Digital BW, The Print

I just received my sample print of the K7 inkset and I am shocked at
how ordinary this print looks.

It is an image of two water towers with two pick up trucks inside a
dark carport. It was done on a 2200 on Innova Smooth Cotton. As for
neutrality, when I laid this print down beside a print done on the
same exact paper with UC, QTR, and Roy's curves 70C/ 20 W, the color
tone is very, very close to my UC print, I proimise. The superior
tonal seperation simply isn't there in this sample print, and the
other Piezzotone ICC prints I have on this table or my UC QTR prints
from drum scans for the most part actually look richer in both ends of
the tonal spectrum. The blacks of this sample print are not in ANY way
superior from a direct comparison to other inkjet prints I have around
here and the highlight seperaton compared to Piezzotone ICC with
Studio Print especially look flat and ill defined. 

Look, Jon Cone knows more about digital monochrome than I'll ever know
but someting isn't right with this sample print. I just looks dull.
Has anyone else received one and if so what are your first impressions?

As to this whole discussion of neturality, I agree totally with what
Tyler just said. I think a lot of us strived for absolute neutrality
because for so long it was unobtainable for the most part. Now that we
have it I also say, so what, why is it desireable? I actually prefer
some hue to my monochrome prints, either toward cool, warm, selenium,
or something. Now it could be I'm just looking at an imperfect test
print from a not so great scan, but really I feel like staying exactly
where I am for the time being until I see more. I do hope my first
impressions are not final ones.

John

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" 
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> I just received my sample print of the K7 inkset and I am shocked at
> how ordinary this print looks.
> 
> 
> Look, Jon Cone knows more about digital monochrome than I'll ever know
> but someting isn't right with this sample print. I just looks dull.
> Has anyone else received one and if so what are your first 
impressions?
> 


Sounds like they may want to make the original image available for 
comparison use, just like Lyson did for the Digital Dark system.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean"
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
...
> As to this whole discussion of neturality, I agree totally with what
> Tyler just said. I think a lot of us strived for absolute neutrality
> because for so long it was unobtainable for the most part. Now that we
> have it I also say, so what, why is it desireable? I actually prefer
> some hue to my monochrome prints, either toward cool, warm, selenium,
> or something...

It's so hard to make hard and fast opinions about this stuff. When I
first had a chance to see a lot of Frank Gohlke's prints years ago at
a workshop, I was so impressed. They did not yell at you, they had no
screaming whites, no booming blacks, no rich selenium or Portriga
color. Just these glowing grays. I think he used Polyfiber, a paper
the rest of us never took seriously, with a slight selenium toning for
longevity. Sexton and others were part of the same west coast
workshop, so you know these were an exception.
And one of the impressions that really stood out, because it wasn't
the excepted norm- they seemed absolutely dead on neutral. They seemed
so neutral gray, that you actually made note of it consciously, how
beautiful gray is.
But, were they really? Was it just an impression? Would someone else's
work have had the same presence printed on the same materials? Another
time neutrality hit me was an old platinum print at a museum, it could
be neutral or even cold back then because it platinum  wasn't pure. It
was so neutral it looked like pencil lead, but photographic, and very
beautifu. But the same questions apply, was it really lab neutral or
just an impression?
I've always thought neutrality was a viable goal. Under what
circumstances it makes the most beautiful print is another issue
entirely, made even more complicated by how sensitive the eye/brain is
to it, and it's slight variation.
I'd like to play with the inks and see what works with them, and the
different papers, just not enough Epsons laying around.
Tyler

Well put, from someone who has been there.

I'll tell you, the more monochrome work I do the more I like variety,
both for my clients as well as for myself. It is so true that what
works for one photographer in one body of work is totally wrong for
another photographer or another body of work.

As to these older "neutral" silver and plat/pallad prints, I think a
lot of the ones we thought of a lacking a hue were actually a bit cold
 by absolute standards. Harry Callahan used to print on the old
original fiber Kodak Polycontrast paper soon after it first came out.
We were all taught that stuff was junk but his prints were very
silvery and beautuful and of course he crafted the developer and
toning to give him a nice color. I asked him during a show of his work
why he used that paper since it was what we thought of as commercial
paper and he said he liked the print color. It worked great for him
for that Chicago urban work. 

But we're in a different world now. We can have so much more variety
even with the same media, in the same machine, in the same hour. Too
bad Harry isn't around to play with it all. I want as many options as
possible and I don't want to be directed by the materials any more
than is absolutely necessary. I think that the very fact that we are
developing so much control in this area of black and white print color
is the very reason so many of us are reflecting on exactly what it all
means. In the past we played the hand that was delt us and did the
best we could. Now we're gonna have choices.

