Yahoo Groups archive

Digital BW, The Print

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC

Thread

Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-02-23 by Tim Timmermans

Hi guys,

Happy New Year! I've been away and very busy. Just won a Grammy too!
But now back to my other passion. Photography.

Here's the deal. I bought a 1280 with a replacement warranty awhile
back. When I return it I'll get a credit for $399. 

I already have one 2200. Should I get another 2200 or should I get the
R1800?

What is the fundamental difference between the two besides the price
and the speed of the R1800 and its 8 inkset rather than the 7 inks for
the 2200? I there a CFS for the R1800 yet?

Is there still a bronzing issue with the R1800? Should I trade the
2200 in for a R1800 and then have two R1800's, one for BW and one for
color?

Thanks,

Tim

RE: [Digital BW] Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-02-23 by Seth

1.5 pico-liter nozzles and "gloss pigment."

Seth 

==-----Original Message-----
==From: Tim Timmermans [mailto:zenphoto7@...] 
==

==
==I already have one 2200. Should I get another 2200 or should 
==I get the R1800?
==
==What is the fundamental difference between the two besides 
==the price and the speed of the R1800 and its 8 inkset rather 
==than the 7 inks for the 2200? I there a CFS for the R1800 yet?
==
==Is there still a bronzing issue with the R1800? Should I 
==trade the 2200 in for a R1800 and then have two R1800's, one 
==for BW and one for color?
==

Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-02-23 by Louis Dina

Tim,

I cannot comment about the R1800 or the R800 for B&W, but I have 
built custom COLOR profiles for two different R800's using my Eye One 
and Profile Maker 5.  

The R800 (same technology as the R1800) has a larger gamut for glossy 
and semi gloss papers than the 2200 (which I own).  The red, blue and 
gloss cartridges extend the color range and Dmax.  So, for color 
printing on glossy type papers, it seems to be a winner.  

Strangely, on matte papers the 2200 has a larger gamut, and it seems 
to me, higher quality and smoother gradations.  I have seen this on 
two different R800's and I have a color management expert friend who 
has confirmed these findings in his profiles.  You can see it both in 
the print and when comparing profiles using Chromix ColorThink.

I have also been looking for a new color printer, with the intent of 
converting my 2200 to quad inks.  At this time, I am biding my time.  
Not sure if I will even go that route, since I am getting such superb 
B&W results using IJC/OPM for Windows and the Epson UC inkset.  

Hope the above adds a little more to your thinking process.

Lou

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tim Timmermans" 
<zenphoto7@a...> wrote:
> 
> Hi guys,
> 
> Happy New Year! I've been away and very busy. Just won a Grammy too!
> But now back to my other passion. Photography.
> 
> Here's the deal. I bought a 1280 with a replacement warranty awhile
> back. When I return it I'll get a credit for $399. 
> 
> I already have one 2200. Should I get another 2200 or should I get 
the
> R1800?
> 
> What is the fundamental difference between the two besides the price
> and the speed of the R1800 and its 8 inkset rather than the 7 inks 
for
> the 2200? I there a CFS for the R1800 yet?
> 
> Is there still a bronzing issue with the R1800? Should I trade the
> 2200 in for a R1800 and then have two R1800's, one for BW and one 
for
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> color?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tim

Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-02-23 by Clayton Jones

Hello Tim,

>I already have one 2200. Should I get another 2200 or should I get 
>the R1800?

>What is the fundamental difference between the two besides the price
>and the speed of the R1800 and its 8 inkset rather than the 7 inks
>for the 2200? I there a CFS for the R1800 yet?

Here is a good discussion of it

 http://www.inkjetart.com/news/archive/IJN_02-21-05.html



Regards,
Clayton


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

Re: [Digital BW] Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-02-23 by Mark Carstens

Lou,

I've been contemplating a new color printer that would enable me to 
dedicate my 2200 to B&W/quad inks, and appreciate your insight about 
IJC/OPM. It'd be nice to avoid the cost of the second printer and buy 
the Bowhaus RIP instead. My question to you is whether you'd feel the 
same about IJC/OPM even if you didn't write your own profiles? In 
short, does using Profile Maker 5 just give you a broader paper 
selection above and beyond what Bowhaus already provides or are you 
actually improving on established profiles?

Thanks for your input.

