Digital BW, The Print

Hello Julian, 

In answer to your question, no,  I have not seen any MIS VM or FS prints.  I would like to see Bernd's comparison prints if possible...mostly because I like Bernd's subjects and prints.   

I too think it is good that alternative processes are discussed on this forum...regardless of the manufacturer, workflow, inkset, or paper.  That sharing of new ideas techniques and products is what will keep the digital bw movement good and going forward.  

Your recent post indicated the cost difference between two inks shipped to Spain.  Your decision makes economic sense to you and would to me if I lived in Spain.  

So if that makes good economics for you, why have I not switched to MIS inks?  

Simply put, it is a matter of time and investment and expected results.   You see, I have already invested in Piezo software and inks, which are admittedly more expensive than some of the alternatives.  But, I consider the cost of the inks to be incidental and the cost "savings" of using another ink such as MIS to be inconsequential for me.  Why?  Simply because the "real cost" to me is the time it takes to make a salable print.  By that I mean that I don't want to spend any time more than necessary to "adjust curves" or fiddle with transfer functions or other means of getting "close" to what I want to see.  

The Piezo system is WYSIWYG or "what you see is what you print:  WYSIWYP" in my opinion.  I use a calibrated monitor, and when my image looks good on screen, I know that is what I will get from my printer.  I don't think that can be said for another system.  So if I were to save 50 cents per print by using a cheap ink, I most likely will waste that "savings" by spending more time using a system that requires more experimentation and less WYSIWYG.  At least that is my economic take on it.  Admittedly, I like to keep my darkroom photography and printmaking as simple as possible so I can spend more time with clients and more time off on the weekends and evenings. That is good economic sense to me...in my situation. 

Some people may think I am opposed to using anything but Piezo inks.  That is not true.  The truth is that I am not opposed at all.  I simply have a fondness for a system (Piezo) that I use that works and delivers outstanding fine art prints using an inexpensive printer...and in my opinion...reasonably and relatively (to Pro lab costs) inexpensive inks that I believe are "archival" due to their carbon pigment base.

IF at times it seems that I am a strict Piezophile, it is a misconception due to the nature of some of my posts.  I simply post the positives as I honestly see it.  Most of the posts on this forum regarding Piezo have been negative, most often by folks who have not had success with the Piezo system (due to any number of factors).  Because these folks have had "real" problems with the system, and because they blame the inks for their problems, I feel it is only fair to give them and others (especially those that may not have used Piezo yet) a more balanced viewpoint...by offering the experiences of someone who is getting stunningly beautiful Piezo prints.  And if I were a newbie to this (which I was, not long ago) I would be disappointed in a potential product if all I read on the forum were negatives.   In truth, there are many positives.  

I bought into Piezo for various reasons.  I wanted a simple system with software that would work for me...so I did not have to work for it (hope that makes sense...put another way I wanted "user-friendly" software).  I also wanted paper profiles.  I also wanted carbon pigment inks.  I also wanted no dots.  I also wanted a company with good technical support that is free and knowledgeable.   I got all of that with Piezo and Inkjetmall.  

Can other companies provide a good competitive product?  I sure hope so.  And I wish them the best of luck. And I may buy their products if they can provide something that I cannot get elsewhere or with my current system.

On every issue above, the Piezo system has exceeded my expectations...and I did have high expectations too.   Perhaps I am lucky.  But lest you think my use of Piezo is faultless, I can say with all honesty that I have had nozzle clogs (I have even written to a forum about them), I have tried Windex and Fantastic, I have had a printer shut down  for a few days with intermittent nozzle problems.  But I take those events or mishaps in stride.  What keeps me going is the final result...which more often than not delivers prints of outstanding quality.  

As I wrote in my previous message, I am pleased as punch that I got 12 or more 11x14s prints in a row that were "flawless" out of my inexpensive 1160.  Those prints have already been "sold" and have paid for the printer and the inks and my time...several times over.  As a professional photographer, that is important.  I depend on these prints for my income. 

In the end, we all can choose different tools.  What someone else chooses to use is of no matter to me.  Where I take exception, is when people make claims or assertions that the Piezo system is somehow responsible for creating only ugly green prints.  If someone were to see my prints on exhibition, they would know that is not true...at least for my use of the system.  I get rich deep velvet-like blacks and wonderful skintones with great highlights (especially important as I am focused on portraits). 

