Digital BW, The Print

Many on this forum use QTR on Epson UC printers (2200, 400, 7600,
9600) 
using OEM inks.  We know that the "warm" profiles use only the black 
and light black inks, while the toned prints additionally use various 
mixtures of light cyan, light magenta, and yellow.  Because density 
across the 0-100% ramp is built up primarily from two desnity inks,
QTR 
OEM ink prints in general will be less smooth and more dotty in 
highlights.  This is only true at VERY close viewing distances and of 
no consequence for a print hanging on the wall or even prints viewed
on 
had at half arm's length.  Sadly I am one of those "print to the
nose" 
guys (perhaps I need to get a life!).

So what does it take to get better prints?  The original Piezpgraphy 
(and now PiezoTone) and MIS FS inks use 4 shades of gray (black, dark 
gray, medium gray, and light gray) to produce the absolute in ramp 
smoothness and dotless in highlights.  I asked myself is this
necessary?

The approximate ink density relative to black for Piezotone and MIS
FS 
inks are:

Black = 100%
Dark Gray = 55%
Medium Gray = 10%
Light Gray = 5%

In contrast for Epson OEM Matte inks

Black = 100%
Light Black = 35%

I have MIS FS inks loaded on a 1280, and went about creating QTR 
profiles using the following inks:

(1) Full spectrum (quad tone):  Black, Dark Gray, Medium Gray, and 
Light Gray.

(2) Partial spectrum (tritone):  Black, Dark Gray, and Medium Gray

On the 1280 (and presumably other newer printers that are smaller
than 
or equal to 4 pL droplet size):  The tritone prints are just as
smooth 
and dotless as the quad tone prints.  Both are better (very, very 
slightly)
than QTR prints uisng OEM inks.  My guess is that the Light Gray (5%) 
ink was essential in the older Epson 3000 printer which has a much 
larger dot size.

This has an important upshot, but only for advanced users who know
how 
to write profiles with QTR (or other RIPs which allow individual ink 
control).

The Piezotone inks are available in a number of hues (warm-neutral, 
cool-nuetral, cool-selenium, and sepia).  The ability to make decent 
prints using only 3 inks allows users to combine the hues in a single 
printer.  In contrast, on a 1280 using InkjetMall's Piezography ICC 
approach, one is stuck with a single hue.  

The 1280 is a 6 color printer and so it is possible to load black + 2 
hues (say cool-seleniun AND warm-nuetral) of Dark Gray and Medium 
Gray.  With this approach you have a 
redundant ink position which can be some sort of a toner, or used for 
full spectrum quadtone.  For this option you would need to fill your 
own cartridges or create a custom loaded CIS unit.

On the 2200, 4000, 7600, etc which are 7 color (neglecting the glossy 
Photo Black of the 4000), the upshot actually is very promising.  You 
can load THREE hues of PiezoTone inks.  InkjetMall offers 2 hues for 
these printers.  But because the light density ink appears to be 
superfluous, a custom approach will allow 3 hues and countless mixing 
between the hues.

Regards.

Shilesh

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani"
<shilesh.jani@s...> wrote:

...
> So what does it take to get better prints?  The original Piezpgraphy 
> (and now PiezoTone) and MIS FS inks use 4 shades of gray (black, dark 
> gray, medium gray, and light gray) to produce the absolute in ramp 
> smoothness and dotless in highlights.  I asked myself is this
> necessary?

That is a subjective call. I happen to believe it is. However I deal
with a lot of large format images, where the difference may be more
noticable. On the other hand, many are more than happy with the two
part K, and their opinions are as valid as anyone's.

...

> (2) Partial spectrum (tritone):  Black, Dark Gray, and Medium Gray
> 
> On the 1280 (and presumably other newer printers that are smaller
> than 
> or equal to 4 pL droplet size):  The tritone prints are just as
> smooth 
> and dotless as the quad tone prints.

...

Again, some would disagree, even going to 6 inks, 5 grays and black. I
have seen examples and there is a difference. The question is, do you
need it?

> Both are better (very, very 
> slightly)
> than QTR prints uisng OEM inks.  My guess is that the Light Gray (5%) 
> ink was essential in the older Epson 3000 printer which has a much 
> larger dot size.