Mark
Show quoted textHide quoted text
On Feb 22, 2005, at 5:37 PM, Louis Dina wrote:

>
>
> Tim,
>
> I cannot comment about the R1800 or the R800 for B&W, but I have
> built custom COLOR profiles for two different R800's using my Eye One
> and Profile Maker 5.
>
> The R800 (same technology as the R1800) has a larger gamut for glossy
> and semi gloss papers than the 2200 (which I own).  The red, blue and
> gloss cartridges extend the color range and Dmax.  So, for color
> printing on glossy type papers, it seems to be a winner.
>
> Strangely, on matte papers the 2200 has a larger gamut, and it seems
> to me, higher quality and smoother gradations.  I have seen this on
> two different R800's and I have a color management expert friend who
> has confirmed these findings in his profiles.  You can see it both in
> the print and when comparing profiles using Chromix ColorThink.
>
> I have also been looking for a new color printer, with the intent of
> converting my 2200 to quad inks.  At this time, I am biding my time.
> Not sure if I will even go that route, since I am getting such superb
> B&W results using IJC/OPM for Windows and the Epson UC inkset.
>
> Hope the above adds a little more to your thinking process.
>
> Lou
>

Re: [Digital BW] Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-02-23 by Louis Dina

Hi Mark,

For color, I use PM5 to build custom profiles for the Epson driver.  
They work great and I see absolutely no need for a RIP for color.  In 
fact, I do a lot of press work at my job and use my 2200 with custom 
ICC profiles and the Epson driver for proofing.  My proofs are 
actually better than when using a number of RIPs.

For B&W, I am using IJC/OPM with the Epson UC inkset.  I started with 
the profiles supplied by Bowhaus, but made some changes.  My spectro 
just made it easier.  I chose to remove yellow inks from all profiles 
(except sepia ones) to reduce metamerism.  Yellow inks are the 
biggest offender, and removing them has given me fantastic results.  
I always create a series of 5 profiles for each paper - Cool, 
Selenium, Neutral, Warm and Sepia.  OPM (the printing part of the 
program) allows you to blend two profiles with a 0-100% slider so you 
can obtain an infinite range of subtle tones.  I have posted 2200 
profiles (for the Windows Version) on this site in the Files 
section.  Papers include Ep Enh Matte, Ep Velvet Fine Art, Boab 
Entrada (BW and Natural), Somerset Photo Enhanced Radiant white, 
Kirkland Glossy, Ep Prem Glossy, and Lexjet Professional Semi Matte.  
They can be downloaded and used directly if you have a 2200 and the 
windows version.  Here is the link.

http://tinyurl.com/6fksu

These are linearized for my printer, but I have shared them with 
others and they have had great results without making any changes.  
Linearization is easy with a densitometer, spectrophotometer or a 
scanner, if required.  I'd just print a test target with 
linearization and inspect the target to be sure there are no color 
crossovers, and that there is good separation between all 26 steps of 
the grayscale wedge.  If so, you are ready to roll.

I tend to build my 'neutral' profiles to accomodate the natural bias 
of the paper color.  So, my neutral profiles on a warm base paper, 
like Moab Entrada Natural, has a very minor amount of warmth to the 
grays, mirroring the natural paper white.  I just like the results 
better and it keeps the 'neutrals' more consistant from black to 
white.  Seems to look better to my eye and you don't get any jumps as 
you approach paper white.  A cold paper, like EpPremGlossy, may be 
slightly cool to work with the paper.  These are my preferences and 
can be adjusted easily by tweaking the profiles or blending.

I don't use ProfileMaker when adjusting profiles (I only use this to 
build monitor and color printing profiles).  I do use my Eye One 
spectrophotometer and MeasureTool from Gretag to read the data.  
MeasureTool is a free download.  A spectro is not absolutely 
required, but it does provide some extra accuracy and flexibility.  
You can get outstanding results without one.  I hope this provides 
the information you wanted.

My prints have awesome Dmax and are very neutral (when I want 
neutral).  I see no metamerism at all now that I have removed the 
yellow and the tonal gradations are silky smooth.  I may never move 
to Quad inks.  If I get a new 24" printer in the future for color 
work, I will probably try quads in my 2200.  

Contact me if you want additional information.

Lou

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mark Carstens 
<mathdude5@c...> wrote:
> Lou,
> 
> I've been contemplating a new color printer that would enable me to 
> dedicate my 2200 to B&W/quad inks, and appreciate your insight 
about 
> IJC/OPM. It'd be nice to avoid the cost of the second printer and 
buy 
> the Bowhaus RIP instead. My question to you is whether you'd feel 
the 
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> same about IJC/OPM even if you didn't write your own profiles? In 
> short, does using Profile Maker 5 just give you a broader paper 
> selection above and beyond what Bowhaus already provides or are you 
> actually improving on established profiles?
> 
> Thanks for your input.
> 
> Mark

Re: [Digital BW] Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-02-23 by Steve Kale

Lou

With MIS empty cartridges you can get the best of both worlds with your
2200.  Swapping out the inks and flushing is really not a hassle with the
2200.  

