Digital BW, The Print

It's that old B/W trail again, I have a very dark toned image and for 
the life of me it really sucks when I print on any of my Fine Art 
papers loosing the subtle tones. I did a lightened version but it 
looses it's gloomy feel.

My other B/W are contrasty but not quite so dark they look good in 
print but I suspect I'm pushing the limits of the inks and paper here. 
Has anyone any suggestions on this image any comments welcomed.

http://img222.imageshack.us/my.php?image=40779su.jpg

Cheers

William Wilson
www.impact-imaging.biz

What kind of numbers are you coming up with in Photoshop? If you are  
getting 0 in the blackest areas and 255 n the whitest areas, it could  
just need a level or curve adjustment to get some detail in those two  
ends.
Mark

On Sep 20, 2005, at 8:36 AM, William Wilson wrote:

> It's that old B/W trail again, I have a very dark toned image and for
> the life of me it really sucks when I print on any of my Fine Art
> papers loosing the subtle tones. I did a lightened version but it
> looses it's gloomy feel.
>
> My other B/W are contrasty but not quite so dark they look good in
> print but I suspect I'm pushing the limits of the inks and paper here.
> Has anyone any suggestions on this image any comments welcomed.
>
> http://img222.imageshack.us/my.php?image=40779su.jpg
>
> Cheers
>
> William Wilson
> www.impact-imaging.biz
>
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Digital wedding photography	Learn digital photography	Digital  
> photography college
> Digital photography	Digital photography web site	Digital  
> photography course
>
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>  Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint" on the web.
>
>  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>  DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>



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

William,

Just as in darkroom printing, an image like the one you are working on
is a challenge of subtlety to achieve the ideal balance of light and
dark, texture and smoothness. In my opinion, great black and white,
regardless of the form, has to be sculpted and rarely prints itself.

What I do with a file like this, is first make a background copy in PS
to clik on and off to gague my progress, then I go into the shadow
areas and with the dodging tool set to about 5 or below with a fairly
large brush, and start dodging with the HIGHLIGHT mode selected within
the deep shadow areas. This brings out detail within those areas and
can do wonders. Similarly I often do the opposite in the highest
regions, burn shadows within the large highlight areas. The latter
being a much more delicate procedure. This can give you much greater
control over the total luminance range of a file by allowing max black
with maximum white while retaining significant detail in those extreme
problematic areas. 

All this is contingent on your starting with a full rich file (drum
scan prefered for something like that) in the first place. If all you
have is noise in those deepest shadows ( which I run into a lot with
files from the 20D for instance) you are going to have problems no
matter what.

After that you can go back and open a curves adjustment layer and
click on areas that you want to work on with the eye dropper tool, see
where that occurs on the curve and tweak those values.

Yes, all this is Photoshop work but to me there is no seperation
between output and the creative maniulation of that file. 

John



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "William Wilson"
<wm.wilson@b...> wrote:

> It's that old B/W trail again, I have a very dark toned image and for 
> the life of me it really sucks when I print on any of my Fine Art 
> papers loosing the subtle tones. I did a lightened version but it 
> looses it's gloomy feel.
> 
> My other B/W are contrasty but not quite so dark they look good in 
> print but I suspect I'm pushing the limits of the inks and paper here. 
> Has anyone any suggestions on this image any comments welcomed.
> 
> http://img222.imageshack.us/my.php?image=40779su.jpg
> 
> Cheers
> 
> William Wilson
> www.impact-imaging.biz

What colorspace it that in?  If I assign sRGB, it looks too light to me; was
it AdobeRGB and saved without a profile?

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of William
Wilson
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 8:36 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] B/W on the 9600

It's that old B/W trail again, I have a very dark toned image and for
the life of me it really sucks when I print on any of my Fine Art
papers loosing the subtle tones. I did a lightened version but it
looses it's gloomy feel.

My other B/W are contrasty but not quite so dark they look good in
print but I suspect I'm pushing the limits of the inks and paper here.
Has anyone any suggestions on this image any comments welcomed.

http://img222.imageshack.us/my.php?image=40779su.jpg

Cheers

William Wilson
www.impact-imaging.biz




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

Isn't it more appropriate to assume that William has the image looking how
he wants it on screen but is unsatisfied with the print?

William, you say you are using the 9600 but what is your print workflow and
ink?

Steve

> From: john dean <deanwork2003@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 13:08:59 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> 
> William,
> 
> Just as in darkroom printing, an image like the one you are working on
> is a challenge of subtlety to achieve the ideal balance of light and
> dark, texture and smoothness. In my opinion, great black and white,
> regardless of the form, has to be sculpted and rarely prints itself.
> 
> What I do with a file like this, is first make a background copy in PS
> to clik on and off to gague my progress, then I go into the shadow
> areas and with the dodging tool set to about 5 or below with a fairly
> large brush, and start dodging with the HIGHLIGHT mode selected within
> the deep shadow areas. This brings out detail within those areas and
> can do wonders. Similarly I often do the opposite in the highest
> regions, burn shadows within the large highlight areas. The latter
> being a much more delicate procedure. This can give you much greater
> control over the total luminance range of a file by allowing max black
> with maximum white while retaining significant detail in those extreme
> problematic areas.
> 
> All this is contingent on your starting with a full rich file (drum
> scan prefered for something like that) in the first place. If all you
> have is noise in those deepest shadows ( which I run into a lot with
> files from the 20D for instance) you are going to have problems no
> matter what.
> 
> After that you can go back and open a curves adjustment layer and
> click on areas that you want to work on with the eye dropper tool, see
> where that occurs on the curve and tweak those values.
> 
> Yes, all this is Photoshop work but to me there is no seperation
> between output and the creative maniulation of that file.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "William Wilson"
> <wm.wilson@b...> wrote:
>> It's that old B/W trail again, I have a very dark toned image and for
>> the life of me it really sucks when I print on any of my Fine Art
>> papers loosing the subtle tones. I did a lightened version but it
>> looses it's gloomy feel.
>> 
>> My other B/W are contrasty but not quite so dark they look good in
>> print but I suspect I'm pushing the limits of the inks and paper here.
>> Has anyone any suggestions on this image any comments welcomed.
>> 
>> http://img222.imageshack.us/my.php?image=40779su.jpg
>> 
>> Cheers
>> 
>> William Wilson
>> www.impact-imaging.biz

Hi Steve

You're quite right this is the final image, it is a very dark style and
originates from a digital workflow no negatives or scans.

I normally print in colour on fine art paper and canvas using Epson
Ultrachrome inks and custom profiles for colour work.

Over the last few months I have been reviving my B/W work and have been
reading this list, so I thought you guy's would be familiar with the
faithful reproduction of this type of image not necessarily on a 9600 but
none the less more experienced than me.

My usual paper is the "Fujifilm Fine Art Photo Rag Paper 300gsm" and icc
profile printing from CS2 not rip, inks are genuine Epson Utrachromes.

William

  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Steve Kale
  Sent: 20 September 2005 14:25
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600


  Isn't it more appropriate to assume that William has the image looking how
  he wants it on screen but is unsatisfied with the print?

  William, you say you are using the 9600 but what is your print workflow
and
  ink?

  Steve


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

I would never assume that what a monochrome image looks like on a
screen is the same animal as a print on rag paper. Reading the numbers
are far more important in regard to tonality, contrast, and density. 

If he is not using QTR, Bauhaus, or another rip with the 9600 for
black and white he should be. And he would probably get much better
results printing out of greyscale 2.2 with QTR rather than trying to
use RGB and the Epson print driver by itself. Just my thoughts from
direct experence with this machine.

John 



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "William Wilson"
<wm.wilson@b...> wrote:
> Hi Steve
> 
> You're quite right this is the final image, it is a very dark style and
> originates from a digital workflow no negatives or scans.
> 
> I normally print in colour on fine art paper and canvas using Epson
> Ultrachrome inks and custom profiles for colour work.
> 
> Over the last few months I have been reviving my B/W work and have been
> reading this list, so I thought you guy's would be familiar with the
> faithful reproduction of this type of image not necessarily on a
9600 but
> none the less more experienced than me.
> 
> My usual paper is the "Fujifilm Fine Art Photo Rag Paper 300gsm" and icc
> profile printing from CS2 not rip, inks are genuine Epson Utrachromes.
> 
> William
>   -----Original Message-----
>   From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
Steve Kale
>   Sent: 20 September 2005 14:25
>   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>   Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> 
> 
>   Isn't it more appropriate to assume that William has the image
looking how
>   he wants it on screen but is unsatisfied with the print?
> 
>   William, you say you are using the 9600 but what is your print
workflow

> and
>   ink?
> 
>   Steve
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

William Wilson wrote:

> inks are genuine Epson Utrachromes.
>
> William

That, may be your problem.

If you want the best B&W you can get, you aren't going to get it using 
color inks. You'll get better results from a dedicated B&W inkset, such 
as the MIS UT-7 (if you want a variable tone inkset) or the Piezotone K7 
(if you want a fixed tone inkset). Either one of these should give you 
better shadow detail, which seems to be what you are after.

Be aware that if you are going to really push it, you need the tools to 
help you. In this case, you really should be using a RIP like 
StudioPrint which lets you linearize your particular 
printer/ink/substrate and can handle quad-sets, hex-sets, and hep-sets 
(StudioPrint either already supports hep-sets, or is about to). 
Alternatively, you could try QTR which is reported to be excellent also.

You wouldn't expect excellent B&W printing to ilfochrome; you shouldn't 
expect any better results printing B&W with UltraChromes.
--
Bruce Watson

John

Thanks for your input most appreciated I could print through QTR but haven't
used it before.

William

  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of john dean
  Sent: 20 September 2005 15:58
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600


  I would never assume that what a monochrome image looks like on a
  screen is the same animal as a print on rag paper. Reading the numbers
  are far more important in regard to tonality, contrast, and density.

  If he is not using QTR, Bauhaus, or another rip with the 9600 for
  black and white he should be. And he would probably get much better
  results printing out of greyscale 2.2 with QTR rather than trying to
  use RGB and the Epson print driver by itself. Just my thoughts from
  direct experence with this machine.

