Digital BW, The Print

Today I had access to a densitometer for about an hour at a nearby
print shop. The gentleman showed me how to read paper white and then
the rest of the 21 step grayscale. After the numbers were recorded I
brought the readings into QTR to linearize. Printing a previous 21
step grayscale with the supplied paper curve and comparing it to one
printed with my paper curve created from the readings, mine is
extremely dark and flat. I've changed the ink limit and the black
boost with no favorable results. I'm bidding on an X-Rite 810
densitometer on Ebay. The one I used today at the print shop was an
X-Rite 500. With the supplied paper curve, the 85-100 steps were
clearly separated; but with my readings, 85-100 was totally black and
shiny with ink lay down. The actual numbers for my readings were much
smaller than those with the supplied curves. My DMax was 1.52 and the
paper white was .03. I am using H'Muhle Photo Matte 170gsm paper with
UT2 inks.

Could someone make sense from the percentage readings?
0--.03
5--.10
10--.19
15--.26
20--.34
25--.44
30--.52
35--.60
40--.70
45--.80
50--.89
55--.97
60--1.03
65--1.09
70--1.13
75--1.18
80--1.23
85--1.29
90--1.34
95--1.38
100--1.52

My ink limit for the test was 70% with Black Boost of 85%.

Any and all help will be greatly appreciated in helping me get this
resolved.

Your frustrated friend in Photography,

Johnny

Johnny,
All in all those numbers don't look that odd, except for perhaps the
low dmax, but I don't know what it should be for that paper. On
Photorag I would expect closer to 1.7.

The following sort of assumes you are using a Mac. On a PC there
may be other ways to not get what you want.

So, a couple of clarifications:

1. Are you using the exact same file as your "supplied paper curve"
with the exception of the LINEARIZE statement?

It sounds like you might be printing with the wrong black.

2. Did you use the same settings for dpi etc?

Printing at a different dpi will change the curve.

3. Did you delete the LINEARIZE statement to print the test strip?
 
You don't want the old one in effect, since there is only one linearization
done, so that when you put new values in, you would lose the effect
of the old one.

4. Does the linearize statement look like: LINEARIZE="0.03 .10 .19 and so on
all on one line?

5. Are you getting any errors during the curve generation? They can go by
very quickly. Do the individual inks come in and go out in a reasonable way?
Sometimes you can get NAN and other indications of an error. Usually, in 
that case you can't use the curve, however.

Hope that's a start.

Costa

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Johnny Eades" <jeades1@s...> 
wrote:

> 
> Today I had access to a densitometer for about an hour at a nearby
> print shop. The gentleman showed me how to read paper white and then
> the rest of the 21 step grayscale. After the numbers were recorded I
> brought the readings into QTR to linearize. Printing a previous 21
> step grayscale with the supplied paper curve and comparing it to one
> printed with my paper curve created from the readings, mine is
> extremely dark and flat. I've changed the ink limit and the black
> boost with no favorable results. I'm bidding on an X-Rite 810
> densitometer on Ebay. The one I used today at the print shop was an
> X-Rite 500. With the supplied paper curve, the 85-100 steps were
> clearly separated; but with my readings, 85-100 was totally black and
> shiny with ink lay down. The actual numbers for my readings were much
> smaller than those with the supplied curves. My DMax was 1.52 and the
> paper white was .03. I am using H'Muhle Photo Matte 170gsm paper with
> UT2 inks.
> 
> Could someone make sense from the percentage readings?
> 0--.03
> 5--.10
> 10--.19
> 15--.26
> 20--.34
> 25--.44
> 30--.52
> 35--.60
> 40--.70
> 45--.80
> 50--.89
> 55--.97
> 60--1.03
> 65--1.09
> 70--1.13
> 75--1.18
> 80--1.23
> 85--1.29
> 90--1.34
> 95--1.38
> 100--1.52
> 
> My ink limit for the test was 70% with Black Boost of 85%.
> 
> Any and all help will be greatly appreciated in helping me get this
> resolved.
> 
> Your frustrated friend in Photography,
> 
> Johnny

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ccolbertbw"
<ccolbert@u...> wrote:
> 
> Johnny,
> All in all those numbers don't look that odd, except for perhaps the
> low dmax, but I don't know what it should be for that paper. On
> Photorag I would expect closer to 1.7.
> 
> The following sort of assumes you are using a Mac. On a PC there
> may be other ways to not get what you want.