If someone does have problems with their CIS or their carts or their printer or their paper, I consider that just part of life...and to my experience the manufacturers of the CIS (nomorecarts), the ink (Inkjetmall), and the papers have all been very good about replacing any product that is proven defective...and even some product that has not been truly proven defective.    Nevertheless the "problems" must be frustrating to be sure. But the experience of the photographers who are having a problem does not mean that all systems are bad or deliver poor results.  The facts demonstrate that excellent prints can come from a Piezo system...just maybe not all systems...and maybe not all photographers who use them.  

Well this commentary has gotten much longer than I intended.  I hope it helps someone. 

With sincere respect, 

Steadman

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Julian Thomas 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 5:56 AM
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Back to basics


  Steadman, I have to ask, have you seen MIS FS output through the cone
  driver? Like Mike K, I think that piezo software is bang on, especially for
  4 colour printers, but there are problems with the inks for a growing number
  of people. I hope to be moving to a 7000 soon, and I'll be using the piezo
  software, but MIS FS inks. One of the things I will be eternally thankfull
  to this list for is that it has opened up other possibilities beyond piezo.
  Bernd has just sent me his set of prints of comparisons of Piezo with
  various other combinations. FS through the Cone driver is 'different' to
  piezo, slightly, but  a slight curves tweak would get the same result.
  Smooth tones, dotless highlights, the colour of piezo when piezo is on form.
  BTW others have said that piezo compresses shadow detail, and I don't see
  that. A comparison of the 'stair' image and bernd's print show more visible
  detail in the stairs and a dark chimney area in Bernd's print from Piezo,
  but this is easily corrected. For 6 colour printers, bernd's print on MIS VM
  with a no. 3 curve is truly beautiful.

  Julian
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Steadman Uhlich" <steadmanuhlich@...>
  To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
  Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 5:53 AM
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Back to basics


  > It is too bad you see green with your PiezoBW system and that it is a
  disappointment for you.
  >
  > I just framed (12) 11x14 prints today on a variety of papers all made with
  PiezoBW inks.  Each one is lovely.  No green at all.  Some of the blacks
  must be seen to be believed because of the richness and depth.  On a few of
  the images, the skin tones "glow" and contrasted with the black velvety
  background on a few, the impression is of great texture and depth.    All of
  these prints have been seen by over a dozen people in different lighting
  environments and no one sees green at all.  They all comment on the rich
  tones of grey and the luminous skin and the velvet black which because it is
  printed on a matte paper...looks like real velvet...not some plasticky RC
  surface gloss.
  >
  > But maybe you just had a little bad luck or a bad printer or bad karma.
  >
  > I say this because when or if you get a Piezo system that works, you will
  not want to switch.  It can be that good.
  >
  > Good luck,
  >
  > Steadman
  >   ----- Original Message -----
  >   From: djcook50@...
  >   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  >   Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 10:05 PM
  >   Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Back to basics
  >
  >
  >   Thanks for the feedback Joe.
  >
  >   Too bad the piezography system is disappointing.  Do you get the
  >   green cast results with all papers you've tried?
  >
  >   Prior to the piezography system did you have any luck with other inks
  >   and workflows?
  >
  >   Dave
  >
  >
  >   --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., Joseph Glasgow
  >   <joeglas3@y...> wrote:
  >   > --- djcook50@y... wrote:
  >   > > I'm interested in hearing from anyone who's found a
  >   > > good workflow for
  >   > > the original MIS Quadtone inks, specifically using
  >   > > the Epson 1200 .>
  >   > > Anyone using the Epson 1200 and original MIS
  >   > > Quadtones successfully?
  >   > > > Also, is there anyone who's made the switch to
  >   > > Piezography using the > 1200 with satisfactory
  >   > results?  This seems to be
  >   > > the direction I'm
  >   > > heading.
  >   > >
  >   > > I'm much more interested in making excellent B&W
  >   > > prints than
  >   > > continually tweaking and testing.
  >   > >
  >   > > Thanks,
  >   > > David
  >   >
  >   >      I am working with piezography software and an
  >   > Epson 1200 printer. I like the ease of the software
  >   > and the excellent tonal range of the prints. But the
  >   > ugly green cast of the finished product is
  >   > unacceptable. This green cast appears with every paper
  >   > that I have tried from the cone tech sample pack.  the
  >   > green cast of my prints in no way resembles the color
  >   > cast of the free sample print that I received from the
  >   > inkjetmall in the mail. I would like to say that all
  >   > is well with Piezography but it is not.
  >   >
  >   >                     joe
  >   > >
  >   > >
  >   >
  >   >
  >   > __________________________________________________
  >   > Do You Yahoo!?
  >   > Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
  >   > http://personals.yahoo.com
  >
  >
  >         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
  >               ADVERTISEMENT
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >   Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
  other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
  >
  >   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
  >
  >   Please follow these basic guidelines:
  >   - Include your full name with your message.
  >   - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
  >   - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to
  keep them short.
  >   - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
  header.
  >   - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
  "flames."
  >   - Complete your Yahoo profile.
  >   - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
  resources on the homepage.
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
  >
  >
  >
  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
  >
  >
  >
  > Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
  other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
  >
  > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
  >
  > Please follow these basic guidelines:
  > - Include your full name with your message.
  > - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
  > - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
  them short.
  > - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
  > - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
  > - Complete your Yahoo profile.
  > - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
  resources on the homepage.
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
  >
  >
  >