  John


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

I don't think you are going to get the best results with your colour managed
approach.  Getting this sort of thing right requires a reasonable investment
in time and knowledge.  On this list there are novices, intermediates like
myself and then some real gurus - all able to help.  Personally you might
want to take the time to explore Quadtone RIP (QTR) a little.  It will drive
the UC inks and I believe it works with a 9600.  You should also focus in on
a little module in QTR called QTR Create ICC which will profile the
luminance axis of your output with a greyscale (not colour) ICC profile.
This is arguably about the best way you will "fit" your image into the
reduced dynamic range of rag paper.  I am not familiar with the paper you
mention below.  Are you in a position to measure dMax?  John Dean is correct
to say that what you see on screen without an accurate soft proof (and
appropriate viewing conditions) will be an accurate depiction of what you
can achieve on paper - for starters your display can likely produce a much
better black.  But QTR Create ICC can help with fitting the image to the
reduced dynamic range.  A starting point is to determine whether your paper
and ink are a suitable choice for such an image - this will depend a lot on
what dMax you're getting.  MIS Eboni ink will likely perform better than
your Epson MK (and is a lot cheaper).

> From: William Wilson <wm.wilson@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 15:32:45 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> 
> Hi Steve
> 
> You're quite right this is the final image, it is a very dark style and
> originates from a digital workflow no negatives or scans.
> 
> I normally print in colour on fine art paper and canvas using Epson
> Ultrachrome inks and custom profiles for colour work.
> 
> Over the last few months I have been reviving my B/W work and have been
> reading this list, so I thought you guy's would be familiar with the
> faithful reproduction of this type of image not necessarily on a 9600 but
> none the less more experienced than me.
> 
> My usual paper is the "Fujifilm Fine Art Photo Rag Paper 300gsm" and icc
> profile printing from CS2 not rip, inks are genuine Epson Utrachromes.
> 
> William

Getting a smooth ramp in the deep shadows is one of the challenges of
digital B&W.  The color-to-black ink crossovers are probably the problem.
For example, a list member sent me test strips of IP5 with a 9600, and 95%
was often the darkest patch.  The default Epson drivers usually compress the
deep shadows severely. 

So, part of the problem is probably a profile/curve that is not rendering
the deep shadows very well.

Additionally, of course, matte papers don't have the dmax that a glossy or
silver print would have.  This probably limits the eye's ability to separate
the deep shadows.

It's a really nice shot, by the way.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of William
> Wilson
> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 4:36 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] B/W on the 9600
> 
> It's that old B/W trail again, I have a very dark toned image and for
> the life of me it really sucks when I print on any of my Fine Art
> papers loosing the subtle tones. I did a lightened version but it
> looses it's gloomy feel.
> 
> My other B/W are contrasty but not quite so dark they look good in
> print but I suspect I'm pushing the limits of the inks and paper here.
> Has anyone any suggestions on this image any comments welcomed.
> 
> http://img222.imageshack.us/my.php?image=40779su.jpg
> 
> Cheers
> 
> William Wilson
> www.impact-imaging.biz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Hi Bruce

I must admit using a dedicated B/W would be my first choice and with your
advice maybe the only route, that's why I signed up in the first place as my
main business is colour I really should seriously think on two separate
workflows.

William

  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
hogarth@...
  Sent: 20 September 2005 16:10
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600


  William Wilson wrote:

  > inks are genuine Epson Utrachromes.
  >
  > William

  That, may be your problem.

  If you want the best B&W you can get, you aren't going to get it using
  color inks. You'll get better results from a dedicated B&W inkset, such
  as the MIS UT-7 (if you want a variable tone inkset) or the Piezotone K7
  (if you want a fixed tone inkset). Either one of these should give you
  better shadow detail, which seems to be what you are after.

  Be aware that if you are going to really push it, you need the tools to
  help you. In this case, you really should be using a RIP like
  StudioPrint which lets you linearize your particular
  printer/ink/substrate and can handle quad-sets, hex-sets, and hep-sets
  (StudioPrint either already supports hep-sets, or is about to).
  Alternatively, you could try QTR which is reported to be excellent also.

  You wouldn't expect excellent B&W printing to ilfochrome; you shouldn't
  expect any better results printing B&W with UltraChromes.
  --
  Bruce Watson



















  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

    a..  Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint" on the web.

    b..  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

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


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--



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

William

Dedicated B&W inks are certainly better than your UCs two greyscale inks.
But I also suspect you can get a lot better output than you are currently
with your existing colour setup.  Personally you may find it worth exploring
what you can do with that colour setup and then decide if that passes
mustard before making an additional investment in hardware.  (Or the 9800
will undoubtedly be considerably better at both colour and B&W than the
9600.)  The first thing I would do is swap MIS Eboni ink for your Epson
matte black ink (you can use this for colour work also - just reprofile).
Eboni will produce a better black on matte paper than Epson MK - not
dramatically better but better nonetheless.  Also spend some time with QTR -
it is powerful and cheap ($50).  It allows you complete control over the
individual inks in a 9600, allows you to linearise the greyscale output and
the QTR Create ICC module allows you to profile this output and use CM to
fit images to the print space.  If that still doesn't cut it then it's
either a 9800 (3 K inks) or, as a further step, a dedicated B&W setup with
anything from 3 (UT7) to 7 (Peizo K7) K inks.

Steve

> From: William Wilson <wm.wilson@btopenworld.com>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 16:32:58 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> 
> Hi Bruce
> 
> I must admit using a dedicated B/W would be my first choice and with your
> advice maybe the only route, that's why I signed up in the first place as my
> main business is colour I really should seriously think on two separate
> workflows.
> 
> William
>   -----Original Message-----
>   From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
> hogarth@...
>   Sent: 20 September 2005 16:10
>   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>   Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> 
> 
>   William Wilson wrote:
> 
>> inks are genuine Epson Utrachromes.
>> 
>> William
> 
>   That, may be your problem.
> 
>   If you want the best B&W you can get, you aren't going to get it using
>   color inks. You'll get better results from a dedicated B&W inkset, such
>   as the MIS UT-7 (if you want a variable tone inkset) or the Piezotone K7
>   (if you want a fixed tone inkset). Either one of these should give you
>   better shadow detail, which seems to be what you are after.
> 
>   Be aware that if you are going to really push it, you need the tools to
>   help you. In this case, you really should be using a RIP like
>   StudioPrint which lets you linearize your particular
>   printer/ink/substrate and can handle quad-sets, hex-sets, and hep-sets
>   (StudioPrint either already supports hep-sets, or is about to).
>   Alternatively, you could try QTR which is reported to be excellent also.
> 
>   You wouldn't expect excellent B&W printing to ilfochrome; you shouldn't
>   expect any better results printing B&W with UltraChromes.
>   --
>   Bruce Watson
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   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 ³Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines² 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 ³OWNER² AND
> ³MODERATORS² 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  ³OWNER² AND
> ³MODERATORS² 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
> 
>     a..  Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint" on the web.
> 
>     b..  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>      DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> 
>     c..  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, 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 ³Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines² 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 ³OWNER² AND
> ³MODERATORS² 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  ³OWNER² AND ³MODERATORS² 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
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
>

Steve

I'm taking all this info onboard, time to do some reading up and getting to
grips with QTR. Regarding the paper I buy regularly so changing to a more
suitable type for B/W isn't a problem. Changing inks is, I can only use
PhotoBlack with canvases and that's my main printing revenue. After a couple
of ink swaps I could have bought a dedicated printer for B/W, but first some
education.

William

  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Steve Kale
  Sent: 20 September 2005 16:48
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600


  William

  Dedicated B&W inks are certainly better than your UCs two greyscale inks.
  But I also suspect you can get a lot better output than you are currently
  with your existing colour setup.  Personally you may find it worth
exploring
  what you can do with that colour setup and then decide if that passes
  mustard before making an additional investment in hardware.  (Or the 9800
  will undoubtedly be considerably better at both colour and B&W than the
  9600.)  The first thing I would do is swap MIS Eboni ink for your Epson
  matte black ink (you can use this for colour work also - just reprofile).
  Eboni will produce a better black on matte paper than Epson MK - not
  dramatically better but better nonetheless.  Also spend some time with
QTR -
  it is powerful and cheap ($50).  It allows you complete control over the
  individual inks in a 9600, allows you to linearise the greyscale output
and
  the QTR Create ICC module allows you to profile this output and use CM to
  fit images to the print space.  If that still doesn't cut it then it's
  either a 9800 (3 K inks) or, as a further step, a dedicated B&W setup with
  anything from 3 (UT7) to 7 (Peizo K7) K inks.

  Steve




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

If you are using PK ink on matte paper it is likely a good 2/3rds of your
problem  ;-)

> From: William Wilson <wm.wilson@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 18:01:08 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> 
> Steve
> 
> I'm taking all this info onboard, time to do some reading up and getting to
> grips with QTR. Regarding the paper I buy regularly so changing to a more
> suitable type for B/W isn't a problem. Changing inks is, I can only use
> PhotoBlack with canvases and that's my main printing revenue. After a couple
> of ink swaps I could have bought a dedicated printer for B/W, but first some
> education.
> 
> William

Bingo, it just struck me as well although this is a fine art paper and made
for PK ink it wont be the best for BW.

I do have an Epson R300 and could try QTR and other papers on that as a
trial and some practice.

  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Steve Kale
  Sent: 20 September 2005 18:07
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600


  If you are using PK ink on matte paper it is likely a good 2/3rds of your
  problem  ;-)


  > From: William Wilson <wm.wilson@...>
  > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
  > Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 18:01:08 +0100
  > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
  > Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
  >
  > Steve
  >
  > I'm taking all this info onboard, time to do some reading up and getting
to
  > grips with QTR. Regarding the paper I buy regularly so changing to a
more
  > suitable type for B/W isn't a problem. Changing inks is, I can only use
  > PhotoBlack with canvases and that's my main printing revenue. After a
couple
  > of ink swaps I could have bought a dedicated printer for B/W, but first
some
  > education.
  >
  > William



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

William  -
 
You can get VERY good results with QTR or IJC/OPM using the UC inks.  Considering the price of QTR you really have little to lose.  Once you get QTR down pat you can make the determination to go to a decicated ink set or not.  But, using QTR IJC/OPM or IP you can make gallery quality b&w prints.
 
Tom Baker

William Wilson <wm.wilson@...> wrote:
Steve

I'm taking all this info onboard, time to do some reading up and getting to
grips with QTR. Regarding the paper I buy regularly so changing to a more
suitable type for B/W isn't a problem. Changing inks is, I can only use
PhotoBlack with canvases and that's my main printing revenue. After a couple
of ink swaps I could have bought a dedicated printer for B/W, but first some
education.