No, I use a PC and Roy's QTR 2.2b for Windows.
 
> So, a couple of clarifications:
> 
> 1. Are you using the exact same file as your "supplied paper curve"
> with the exception of the LINEARIZE statement?

Yes 
> It sounds like you might be printing with the wrong black.
> 
I'm using MIS Eboni inks UT2 for the Epson 1280

> 2. Did you use the same settings for dpi etc?
Yes everything was the same but for the density reading replaced with
mine.

> Printing at a different dpi will change the curve.

DPI was the same for both 

> 3. Did you delete the LINEARIZE statement to print the test strip?
 
It was deleted with the new one after linearization  

> You don't want the old one in effect, since there is only one
linearization
> done, so that when you put new values in, you would lose the effect
> of the old one.
> 
> 4. Does the linearize statement look like: LINEARIZE="0.03 .10 .19
and so on
> all on one line?

Yes
> 
> 5. Are you getting any errors during the curve generation? They can
go by
> very quickly. Do the individual inks come in and go out in a
reasonable way?
> Sometimes you can get NAN and other indications of an error.
Usually, in 
> that case you can't use the curve, however.
> 

No error were noted or observed by me.

> Hope that's a start.
> 
> Costa
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Johnny Eades"
<jeades1@s...> 

> wrote:
> > 
> > Today I had access to a densitometer for about an hour at a nearby
> > print shop. The gentleman showed me how to read paper white and then
> > the rest of the 21 step grayscale. After the numbers were recorded I
> > brought the readings into QTR to linearize. Printing a previous 21
> > step grayscale with the supplied paper curve and comparing it to one
> > printed with my paper curve created from the readings, mine is
> > extremely dark and flat. I've changed the ink limit and the black
> > boost with no favorable results. I'm bidding on an X-Rite 810
> > densitometer on Ebay. The one I used today at the print shop was an
> > X-Rite 500. With the supplied paper curve, the 85-100 steps were
> > clearly separated; but with my readings, 85-100 was totally black and
> > shiny with ink lay down. The actual numbers for my readings were much
> > smaller than those with the supplied curves. My DMax was 1.52 and the
> > paper white was .03. I am using H'Muhle Photo Matte 170gsm paper with
> > UT2 inks.
> > 
> > Could someone make sense from the percentage readings?
> > 0--.03
> > 5--.10
> > 10--.19
> > 15--.26
> > 20--.34
> > 25--.44
> > 30--.52
> > 35--.60
> > 40--.70
> > 45--.80
> > 50--.89
> > 55--.97
> > 60--1.03
> > 65--1.09
> > 70--1.13
> > 75--1.18
> > 80--1.23
> > 85--1.29
> > 90--1.34
> > 95--1.38
> > 100--1.52
> > 
> > My ink limit for the test was 70% with Black Boost of 85%.
> > 
> > Any and all help will be greatly appreciated in helping me get this
> > resolved.
> > 
> > Your frustrated friend in Photography,
> > 
> > Johnny

Sounds like you've done all the right things. But I would have a
look in the resulting quad file to be sure nothing is amiss. 

I would check that all the numbers increase as you would
expect and that the ink channel for the black you expect is really
being used.

I have fooled myself a number of ways, and checking the final output
values often indicates where the problem lies.

I don't understand your reply here. Please rephrase:

> 3. Did you delete the LINEARIZE statement to print the test strip?
It was deleted with the new one after linearization

What I do is to delete the LINEARIZE statement. Compile the descriptor. Print the test strip.
Add the resulting LINEARIZE. Recompile.  Then print a test image that allows you to check 
the deep shadows. 