Steve
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> From: Louis Dina <lbdina@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 01:37:24 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast
> 
> 
> 
> Tim,
> 
> I cannot comment about the R1800 or the R800 for B&W, but I have
> built custom COLOR profiles for two different R800's using my Eye One
> and Profile Maker 5.
> 
> The R800 (same technology as the R1800) has a larger gamut for glossy
> and semi gloss papers than the 2200 (which I own).  The red, blue and
> gloss cartridges extend the color range and Dmax.  So, for color
> printing on glossy type papers, it seems to be a winner.
> 
> Strangely, on matte papers the 2200 has a larger gamut, and it seems
> to me, higher quality and smoother gradations.  I have seen this on
> two different R800's and I have a color management expert friend who
> has confirmed these findings in his profiles.  You can see it both in
> the print and when comparing profiles using Chromix ColorThink.
> 
> I have also been looking for a new color printer, with the intent of
> converting my 2200 to quad inks.  At this time, I am biding my time.
> Not sure if I will even go that route, since I am getting such superb
> B&W results using IJC/OPM for Windows and the Epson UC inkset.
> 
> Hope the above adds a little more to your thinking process.
> 
> Lou
>

Re: [Digital BW] Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-02-23 by Ernst Dinkla

Louis Dina wrote:

>Tim,
>
>Strangely, on matte papers the 2200 has a larger gamut, and it seems 
>to me, higher quality and smoother gradations.  I have seen this on 
>two different R800's and I have a color management expert friend who 
>has confirmed these findings in his profiles.  You can see it both in 
>the print and when comparing profiles using Chromix ColorThink.
>  
>

In the past there has been a discussion on the Colorsync list how the 
CcMmYK inks create a wider gamut than CMYK printers. You can either 
describe it as better subtractive color mixing of the larger LC and LM 
dots compared to what small C and M dots deliver or less white paper in 
the highlights with a CcMmYK printer so more color. I prefer the first 
description. That's the difference between CMYK and CcMmYK gamut.

The bigger gamut of the R800 on gloss will probably be in other hue 
regions (full red, orange, blue, violet) than the bigger gamut of the 
2200 on matte papers (pastel colors mainly). The gamut shapes will be 
different and the total color (in delta E) number doesn't tell that. Dot 
formation, smaller droplets with more circumference hence different 
bleeding on the edges and into the coating per paper quality influences 
the gamut possible, that's less a problem with diluted colors like LC 
and LM that already did bleed in a sense than with full colors like red 
and blue. So the R800 probably loses its strength in the full colors and 
didn't get something in return. To put it in another perspective the 
better strong red, orange, blue, violet became equal to the MY, MYY, MC, 
MMC mixes of a normal CMYK printer on matte papers.  The 2200 strength 
in the pastels didn't suffer as much.

Comparing rotogravure color mixing with offset color mixing in a sense, 
the first excels on cheap matte papers.

Ernst

[Digital BW] Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-02-23 by Louis Dina

Thanks, Steve.

Could you point me to the specific cartridges and inks you are 
talking about?  I am assuming you are talking about UT7 ink?  I may 
give it a try.  I'm not fond of changing cartridges, and all the 
posts about clogging, purging and cleaning make me a bit nervous.  
That is why I was going to wait until I got a new printer.  The, I'd 
have a color printer that I could also use for B&W with OEM inks in 
case I have a bad experience with dedicated inks mucking up my 2200.

Right now, I am getting Dmax of 1.7 or greater on matte papers and up 
to 2.1 to 2.3 on glossy papers with the UC inkset.  And my prints are 
very neutral throughout the tonal range.  Not bad for a color inkset 
and no need to change cartridges.  Still, I'd be interested in trying 
dedicated B&W inks.  I just don't want to deal with potential 
clogging problems.

Regards, Lou

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
> Lou
> 
> With MIS empty cartridges you can get the best of both worlds with 
your
> 2200.  Swapping out the inks and flushing is really not a hassle 
with the
> 2200.  
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> > From: Louis Dina <lbdina@c...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 01:37:24 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Tim,
> > 
> > I cannot comment about the R1800 or the R800 for B&W, but I have
> > built custom COLOR profiles for two different R800's using my Eye 
One
> > and Profile Maker 5.
> > 
> > The R800 (same technology as the R1800) has a larger gamut for 
glossy
> > and semi gloss papers than the 2200 (which I own).  The red, blue 
and
> > gloss cartridges extend the color range and Dmax.  So, for color
> > printing on glossy type papers, it seems to be a winner.
> > 
> > Strangely, on matte papers the 2200 has a larger gamut, and it 
seems
> > to me, higher quality and smoother gradations.  I have seen this 
on
> > two different R800's and I have a color management expert friend 
who
> > has confirmed these findings in his profiles.  You can see it 
both in
> > the print and when comparing profiles using Chromix ColorThink.
> > 
> > I have also been looking for a new color printer, with the intent 
of
> > converting my 2200 to quad inks.  At this time, I am biding my 
time.
> > Not sure if I will even go that route, since I am getting such 
superb
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> > B&W results using IJC/OPM for Windows and the Epson UC inkset.
> > 
> > Hope the above adds a little more to your thinking process.
> > 
> > Lou
> >

Re: [Digital BW] Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-02-23 by Steve Kale

I think many of the clogging/foam issues have been resolved with the new
refillable cartridges with foam interiors (hopefully I have not just jinxed
myself!). Here are the cartridges for the 21/2200:

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

I have a set filled with their Epson UC equivalent inks (I buy the 4oz
bottles and refill my own) which I use for colour - I use Eboni for matt and
Paul's new PKN for RC paper.