William

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Steve Kale
Sent: 20 September 2005 16:48
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600


William

Dedicated B&W inks are certainly better than your UCs two greyscale inks.
But I also suspect you can get a lot better output than you are currently
with your existing colour setup. Personally you may find it worth
exploring
what you can do with that colour setup and then decide if that passes
mustard before making an additional investment in hardware. (Or the 9800
will undoubtedly be considerably better at both colour and B&W than the
9600.) The first thing I would do is swap MIS Eboni ink for your Epson
matte black ink (you can use this for colour work also - just reprofile).
Eboni will produce a better black on matte paper than Epson MK - not
dramatically better but better nonetheless. Also spend some time with
QTR -
it is powerful and cheap ($50). It allows you complete control over the
individual inks in a 9600, allows you to linearise the greyscale output
and
the QTR Create ICC module allows you to profile this output and use CM to
fit images to the print space. If that still doesn't cut it then it's
either a 9800 (3 K inks) or, as a further step, a dedicated B&W setup with
anything from 3 (UT7) to 7 (Peizo K7) K inks.

Steve




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




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








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

If you want to stick to PK, try some Epson Premium Semimatte paper (>200
years dark storage life according to Wilhelm).  While it needs a post-print
spray like PremierArt Print Shield to get rid of the bronzing, the dmax and
general look of the paper is very nice -- closer to a silver print than a
matte paper, especially if dry mounted on matte board.

PK on matte paper will never give a good dmax or good shadow details.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

> If you are using PK ink on matte paper it is likely a good 2/3rds of your
> problem  ;-)
> 
> 
> > From: William Wilson <wm.wilson@...m>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 18:01:08 +0100
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > I'm taking all this info onboard, time to do some reading up and getting
> to
> > grips with QTR. Regarding the paper I buy regularly so changing to a
> more
> > suitable type for B/W isn't a problem. Changing inks is, I can only use
> > PhotoBlack with canvases and that's my main printing revenue. After a
> couple
> > of ink swaps I could have bought a dedicated printer for B/W, but first
> some
> > education.
> >
> > William
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

What Tom just said, copy that.

Sorry we missed the PK issue. It's 3/4 of your problem.

But as Paul pointed out with an rc paper like P. Semi Gloss you will
achieve a really good dmax but you do have to spray it. However....
I've never gotten an acceptable black and white color tone using the
rc media, epson inks with QTR or othewise. It always looks too warm so
I always stay with matte media for monochrome and Ultrachrome inkset.

John



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Tom Baker
<tbaker1328@s...> wrote:
> William  -
>  
> You can get VERY good results with QTR or IJC/OPM using the UC inks.
 Considering the price of QTR you really have little to lose.  Once
you get QTR down pat you can make the determination to go to a
decicated ink set or not.  But, using QTR IJC/OPM or IP you can make
gallery quality b&w prints.
>  
> Tom Baker
> 
> William Wilson <wm.wilson@b...> wrote:
> Steve
> 
> I'm taking all this info onboard, time to do some reading up and
getting to
> grips with QTR. Regarding the paper I buy regularly so changing to a
more
> suitable type for B/W isn't a problem. Changing inks is, I can only use
> PhotoBlack with canvases and that's my main printing revenue. After
a couple
> of ink swaps I could have bought a dedicated printer for B/W, but
first some
> education.
> 
> William
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
Steve Kale
> Sent: 20 September 2005 16:48
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> 
> 
> William
> 
> Dedicated B&W inks are certainly better than your UCs two greyscale
inks.
> But I also suspect you can get a lot better output than you are
currently
> with your existing colour setup. Personally you may find it worth
> exploring
> what you can do with that colour setup and then decide if that passes
> mustard before making an additional investment in hardware. (Or the 9800
> will undoubtedly be considerably better at both colour and B&W than the
> 9600.) The first thing I would do is swap MIS Eboni ink for your Epson
> matte black ink (you can use this for colour work also - just
reprofile).
> Eboni will produce a better black on matte paper than Epson MK - not
> dramatically better but better nonetheless. Also spend some time with
> QTR -
> it is powerful and cheap ($50). It allows you complete control over the
> individual inks in a 9600, allows you to linearise the greyscale output
> and
> the QTR Create ICC module allows you to profile this output and use
CM to
> fit images to the print space. If that still doesn't cut it then it's
> either a 9800 (3 K inks) or, as a further step, a dedicated B&W
setup with
> anything from 3 (UT7) to 7 (Peizo K7) K inks.
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>...
> I've never gotten an acceptable black and white color tone using the
> rc media, epson inks with QTR or othewise. It always looks too warm ...

RC does seem to look better with a cool tone.  The HP B&W ink/media do this,
for example.  On the other hand, most of the good B&W calendars use a dead
neutral, sometimes with a very slight "selenium" (magenta) bias.

On reason the EZ and UT-FSN inksets are a bit on the cool side with matte
paper is to achieve a good RC tone.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Interesting.  I really like it with AB&W's Warm setting.  :-)

> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>

> 
> RC does seem to look better with a cool tone.

William, this looks like a natural for black-only...just so long as
you print it big! You want gloomy, of course, but you also want zip. 
Presumably you'd be happiest (gloomiest?) with Eboni, but I'm a mere
humble OEM pigment guy so I'll refrain from advocating it...

Nice work.

http://img222.imageshack.us/my.php?image=40779su.jpg


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "William Wilson"
<wm.wilson@b...> wrote:

> It's that old B/W trail again, I have a very dark toned image and for 
> the life of me it really sucks when I print on any of my Fine Art 
> papers loosing the subtle tones. I did a lightened version but it 
> looses it's gloomy feel.
> 
> My other B/W are contrasty but not quite so dark they look good in 
> print but I suspect I'm pushing the limits of the inks and paper here. 
> Has anyone any suggestions on this image any comments welcomed.
> 
> http://img222.imageshack.us/my.php?image=40779su.jpg
> 
> Cheers
> 
> William Wilson
> www.impact-imaging.biz

Nice pic and very subtle very dark shadows. On my monitor, in a darkish room, I 
can see little or no detail in the tops of the dark mountain range.

As a new-be to digital printing still unable to figure the basics out, I'm a bit 
nervous about offering an opinion.

But if there is no way to make the print exactly match the monitor, can't you 
apply what ever knowledge and instincts you have, make a trail print and then 
make what ever corrections are needed.

This is pretty much what everyone I knew used to to do about "drying down"

David





john dean wrote:

> I would never assume that what a monochrome image looks like on a
> screen is the same animal as a print on rag paper. Reading the numbers
> are far more important in regard to tonality, contrast, and density.
> 
> If he is not using QTR, Bauhaus, or another rip with the 9600 for
> black and white he should be. And he would probably get much better
> results printing out of greyscale 2.2 with QTR rather than trying to
> use RGB and the Epson print driver by itself. Just my thoughts from
> direct experence with this machine.
> 
> John
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "William Wilson"
> <wm.wilson@b...> wrote:
>  > Hi Steve
>  >
>  > You're quite right this is the final image, it is a very dark style and
>  > originates from a digital workflow no negatives or scans.
>  >
>  > I normally print in colour on fine art paper and canvas using Epson
>  > Ultrachrome inks and custom profiles for colour work.
>  >
>  > Over the last few months I have been reviving my B/W work and have been
>  > reading this list, so I thought you guy's would be familiar with the
>  > faithful reproduction of this type of image not necessarily on a
> 9600 but
>  > none the less more experienced than me.
>  >
>  > My usual paper is the "Fujifilm Fine Art Photo Rag Paper 300gsm" and icc
>  > profile printing from CS2 not rip, inks are genuine Epson Utrachromes.
>  >
>  > William
>  >   -----Original Message-----
>  >   From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>  > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
> Steve Kale
>  >   Sent: 20 September 2005 14:25
>  >   To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>  >   Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
>  >
>  >
>  >   Isn't it more appropriate to assume that William has the image
> looking how
>  >   he wants it on screen but is unsatisfied with the print?
>  >
>  >   William, you say you are using the 9600 but what is your print
> workflow
>  > and
>  >   ink?
>  >
>  >   Steve
>  >
>  >
>  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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 wedding photography 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+wedding+photography&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=Umur-3rsLOic7dZMwVL94w> 
> 	Learn digital photography 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Learn+digital+photography&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=emApqtvj0kHQhppIzRrNgw> 
> 	Digital photography college 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+college&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=aIiABJLTZsUnmWBs4mZwuA> 
> 
> Digital photography 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=pJmwqgVzec3JGBtWYlPbOg> 
> 	Digital photography web site 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+web+site&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=BMII8rtDZlAtVdZsPhaZqw> 
> 	Digital photography course 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+course&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=OrnrutXVhHZu-7E7ccLtuw> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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/>.
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

Thank you

Since I set up QTR yesterday I'm getting there, a few test prints and a
remodelled version of my image and it printed much better.

I know it can be much better so today it will be a case of refining QTR and
a producing a successful print.

William

  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of djon43
  Sent: 21 September 2005 01:08
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600


  William, this looks like a natural for black-only...just so long as
  you print it big! You want gloomy, of course, but you also want zip.
  Presumably you'd be happiest (gloomiest?) with Eboni, but I'm a mere
  humble OEM pigment guy so I'll refrain from advocating it...

  Nice work.

  http://img222.imageshack.us/my.php?image=40779su.jpg


  --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "William Wilson"
  <wm.wilson@b...> wrote:
  > It's that old B/W trail again, I have a very dark toned image and for
  > the life of me it really sucks when I print on any of my Fine Art
  > papers loosing the subtle tones. I did a lightened version but it
  > looses it's gloomy feel.
  >
  > My other B/W are contrasty but not quite so dark they look good in
  > print but I suspect I'm pushing the limits of the inks and paper here.
  > Has anyone any suggestions on this image any comments welcomed.
  >
  > http://img222.imageshack.us/my.php?image=40779su.jpg
  >
  > Cheers
  >
  > William Wilson
  > www.impact-imaging.biz


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

Thanks David

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
dannysoar
Sent: 21 September 2005 01:10
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600


Nice pic and very subtle very dark shadows. On my monitor, in a darkish
room, I
can see little or no detail in the tops of the dark mountain range.

As a new-be to digital printing still unable to figure the basics out, I'm a
bit
nervous about offering an opinion.

But if there is no way to make the print exactly match the monitor, can't
you
apply what ever knowledge and instincts you have, make a trail print and
then
make what ever corrections are needed.

This is pretty much what everyone I knew used to to do about "drying down"

David

A recent post from John Dean started my brain spinning.  Could someone help calm my 
thinking?! 

John Dean wrote:

"And he would probably get much better results printing out of greyscale 2.2 with QTR 
rather than trying to use RGB and the Epson print driver by itself."