...
The above mentioned 6 part "quads" were done with a 9000. Obviously
native dot size is a factor, but dots are dots.


> On the 2200, 4000, 7600, etc which are 7 color (neglecting the glossy 
> Photo Black of the 4000), the upshot actually is very promising.  You 
> can load THREE hues of PiezoTone inks.  InkjetMall offers 2 hues for 
> these printers.  But because the light density ink appears to be 
> superfluous, a custom approach will allow 3 hues and countless mixing 
> between the hues.

That is certainly possible, and an interesting idea. For now, I prefer
the smoother 4 ink aproach, and various options between two complete
hue sets with a shared K with an x600. Also, for now, the straight UC
set for heavily toned mono work.
Clearly though, as printers come out with more tanks, and smaller
dots, many interesting options open up for creative thinkers like you.
Keep it up.
One thing we are going to see more of, multi-part Ks with CMY toners,
quite possible even now with a x600 and StudioPrint. You can take all
this quite far given a budget beyond most of us, the new
Roland/StudioPrint/DaVinci system for example.

Tyler

Tyler,

Which two  PIezzotone inksets do you like to blend for the most useful range 
of mono color?

I am getting my main board back tomorrow for my 7000 which hopefully then 
will be restored after my Lyson jelled with pigment disaster.

RIght now I have the Selenium Tone PT set in there and I will have this 
linearized with QTR. I realize you are using 7 total channels but, if I were to 
use the 2 additional channels  i will have for a toning pigment do you think it 
would do me any good or, just be more trouble than its worth? I am getting 
very good carbon sepia hues out of my 9600 with UCrome.

John







That is certainly possible, and an interesting idea. For now, I prefer

> the smoother 4 ink aproach, and various options between two complete
> hue sets with a shared K with an x600. Also, for now, the straight UC
> set for heavily toned mono work.
> Tyler

Shilesh Jani wrote:

>
> Many on this forum use QTR on Epson UC printers (2200, 400, 7600,
> 9600)
> using OEM inks.  We know that the "warm" profiles use only the black
> and light black inks, while the toned prints additionally use various
> mixtures of light cyan, light magenta, and yellow.  Because density
> across the 0-100% ramp is built up primarily from two desnity inks,
> QTR
> OEM ink prints in general will be less smooth and more dotty in
> highlights.  This is only true at VERY close viewing distances and of
> no consequence for a print hanging on the wall or even prints viewed
> on
> had at half arm's length.  Sadly I am one of those "print to the
> nose"
> guys (perhaps I need to get a life!).
>
> So what does it take to get better prints?  The original Piezpgraphy
> (and now PiezoTone) and MIS FS inks use 4 shades of gray (black, dark
> gray, medium gray, and light gray) to produce the absolute in ramp
> smoothness and dotless in highlights.  I asked myself is this
> necessary?
>
> The approximate ink density relative to black for Piezotone and MIS
> FS
> inks are:
>
> Black = 100%
> Dark Gray = 55%
> Medium Gray = 10%
> Light Gray = 5%
>
The defaults for the PiezoTone inks densities from StudioPrint 10 is:

Black = 100%
Light black = 50%
Very light black = 20%
very very light black = 7%

This is what I'm using (that is, I haven't changed the default settings) 
printing on an Epson 7600 using PiezoTones on Hahnemuhle Photo Rag 
308gsm, with StudioPrint.

If you really want dotless, I think you need to consider either the 
PiezoTones, or the MIS Ultratone inks for a seven channel printer like 
the Epson x6xx printers.

I would have to take issue with your statement that "This is only true 
at VERY close viewing distances and of no consequence for a print 
hanging on the wall or even prints viewed on had at half arm's length." 
I've run some unscientific tests, and people other than myself (that is, 
non-photographer, non-printer neighbors) can see the difference between 
PiezoTones printed at 1440 and at 2880 from farther away than "normal 
viewing distance." The only difference I can see with a loupe on these 
test prints is the level of dotiness. I think less dotiness is clearly 
visible (at least off my printer) from normal viewing distances.