I use the following setup for B&W:
 
# K PKN
# LK glop
# C PK 
# LC UT7 Warm Light Grey
# M Eboni
# LM UT7 Cool Light Grey
# Y UT7 Sepia toner

All MIS inks.  Carl Schofield has a similar setup albeit with some of the
inks in different slots.  By putting PKN in the K slot I can leave it there
when I switch to colour.  The UT7 inks are in their UT7 slots (except eboni
of course).  

I am getting the following dMax's on Ilford Galerie Smooth Pearl after a 50%
glop application:

Warm 2.43
Cool 2.32
Neutral 2.34
Sepia 2.42

These are measurements from prints that have dried for around 12 hours.  The
dMax's are slightly lower than what can be achieved with the Epson driver
but the difference is not visually significant.

The most difficult ink to flush is of course the glop/LK.  I have to do a
few cleaning cycles and print a couple of A4 sheets with my glop overcoat
curve to purge any and all LK from the glop.

Maybe I was imagining things but when I made the switch to the dual setup in
January I felt there was much greater detail in the dedicated B&W prints.

With the refillable cartridges I will never bother with a CFS again.

Hope this helps

Steve
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> From: Louis Dina <lbdina@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 13:38:44 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks, Steve.
> 
> Could you point me to the specific cartridges and inks you are
> talking about?  I am assuming you are talking about UT7 ink?  I may
> give it a try.  I'm not fond of changing cartridges, and all the
> posts about clogging, purging and cleaning make me a bit nervous.
> That is why I was going to wait until I got a new printer.  The, I'd
> have a color printer that I could also use for B&W with OEM inks in
> case I have a bad experience with dedicated inks mucking up my 2200.
> 
> Right now, I am getting Dmax of 1.7 or greater on matte papers and up
> to 2.1 to 2.3 on glossy papers with the UC inkset.  And my prints are
> very neutral throughout the tonal range.  Not bad for a color inkset
> and no need to change cartridges.  Still, I'd be interested in trying
> dedicated B&W inks.  I just don't want to deal with potential
> clogging problems.
> 
> Regards, Lou
>

[Digital BW] Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-02-23 by David Wroblewski

> I use the following setup for B&W:
>  
> # K PKN
> # LK glop
> # C PK 
> # LC UT7 Warm Light Grey
> # M Eboni
> # LM UT7 Cool Light Grey
> # Y UT7 Sepia toner
> 

Steve,

I'm missing something here. Why do you have PKN, Eboni, *and* PK?
Isn't it enough to have Eboni for matte and PKN for semigloss and
glossy? 

-David

Re: [Digital BW] Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-02-23 by Steve Kale

PKN is neutral and PK is warm.  So you have a very dark warm and a light
warm for warm prints. For neutral you have PKN and a blend of the two light
greys. For cool prints: PKN and the cool light grey.
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> From: David Wroblewski <dawroblewski@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 20:44:53 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast
> 
> 
> 
>> I use the following setup for B&W:
>>  
>> # K PKN
>> # LK glop
>> # C PK 
>> # LC UT7 Warm Light Grey
>> # M Eboni
>> # LM UT7 Cool Light Grey
>> # Y UT7 Sepia toner
>> 
> 
> Steve,
> 
> I'm missing something here. Why do you have PKN, Eboni, *and* PK?
> Isn't it enough to have Eboni for matte and PKN for semigloss and
> glossy? 
> 
> -David
> 
> 
>

[Digital BW] Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-02-23 by David Wroblewski

Great, thanks for the clarification. Is there any visible
difference between using K plus 2 grays rather than 3 grays? 

I assume not--just curious though. The story I'm making up
for myself here is that quads used to be necessary but the
smaller droplet size on current printers allows us to go 
to two grays without a visible difference in the print. Or
maybe it's better software?

In any case, that's a big deal, in my opinion.

