wrote:
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> 
> wrote:
> > >What are the UT-VM inks? Are these MIS?
> > 
> > The original UT inkset was an upgrade of the old MIS VM inkset.  It used the
> > same densities as the old one and worked reasonably well with the older
> > curves for most printers.
> > 
> > The old MIS VM inkset actually started life as my "Variable-Piezo" inkset
> > for my 1160.  MIS made a hextone version of it by simply moving the toner to
> > the M spot from the Y position, so that it could benefit from the light ink.
> > Then the toner and C inks were diluted for the light positions.
> > 
> > This inkset, on a 1280, produced the smoothest highlights I'd ever measured
> > with my scanner at 1600 dpi (using the histogram standard deviation tool to
> > get an objective measure).
> > 
> > The UT inkset is still sold by MIS.
> > 
> > I would stay away from the old MIS VM inkset.  Those old pigs warmed up and
> > faded considerably more than the UT family of inks.  I wish they were off
> > the market. 
> > 
> > The UT2 inkset came out of a project that had several goals.  One was to get
> > better glossy printing.  As you can see from another thread here, the glossy
> > materials are maturing into what some of use think is the closest thing to
> > the air-dried silver prints we used to make.  In fact, I think they are now
> > visually better than the old silver prints.  However, the UT inkset did a
> > poor job on glossy papers.  One of the reasons was due to the inks being too
> > light.  They flood the surface and cause much more roughness than do denser
> > inks.
> > 
> > So, if ultimate smoothness under a loupe with matte paper is the goal, then
> > the UT (aka UT-1) inkset might be what you'd want.  Those light inks,
> > however, will exclude you from top notch glossy printing, which may be a
> > huge part of the future of this medium.
> > 
> > Note also that the UT-1 inkset curves are more difficult to tweak, it cannot
> > do sepia printing, and it cannot use the Glop to control the bronzing on
> > glossy (Premium Semimatte included) papers.
> > 
> > So, it's a matter of compromising the various characteristics.  At any
> > normal viewing distance I doubt many would be able to tell the difference
> > between the inksets in terms of smoothness.
> > 
> > Hope this helps.
> > 
> > Paul
> > www.PaulRoark.com 
> > 
> 
> Thanks Paul,
> 
> I'm not sure this actually answers my question, unless I am too dense to read 
between the 
> lines! I was initially confused because Roy's reference was to a UT-VM inkset, but 
from 
> both your answer and the MIS website, it seems there is no UT-VM inkset, that the 
2 terms 
> are mutually exclusive. Unless by UT-VM he means the UT inks, which I understand 
from 
> your message grew out of the VM inkset.


Sorry about the terminology -- yes I mean't straight, original UT inks that are 
colorwise the same as the old VM.

Roy

I also have seen some dots in highlights of a 1280 with UT2. Really not noticeable but for digital reluctant galleries and customers it could become an issue. I understand that Paul developed UT2 to be both very flexible and very printer friendly and to also do a decent job without curves on the Epson driver. He certainly succeeded in all respects

However, since I intend to move to QTR for a number of other reasons, I have an idea I'd like to try. What if I loaded the 1280 with Eboni black plus the (3) grays from the 1160 UltraChrome FS set (pure carbon), plus the cool toner from the 1160 UT set, plus the sepia toner from the 1280 UT2 set? The QTR profile for the 1160/FS would serve as a starting point for warm carbon prints and be modified for cool, neutral and sepia by adding the appropriate toner. 

I would assume this would provide a very smooth gray scale with the ability for cool and sepia toning. Any comment would be greatly appreciated.

Bob

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Stephen P. Veillette 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2005 12:52 AM
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] UT2 inks and dots in highlights



  For anyone who is interested, I've posted some sample images that illustrate what I have 
  tried to describe:

  http://www.savagesteve.net/ut2

  The stepwedge images show the dot patterns the best.