Considering that I am using a completely digital workflow, including digital capture, is it 
still necessary to convert to graygamma 2.2?  My images are captured RAW and then 
created in ProPhoto from ACR.  Color to B&W conversion is performed with a channels 
layer.  In a zip file that I downloaded from the qtr download site called 
"grayspaceXYZv2.zip" there is a document titled "gray-readme.rtf", and it says,


"In the past when printing to QuadToneRIP in the Print with Preview dialog the Print Space 
was always Same as Source.  This disabled the Photoshop color management system 
during output to QuadToneRIP and the printer.  With soft-proofing it was possible to 
preview what the output would look like.  However you would still have to edit your file to 
take into account the different between the look of profile attached to the image and the 
soft-proof profile.  Which basically means you are editing to a particular paper/ink setup.  
Most of the time this is OK but if you'd like to try a different type of paper such as photo 
paper rather than matte paper you would need to re-edit the image for the new paper.

With the two new generic print profiles the color management system of Photoshop can be 
used the automatically convert between the look on the display, matte paper and photo 
paper.  In other words you just edit to a generic working space profile.  The Photoshop 
color management system converts the data for display and will also now convert for the 
print using perceptual intent and black point compensation –all seamlessly without having 
to even use soft-proofing.  Since QuadToneRIP already has builtin linearized profiles we 
can use two generic ICC profiles to handle both matte and photo papers.

To use this simply, in Print with Preview select a Print Space Profile either Gray Matte Paper 
or Gray Photo Paper rather than Same as Source when you print.   You should also have 
Intent: Perceptual and Black Point Compensation selected."


The document I just quoted uses the expression "Generic working space profile".  
Considering this information, my thinking is that is shouldn't matter if I use a generic 
working space profile that is RGB or gray gamma 2.2.  What difference does it make if I 
manually convert from RGB to graygamma 2.2, or if PS does it for me when it converts 
from RGB to this gray matte paper print space. 

Is my reasoning flawed?

It certainly would be easy to change my workflow and convert to graygamma 2.2 after 
doing my color to black and white conversion.  It's not that I want to eliminate this step.  
I'm just trying to understand what's going on so that I can do or not do the conversion 
because it is needed, not because I am following a recipe like a robot.

Thanks for any insights.

Best.

Josh

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" 
<deanwork2003@y...> wrote:

> I would never assume that what a monochrome image looks like on a
> screen is the same animal as a print on rag paper. Reading the numbers
> are far more important in regard to tonality, contrast, and density. 
> 
> If he is not using QTR, Bauhaus, or another rip with the 9600 for
> black and white he should be. And he would probably get much better
> results printing out of greyscale 2.2 with QTR rather than trying to
> use RGB and the Epson print driver by itself. Just my thoughts from
> direct experence with this machine.
> 
> John 
> 
>

Hi Josh,

Sorry I didn't mean to make this difficult.
But you should post this question to the group that is set up to cover
these QTR questions specificly. It is: 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/QuadtoneRIP/?yguid=181774681

Roy monitors this group regularly so you can go to the source with
your concerns. Apparently QTR can convert on the fly to a grey scale
print space.

I personally have always set my profile in the Epson driver at 2.2
gamma and have achieved perfect results in regard to contrast and
density exactly as I see them on my monitor without any extra ink load
settings utilized. My personal approach is to not soft proof color
tone or use RGB for monochrome because I don't think it is subtle
enough and have always prefered to make a small proof and set it aside
for future reference. I have about 15 different possibilities that I
draw from. I do always work in 16 bit though until print time.

I did suggest this method to you because it has worked so well for me.
I wouldn't worry too much about all this. It might be a good idea to
do a couple of quck tests of 4x5 images to see what your best results
are both ways. I also don't know the differences betweeen QTR's
function on a pc if you are in a Windows environment. But again, Roy
is the one to ask about all this.

John





--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "joshhackney"
<joshhackney@g...> wrote:
> A recent post from John Dean started my brain spinning.  Could
someone help calm my 
> thinking?! 
> 
> John Dean wrote:
> 
> "And he would probably get much better results printing out of
greyscale 2.2 with QTR 
> rather than trying to use RGB and the Epson print driver by itself."
> 
> Considering that I am using a completely digital workflow, including
digital capture, is it 
> still necessary to convert to graygamma 2.2?  My images are captured
RAW and then 
> created in ProPhoto from ACR.  Color to B&W conversion is performed
with a channels 
> layer.  In a zip file that I downloaded from the qtr download site
called 
> "grayspaceXYZv2.zip" there is a document titled "gray-readme.rtf",
and it says,
> 
> 
> "In the past when printing to QuadToneRIP in the Print with Preview
dialog the Print Space 
> was always Same as Source.  This disabled the Photoshop color
management system 
> during output to QuadToneRIP and the printer.  With soft-proofing it
was possible to 
> preview what the output would look like.  However you would still
have to edit your file to 
> take into account the different between the look of profile attached
to the image and the 
> soft-proof profile.  Which basically means you are editing to a
particular paper/ink setup.  
> Most of the time this is OK but if you'd like to try a different
type of paper such as photo 
> paper rather than matte paper you would need to re-edit the image
for the new paper.
> 
> With the two new generic print profiles the color management system
of Photoshop can be 
> used the automatically convert between the look on the display,
matte paper and photo 
> paper.  In other words you just edit to a generic working space
profile.  The Photoshop 
> color management system converts the data for display and will also
now convert for the 
> print using perceptual intent and black point compensation –all
seamlessly without having 
> to even use soft-proofing.  Since QuadToneRIP already has builtin
linearized profiles we 
> can use two generic ICC profiles to handle both matte and photo papers.
> 
> To use this simply, in Print with Preview select a Print Space
Profile either Gray Matte Paper 
> or Gray Photo Paper rather than Same as Source when you print.   You
should also have 
> Intent: Perceptual and Black Point Compensation selected."
> 
> 
> The document I just quoted uses the expression "Generic working
space profile".  
> Considering this information, my thinking is that is shouldn't
matter if I use a generic 
> working space profile that is RGB or gray gamma 2.2.  What
difference does it make if I 
> manually convert from RGB to graygamma 2.2, or if PS does it for me
when it converts 
> from RGB to this gray matte paper print space. 
> 
> Is my reasoning flawed?
> 
> It certainly would be easy to change my workflow and convert to
graygamma 2.2 after 
> doing my color to black and white conversion.  It's not that I want
to eliminate this step.  
> I'm just trying to understand what's going on so that I can do or
not do the conversion 

> because it is needed, not because I am following a recipe like a robot.
> 
> Thanks for any insights.
> 
> Best.
> 
> Josh
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" 
> <deanwork2003@y...> wrote:
> > I would never assume that what a monochrome image looks like on a
> > screen is the same animal as a print on rag paper. Reading the numbers
> > are far more important in regard to tonality, contrast, and density. 
> > 
> > If he is not using QTR, Bauhaus, or another rip with the 9600 for
> > black and white he should be. And he would probably get much better
> > results printing out of greyscale 2.2 with QTR rather than trying to
> > use RGB and the Epson print driver by itself. Just my thoughts from
> > direct experence with this machine.
> > 
> > John 
> > 
> >

In PS, check your color settings.  If the working space for Gray, is Gray
Gamma 2.2, you already are using it.
When you convert from rgb to BW with a “channels layer” how do you save the
file?  What is the ICC profile you see in the save as dialog.

John

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
joshhackney
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 10:20 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600

A recent post from John Dean started my brain spinning.  Could someone help
calm my
thinking?!

John Dean wrote:

"And he would probably get much better results printing out of greyscale 2.2
with QTR
rather than trying to use RGB and the Epson print driver by itself."
<big snip>


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

Your reasoning is not flawed.  You don't have to work in GG2.2 if you are
doing a conversion to a grey printer profile as the document exits PS on its
way to the printer driver.  But a few things have moved along since the note
you are quoting.  The QTR-Gray Matte Paper and QTR-Gray Photo Paper profiles
were very generic profiles and are now a little dated (but better than
nothing).  You can, if you have an Eye-One Photo device, create your own
grey printer profile so that you are converting the luminance of your
document to match the ACTUAL profile of YOUR printer.

> From: joshhackney <joshhackney@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@...m>
> Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 14:19:36 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> 
> A recent post from John Dean started my brain spinning.  Could someone help
> calm my 
> thinking?! 
> 
> John Dean wrote:
> 
> "And he would probably get much better results printing out of greyscale 2.2
> with QTR 
> rather than trying to use RGB and the Epson print driver by itself."
> 
> Considering that I am using a completely digital workflow, including digital
> capture, is it 
> still necessary to convert to graygamma 2.2?  My images are captured RAW and
> then 
> created in ProPhoto from ACR.  Color to B&W conversion is performed with a
> channels 
> layer.  In a zip file that I downloaded from the qtr download site called
> "grayspaceXYZv2.zip" there is a document titled "gray-readme.rtf", and it
> says,
> 
> 
> "In the past when printing to QuadToneRIP in the Print with Preview dialog the
> Print Space 
> was always Same as Source.  This disabled the Photoshop color management
> system 
> during output to QuadToneRIP and the printer.  With soft-proofing it was
> possible to 
> preview what the output would look like.  However you would still have to edit
> your file to 
> take into account the different between the look of profile attached to the
> image and the 
> soft-proof profile.  Which basically means you are editing to a particular
> paper/ink setup. 
> Most of the time this is OK but if you'd like to try a different type of paper
> such as photo 
> paper rather than matte paper you would need to re-edit the image for the new
> paper.
> 
> With the two new generic print profiles the color management system of
> Photoshop can be 
> used the automatically convert between the look on the display, matte paper
> and photo 
> paper.  In other words you just edit to a generic working space profile.  The
> Photoshop 
> color management system converts the data for display and will also now
> convert for the 
> print using perceptual intent and black point compensation ­all seamlessly
> without having 
> to even use soft-proofing.  Since QuadToneRIP already has builtin linearized
> profiles we 
> can use two generic ICC profiles to handle both matte and photo papers.
> 
> To use this simply, in Print with Preview select a Print Space Profile either
> Gray Matte Paper 
> or Gray Photo Paper rather than Same as Source when you print.   You should
> also have 
> Intent: Perceptual and Black Point Compensation selected."
> 
> 
> The document I just quoted uses the expression "Generic working space
> profile".  
> Considering this information, my thinking is that is shouldn't matter if I use
> a generic 
> working space profile that is RGB or gray gamma 2.2.  What difference does it
> make if I 
> manually convert from RGB to graygamma 2.2, or if PS does it for me when it
> converts 
> from RGB to this gray matte paper print space.
> 
> Is my reasoning flawed?
> 
> It certainly would be easy to change my workflow and convert to graygamma 2.2
> after 
> doing my color to black and white conversion.  It's not that I want to
> eliminate this step.
> I'm just trying to understand what's going on so that I can do or not do the
> conversion 
> because it is needed, not because I am following a recipe like a robot.
> 
> Thanks for any insights.
> 
> Best.
> 
> Josh

I suspect he is simply using a Channel Mixer layer in which case the
document remains in his RGB workspace - ProPhoto RGB.  This is all fine.