John

> It's so hard to make hard and fast opinions about this stuff. When I
> first had a chance to see a lot of Frank Gohlke's prints years ago at
> a workshop, I was so impressed. They did not yell at you, they had no
> screaming whites, no booming blacks, no rich selenium or Portriga
> color. Just these glowing grays. I think he used Polyfiber, a paper
> the rest of us never took seriously, with a slight selenium toning for
> longevity. Sexton and others were part of the same west coast
> workshop, so you know these were an exception.
> And one of the impressions that really stood out, because it wasn't
> the excepted norm- they seemed absolutely dead on neutral. They seemed
> so neutral gray, that you actually made note of it consciously, how
> beautiful gray is.
> But, were they really? Was it just an impression? Would someone else's
> work have had the same presence printed on the same materials? Another
> time neutrality hit me was an old platinum print at a museum, it could
> be neutral or even cold back then because it platinum  wasn't pure. It
> was so neutral it looked like pencil lead, but photographic, and very
> beautifu. But the same questions apply, was it really lab neutral or
> just an impression?
> I've always thought neutrality was a viable goal. Under what
> circumstances it makes the most beautiful print is another issue
> entirely, made even more complicated by how sensitive the eye/brain is
> to it, and it's slight variation.
> I'd like to play with the inks and see what works with them, and the
> different papers, just not enough Epsons laying around.
> Tyler

John Dean wrote:

> ... the more monochrome work I do the more I like variety,
> ...


Hmm ...  I think I have an interesting idea ...

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

I really have to go with neutrality being in the eyes of the beholder.  The same
print can be called neutral, warm or cool by different people.
I was at the SF Photo show a couple of weeks ago, I was amazed at the 
variability of the silver prints I saw there.  They appeared to have tones from
greenish, to reddish, to warm, to cool.  I feel that my own vision has varied over
time and is much more sensitive now than before.

As far as the K7 inks, I think the most obvious benefit is the smoothness.  It's
extremely smooth -- no dots visible even with a high power loupe.  Dmax is
probably about the same as other inks.  The color tone is very even across the
density range.  It will vary slightly depending on the paper -- in fact since it
has no variable tone varying the paper is the only option.  It measures very
close to neutral.  The paper tone naturally has a big effect at the light end.

Roy

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" 
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> I just received my sample print of the K7 inkset and I am shocked 
>at how ordinary this print looks.
...
> Look, Jon Cone knows more about digital monochrome than I'll ever 
>know but someting isn't right with this sample print. I just looks 
>dull.
> Has anyone else received one and if so what are your first 
>impressions?
> 

We received ours yesterday, and I have similar feelings. The 
highlights on the water tower appeared to have abrupt changes, like 
mild posterisation, but it was difficult to tell because of the 
banding. Maybe a nozzle was blocked when they printed ours. The best 
D-Max I could measure was 1.65, which seems rather low. There were 
patches of detailless shadow, but I guess that could have been on 
the negative. The print was, however, dead neutral within the 
reading accuracy of our TR924 densitometer.

Maybe a simple 0-255 step wedge would have told us more.

I'm still interested in trying the system (with IJC/OPM, because 
that's what we use) but I would like to see a better print, or have 
the original file for comparison. Of course I should be writing this 
to Inkjetmall, but I saw John's post and decided to respond.

Best, Helen

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" 
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> It was done on a 2200 on Innova Smooth Cotton. As for
> neutrality, when I laid this print down beside a print done on the
> same exact paper with UC, QTR, and Roy's curves 70C/ 20 W, the color
> tone is very, very close to my UC print, I proimise. 
> John

Which of Roy's curves did you use?  

I've recently acquired some Innova Smooth Cotton and was hoping one of 
the curves Roy provides w/QTR would work with it.  I did a few quick 
test prints using both one of the supplied pk and an mk curves and 
didn't have much luck.  I realize I should roll up my sleeves and make 
my own, but if you've found one of Roy's that works well, I'd 
appreciate knowing which one.

Thanks,

Dean

Dean,

The 2200 print I was refering to was the K7 sample print and the UC
QTR neutral print was done on a 9600 with MK using the Photo Rag
curves at 70c/30w. That was a typo below that does't equal 100%! I
have also used 75/25 and 80/20 with excellent results on Photo Rag and
Innova S.C. for slightly cooler hues. I assume doing this on a 2200
would vary more from machine to machine but I imagine this would be close.