-David

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
> PKN is neutral and PK is warm.  So you have a very dark warm and a light
> warm for warm prints. For neutral you have PKN and a blend of the
two light
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> greys. For cool prints: PKN and the cool light grey.
> 
> 
> > From: David Wroblewski <dawroblewski@y...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 20:44:53 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >> I use the following setup for B&W:
> >>  
> >> # K PKN
> >> # LK glop
> >> # C PK 
> >> # LC UT7 Warm Light Grey
> >> # M Eboni
> >> # LM UT7 Cool Light Grey
> >> # Y UT7 Sepia toner
> >> 
> > 
> > Steve,
> > 
> > I'm missing something here. Why do you have PKN, Eboni, *and* PK?
> > Isn't it enough to have Eboni for matte and PKN for semigloss and
> > glossy? 
> > 
> > -David
> > 
> > 
> >

Re: [Digital BW] Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-02-23 by Steve Kale

I think the general view is that 3 greys are not needed with the more modern
printers.  I would still like Mac QTR to be able to print at 2880 on the
21/2200 though...
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> From: David Wroblewski <dawroblewski@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 22:04:12 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast
> 
> 
> 
> Great, thanks for the clarification. Is there any visible
> difference between using K plus 2 grays rather than 3 grays?
> 
> I assume not--just curious though. The story I'm making up
> for myself here is that quads used to be necessary but the
> smaller droplet size on current printers allows us to go
> to two grays without a visible difference in the print. Or
> maybe it's better software?
> 
> In any case, that's a big deal, in my opinion.
> 
> -David
>

Re: [Digital BW] Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-02-24 by Mark Carstens

Hey, Lou,

Thanks, for the information. I would jump at the chance to use the 
profiles you've posted but I'm on a Mac. I would have to linearize with 
my scanner for the time being, but I'm OK with that. Still, I'm 
encouraged by your experience and will look into it further.

I've contemplated moving over to MIS inks (color pigs and quad) as 
Steve Kale has suggested, but would be limited by having to pay someone 
to create new color profiles for me. Operating on a shoestring budget 
is a pain and the costs of experimentation can add up quickly. I would 
rather lock into a sure thing than spend a lot of time trying to dial 
in solution that requires a lot of tweaking to get right.

I would like additional information. Where should I contact you?

Mark
Show quoted textHide quoted text
On Feb 23, 2005, at 3:14 AM, Louis Dina wrote:

>
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> For color, I use PM5 to build custom profiles for the Epson driver.
> They work great and I see absolutely no need for a RIP for color.  In
> fact, I do a lot of press work at my job and use my 2200 with custom
> ICC profiles and the Epson driver for proofing.  My proofs are
> actually better than when using a number of RIPs.
>
> For B&W, I am using IJC/OPM with the Epson UC inkset.  I started with
> the profiles supplied by Bowhaus, but made some changes.  My spectro
> just made it easier.  I chose to remove yellow inks from all profiles
> (except sepia ones) to reduce metamerism.  Yellow inks are the
> biggest offender, and removing them has given me fantastic results.
> I always create a series of 5 profiles for each paper - Cool,
> Selenium, Neutral, Warm and Sepia.  OPM (the printing part of the
> program) allows you to blend two profiles with a 0-100% slider so you
> can obtain an infinite range of subtle tones.  I have posted 2200
> profiles (for the Windows Version) on this site in the Files
> section.  Papers include Ep Enh Matte, Ep Velvet Fine Art, Boab
> Entrada (BW and Natural), Somerset Photo Enhanced Radiant white,
> Kirkland Glossy, Ep Prem Glossy, and Lexjet Professional Semi Matte.
> They can be downloaded and used directly if you have a 2200 and the
> windows version.  Here is the link.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/6fksu
>
> These are linearized for my printer, but I have shared them with
> others and they have had great results without making any changes.
> Linearization is easy with a densitometer, spectrophotometer or a
> scanner, if required.  I'd just print a test target with
> linearization and inspect the target to be sure there are no color
> crossovers, and that there is good separation between all 26 steps of
> the grayscale wedge.  If so, you are ready to roll.
>
> I tend to build my 'neutral' profiles to accomodate the natural bias
> of the paper color.  So, my neutral profiles on a warm base paper,
> like Moab Entrada Natural, has a very minor amount of warmth to the
> grays, mirroring the natural paper white.  I just like the results
> better and it keeps the 'neutrals' more consistant from black to
> white.  Seems to look better to my eye and you don't get any jumps as
> you approach paper white.  A cold paper, like EpPremGlossy, may be
> slightly cool to work with the paper.  These are my preferences and
> can be adjusted easily by tweaking the profiles or blending.
>
> I don't use ProfileMaker when adjusting profiles (I only use this to
> build monitor and color printing profiles).  I do use my Eye One
> spectrophotometer and MeasureTool from Gretag to read the data.
> MeasureTool is a free download.  A spectro is not absolutely
> required, but it does provide some extra accuracy and flexibility.
> You can get outstanding results without one.  I hope this provides
> the information you wanted.
>
> My prints have awesome Dmax and are very neutral (when I want
> neutral).  I see no metamerism at all now that I have removed the
> yellow and the tonal gradations are silky smooth.  I may never move
> to Quad inks.  If I get a new 24" printer in the future for color
> work, I will probably try quads in my 2200.
>
> Contact me if you want additional information.
>
> Lou
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Mark Carstens
> <mathdude5@c...> wrote:
>> Lou,
>>
>> I've been contemplating a new color printer that would enable me to
>> dedicate my 2200 to B&W/quad inks, and appreciate your insight
> about
>> IJC/OPM. It'd be nice to avoid the cost of the second printer and
> buy
>> the Bowhaus RIP instead. My question to you is whether you'd feel
> the
>> same about IJC/OPM even if you didn't write your own profiles? In
>> short, does using Profile Maker 5 just give you a broader paper
>> selection above and beyond what Bowhaus already provides or are you
>> actually improving on established profiles?
>>
>> Thanks for your input.
>>
>> Mark
>