  Again, I'm interested to know if this is just me (hardware problem, curve/driver problem, 
  brain matter problem) or if this is normal.

  -Steve


  --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Stephen P. Veillette" 
  <stephen@v...> wrote:
  > 
  > Paul,
  > 
  > I'm printing on EEM with the Matte Paper setting (also tried Photo
  > Paper), both 1440 and 2880 dpi, with the neutral curve.  Also, I'm
  > using the Eboni black ink-- haven't tried photo black yet.
  > 
  > I'm going to make some scans tonight and post them on the web so you
  > can see exactly what I'm talking about-- I think a picture in this
  > case will really be worth a thousand words.
  > 
  > Thank you for your offer for the test strip.  I'll send you my address.
  > 
  > -Steve
  > 
  > 
  > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
  > <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
  > > Steve,
  > > 
  > > >... 1280 printer and a set of UT2 inks.  ...
  > > 
  > > >In the prints I've made with the UT2 inks, I've noticed, under a loupe 
  > > >and with the naked eye, obvious dot patterns in the highlights, 
  > > 
  > > Under a loupe one might be able to see some dots on some papers
  > under some
  > > lighting conditions.  Looking at a test strip of PremierArt 205 under a
  > > loupe, I see the paper texture and not dots, at least in reflected,
  > overhead
  > > light that is at a fair angle.  With another magnifier and more
  > straight-on
  > > light I might be able to distinguish the dots from the paper
  > texture, but
  > > it's not clear to me.  With back lighting I see some roughness, but
  > it could
  > > be the paper and not dots.  
  > > 
  > > Other papers might show more dots.
  > > 
  > > >...it appears that UT2 does not have a light gray (toned or
  > untoned) ink 
  > > 
  > > The system uses a black ink, 2 dark gray inks (cool and warm
  > carbon), and 3
  > > lighter gray inks (cool, warm [carbon], and sepia).  Then there are 3
  > > different dot sizes for each of these due to the variable-dot
  > technology.  
  > > 
  > > The system is much like the OEM inks in the density distribution. 
  > However,
  > > the UT2 inks are very low gamut, thus giving them far less color
  > contrast
  > > than the color inks.
  > > 
  > > I'm sure you've checked the resolution and other settings.  
  > > 
  > > What paper, black ink, and media type setting are you using?
  > > 
  > > There are, of course, trade-offs between number and lightness of the
  > inks,
  > > and other factors.  The lighter inks in my previous efforts, for
  > example,
  > > tended to flood glossy papers.  The light inks often cause the worst
  > > bronzing.  BO printing with the new neutral photo black mix, for
  > example,
  > > has less objectionable bronzing than the UT2 inkset.  In the R800
  > there are
  > > no more light inks.
  > > 
  > > But, back to your issue, I can't tell what you're looking at.  Send
  > me your
  > > address off list and I'll mail one of the PA 205 UT2 Medium Warm
  > test strips
  > > I printed today.
  > > 
  > > Paul
  > > www.PaulRoark.com





  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]

I also have seen some dots in highlights of a 1280 with UT2. Really
not noticeable but for digital reluctant galleries and customers it
could become an issue. I understand that Paul developed UT2 to be both
very flexible and very printer friendly and to also do a decent job
without curves on the Epson driver. He certainly succeeded in all respects

However, since I intend to move to QTR for a number of other reasons,
I have an idea I'd like to try. I would propose to load the 1280 with
Eboni black plus the (3) grays from the 1160 UltraChrome FS set (pure
carbon), plus the cool toner from the 1160 UT set, plus the sepia
toner from the 1280 UT2 set? The QTR profile for the 1160/FS (modified
for the 6 color printer) would serve as a starting point for warm
carbon prints and be modified for cool, neutral and sepia by adding
the appropriate toner. 

I would assume this would provide a very smooth gray scale with the
ability for cool and sepia toning. Any comment would be greatly
appreciated.

Bob