And, as Tyler says, hex tone inksets are even smoother. The difference 
being the distance between the dots.

Is it necessary? I think it is, yes. Of course, YMMV.
--
Bruce Watson

I mix my own <G>.
Actually, the cool side is Selenium. But the warm side is my own mix
of the WN and CS sets. Neither seemed exactly right.
If you notice, there is a great deal of sense to the way IJM pairs
their dual sets. Selnium + WN, and CN + CS.
These sets have more likelyhood of meeting in the middle in a pleasing
way.
With only two tanks open, I'm not sure what to suggest. Since you are
happy with your UC Sepias, that seems to sugget the WNs, but I'n not
sure which two densities would be most useful.
What could be more interestin, 2 from the CN set to do subtle all cool
blends. The Seleniums really are a bit warm by silver standards. I
just printed a whole show for someone with the CN set, and was
suprised at how nice the set is.
Maybe the two light inks, so you have those Selenium shadows.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean"
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> 
> Tyler,
> 
> Which two  PIezzotone inksets do you like to blend for the most
useful range 
> of mono color?
> 
> I am getting my main board back tomorrow for my 7000 which hopefully
then 
> will be restored after my Lyson jelled with pigment disaster.
> 
> RIght now I have the Selenium Tone PT set in there and I will have this 
> linearized with QTR. I realize you are using 7 total channels but,
if I were to 
> use the 2 additional channels  i will have for a toning pigment do
you think it 
> would do me any good or, just be more trouble than its worth? I am
getting 

> very good carbon sepia hues out of my 9600 with UCrome.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That is certainly possible, and an interesting idea. For now, I prefer
> > the smoother 4 ink aproach, and various options between two complete
> > hue sets with a shared K with an x600. Also, for now, the straight UC
> > set for heavily toned mono work.
> > Tyler

BUT do you print and calibrate (densitometer check) the contrast difference,
however so slight, between the two resolutions?  Then, adjust so that both
prints are exactly equal in contrast and tone before bringing in the
neighbors?

Why would seven inks give no dots and four would create a problem?  Are you
calculating --and controlling-- dot gain?  There is no mention of which
paper, very much a factor in dot gain.  In fact some papers blasted with
seven inks would saturate so badly your friends and neighbors wouldn't like
them either.

What I am not understanding is why you have friends and neighbors looking at
the prints, then you are deciding why they see a difference (dots)?  At
least, that's what I take from what you said.  Just doesn't seem objective.

I am not questioning all your calculations.  It just seems to be a hard line
approach --if you don't have this it won't work.  Would you please explain a
little more?

Seth

==-----Original Message-----
==[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On 
==Behalf Of hogarth@...


==>
==> So what does it take to get better prints?  The original 
==Piezpgraphy 
==> (and now PiezoTone) and MIS FS inks use 4 shades of gray 
==(black, dark 
==> gray, medium gray, and light gray) to produce the absolute in ramp 
==> smoothness and dotless in highlights.  I asked myself is this 
==> necessary?
==>
==> The approximate ink density relative to black for Piezotone 
==and MIS FS 
==> inks are:
==>
==> Black = 100%
==> Dark Gray = 55%
==> Medium Gray = 10%
==> Light Gray = 5%
==>
==The defaults for the PiezoTone inks densities from StudioPrint 10 is:
==
==Black = 100%
==Light black = 50%
==Very light black = 20%
==very very light black = 7%
==
==This is what I'm using (that is, I haven't changed the 
==default settings) printing on an Epson 7600 using PiezoTones 
==on Hahnemuhle Photo Rag 308gsm, with StudioPrint.
==
==If you really want dotless, I think you need to consider 
==either the PiezoTones, or the MIS Ultratone inks for a seven 
==channel printer like the Epson x6xx printers.
==
==I would have to take issue with your statement that "This is 
==only true at VERY close viewing distances and of no 
==consequence for a print hanging on the wall or even prints 
==viewed on had at half arm's length." 
==I've run some unscientific tests, and people other than 
==myself (that is, non-photographer, non-printer neighbors) can 
==see the difference between PiezoTones printed at 1440 and at 
==2880 from farther away than "normal viewing distance." The 
==only difference I can see with a loupe on these test prints 
==is the level of dotiness. I think less dotiness is clearly 
==visible (at least off my printer) from normal viewing distances.
==
==And, as Tyler says, hex tone inksets are even smoother. The 
==difference being the distance between the dots.
==
==Is it necessary? I think it is, yes. Of course, YMMV.
==--
==Bruce Watson
==
==
==
==
==
==
==
==
==
==
==
==------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
==--------------------~--> In low income neighborhoods, 84% do 
==not own computers.
==At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide!
==http://us.click.yahoo.com/S.QlOD/3MnJAA/Zx0JAA/ucIolB/TM
==--------------------------------------------------------------
==------~-> 
==
==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
==
==
==
== 
==
==
==
==
==