> From: John Moody <moodymz3@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 11:13:06 -0400
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> 
> In PS, check your color settings.  If the working space for Gray, is Gray
> Gamma 2.2, you already are using it.
> When you convert from rgb to BW with a ³channels layer² how do you save the
> file?  What is the ICC profile you see in the save as dialog.
> 
> John

I am having similar problems.  Could someone briefly summarize a 
proper B&W workflow from a digital ProRGB workspace color file 
through printing in QTR.  

If you have a color image in ProRGB, should you make it B&W using the 
channel mixer or just converting to the Gray Gamma 2.2 workspace? 
Does this hurt the image?  

So far the images that I converted from RGB directly to Gray Gamma 
2.2 and printed through QTR have lacked dMax compared to images 
printed on a R2400 through AB&W.  The problem with AB&W is that it is 
a game guessing what the B&W will look like unless you have made a 
custom profile for AB&W.

Thanks,
Ryan
   

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
> I suspect he is simply using a Channel Mixer layer in which case the
> document remains in his RGB workspace - ProPhoto RGB.  This is all 
fine.
> 
> 
> > From: John Moody <moodymz3@y...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 11:13:06 -0400
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> > 
> > In PS, check your color settings.  If the working space for Gray, 
is Gray
> > Gamma 2.2, you already are using it.
> > When you convert from rgb to BW with a ³channels layer² how do 
you save the

> > file?  What is the ICC profile you see in the save as dialog.
> > 
> > John

> From: royalrex1 <ryan@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 17:19:50 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> 
> I am having similar problems.  Could someone briefly summarize a
> proper B&W workflow from a digital ProRGB workspace color file
> through printing in QTR.
> 
> If you have a color image in ProRGB, should you make it B&W using the
> channel mixer or just converting to the Gray Gamma 2.2 workspace?
> Does this hurt the image?

There are many many ways to take a colour image and convert it to B&W,
including using Channel Mixer.  This choice is completely independent of
QTR. 
> 
> So far the images that I converted from RGB directly to Gray Gamma
> 2.2 

This is not a recommended method for converting to B&W

>and printed through QTR have lacked dMax compared to images
> printed on a R2400 through AB&W.

This should not be the case.  The black point should be about the same.

>The problem with AB&W is that it is
> a game guessing what the B&W will look like unless you have made a
> custom profile for AB&W.

You should be using QTR Create ICC to profile it.  Roy's latest efforts will
allow you to proof for hue as well.  He has done an ENORMOUS amount of work
on the next release.  Even when I use AB&W on my 4800 I still convert the
document on-the-fly to a QTR Create ICC greyscale profile that profiles my
AB&W settings.  I can also accurately soft proof all of this before
printing.

Thanks for the responses.

John Moody - Steve Kale is correct.  When I save after performing my color to bw 
conversion the file is still in ProPhotoRGB.  

John Dean - thanks also.  Don't apologize.  You comment is what spurred me to finally ask 
this question.  

Let me preface the rest of my message my saying that I'm not opposed to doing my own 
testing, and will do so.  I don't want to be a copycat, and do things just because "John and 
Steve on the forum told me to!"  I'd just like to approach my testing with an understanding 
of the theory behind it and not just blind trial and error.  I appreciate all of your patience 
with me as a beginner.

It sounds as though John Dean is working in GG2.2 and printing through QTR with no 
color management, and Steve Kale is working in ???? space and printing with "let ps 
determine colors" with profiles he has created with an i1 and QTR.  Is this correct?

I asked the original question because I have seen on this forum that many people work in 
GG2.2.  It seems that many (not all) of the active posters on this forum are shooting some 
sort of b&w film and scanning.  Therefore it makes sense for them to scan directly into a 
gray space.  My real curiosity is that for those of us shooting digital, that start out in an 
RGB space, is it useful to convert to a gray space after our color to b&w conversion, and 
before continuing the rest of our edits in PS?  Are there any downsides to staying in RGB?  
Possible tints introduced, file size . . . something else?  I only ask because my current 
workflow includes Photokit Sharpener, which requires an RGB working space.  

Another question I have is why greygamma 2.2, and not greygamma 1.8?  When I bought 
my first set of piezotones for a 1280, the documentation from Cone said to use GG1.8.

The context of my question is that I am currently in transition from ImagePrint on a 2200 
to a yet to be determined RIP on a 7800.  That RIP is likely to be QTR, and the 7800 is 
likely to be running K7.  Tyler has me thinking about StudioPrint too - if only they had a 
Mac version.  I am currently evaluating K7 in my 2200, but have found the generic curves 
to be insufficient, and I am therefore preparing to purchase a GTM i1 asap.

Thanks for your patience.

Best 

Josh

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> 
wrote:

> Your reasoning is not flawed.  You don't have to work in GG2.2 if you are
> doing a conversion to a grey printer profile as the document exits PS on its
> way to the printer driver.  But a few things have moved along since the note
> you are quoting.  The QTR-Gray Matte Paper and QTR-Gray Photo Paper profiles
> were very generic profiles and are now a little dated (but better than
> nothing).  You can, if you have an Eye-One Photo device, create your own
> grey printer profile so that you are converting the luminance of your
> document to match the ACTUAL profile of YOUR printer.
> 
> 
> > From: joshhackney <joshhackney@g...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 14:19:36 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> > 
> > A recent post from John Dean started my brain spinning.  Could someone help
> > calm my 
> > thinking?! 
> > 
> > John Dean wrote:
> > 
> > "And he would probably get much better results printing out of greyscale 2.2
> > with QTR 
> > rather than trying to use RGB and the Epson print driver by itself."
> > 
> > Considering that I am using a completely digital workflow, including digital
> > capture, is it 
> > still necessary to convert to graygamma 2.2?  My images are captured RAW and
> > then 
> > created in ProPhoto from ACR.  Color to B&W conversion is performed with a
> > channels 
> > layer.  In a zip file that I downloaded from the qtr download site called
> > "grayspaceXYZv2.zip" there is a document titled "gray-readme.rtf", and it
> > says,
> > 
> > 
> > "In the past when printing to QuadToneRIP in the Print with Preview dialog the
> > Print Space 
> > was always Same as Source.  This disabled the Photoshop color management
> > system 
> > during output to QuadToneRIP and the printer.  With soft-proofing it was
> > possible to 
> > preview what the output would look like.  However you would still have to edit
> > your file to 
> > take into account the different between the look of profile attached to the
> > image and the 
> > soft-proof profile.  Which basically means you are editing to a particular
> > paper/ink setup. 
> > Most of the time this is OK but if you'd like to try a different type of paper
> > such as photo 
> > paper rather than matte paper you would need to re-edit the image for the new
> > paper.
> > 
> > With the two new generic print profiles the color management system of
> > Photoshop can be 
> > used the automatically convert between the look on the display, matte paper
> > and photo 
> > paper.  In other words you just edit to a generic working space profile.  The
> > Photoshop 
> > color management system converts the data for display and will also now
> > convert for the 
> > print using perceptual intent and black point compensation ­all seamlessly
> > without having 
> > to even use soft-proofing.  Since QuadToneRIP already has builtin linearized
> > profiles we 
> > can use two generic ICC profiles to handle both matte and photo papers.
> > 
> > To use this simply, in Print with Preview select a Print Space Profile either
> > Gray Matte Paper 
> > or Gray Photo Paper rather than Same as Source when you print.   You should
> > also have 
> > Intent: Perceptual and Black Point Compensation selected."
> > 
> > 
> > The document I just quoted uses the expression "Generic working space
> > profile".  
> > Considering this information, my thinking is that is shouldn't matter if I use
> > a generic 
> > working space profile that is RGB or gray gamma 2.2.  What difference does it
> > make if I 
> > manually convert from RGB to graygamma 2.2, or if PS does it for me when it
> > converts 
> > from RGB to this gray matte paper print space.
> > 
> > Is my reasoning flawed?
> > 
> > It certainly would be easy to change my workflow and convert to graygamma 2.2
> > after 
> > doing my color to black and white conversion.  It's not that I want to
> > eliminate this step.
> > I'm just trying to understand what's going on so that I can do or not do the
> > conversion 
> > because it is needed, not because I am following a recipe like a robot.
> > 
> > Thanks for any insights.
> > 
> > Best.
> > 
> > Josh

> From: joshhackney <joshhackney@...>


> Steve Kale is working in ???? space and printing with
> "let ps 
> determine colors" with profiles he has created with an i1 and QTR.  Is this
> correct?

Yes - specifically with QTR Create ICC.  I use GG 2.2 for my greyscale space
and normally ProPhoto for colour.  When working on a B&W doc though I
typically export from my raw converter to Adobe RGB as I don't need the
gamut of ProPhoto.

> 
> I asked the original question because I have seen on this forum that many
> people work in 
> GG2.2.  It seems that many (not all) of the active posters on this forum are
> shooting some 
> sort of b&w film and scanning.  Therefore it makes sense for them to scan
> directly into a 
> gray space.  My real curiosity is that for those of us shooting digital, that
> start out in an 
> RGB space, is it useful to convert to a gray space after our color to b&w
> conversion, and 
> before continuing the rest of our edits in PS?

It saves a lot of storage.  But then I convert to B&W by splitting the
channels and save these as separate layers.

>Are there any downsides to
> staying in RGB?  
> Possible tints introduced,

No

> file size

Yes
> . . . something else?  I only ask because
> my current 
> workflow includes Photokit Sharpener, which requires an RGB working space.

Same here and that is why I set Adobe RGB as my colour workspace when doing
B&W work.  GG 2.2 is a neat subset of Adobe RGB and so switching back and
forth between greyscale and RGB colour doesn't entail a lot of contortion.
  
> 
> Another question I have is why greygamma 2.2, and not greygamma 1.8?