I expect you are doing the same.

good luck,
Costa


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Johnny Eades" <jeades1@s...> 
wrote:

> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ccolbertbw"
> <ccolbert@u...> wrote:
> > 
> > Johnny,
> > All in all those numbers don't look that odd, except for perhaps the
> > low dmax, but I don't know what it should be for that paper. On
> > Photorag I would expect closer to 1.7.
> > 
> > The following sort of assumes you are using a Mac. On a PC there
> > may be other ways to not get what you want.
> 
> 
> No, I use a PC and Roy's QTR 2.2b for Windows.
>  
> > So, a couple of clarifications:
> > 
> > 1. Are you using the exact same file as your "supplied paper curve"
> > with the exception of the LINEARIZE statement?
> 
> Yes 
> > It sounds like you might be printing with the wrong black.
> > 
> I'm using MIS Eboni inks UT2 for the Epson 1280
> 
> > 2. Did you use the same settings for dpi etc?
> Yes everything was the same but for the density reading replaced with
> mine.
> 
> > Printing at a different dpi will change the curve.
> 
> DPI was the same for both 
> 
> > 3. Did you delete the LINEARIZE statement to print the test strip?
>  
> It was deleted with the new one after linearization  
> 
> > You don't want the old one in effect, since there is only one
> linearization
> > done, so that when you put new values in, you would lose the effect
> > of the old one.
> > 
> > 4. Does the linearize statement look like: LINEARIZE="0.03 .10 .19
> and so on
> > all on one line?
> 
> Yes
> > 
> > 5. Are you getting any errors during the curve generation? They can
> go by
> > very quickly. Do the individual inks come in and go out in a
> reasonable way?
> > Sometimes you can get NAN and other indications of an error.
> Usually, in 
> > that case you can't use the curve, however.
> > 
> 
> No error were noted or observed by me.
> 
> > Hope that's a start.
> > 
> > Costa
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Johnny Eades"
> <jeades1@s...> 
> > wrote:
> > > 
> > > Today I had access to a densitometer for about an hour at a nearby
> > > print shop. The gentleman showed me how to read paper white and then
> > > the rest of the 21 step grayscale. After the numbers were recorded I
> > > brought the readings into QTR to linearize. Printing a previous 21
> > > step grayscale with the supplied paper curve and comparing it to one
> > > printed with my paper curve created from the readings, mine is
> > > extremely dark and flat. I've changed the ink limit and the black
> > > boost with no favorable results. I'm bidding on an X-Rite 810
> > > densitometer on Ebay. The one I used today at the print shop was an
> > > X-Rite 500. With the supplied paper curve, the 85-100 steps were
> > > clearly separated; but with my readings, 85-100 was totally black and
> > > shiny with ink lay down. The actual numbers for my readings were much
> > > smaller than those with the supplied curves. My DMax was 1.52 and the
> > > paper white was .03. I am using H'Muhle Photo Matte 170gsm paper with
> > > UT2 inks.
> > > 
> > > Could someone make sense from the percentage readings?
> > > 0--.03
> > > 5--.10
> > > 10--.19
> > > 15--.26
> > > 20--.34
> > > 25--.44
> > > 30--.52
> > > 35--.60
> > > 40--.70
> > > 45--.80
> > > 50--.89
> > > 55--.97
> > > 60--1.03
> > > 65--1.09
> > > 70--1.13
> > > 75--1.18
> > > 80--1.23
> > > 85--1.29
> > > 90--1.34
> > > 95--1.38
> > > 100--1.52
> > > 
> > > My ink limit for the test was 70% with Black Boost of 85%.
> > > 
> > > Any and all help will be greatly appreciated in helping me get this
> > > resolved.
> > > 
> > > Your frustrated friend in Photography,
> > > 
> > > Johnny

It's very important that you delete the old linearize statement BEFORE 
you print the stepwedge for re-linearization. Otherwise you're 
linearizing against values which doesn't exist. Linearization is always 
done against an unlinearized curve.

You can do this with a scanner as well. It's a good way to practise, 
then you can do it properly next time you get access to a densitometer 
again.

Scan the printed stepwedge without adjustments and bring it into 
Photoshop. Then read the L values of each step and enter them into the 
linearization in QTR. The values should go from high to low instead of 
low to high. That's how QTR differentiates between the different types 
of readings.