Take it Bruce, I gotta go...
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Seth"
<seth@m...> wrote:
> BUT do you print and calibrate (densitometer check) the contrast
difference,
> however so slight, between the two resolutions?  Then, adjust so
that both
> prints are exactly equal in contrast and tone before bringing in the
> neighbors?
> 
> Why would seven inks give no dots and four would create a problem? 
Are you
> calculating --and controlling-- dot gain?  There is no mention of which
> paper, very much a factor in dot gain.  In fact some papers blasted with
> seven inks would saturate so badly your friends and neighbors
wouldn't like
> them either.
> 
> What I am not understanding is why you have friends and neighbors
looking at
> the prints, then you are deciding why they see a difference (dots)?  At
> least, that's what I take from what you said.  Just doesn't seem
objective.
> 
> I am not questioning all your calculations.  It just seems to be a
hard line
> approach --if you don't have this it won't work.  Would you please
explain a

> little more?
> 
> Seth
> ==

Thanks Tyler,

I think you are right. First I will work with pure ST since that is what I have, then 
just might try the CN in the other two spots.There have been a couple of 
things I did with a smaller printer with the ST and thought the highlights went a 
bit warm. 

A couple of weeks ago a client of mine brought by some proofs of landscapes 
that were done with a 9000 with Piezzo ST on the Epson Ultrasmooth rag. 
The color tone was very different from what I had done with Hahnemuhle 
papers, they were very silvery and much cooler. I was actually surprised that I 
liked them and it made me think that paper choice also gives me color 
options.

Thanks for the comments. I am going to NY next week and might try to stop in 
at the Diallo studio while in Brooklyn to see what he is doing in this regard.

John 



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" <
tyler@t...> wrote:

> 
> I mix my own <G>.
> Actually, the cool side is Selenium. But the warm side is my own mix
> of the WN and CS sets. Neither seemed exactly right.
> If you notice, there is a great deal of sense to the way IJM pairs
> their dual sets. Selnium + WN, and CN + CS.
> These sets have more likelyhood of meeting in the middle in a pleasing
> way.
> With only two tanks open, I'm not sure what to suggest. Since you are
> happy with your UC Sepias, that seems to sugget the WNs, but I'n not
> sure which two densities would be most useful.
> What could be more interestin, 2 from the CN set to do subtle all cool
> blends. The Seleniums really are a bit warm by silver standards. I
> just printed a whole show for someone with the CN set, and was
> suprised at how nice the set is.
> Maybe the two light inks, so you have those Selenium shadows.
> Tyler
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean"
> <deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> > 
> > Tyler,
> > 
> > Which two  PIezzotone inksets do you like to blend for the most
> useful range 
> > of mono color?
> > 
> > I am getting my main board back tomorrow for my 7000 which hopefully
> then 
> > will be restored after my Lyson jelled with pigment disaster.
> > 
> > RIght now I have the Selenium Tone PT set in there and I will have this 
> > linearized with QTR. I realize you are using 7 total channels but,
> if I were to 
> > use the 2 additional channels  i will have for a toning pigment do
> you think it 
> > would do me any good or, just be more trouble than its worth? I am
> getting 
> > very good carbon sepia hues out of my 9600 with UCrome.
> > 
> > John
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > That is certainly possible, and an interesting idea. For now, I prefer
> > > the smoother 4 ink aproach, and various options between two complete
> > > hue sets with a shared K with an x600. Also, for now, the straight UC
> > > set for heavily toned mono work.
> > > Tyler

Seth wrote:

> BUT do you print and calibrate (densitometer check) the contrast 
> difference,
> however so slight, between the two resolutions?  Then, adjust so that both
> prints are exactly equal in contrast and tone before bringing in the
> neighbors?