2 or 3 grays/greys? (was Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast)

2005-03-01 by rikeller

This is an interesting question (to me at least), so I thought I'd 
"bump" this thread and see what people with far more knowledge about 
this sort of thing than I have to say...

To add to the discussion though, I found the following information 
regarding the optical density (O.D.) for the Piezotone and the MIS 
Ultra-Tone (UT) ink sets at:

http://www.inkjetmall.com/store/info/1000-hours.html
http://www.inksupply.com/index.cfm?source=html/utfadedata.html

Below, I show the data just for Hahnemuhle Photo Rag paper. For the 
purposes of this discussion, I have not looked at the fade data, but 
just the given measured starting O.D.'s

The O.D.'s for the Piezotone inks (Warm Neutral though the other ink 
sets are similar) are as follows:

Light gray: 0.138
Medium gray: 0.241
Dark gray: 0.711
Black: 1.720/1.780 (Museum/Portfolio)

The O.D.'s for the UT inks are as follows:

UT-Y (25% Black): 0.500
UT-M (cool toner): 0.600
UT-LM (light cool toner): 0.640
UT-LC (50% Black): 1.340
UT-C (75% Black): 1.330
UT-LK (Light Black): 1.270
UT-K (Eboni): 1.750

Based on this data, there are a few conclusions that I draw:

- the lightest UT ink (UT-Y, "25% Black") is far darker than the 
lightest two Piezotone inks and is just a little lighter than the 
darkest gray Piezotone ink.

- the UT-LC ("50% Black") and UT-C ("75% Black") inks have essentially 
the same density, which strangely enough, is lighter than the UT-LK 
("Light Black") ink.

- The Ultratones have essentially three densities: 1) around 0.5-0.6; 
2) around 1.3; and 3) black.

- The Piezotones have four densities 1) around 0.15; 2) around 0.24; 
3) around 0.7; and 4) black.

- The Ultratones' range implies that separation between dark inks is 
more important, while the Piezotones' range implies that separation 
between light inks is more important.

So the question is: for those who have used/seen both ink sets, what 
differences do you see in the final output based on these different 
philosophies? Do the Piezotones have better detail or fewer visible 
dots in the lighter tones? Do the Ultra-tones have better detail or 
fewer visible dots in the darker tones? Other differences? I am more 
interested in the differences between "real" images, as opposed to 21-
step wedges...

Rik

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
> I think the general view is that 3 greys are not needed with the 
more modern
> printers.  I would still like Mac QTR to be able to print at 2880 on 
the
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> 21/2200 though...
> 
> 
> > From: David Wroblewski <dawroblewski@y...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 22:04:12 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Great, thanks for the clarification. Is there any visible
> > difference between using K plus 2 grays rather than 3 grays?
> > 
> > I assume not--just curious though. The story I'm making up
> > for myself here is that quads used to be necessary but the
> > smaller droplet size on current printers allows us to go
> > to two grays without a visible difference in the print. Or
> > maybe it's better software?
> > 
> > In any case, that's a big deal, in my opinion.
> > 
> > -David
> >

RE: [Digital BW] 2 or 3 grays/greys? (was Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast)

2005-03-01 by Paul Roark

Rik,

The numbers in these charts do not coincide with what I've measured or with
how the inksets were designed.

>http://www.inkjetmall.com/store/info/1000-hours.html

Note that the fade tests here compare the new PiezoTone to the old FS, not
the UT-FS or UT-FSN.  They have no bearing on the UT family of inks.

The chart does, however, show that the FS and PiezoTone densities are about
the same.  They were designed to be the same, and they print with the same
drivers and curves.  So, as a starting point, I'd assume that FS and
PiezoTone ODs are the same. 

The explanation of the Piezo test says, "All of the monochromatic inks were
printed in patches of gray or black. The color inks were printed in patches
of their full hue..."

