Scott, I am also putting an old 1160 back in service and just have to
decide whether to go with UT-FS or UT-FSN inkset (still hoping some
kind soul can spare a small sample from each and a stamp... hint,
hint ;) I recently pulled out a large number of b&w prints I made
with mine and the original MIS VM inkset. Even though *I* could
never get a perfectly smooth gradient, I was able to make some
stellar prints using that outdated inkset and Paul's old curves. A
good friend of mine who uses a 2200+IP for b&w was amazed at how good
the 1160 output was. I still have a spare virgin CFS from MIS... and
the 1160 is of course the cheapest and easiest way to get that
going. Good luck! The printer is an amazingly cheap route to good
large b&w prints... maybe I'll just have to live through a few
more "clogs from hell" before I shell out for the R2400 :)
mark
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> Scott,
>
> > I have an Epson 1160 printer more or less gather dust
> > in the back room.
> >
> > Lately I've wondered about putting this into duty as a
> > dedicated B&W printer.
> >
> > What MIS setup might I seek out and what quality of
> > results should I expect?
>
> The MIS UT-FS and UT-FSN are the best options. With curves and if
the
> printer is in good shape it can do a better job than the C86, at
least on
> matte paper. I used one for quite a while.
>
> The downside is that some don't like curves. With none, it
actually gives a
> good ramp, but a bit light, and the cyan (dark gray) dots are a bit
too
> prominent. The "mild" partitioning curve is probably the best
compromise
> between smoothness and tolerance of printer, inkset and paper
variability.
> The full partitioning curves give the ultimate results, but they
are also
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> the most sensitive to variances.
>
> Good luck with it. It is a classic quad printer in my view.
>
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com