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

OK folks,

I think I'm finally beginning to see the light. Let me restate the 
procedure as I now understand it.

First I remove the linearize line in the .qidf to print a 21 
stepwedge from within QTR using the paper curve that I desire to 
change to suit my ink/paper combination.

Second I take the density readings from the unlinearized 21 
stedpwedge to plug into QTR's curve creation utility.

Thirdly I create the paper curve and reprint the 21 stepwedge to see 
the results.

Am I in the ballpark now?

Your slightly less frustrated friend in Photography,

Johnny

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Daniel Staver 
<daniel@p...> wrote:
> It's very important that you delete the old linearize statement 
BEFORE 
> you print the stepwedge for re-linearization. Otherwise you're 
> linearizing against values which doesn't exist. Linearization is 
always 
> done against an unlinearized curve.
> 
> You can do this with a scanner as well. It's a good way to 
practise, 
> then you can do it properly next time you get access to a 
densitometer 
> again.
> 
> Scan the printed stepwedge without adjustments and bring it into 
> Photoshop. Then read the L values of each step and enter them into 
the 
> linearization in QTR. The values should go from high to low instead 
of 
> low to high. That's how QTR differentiates between the different 
types 

> of readings.
> 
> --
> Daniel Staver
> http://daniel.staver.no

> Am I in the ballpark now?

Yes!

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

Daniel,

I deleted the Linearize line and scanned the grayscale and read the 
steps in Lab and put them in the curve creation window. It generated 
the LINEARIZE line in the .qidf but it did not create the curve from 
it.

This is what is in the .qidf file. You can see I entered the values 
from the Low to the High.

-PRINTER=Quad1280
CURVE_NAME=UT2-MY-HPhotoRag-neutral-2
GRAPH_CURVE=YES
N_OF_INKS=6
DEFAULT_INK_LIMIT=45
BOOST_K=55
LIMIT_K=
LIMIT_C=45
LIMIT_M=45
LIMIT_Y=0
LIMIT_LC=45
LIMIT_LM=40
N_OF_GRAY_PARTS=3
GRAY_INK_1=K
GRAY_VAL_1=100
GRAY_INK_2=M
GRAY_VAL_2=50.5
GRAY_INK_3=LM
GRAY_VAL_3=17.2
GRAY_HIGHLIGHT=4
GRAY_SHADOW=8
GRAY_OVERLAP=10
GRAY_GAMMA=1
GRAY_CURVE=
N_OF_TONER_PARTS=2
TONER_INK_1=C
TONER_VAL_1=100
TONER_INK_2=LC
TONER_VAL_2=39
TONER_HIGHLIGHT=0.5
TONER_SHADOW=1
TONER_GAMMA=1
TONER_CURVE=
N_OF_UNUSED=1
UNUSED_INK_1=Y
LINEARIZE="15 16 21 25 26 27 28 28 31 33 34 37 41 45 49 55 60 67 76 
87 99 "

-- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Daniel Staver 
<daniel@p...> wrote:
> It's very important that you delete the old linearize statement 
BEFORE 
> you print the stepwedge for re-linearization. Otherwise you're 
> linearizing against values which doesn't exist. Linearization is 
always 
> done against an unlinearized curve.
> 
> You can do this with a scanner as well. It's a good way to 
practise, 
> then you can do it properly next time you get access to a 
densitometer 
> again.
> 
> Scan the printed stepwedge without adjustments and bring it into 
> Photoshop. Then read the L values of each step and enter them into 
the 
> linearization in QTR. The values should go from high to low instead 
of 
> low to high. That's how QTR differentiates between the different 
types 

> of readings.
> 
> --
> Daniel Staver
> http://daniel.staver.no

> This is what is in the .qidf file. You can see I entered the values 
> from the Low to the High.

Values from a scanner should be high to low.

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

Daniel,

OOOPS! i GUESS IF i COULD READ I could get this thing right. 


Well, I dropped out of this browser long enough to go and enter them 
from HIGH to LOW as follows and still no curve was generated. The 
Linerize line was added to the .qidf though. HHHMMMMMM? What did I do 
wrong now, I wonder?