The test patches for the grays were not at full strength.  See the obvious
discrepancy that the UC yellow has a higher OD than the dark gray PT - no
way.  In fact, note that the UC Yellow in the InkJetMall table has a higher
OD than the UltraChrome M or C - no way.  The fade rate of the UC cyan
(which the table spells "cyanine") is said to be the higher than the Y or M.
Again, contrary to my tests and RIT tests of the MIS "Archival" pigments.
See the graph of the RIT fade results here:
http://www.inksupply.com/index.cfm?source=html/rit.html .

Bottom line, I don't put a lot of weight in the InkJetMall chart.

The MIS chart at

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

is for the UT1 variable-tone inkset.  The numbers are close to what I get
with the X-Rite spectrophotometer (at least where there is not an obvious
mistake in the UT-LC).

>Below, I show the data just for Hahnemuhle Photo Rag paper...

>The O.D.'s for the PiezoTone inks (Warm Neutral though the other ink 
>sets are similar) are as follows:

>Light gray: 0.138
>Medium gray: 0.241
>Dark gray: 0.711
>Black: 1.720/1.780 (Museum/Portfolio)

The grays above are not at 100% density.  It's possible the "Color
Management" in the Epson driver was set to "Color Controls."

>The O.D.'s for the UT inks are as follows:

>UT-Y (25% Black): 0.500
>UT-M (cool toner): 0.600
>UT-LM (light cool toner): 0.640
>UT-LC (50% Black): 1.340
>UT-C (75% Black): 1.330
>UT-LK (Light Black): 1.270
>UT-K (Eboni): 1.750

These are close to what one would get if the printer pumped out 100% with
"No Color Adjustment."

>Based on this data, there are a few conclusions that I draw:

>- the lightest UT ink (UT-Y, "25% Black") is far darker than the 
>lightest two PiezoTone inks ...

No.  In fact the UT1 Y in a hextone set (which is the M in the quad set) was
the lightest gray a 4-ink printer could have and still have a cold toner.
The lightest gray was set to a value between the Piezo/FS Y and M densities.
On an 1160, which was the printer I then had and designed the inkset for, it
prints dotless.

>- the UT-LC ("50% Black") and UT-C ("75% Black") inks have essentially 
>the same density,

No, the MIS chart is in error.  The UT1-LC is a 50% dilution of the UT1-C.
The density give for the UT-C is the correct.  The UT-C is the basic density
of the dark grays in the PiezoTone and the UT family of inks.  The dark
grays are all about the same density.

> which strangely enough, is lighter than the UT-LK ("Light Black") ink.

No the LK is lighter than the UT-C (1.24 for LK, 1.32 for UT-C in the MIS
chart).

>- The Ultratones have essentially three densities: 
>1) around 0.5-0.6; 2) around 1.3; and 3) black.

MIS left out the LC & LM for some reason.  They are both 50% dilutions of
the C & M, respectively.

>- The Piezotones have four densities 
>1) around 0.15; 2) around 0.24; 3) around 0.7; and 4) black.

The PiezoTone/FS densities of the Y & M are slightly below and above the UT1
lightest gray, and they are all very close.  That is one of the things I
finally changed for my 7500UT-FSN setup.  I've moved the M (now LC in the
7500 set) to a position that is closer to half way between the lightest and
darkest Piezo/FS densities.

>... what differences do you see in the final output based on 
>these different philosophies?

The Piezo and FS densities are the same and they print the same.

The UT1 is an older variable tone that had a light gray that was slightly
darker than the FS-Y.  The lightest toner in the hextone set (LM) was
extremely light.  The 1280 with the UT1 inkset had the smoothest highlights
I've measured, using a 1600 dpi scanner and the histogram standard deviation
tool.

The UT1 in a quad (4-ink printer) does show more dots in the neutral or cool
prints due to there being only one toner.  Most found it fine in an 1160,
but in my 3000 I preferred the VMS with the old inks and the UT-FSN with the
newer inks.

The Piezo/FS/UT-FS inks can produce a print that is slightly smoother than
the current UT2 and UT7 inksets unless the optional Y position has a light
ink in it.  In my 7500, for example, I use the FSN-Y in the Y position to
get perfectly dotless highlights (even with a loupe).  Most, however, will
never see the dots in the UT2 and UT7 inksets in actual prints.

The higher densities are in there for several reasons.  First, they allow
the printers to print good B&W with virtually no workflow.  Second, they are
needed to avoid overloading the glossy papers.  Third, they are needed to
achieve the tone range from cold to sepia.   But, I've noted regularly that
for those who do not use sepia, that spot has other uses -- another light
carbon for better lightfastness, glop for bronze-less glossy prints, custom
tone inks, and, as relevant to this question, a very light gray for more
smoothness.