If you convert to a profile that depicts your printer it doesn't matter
(think colour management in a colour workflow - you output to a printer
profile just before or concurrent with printing)

>When I 
> bought 
> my first set of piezotones for a 1280, the documentation from Cone said to use
> GG1.8.
> 
> The context of my question is that I am currently in transition from
> ImagePrint on a 2200
> to a yet to be determined RIP on a 7800.  That RIP is likely to be QTR, and
> the 7800 is 
> likely to be running K7.  Tyler has me thinking about StudioPrint too - if
> only they had a 
> Mac version.  I am currently evaluating K7 in my 2200, but have found the
> generic curves 
> to be insufficient, and I am therefore preparing to purchase a GTM i1 asap.

Make good use of QTR Create ICC.  It is worth the price of QTR alone.

Steve,

Sounds great.  Does this new version of QTR Create icc still use the  
same MT file input or does it need spectral measurement data for the  
hue part?  I'm hoping I can generate new icc profiles from my saved  
MT files so I don't have to go back and re-measure.

Carl

On Sep 21, 2005, at 2:05 PM, Steve Kale wrote:

>
> You should be using QTR Create ICC to profile it.  Roy's latest  
> efforts will
> allow you to proof for hue as well.  He has done an ENORMOUS amount  
> of work
> on the next release.  Even when I use AB&W on my 4800 I still  
> convert the
> document on-the-fly to a QTR Create ICC greyscale profile that  
> profiles my
> AB&W settings.  I can also accurately soft proof all of this before
> printing.


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

Josh,

You are exactly right. Most of what I do if from drum scans that were
originally saved as grey scale 16 bit files, though I am beginning to
work more and more with digital camera files, just not much in
monochrome yet. I need to think through this more too.

The native gg space for a Mac is usually set at gg 1.8. When I first
started using QTR, in Roy's documentation he suggested using GG 2.2 as
the print space because his curves were optimized for that space.
Since I've had excellent results with HIS PREMADE CURVES on my machine
I still have not linearized that machine with an Eye One, which may
improve things a little, though I'm not sure exactly how much if any.
I don't really have any complaints about the tonal ramp transitions,
metamerism issues, etc. but there is always room for improvement. Now
the older printers vary a lot more from machine to machine. 

The issue of converting an rgb file to a greyscale file is open to
many interpretations and possibilities. Different files, cameras, etc
perform differently as do different qualities of subjects dealt with.

Bottom line is, if you do have an Eye One or similar device you are
better off using it now with QTR because it has a lot of features that
allow for partitioning of ink density these days. And, that brings it
more in line with what Studio Print has been capable of doing all this
time.

John

>You'll get better results from a >dedicated B&W inkset, such
>as the MIS UT-7 (if you want a variable >tone inkset) or the Piezotone K7
>(if you want a fixed tone inkset).

If QTR isn't available for the 9600 then I'd agree with this statement. But 
if it is then I'd suggest you check it out before going to a two printer 
system.  I'm getting what I think are excellent results from the 2200 with 
QTR and Ultrachorme inks (except that I've substituted MIS Eboni black for 
the Epson MK). Plus I no longer have to wrestle with MIS' off and on quality 
control problems and can make the occasional color print with ease.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <hogarth@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 11:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600


William Wilson wrote:

> inks are genuine Epson Utrachromes.
>
> William

That, may be your problem.

If you want the best B&W you can get, you aren't going to get it using
color inks. You'll get better results from a dedicated B&W inkset, such
as the MIS UT-7 (if you want a variable tone inkset) or the Piezotone K7
(if you want a fixed tone inkset). Either one of these should give you
better shadow detail, which seems to be what you are after.

Be aware that if you are going to really push it, you need the tools to
help you. In this case, you really should be using a RIP like
StudioPrint which lets you linearize your particular
printer/ink/substrate and can handle quad-sets, hex-sets, and hep-sets
(StudioPrint either already supports hep-sets, or is about to).
Alternatively, you could try QTR which is reported to be excellent also.

You wouldn't expect excellent B&W printing to ilfochrome; you shouldn't
expect any better results printing B&W with UltraChromes.
--
Bruce Watson




















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

The current version doesn't have colour information and so can't soft proof
hue but Roy is working on an update which should please us all.  I would
hang on to those MT files.

> From: Carl Schofield <scho@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 15:52:43 -0400
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: QTR Workflow - was B/W on the 9600
> 
> Steve,
> 
> Sounds great.  Does this new version of QTR Create icc still use the
> same MT file input or does it need spectral measurement data for the
> hue part?  I'm hoping I can generate new icc profiles from my saved
> MT files so I don't have to go back and re-measure.
> 
> Carl

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "joshhackney"
<joshhackney@g...> wrote:
...

I have thoughts on some of this, but not allof your concerns...

>...My real curiosity is that for those of us shooting digital, that
start out in an 
> RGB space, is it useful to convert to a gray space after our color
to b&w conversion, and 
> before continuing the rest of our edits in PS?  Are there any
downsides to staying in RGB?  
> Possible tints introduced, file size . . . something else?  I only
ask because my current 
> workflow includes Photokit Sharpener, which requires an RGB working
space.  

Then you must stay in RGB for that step, and that is the downside to
an earlier conversion. If not for your use of that particular filter,
I don't see any reason to stay in RGB.

> 
> Another question I have is why greygamma 2.2, and not greygamma 1.8?

There are any number of Gray spaces you could convert to for any
number of reasons. I tend to prefer keeping files in a commonly used
space so in the future the files can be repurposed. If it is converted
and archived in a space more related to a particulare output system,
it may become obsolete and less relevant for future printing. If you
are printing with a color managed system and will be converting to
print anyway, I think the choice matters less.
But the real issue is this-  Popular color spaces tend to be gamma
2.2, so your conversion to a gray 2.2 space will be less "lossy", and
2.2 is a common space out there in the world. So since you are likely
to have more than one conversion in your process (RGB-gray-output) it
makes sense to have at least one of them be as lossless as possible.
ProPhoto is gamma 1.8, so there could be an arguement for going to 1.8
gamma gray.
Keep in mind they will all display the same.

> When I bought 
> my first set of piezotones for a 1280, the documentation from Cone
said to use GG1.8.
> 

Jon likes 1.8 spaces. For years he's recommended using ColorMatch for
RGB, it's 1.8. He has fairly elaborate and rational reasons for this
involving issues besides gamma alone. One of the most educational
exchanges on a list was an arguement that lasted for days and days
between Jon and David Tobie about this issue. Things like that don't
happen on lists any more... I believe he is less dogmatic about it
these days. We've all evolved away from the "1.8 for Macs" thing.
Anyway, so if he uses a 1.8 RGB space, you can see why he would favor
a 1.8 gray space. He knows it works down the line with their profiles
because of his experience at their shop and therefore has specific
setting recommendations. Color management is so easily messed up that
helping poeple with product settings needs to be clear as a bell.
I asked him once, since his profiles were a color managed conversion,
if theoretically other spaces would convert to his profiles without
problems and he agreed it would probably work.

Anyway, if this is of any help, my thinking is to convert from RGB to
a commonly used gray space that has the same gamma as the RGB space
and archive, then convert when printing on the fly with the output
profile. I see no reason not to leave RGB as soon as possible, except
for your filter dilemma.

Hope that helps some.
Tyler

Just a couple of extra points.  I would keep your colour originals in
ProPhoto - think of this as your processed film (the raw file your
unprocessed film copy).  If you are using Channel Mixer to convert to B&W
and want to be able to retrace your steps then saving this step as a layer
will, I believe, require you to keep the document in RGB.  This isn't such a
big deal except for the extra size etc.  If you are not worried about
keeping this layer then I would flatten and then go to GG 2.2 greyscale.
You can then easily save the document then bounce to Adobe RGB (which has a
gamma of 2.2) for your Photokit output sharpen and then print - discarding
the output sharpened file once it has printed.

> From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 22:22:51 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "joshhackney"
> <joshhackney@g...> wrote:
> ...
> 
> I have thoughts on some of this, but not allof your concerns...
> 
>> ...My real curiosity is that for those of us shooting digital, that
> start out in an 
>> RGB space, is it useful to convert to a gray space after our color
> to b&w conversion, and
>> before continuing the rest of our edits in PS?  Are there any
> downsides to staying in RGB?
>> Possible tints introduced, file size . . . something else?  I only
> ask because my current
>> workflow includes Photokit Sharpener, which requires an RGB working
> space.  
> 
> Then you must stay in RGB for that step, and that is the downside to
> an earlier conversion. If not for your use of that particular filter,
> I don't see any reason to stay in RGB.
> 
>> 
>> Another question I have is why greygamma 2.2, and not greygamma 1.8?
> 
> There are any number of Gray spaces you could convert to for any
> number of reasons. I tend to prefer keeping files in a commonly used
> space so in the future the files can be repurposed. If it is converted
> and archived in a space more related to a particulare output system,
> it may become obsolete and less relevant for future printing. If you
> are printing with a color managed system and will be converting to
> print anyway, I think the choice matters less.
> But the real issue is this-  Popular color spaces tend to be gamma
> 2.2, so your conversion to a gray 2.2 space will be less "lossy", and
> 2.2 is a common space out there in the world. So since you are likely
> to have more than one conversion in your process (RGB-gray-output) it
> makes sense to have at least one of them be as lossless as possible.
> ProPhoto is gamma 1.8, so there could be an arguement for going to 1.8
> gamma gray.
> Keep in mind they will all display the same.
> 
>> When I bought 
>> my first set of piezotones for a 1280, the documentation from Cone
> said to use GG1.8.
>> 
> 
> Jon likes 1.8 spaces. For years he's recommended using ColorMatch for
> RGB, it's 1.8. He has fairly elaborate and rational reasons for this
> involving issues besides gamma alone. One of the most educational
> exchanges on a list was an arguement that lasted for days and days
> between Jon and David Tobie about this issue. Things like that don't
> happen on lists any more... I believe he is less dogmatic about it
> these days. We've all evolved away from the "1.8 for Macs" thing.
> Anyway, so if he uses a 1.8 RGB space, you can see why he would favor
> a 1.8 gray space. He knows it works down the line with their profiles
> because of his experience at their shop and therefore has specific
> setting recommendations. Color management is so easily messed up that
> helping poeple with product settings needs to be clear as a bell.
> I asked him once, since his profiles were a color managed conversion,
> if theoretically other spaces would convert to his profiles without
> problems and he agreed it would probably work.
> 
> Anyway, if this is of any help, my thinking is to convert from RGB to
> a commonly used gray space that has the same gamma as the RGB space
> and archive, then convert when printing on the fly with the output
> profile. I see no reason not to leave RGB as soon as possible, except
> for your filter dilemma.
> 
> Hope that helps some.
> Tyler
>

Does the Eboni black have a higher d-max than the
Ultrachrome MK ink?  What advantages are there in
substituting it

Thanks,

Tom

Good question. We know it's cooler, but the dmax is not much different
is it?