Still frustrated but still your friend in Photography,

Johnny

PRINTER=Quad1280
CURVE_NAME=UT2-MY-HPhotoRag-neutral-2
GRAPH_CURVE=YES
N_OF_INKS=6
DEFAULT_INK_LIMIT=45
BOOST_K=55
LIMIT_K=
LIMIT_C=45
LIMIT_M=45
LIMIT_Y=0
LIMIT_LC=45
LIMIT_LM=40
N_OF_GRAY_PARTS=3
GRAY_INK_1=K
GRAY_VAL_1=100
GRAY_INK_2=M
GRAY_VAL_2=50.5
GRAY_INK_3=LM
GRAY_VAL_3=17.2
GRAY_HIGHLIGHT=4
GRAY_SHADOW=8
GRAY_OVERLAP=10
GRAY_GAMMA=1
GRAY_CURVE=
N_OF_TONER_PARTS=2
TONER_INK_1=C
TONER_VAL_1=100
TONER_INK_2=LC
TONER_VAL_2=39
TONER_HIGHLIGHT=0.5
TONER_SHADOW=1
TONER_GAMMA=1
TONER_CURVE=
N_OF_UNUSED=1
UNUSED_INK_1=Y
LINEARIZE="99 87 76 67 60 55 49 75 41 37 34 33 31 28 28 27 26 25 21 16 
15 "

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Daniel Staver 
<daniel@p...> wrote:

> > This is what is in the .qidf file. You can see I entered the values 
> > from the Low to the High.
> 
> Values from a scanner should be high to low.
> 
> --
> Daniel Staver
> http://daniel.staver.no

That's odd... Doesn't work for me either right now, but I tested this 
earlier and had no problems. I'll look into it, but probably won't have 
time until tomorrow.

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


Johnny Eades wrote:

> 
> Daniel,
> 
> OOOPS! i GUESS IF i COULD READ I could get this thing right. 
> 
> 
> Well, I dropped out of this browser long enough to go and enter them 
> from HIGH to LOW as follows and still no curve was generated. The 
> Linerize line was added to the .qidf though. HHHMMMMMM? What did I do 
> wrong now, I wonder?
> 
> Still frustrated but still your friend in Photography,
> 
> Johnny
> 
> PRINTER=Quad1280
> CURVE_NAME=UT2-MY-HPhotoRag-neutral-2
> GRAPH_CURVE=YES
> N_OF_INKS=6
> DEFAULT_INK_LIMIT=45
> BOOST_K=55
> LIMIT_K=
> LIMIT_C=45
> LIMIT_M=45
> LIMIT_Y=0
> LIMIT_LC=45
> LIMIT_LM=40
> N_OF_GRAY_PARTS=3
> GRAY_INK_1=K
> GRAY_VAL_1=100
> GRAY_INK_2=M
> GRAY_VAL_2=50.5
> GRAY_INK_3=LM
> GRAY_VAL_3=17.2
> GRAY_HIGHLIGHT=4
> GRAY_SHADOW=8
> GRAY_OVERLAP=10
> GRAY_GAMMA=1
> GRAY_CURVE=
> N_OF_TONER_PARTS=2
> TONER_INK_1=C
> TONER_VAL_1=100
> TONER_INK_2=LC
> TONER_VAL_2=39
> TONER_HIGHLIGHT=0.5
> TONER_SHADOW=1
> TONER_GAMMA=1
> TONER_CURVE=
> N_OF_UNUSED=1
> UNUSED_INK_1=Y
> LINEARIZE="99 87 76 67 60 55 49 75 41 37 34 33 31 28 28 27 26 25 21 16 
> 15 "

Johnny and Daniel too,

Roy's curve fitter does not do well if the curve is not monotonic- either up or down.
Johnny's original values from the densitometer looked fine, but the new L values
are not good because they have a big bump in the middle. This makes the curve fitting not 
work at least in my hands.

You can take the scanned image and use the histogram in PS (Roy's suggestion) to read 
out the values a bit more precisely - may not help if the scanner produced a poor curve.