John






--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Dean Carnagey"
<Mister_Tazmo@h...> wrote:

> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" 
> <deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> > It was done on a 2200 on Innova Smooth Cotton. As for
> > neutrality, when I laid this print down beside a print done on the
> > same exact paper with UC, QTR, and Roy's curves 70C/ 20 W, the color
> > tone is very, very close to my UC print, I proimise. 
> > John
> 
> Which of Roy's curves did you use?  
> 
> I've recently acquired some Innova Smooth Cotton and was hoping one of 
> the curves Roy provides w/QTR would work with it.  I did a few quick 
> test prints using both one of the supplied pk and an mk curves and 
> didn't have much luck.  I realize I should roll up my sleeves and make 
> my own, but if you've found one of Roy's that works well, I'd 
> appreciate knowing which one.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dean

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" 
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> Dean,
> 
> The 2200 print I was refering to was the K7 sample print and the UC
> QTR neutral print was done on a 9600 with MK using the Photo Rag
> curves at 70c/30w. That was a typo below that does't equal 100%! I
> have also used 75/25 and 80/20 with excellent results on Photo Rag and
> Innova S.C. for slightly cooler hues. I assume doing this on a 2200
> would vary more from machine to machine but I imagine this would be 
close.
> 
> John

Thanks for the clarification, John.  Perhaps my 2200 is quite varried 
from your 9600 as I've not been able to (as yet) achieve a satisfactory 
print using the supplied Photo Rag curve.  

I really like this paper.  Actually, I think it was one of your old 
posts that led me to investigate it.  I've been hesitant to invest in 
the proper equipment and in the time to learn to make my own curves, 
but given how I feel about this paper, I may now have the motivation to 
do so.

Thanks again,

-Dean

My g'friend, not a bad test subject with no expertise, but pretty good
eyes, always calls my 2200 UC Mk Cool prints "purple." That's here
pretty consistent judgement.

Roy Harrington wrote:

>
> I really have to go with neutrality being in the eyes of the beholder. 
> The same
> print can be called neutral, warm or cool by different people.
> I was at the SF Photo show a couple of weeks ago, I was amazed at the
> variability of the silver prints I saw there. They appeared to have 
> tones from
> greenish, to reddish, to warm, to cool. I feel that my own vision has 
> varied over
> time and is much more sensitive now than before.
>
> As far as the K7 inks, I think the most obvious benefit is the 
> smoothness. It's
> extremely smooth -- no dots visible even with a high power loupe. Dmax is
> probably about the same as other inks. The color tone is very even 
> across the
> density range. It will vary slightly depending on the paper -- in fact 
> since it
> has no variable tone varying the paper is the only option. It measures 
> very
> close to neutral. The paper tone naturally has a big effect at the 
> light end.
>
> Roy
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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 \ufffdGroup Topic, Rules and Guidelines\ufffd 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 \ufffdOWNER\ufffd 
> AND \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd 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 \ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd 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.
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Digital photography technique 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+technique&w1=Digital+photography+technique&w2=Digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+software&w4=Photography+school&w5=Professional+digital+photography&w6=Stock+photography&c=6&s=179&.sig=8HQ55AQFB376U15T8mciBw> 
> 	Digital photography 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography&w1=Digital+photography+technique&w2=Digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+software&w4=Photography+school&w5=Professional+digital+photography&w6=Stock+photography&c=6&s=179&.sig=HWbuIJnfUOqUXbf2wbpZdw> 
> 	Digital photography software 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+software&w1=Digital+photography+technique&w2=Digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+software&w4=Photography+school&w5=Professional+digital+photography&w6=Stock+photography&c=6&s=179&.sig=zE6JoNQjSwvUyMC9sHw3NA> 
>
> Photography school 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Photography+school&w1=Digital+photography+technique&w2=Digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+software&w4=Photography+school&w5=Professional+digital+photography&w6=Stock+photography&c=6&s=179&.sig=pnzUJW8CPs8cfkRRUNz99w> 
> 	Professional digital photography 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Professional+digital+photography&w1=Digital+photography+technique&w2=Digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+software&w4=Photography+school&w5=Professional+digital+photography&w6=Stock+photography&c=6&s=179&.sig=Xu8RR7dXrAL3n40frDlehQ> 
> 	Stock photography 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Stock+photography&w1=Digital+photography+technique&w2=Digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+software&w4=Photography+school&w5=Professional+digital+photography&w6=Stock+photography&c=6&s=179&.sig=bG4mempkge509aNFosmKFQ> 
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>     * Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint>" on
>       the web.
>     * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>       DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>     * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>