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Tom Husband
<thusband@s...> wrote:

> Does the Eboni black have a higher d-max than the
> Ultrachrome MK ink?  What advantages are there in
> substituting it
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tom

I've been enjoying A4 B&W prints from my Epson C86 with MIS EZN/W inks for
almost a year now.  For color, I went from an Epson R800 to an R1800, and
now I would like the capability of 13"x19" B&W prints.  Looking for
recommendations / suggestions / options for a dedicated 13" wide B&W
printer.

Thanks,
Scott

Hello Josh,

I've been following this thread, and seems to me there are some
unspoken assumptions going on here that could use some clarification.
so let me add .02 worth.


>>>>
I asked the original question because I have seen on this forum that
many people work in GG2.2 ...   
>>>>

When converting RGB to Grayscale mode (either from a neg scan
or a digicam file), the workspace/image profile doesn't automatically
have to be GG2.2 .  It can default to anything you want.  This is
determined by the Gray setting in the Color Settings window.

There are 7 canned profiles for grayscale images in PS: 2 GG and 5 DG
(Dot Gain) profiles.  You can choose any of these to be the default in
Color Settings (or you can also make your own custom profile and use
that).  Whatever is set there becomes the default grayscale profile
whenever you convert an RGB image to Grayscale (or scan directly into
Grayscale).  After the initial assignment, this profile can be changed
to something else if you wish.  This, of course, doesn't address the
question of which to use and why, but first things first.


>>>>
Another question I have is why greygamma 2.2, and not greygamma 1.8? 
When I bought my first set of piezotones for a 1280, the documentation
from Cone said to use GG1.8.
>>>>

There are lots of reasons for choosing one image profile or another,
but it boils down to what kind of workflow you want to use.  You have
to understand all that stuff before you can make an informed decision
here.  Anyone who is offering advice on how to get started has to say
something.  The PZ folks probably said GG 1.8 because it matched
whatever else they were recommending in the workflow.

I use DG 20% for the image profile because for my workflow it closely
matches the print I get (good WYSIWYG) when the printer driver gamma
is set to 1.8.  I use driver gamma 1.8 because the print density is
closest to what I want before doing any work on the file (gamma 2.2 is
too dark and 1.5 is too light).  If I use driver Gamma 2.2 I have to
do more work to the image to get the print back to the density that
1.8 gives me in the first place.  Why do that?  (there is a more
detailed discussion of this subject in article #4 at the web link
below).

So the bottom line is before you can make an informed choice of image
profile, you must first determine what the output settings will be. 
What they are is largely determined by what kind of over all workflow
is used (BO, partition curves, icc profiles, whatever).  When you add
a RIP to the mix a whole new dimension is added.  I see the image
profile as being at the front end of the workflow, so it seems to me
the best way to determine this is to start at the end and work
backwards.  


>>>>
My real curiosity is that for those of us shooting digital, that start
out in an RGB space, is it useful to convert to a gray space after our
color to b&w conversion, and before continuing the rest of our edits
in PS?  Are there any downsides to staying in RGB?  Possible tints
introduced, file size . . . something else?  I only ask because my
current  workflow includes Photokit Sharpener, which requires an RGB
working space.  
>>>>>

For me the main reason is file size.  Grayscale images are 1/3 the
size (a 90mg RGB file becomes 30 mg).  During the work, when adding
layers, etc., the memory usage is enormous and things take longer, so
grayscale adds an advantage there as well, not just in storage space.
 As for differences in the result, in my early experiments I saw that
prints from RGB images were slightly different in density and
contrast, but with no real advantage either way, just different.   So
I always go Grayscale.  

I hope this is of some help.


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Steve Kale wrote:
>...   If you are using Channel Mixer to convert to B&W
> and want to be able to retrace your steps then saving this step as a layer
> will, I believe, require you to keep the document in RGB.  This isn't such a
> big deal except for the extra size etc.  If you are not worried about
> keeping this layer then I would flatten and then go to GG 2.2 greyscale.
> You can then easily save the document then bounce to Adobe RGB (which has a
> gamma of 2.2) for your Photokit output sharpen and then print - discarding
> the output sharpened file once it has printed.
> 
> 
What is the advantage of converting to GG2.2 if you're workflow requires 
you to convert back to RGB? The same applies when using Paul Roark's 
curves for example. Retaining the original colour file and being able to 
alter the channel mixer settings etc right up until print time surely 
outweighs any advantage in converting?

Howard

Well it depends.  (Personally I don't use the Channel Mixer method as I find
it restricting.  I prefer to use the Split Channels method and consequently
I get a greyscale file.  I use GG 2.2 because I can bounce into Adobe RGB
for PK Sharpener and back to greyscale without vexing the file too much.  I
do not store this output sharpened file and so my B&W image is stored in
greyscale with its lower storage and work size.  I do not print using Paul's
curves.)  It depends on your workflow (as Clayton said in an earlier mail).
If the rest of your workflow is expecting a gamma of 2.2 and you use a
colour space with a different gamma then you will run into problems if you
are not colour managing your output to the printer (ie selecting a printer
profile with Let Photoshop Determine Colors at the printing stage): in this
case your selection of workspace matters.  I believe Paul does all his
curves work for an Adobe RGB space and hence working in ProPhoto is not a
good idea if you want to use his methodology.  Clayton uses DotGain 20%
because he too doesn't colour manage his output and he finds that this
workspace matches his print space the best.  My bet is that a workspace of
GG2.2 or Adobe RGB is the underlying assumption in the non colour managed
Epson Adv B&W workflow.

BUT the core point of this conversation has been that a No Color
Management/Same as Source workflow is now rather dated (perhaps with the key
exception of Paul's workflow - see below *).  Anyone printing to a
linearised greyscale, such as those using QTR, IJC/OPM and Epson Adv B&W, or
those printing to a non-linearised greyscale, such as those using Black Only
printing, would do well to avail themselves of the little but powerful
module included with QTR called QTR Create ICC.  This module allows you to
profile the luminance of your printer's greyscale production and store it as
an ICC profile.  So when you come to print you can Let Photoshop Determine
Colors and convert the image file from whatever colour space you are using
for the file or workspace to a printer/output space that reflects your, well
err, printer output.  In this case it doesn't matter whether you have a
greyscale image tagged as GG2.2, GG1.8, DG20%, Adobe RGB, ProPhoto RGB or
any other.  When it leaves Photoshop it will be converted to a profile which
reflects your printer setup.  This is just like a colour (colour managed)
workflow.  The one difference is that it makes no attempt to output manage
hue - your greyscale hue is determined by the RIP or driver and ink/paper
setup you use to generate it.  In other words, there is no attempt to
maintain your nice neutral image on screen as neutral in the printer if you
have, say, selected a warm QTR curve.  Only the luminance axis is managed
and the print comes out warm as you wanted.  While this is the case, Roy is
working on a way to allow you to soft proof hue with the same ICC profile.
So when you set up a soft proof in the normal fashion in Photoshop you will
see the hue of the profiled printer setup (eg QTR with a warm curve selected
or Epson Adv B&W set to warm and darker - whichever settings you profiled
with QTR Create ICC) and the impact of the luminance management (the
compression to the reduced dynamic range of the printer) - for example a
nice warm image as it would print (reduced dynamic range and all).  THIS IS
AN EXTREMELY POWERFUL TOOL AND WELL WORTH THE COST OF QTR ON ITS OWN.  Even
if you are not using QTR as your RIP/driver, if you have an Eye-One Photo
and hence can use MeasureTool to read a step wedge printed using whatever
workflow you use, then you can likely benefit from using QTR Create ICC
(especially if you have a lumpy non linear output like black only).

Steve


* I noted Paul's RGB curve workflow as a possible exception because I
haven't fully thought it through.  Paul, in essence, targets a particular
greyscale profile with his curves.  This is quite different from getting
what you get with, say, black only (by this I mean you aren't able to change
the luminance profile of the greyscale generated by your printer in black
only mode - it is a black box and you get what you get) or managing, through
linearisation, your greyscale output.  Paul's curves in effect define the
transformation from workspace to print space.  With the other methods the
print space is constructed independently of the workspace (with the minor
exception that Clayton hunted out a workspace which best matched the print
space - a good starting point).  QTR Create ICC was designed to use colour
theory to manage the transformation between two independent spaces.

> From: Howard Shaw <glassman@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 08:08:56 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> 
> 
> Steve Kale wrote:
>> ...   If you are using Channel Mixer to convert to B&W
>> and want to be able to retrace your steps then saving this step as a layer
>> will, I believe, require you to keep the document in RGB.  This isn't such a
>> big deal except for the extra size etc.  If you are not worried about
>> keeping this layer then I would flatten and then go to GG 2.2 greyscale.
>> You can then easily save the document then bounce to Adobe RGB (which has a
>> gamma of 2.2) for your Photokit output sharpen and then print - discarding
>> the output sharpened file once it has printed.
>> 
>> 
> What is the advantage of converting to GG2.2 if you're workflow requires
> you to convert back to RGB? The same applies when using Paul Roark's
> curves for example. Retaining the original colour file and being able to
> alter the channel mixer settings etc right up until print time surely
> outweighs any advantage in converting?
> 
> Howard
> 
> 
> 
> 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 ³Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines² 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 ³OWNER² AND
> ³MODERATORS² 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  ³OWNER² AND ³MODERATORS² 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
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
>

Yes - on matte papers such as HPR and Permajet Alpha you will get a modest
but measurable increase in dMax by using Eboni.  Other advantages include
the fact that it is considerably cheaper than Epson MK.

> From: Tom Husband <thusband@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:00:27 -0700 (PDT)
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] 2200 and Ultrachrome MK vs. MIS Eboni Black
> 
> Does the Eboni black have a higher d-max than the
> Ultrachrome MK ink?  What advantages are there in
> substituting it
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tom

Thanks everyone for your input.  Your comments have been very helpful, and I'll be re-
thinking my workflow over the next few weeks.  

I'm looking forward to getting the i1 in house and to start using it with QTR create ICC.  
Following Steve's "color managed" approach is most intuitive to me, since it is so similar to 
my color workflow.  Steve, just to clarify one point.  When you use your QTR create ICC 
profiles with PS set to "Let PS determine colors", are you printing through QTR, or are you 
bypassing QTR and going straight to the print driver?  If you use the icc profile you create 
with QTR create ICC AND print through QTR, aren't you converting your file twice?  (I'm not 
sure if "converting" in the previous sentence was the proper word, but I think you get the 
idea).  At first I thought you were bypassing QTR, but judging from your latest comments 
about hue, it seems that you are in fact using the ICC profile and QTR.