Costa



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Daniel Staver <daniel@p...> 
wrote:

> That's odd... Doesn't work for me either right now, but I tested this 
> earlier and had no problems. I'll look into it, but probably won't have 
> time until tomorrow.
> 
> --
> Daniel Staver
> http://daniel.staver.no
> 
> 
> Johnny Eades wrote:
> > 
> > Daniel,
> > 
> > OOOPS! i GUESS IF i COULD READ I could get this thing right. 
> > 
> > 
> > Well, I dropped out of this browser long enough to go and enter them 
> > from HIGH to LOW as follows and still no curve was generated. The 
> > Linerize line was added to the .qidf though. HHHMMMMMM? What did I do 
> > wrong now, I wonder?
> > 
> > Still frustrated but still your friend in Photography,
> > 
> > Johnny
> > 
> > PRINTER=Quad1280
> > CURVE_NAME=UT2-MY-HPhotoRag-neutral-2
> > GRAPH_CURVE=YES
> > N_OF_INKS=6
> > DEFAULT_INK_LIMIT=45
> > BOOST_K=55
> > LIMIT_K=
> > LIMIT_C=45
> > LIMIT_M=45
> > LIMIT_Y=0
> > LIMIT_LC=45
> > LIMIT_LM=40
> > N_OF_GRAY_PARTS=3
> > GRAY_INK_1=K
> > GRAY_VAL_1=100
> > GRAY_INK_2=M
> > GRAY_VAL_2=50.5
> > GRAY_INK_3=LM
> > GRAY_VAL_3=17.2
> > GRAY_HIGHLIGHT=4
> > GRAY_SHADOW=8
> > GRAY_OVERLAP=10
> > GRAY_GAMMA=1
> > GRAY_CURVE=
> > N_OF_TONER_PARTS=2
> > TONER_INK_1=C
> > TONER_VAL_1=100
> > TONER_INK_2=LC
> > TONER_VAL_2=39
> > TONER_HIGHLIGHT=0.5
> > TONER_SHADOW=1
> > TONER_GAMMA=1
> > TONER_CURVE=
> > N_OF_UNUSED=1
> > UNUSED_INK_1=Y
> > LINEARIZE="99 87 76 67 60 55 49 75 41 37 34 33 31 28 28 27 26 25 21 16 
> > 15 "

Costa and Daniel,

I see the incorrerct number of 75 in the line. I went back and 
started from square one and plugged in the densities again and it did 
generate a curve, but it is flat in the middle tones; and just not 
good for any printing. I just can't get the LAB VALUES to work in 
generating a curve. I missed out on another densitometer on eBay just 
a few minutes ago. That makes 8 I've tried to get with no success. 
I'll see if I can get access to the densitometer again this week with 
a fresh grayscale print that has not been tagged or worked up in 
PhotoShop or anything but the straight unadulterated file.--- In 
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "ccolbertbw" 
<ccolbert@u...> wrote:
> 
> Johnny and Daniel too,
> 
> Roy's curve fitter does not do well if the curve is not monotonic- 
either up or down.
> Johnny's original values from the densitometer looked fine, but the 
new L values
> are not good because they have a big bump in the middle. This makes 
the curve fitting not 
> work at least in my hands.
> 
> You can take the scanned image and use the histogram in PS (Roy's 
suggestion) to read 
> out the values a bit more precisely - may not help if the scanner 
produced a poor curve.
> 
> Costa
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Daniel Staver 
<daniel@p...> 
> wrote:
> > That's odd... Doesn't work for me either right now, but I tested 
this 
> > earlier and had no problems. I'll look into it, but probably 
won't have 
> > time until tomorrow.
> > 
> > --
> > Daniel Staver
> > http://daniel.staver.no
> > 
> > 
> > Johnny Eades wrote:
> > > 
> > > Daniel,
> > > 
> > > OOOPS! i GUESS IF i COULD READ I could get this thing right. 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Well, I dropped out of this browser long enough to go and enter 
them 
> > > from HIGH to LOW as follows and still no curve was generated. 
The 
> > > Linerize line was added to the .qidf though. HHHMMMMMM? What 
did I do 
> > > wrong now, I wonder?
> > > 
> > > Still frustrated but still your friend in Photography,
> > > 
> > > Johnny
> > > 
> > > PRINTER=Quad1280
> > > CURVE_NAME=UT2-MY-HPhotoRag-neutral-2
> > > GRAPH_CURVE=YES
> > > N_OF_INKS=6
> > > DEFAULT_INK_LIMIT=45
> > > BOOST_K=55
> > > LIMIT_K=
> > > LIMIT_C=45
> > > LIMIT_M=45
> > > LIMIT_Y=0
> > > LIMIT_LC=45
> > > LIMIT_LM=40
> > > N_OF_GRAY_PARTS=3
> > > GRAY_INK_1=K
> > > GRAY_VAL_1=100
> > > GRAY_INK_2=M
> > > GRAY_VAL_2=50.5
> > > GRAY_INK_3=LM
> > > GRAY_VAL_3=17.2
> > > GRAY_HIGHLIGHT=4
> > > GRAY_SHADOW=8
> > > GRAY_OVERLAP=10
> > > GRAY_GAMMA=1
> > > GRAY_CURVE=
> > > N_OF_TONER_PARTS=2
> > > TONER_INK_1=C
> > > TONER_VAL_1=100
> > > TONER_INK_2=LC
> > > TONER_VAL_2=39
> > > TONER_HIGHLIGHT=0.5
> > > TONER_SHADOW=1
> > > TONER_GAMMA=1
> > > TONER_CURVE=
> > > N_OF_UNUSED=1
> > > UNUSED_INK_1=Y
> > > LINEARIZE="99 87 76 67 60 55 49 75 41 37 34 33 31 28 28 27 26 
25 21 16 
> > > 15 "