I think modern printers do a great job with fewer and more dense inks.  So,
I use the UT2 and UT7 spots currently for glop in my printers, whereas the
old non-variable-dot 7500 can't quite do the job without the light UT-FSN-Y
ink.

Hope this helps.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Re: [Digital BW] 2 or 3 grays/greys? (was Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast)

2005-03-01 by rikeller

It helps a lot. Thanks for the detailed response. I was basing my 
interpretation on the assumption that the numbers in the charts were 
real. It's a bit disturbing, to me at least, that the only published 
numbers for ink densities for either company are wrong, misleading 
out-of-date, or all of the above! And that's before we even start 
talking about fade rates.

It would be good to see somebody compile some up-to-date numbers. 
Paul: it looks like you have the data on-hand. Would you be willing 
to give it a shot?

Thanks again.

Rik


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
wrote:
> Hope this helps.

RE: [Digital BW] 2 or 3 grays/greys? (was Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast)

2005-03-01 by Paul Roark

Rik,

As a starting point, I measured the print densities of PiezogaphyBW ink from
10 different samples that had been sold to other people.  Using an 1160 and
the older EAM paper, this is what the average densities were when printed
with "No Color Adjustment":

Piezo C = 1.27
      M = .64
      Y = .40

Different printers, papers, etc. can make these vary.  Seeing 1.3 for UT-C
in a 1280 on current EEM is not unusual at all.  That is, the MIS reading
there is close to what most will see for that ink.  The MIS reading that are
off are the LC and LM.  Also, recall that the UT inkset is not the UT2 or
UT7.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 
_____________________________
Show quoted textHide quoted text
-----Original Message-----
From: rikeller [mailto:rikeller@...] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:26 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] 2 or 3 grays/greys? (was Epson R1800 vs 2200..need
opinion fast)



It helps a lot. Thanks for the detailed response. I was basing my 
interpretation on the assumption that the numbers in the charts were 
real. It's a bit disturbing, to me at least, that the only published 
numbers for ink densities for either company are wrong, misleading 
out-of-date, or all of the above! And that's before we even start 
talking about fade rates.

It would be good to see somebody compile some up-to-date numbers. 
Paul: it looks like you have the data on-hand. Would you be willing 
to give it a shot?

Thanks again.

Rik


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
wrote:
> Hope this helps.







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

Re: [Digital BW] 2 or 3 grays/greys? (was Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-03-02 by David Wroblewski

Very helpful message, Paul. One question below:

> ...But, I've noted regularly that for those who do not use sepia, 
> that spot has other uses -- another light carbon for better 
> lightfastness...

How does another light carbon == better lightfastness? I'm missing
the connection.

Thanks,
David

RE: [Digital BW] 2 or 3 grays/greys? (was Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast

2005-03-02 by Paul Roark

David,

>> ...But, I've noted regularly that for those who do not use sepia, 
>> that spot has other uses -- another light carbon for better 
>> lightfastness...

>How does another light carbon == better lightfastness? 

The sepia ink is the weakest of the MIS UT inks, the pure carbon is the
strongest.  So, by taking out the sepia and putting in carbon, the prints
with the sliders (which use all the inks) will have less of the weak color
pigments in them.  For those who use curves, the cool through medium warm
prints will not be affected.

The neutral MIS inks now use a combination of carbon + cyan & R800 Blue
clone pigs that are very good, but probably still not up to carbon
lightfastness.  All of these inks are also predominantly carbon.

The sepia, however, even though I've removed the troublesome magenta and
substituted the R800 clone red, still has yellow in it.  Yellow is now the
weakest of the bunch.

In general, the more carbon and the less color pigs, the more lightfast the
image will be.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Re: 2 or 3 grays/greys? (was Epson R1800 vs 2200..need opinion fast)

2005-03-26 by Andre

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "rikeller"
<rikeller@y...> wrote:
> 
> This is an interesting question (to me at least), so I thought I'd 
> "bump" this thread and see what people with far more knowledge about 
> this sort of thing than I have to say...
> 
> To add to the discussion though, I found the following information 
> regarding the optical density (O.D.) for the Piezotone and the MIS 
> Ultra-Tone (UT) ink sets at:
> 
> http://www.inkjetmall.com/store/info/1000-hours.html

Be careful here. Do not jump to any conclusion about the fade test
shown at the above link. The MIS inkset in question is not of the UT
familly inkset but the MIS-FS inkset, the equivalent of the original
PiezographyBW inkset, which Inkjetmall no longer, for several well
documented reasonsthat you can read about on the Piezo list and this
list also.

This is not an apples to apples comparison and is about worthless if
you want info on the MIS-UT familly inkset.

Cheers,
Andre Moreau



Cheers,
Andre Moreau

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.