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       

  Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

  Please follow these basic guidelines:
  - Include your full name with your message.
  - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
  - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
  - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
  - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
  - Complete your Yahoo profile.
  - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 




  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Everything that I've printed thus far using the Piezo driver 
with MIS FS inks has been "WYSIWYP".  No messing with curves has 
been required.  So I'm very pleased with my Piezo software 
investment now that I have a choice with the inks.

It's not accurate that people with problems such as I've 
encountered with Piezo (I reported green prints back in July) have 
not had great results with Piezo ink, quite the contrary - I had 
more than 8 months of great Piezo printing prior to my problem 
occurring.  It is the fact that we had such great results with Piezo 
ink and then BANG - major problems - that makes the situation all 
the more frustrating.

Here's hoping that you never get the greenies...

Steve Dolha.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Steadman Uhlich" 
<steadmanuhlich@k...> wrote:
> Hello Julian, 
> 
> In answer to your question, no,  I have not seen any MIS VM or FS 
prints.  I would like to see Bernd's comparison prints if 
possible...mostly because I like Bernd's subjects and prints.   
> 
<snip>

> Simply put, it is a matter of time and investment and expected 
results.   You see, I have already invested in Piezo software and 
inks, which are admittedly more expensive than some of the 
alternatives.  But, I consider the cost of the inks to be incidental 
and the cost "savings" of using another ink such as MIS to be 
inconsequential for me.  Why?  Simply because the "real cost" to me 
is the time it takes to make a salable print.  By that I mean that I 
don't want to spend any time more than necessary to "adjust curves" 
or fiddle with transfer functions or other means of getting "close" 
to what I want to see.  
> 
> The Piezo system is WYSIWYG or "what you see is what you print:  
WYSIWYP" in my opinion.  I use a calibrated monitor, and when my 
image looks good on screen, I know that is what I will get from my 
printer.  I don't think that can be said for another system.  So if 
I were to save 50 cents per print by using a cheap ink, I most 
likely will waste that "savings" by spending more time using a 
system that requires more experimentation and less WYSIWYG.  At 
least that is my economic take on it.  Admittedly, I like to keep my 
darkroom photography and printmaking as simple as possible so I can 
spend more time with clients and more time off on the weekends and 
evenings. That is good economic sense to me...in my situation. 
> 
<snip>
> IF at times it seems that I am a strict Piezophile, it is a 
misconception due to the nature of some of my posts.  I simply post 
the positives as I honestly see it.  Most of the posts on this forum 
regarding Piezo have been negative, most often by folks who have not 
had success with the Piezo system (due to any number of factors).  
Because these folks have had "real" problems with the system, and 
because they blame the inks for their problems, I feel it is only 
fair to give them and others (especially those that may not have 
used Piezo yet) a more balanced viewpoint...by offering the 
experiences of someone who is getting stunningly beautiful Piezo 
prints.  And if I were a newbie to this (which I was, not long ago) 
I would be disappointed in a potential product if all I read on the 
forum were negatives.   In truth, there are many positives.  
> 
> I bought into Piezo for various reasons.  I wanted a simple system 
with software that would work for me...so I did not have to work for 
it (hope that makes sense...put another way I wanted "user-friendly" 
software).  I also wanted paper profiles.  I also wanted carbon 
pigment inks.  I also wanted no dots.  I also wanted a company with 
good technical support that is free and knowledgeable.   I got all 
of that with Piezo and Inkjetmall.  
>