No. I said it was an unscientific test. What I did was use the RIP for 
what it's good for. I linearized both 1440 output and 2880 output. This 
should take care of your slight contrast differences. I printed the same 
file from both print environments, that differed only in the print 
resolution, and the separate linearization.

What I did was show them to people under the same lighting. I asked two 
questions. First, which print to you like better? Second, why? This was 
a couple of years back and I didn't write it down (this was for my 
benefit and not for a journal paper).

And, it's easy enough to replicate the test. You have no need whatsoever 
to take my word for anything.

>
> Why would seven inks give no dots and four would create a problem?  
> Are you
> calculating --and controlling-- dot gain?  

The Ultratones have seven inks, yes. But it's a quadtone inkset, IIRC. 
It's a black, then three warm grays, and three cool grays. The two gray 
sets have the same densities. You mix them (curves) to create the 
"color" you want.

And who said anything about quadtones producing a problem???

> There is no mention of which
> paper, very much a factor in dot gain.

Yes there is. Read for it. It's in my third paragraph.

> In fact some papers blasted with
> seven inks would saturate so badly your friends and neighbors wouldn't 
> like
> them either.

I'm assuming you know a little something about how to print.

>
> What I am not understanding is why you have friends and neighbors 
> looking at
> the prints, then you are deciding why they see a difference (dots)?  At
> least, that's what I take from what you said.  Just doesn't seem 
> objective.

I didn't say it was objective. In fact, I said explicitly that it was 
unscientific.

It's not my job to prove anything to you. You asked a question, and I 
gave you an answer. You can, of course, replicate the test (or, better 
yet, make up your own test) and get your own results, and draw your own 
conclusions.

>
> I am not questioning all your calculations.  It just seems to be a 
> hard line
> approach --if you don't have this it won't work.

Why would you draw that conclusion? I didn't say that, or even imply it. 
You said you wanted to "get better prints." You asked "is this 
necessary" and I replied "I think it is, yes. Of course, YMMV." How in 
the world could you call that a hard line approach - I explicitly said 
that you might get different results.

>   Would you please explain a
> little more?

No. You don't want help, you just want an argument. Do your own 
research, and draw your own conclusions. I'm done with this thread.

>
> Seth
>

I am not questioning your word of what happened.  
I just thought if people liked one over another, there should be a reason
why. You just said it HAD to be the dots.

Not much of what is done here is scientific in the true sense.  Using the
friends and neighbors scenario and saying it had to be the dots got my
attention.

I thought maybe there was more to it.

Seth

==-----Original Message-----
==Behalf Of hogarth@...
==
==What I did was show them to people under the same lighting. I 
==asked two questions. First, which print to you like better? 
==Second, why? This was a couple of years back and I didn't 
==write it down (this was for my benefit and not for a journal paper).
==
==And, it's easy enough to replicate the test. You have no need 
==whatsoever to take my word for anything.
==

Shilesh,

> ...
> On the 1280 (and presumably other newer printers...):  
>The tritone prints are just as smooth
> and dotless as the quad tone prints...

> The 1280 is a 6 color printer and so it is possible to load black + 2
> hues (say cool-seleniun AND warm-nuetral) of Dark Gray and Medium
> Gray.  

You've just described the UT2 and UT7 inksets.

>With this approach you have a
> redundant ink position which can be some sort of a toner, or used for
> full spectrum quadtone.

In the UT2 and UT7 this extra spot -- the yellow position -- is for the
sepia toner, with the option of a super light UT-FS-Y (really unnecessary),
Glop (good for some glossy papers) or whatever.

> For this option you would need to fill your
> own cartridges or create a custom loaded CIS unit.

Or just use the UT2 or UT7, the Epson driver, and the curves that are on my
web site of MIS's.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com