Yeah, I guess the results will vary a lot from scanner to scanner. Roy 
said that the Epson 3200 gave results close to what he got from his 
densitometer. I have the same scanner and think the results aren't too bad.

Why don't you just play around with GRAY_GAMMA, GRAY_HIGHLIGHT, and 
GRAY_SHADOW in the meantime? You can create really good curves even 
without linearization. It just takes a little more experimentation and 
tweaking.

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

> I see the incorrerct number of 75 in the line. I went back and 
> started from square one and plugged in the densities again and it did 
> generate a curve, but it is flat in the middle tones; and just not 
> good for any printing. I just can't get the LAB VALUES to work in 
> generating a curve. I missed out on another densitometer on eBay just 
> a few minutes ago. That makes 8 I've tried to get with no success. 
> I'll see if I can get access to the densitometer again this week with 
> a fresh grayscale print that has not been tagged or worked up in 
> PhotoShop or anything but the straight unadulterated file.--- In

Thanks to everyone for their input. I guess it's back to some more 
experimentation for a while until I can get a densitometer. On top of 
all this my Nikon D70 died on me after just 2 months. It's at the 
factory getting fixed. They say things happen in threes---what's next?

Your friend in Photography,

Johnny

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Daniel Staver 
<daniel@p...> wrote:
> Yeah, I guess the results will vary a lot from scanner to scanner. 
Roy 
> said that the Epson 3200 gave results close to what he got from his 
> densitometer. I have the same scanner and think the results aren't 
too bad.
> 
> Why don't you just play around with GRAY_GAMMA, GRAY_HIGHLIGHT, and 
> GRAY_SHADOW in the meantime? You can create really good curves even 
> without linearization. It just takes a little more experimentation 
and 
> tweaking.
> 
> --
> Daniel Staver
> http://daniel.staver.no
> 
> 
> > I see the incorrerct number of 75 in the line. I went back and 
> > started from square one and plugged in the densities again and it 
did 
> > generate a curve, but it is flat in the middle tones; and just 
not 
> > good for any printing. I just can't get the LAB VALUES to work in 
> > generating a curve. I missed out on another densitometer on eBay 
just 
> > a few minutes ago. That makes 8 I've tried to get with no 
success. 
> > I'll see if I can get access to the densitometer again this week 
with 
> > a fresh grayscale print that has not been tagged or worked up in 
> > PhotoShop or anything but the straight unadulterated file.--- In