Thanks a million to everyone who has contributed to my continuing education.  I hope to 
be able to give back to the community someday.

Best.

Josh

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@b...> 
wrote:
> Well it depends.  (Personally I don't use the Channel Mixer method as I find
> it restricting.  I prefer to use the Split Channels method and consequently
> I get a greyscale file.  I use GG 2.2 because I can bounce into Adobe RGB
> for PK Sharpener and back to greyscale without vexing the file too much.  I
> do not store this output sharpened file and so my B&W image is stored in
> greyscale with its lower storage and work size.  I do not print using Paul's
> curves.)  It depends on your workflow (as Clayton said in an earlier mail).
> If the rest of your workflow is expecting a gamma of 2.2 and you use a
> colour space with a different gamma then you will run into problems if you
> are not colour managing your output to the printer (ie selecting a printer
> profile with Let Photoshop Determine Colors at the printing stage): in this
> case your selection of workspace matters.  I believe Paul does all his
> curves work for an Adobe RGB space and hence working in ProPhoto is not a
> good idea if you want to use his methodology.  Clayton uses DotGain 20%
> because he too doesn't colour manage his output and he finds that this
> workspace matches his print space the best.  My bet is that a workspace of
> GG2.2 or Adobe RGB is the underlying assumption in the non colour managed
> Epson Adv B&W workflow.
> 
> BUT the core point of this conversation has been that a No Color
> Management/Same as Source workflow is now rather dated (perhaps with the key
> exception of Paul's workflow - see below *).  Anyone printing to a
> linearised greyscale, such as those using QTR, IJC/OPM and Epson Adv B&W, or
> those printing to a non-linearised greyscale, such as those using Black Only
> printing, would do well to avail themselves of the little but powerful
> module included with QTR called QTR Create ICC.  This module allows you to
> profile the luminance of your printer's greyscale production and store it as
> an ICC profile.  So when you come to print you can Let Photoshop Determine
> Colors and convert the image file from whatever colour space you are using
> for the file or workspace to a printer/output space that reflects your, well
> err, printer output.  In this case it doesn't matter whether you have a
> greyscale image tagged as GG2.2, GG1.8, DG20%, Adobe RGB, ProPhoto RGB or
> any other.  When it leaves Photoshop it will be converted to a profile which
> reflects your printer setup.  This is just like a colour (colour managed)
> workflow.  The one difference is that it makes no attempt to output manage
> hue - your greyscale hue is determined by the RIP or driver and ink/paper
> setup you use to generate it.  In other words, there is no attempt to
> maintain your nice neutral image on screen as neutral in the printer if you
> have, say, selected a warm QTR curve.  Only the luminance axis is managed
> and the print comes out warm as you wanted.  While this is the case, Roy is
> working on a way to allow you to soft proof hue with the same ICC profile.
> So when you set up a soft proof in the normal fashion in Photoshop you will
> see the hue of the profiled printer setup (eg QTR with a warm curve selected
> or Epson Adv B&W set to warm and darker - whichever settings you profiled
> with QTR Create ICC) and the impact of the luminance management (the
> compression to the reduced dynamic range of the printer) - for example a
> nice warm image as it would print (reduced dynamic range and all).  THIS IS
> AN EXTREMELY POWERFUL TOOL AND WELL WORTH THE COST OF QTR ON ITS OWN.  
Even
> if you are not using QTR as your RIP/driver, if you have an Eye-One Photo
> and hence can use MeasureTool to read a step wedge printed using whatever
> workflow you use, then you can likely benefit from using QTR Create ICC
> (especially if you have a lumpy non linear output like black only).
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> * I noted Paul's RGB curve workflow as a possible exception because I
> haven't fully thought it through.  Paul, in essence, targets a particular
> greyscale profile with his curves.  This is quite different from getting
> what you get with, say, black only (by this I mean you aren't able to change
> the luminance profile of the greyscale generated by your printer in black
> only mode - it is a black box and you get what you get) or managing, through
> linearisation, your greyscale output.  Paul's curves in effect define the
> transformation from workspace to print space.  With the other methods the
> print space is constructed independently of the workspace (with the minor
> exception that Clayton hunted out a workspace which best matched the print
> space - a good starting point).  QTR Create ICC was designed to use colour
> theory to manage the transformation between two independent spaces.
> 
> 
> 
> > From: Howard Shaw <glassman@b...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 08:08:56 +0100
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> > 
> > 
> > Steve Kale wrote:
> >> ...   If you are using Channel Mixer to convert to B&W
> >> and want to be able to retrace your steps then saving this step as a layer
> >> will, I believe, require you to keep the document in RGB.  This isn't such a
> >> big deal except for the extra size etc.  If you are not worried about
> >> keeping this layer then I would flatten and then go to GG 2.2 greyscale.
> >> You can then easily save the document then bounce to Adobe RGB (which has a
> >> gamma of 2.2) for your Photokit output sharpen and then print - discarding
> >> the output sharpened file once it has printed.
> >> 
> >> 
> > What is the advantage of converting to GG2.2 if you're workflow requires
> > you to convert back to RGB? The same applies when using Paul Roark's
> > curves for example. Retaining the original colour file and being able to
> > alter the channel mixer settings etc right up until print time surely
> > outweighs any advantage in converting?
> > 
> > Howard
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 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 ³Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines² 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 ³OWNER² AND
> > ³MODERATORS² 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  ³OWNER² AND 
³MODERATORS² 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
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >

I think the best way to view all this is that there are multiple layers, each of
which have specific roles and definitions.  Then there are conversions from
one level to the next -- color management and print or screen drivers.

(1) File level
 At the file level the pixel numbers have "profiles" that tell what the pixels mean.
This is the function the gray spaces and the color spaces.  Whether you are in
GG 2.2 or Dot Gain 20 or Gray Lab determines what the grayscale numbers mean. 
Similarly AdobeRGB or sRGB or ProPhotoRGB tell what the RGB numbers mean.
These are all "idealized" profile spaces, they are not tied to a particular devices.


(2) Actual input values to a driver -- print or screen, gray or RGB
In general these tend to be hidden, you don't necessarily know these values.
These are tied to a device but are basically a high-level description of what
you want.

(3) The lowest level is the nitty-gritty of what the device needs -- number of
drops of each ink, or screen control lines etc. 

Device drivers are the most visible piece of code.  They convert from (2) to (3).
The regular Epson driver expects RGB input and converts to K,C,M,Y,LC,LM,LK
output in a way that is optimized for color printing. QTR expects a gray input
and converts to K,C,M,Y,LC,LM,LK output in a way that is optimized for B&W
printing.  The new Epson ABW mode is like QTR -- gray input and optimized
for B&W printing.  The Black Only printing available in some drivers is also similar.

The Epson drivers are all "black boxes" -- you can't see or control the actual
conversions.  QTR on the other hand is very open, so if you want you can see and
manipulate all the internal conversions, making is possible to do-your-own.
QTR curves or QTR profiles are the guts of the conversions.

---------------

ICC Color Management is the connection between (1) and (2). It's a wonderful
concept but since it's been introduced over time there are various places that
it can be done.  Just in PS you can Convert explicitly or use the Print Space when
printing.  The OS's support it some places and drivers sometimes support it, too.
This is the source of the "double profiling" problems -- you really don't want to
convert from (1) to (2) multiple times.  For PS I think by far the most popular is
in the Print Space but if you are not printing with PS you may have to convert
explicitly.

For the color world Color Management is pretty much a given everywhere.  
Every device has profiles built for it.  These profiles describe the correspondence
between the level (2) values and universal color values -- Lab or XYZ. 
The ICC definitions are include B&W, RGB and CMYK but in general all the well-
known profiling packages concentrate on color rather than B&W.  B&W is
somewhat simplified compared to color but it has it's own unique characteristics.

QTR-Create-ICC is a new tool to expand full color management to a true B&W
workflow.  The current version creates profiles for the printing side.  A soft-
proofing version is coming soon.  The concept is identical to making color
profiles -- print a target without CM, measure it, create the .icc file.  Then you
just print using that ICC profile.   For now I'm just bundling the QTR-Create-ICC
with QTR Printing but it is truly a completely separate function.  It is usable with
any B&W workflow -- i.e. any driver that takes a grayscale input can benefit.
QTR is one such workflow, but Epson ABW or BO are perfect candidates. 
Lack of grayscale ICC's are the weakest point of the ABW currently (IMO).

---

A potential source of confusion is that the Linearizing and ICC Profiling procedures
are very similar.  In both you print the same target and read it the same way.
I think the way to think of it is that the Linearizing is part of the QTR driver. 
It linearizes from dMin to dMax of the specific paper and ink so the driver can 
give consistent results.  This is the (2) to (3) conversion from above.

The ICC profiling is for the upper level (1) to (2) conversion by the CM.  Here
you are characterizing the driver in a profile that the CM can use for conversions.
There are also a couple of other things that are useful.  You can ICC profile with
any settings of the QTR driver -- for instance QTR profiles are linearized
individually but you can ICC profile any Tone Blend or Ink Limit Adj.  If you have
a favorite setup you can specifically ICC profile that -- when the soft-proofing
is done this will be more obviously useful.  And of course the fact that the
profiling can be used with other drivers is a big difference.

Roy




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "joshhackney" 
<joshhackney@g...> wrote:
> 
> Thanks everyone for your input.  Your comments have been very helpful, and I'll be 
re-
> thinking my workflow over the next few weeks.  
> 
> I'm looking forward to getting the i1 in house and to start using it with QTR create 
ICC.  
> Following Steve's "color managed" approach is most intuitive to me, since it is so 
similar to 
> my color workflow.  Steve, just to clarify one point.  When you use your QTR create 
ICC 
> profiles with PS set to "Let PS determine colors", are you printing through QTR, or 
are you 
> bypassing QTR and going straight to the print driver?  If you use the icc profile you 
create 
> with QTR create ICC AND print through QTR, aren't you converting your file twice?  
(I'm not 
> sure if "converting" in the previous sentence was the proper word, but I think you 
get the 
> idea).  At first I thought you were bypassing QTR, but judging from your latest 
comments 
> about hue, it seems that you are in fact using the ICC profile and QTR.
> 
> Thanks a million to everyone who has contributed to my continuing education.  I 
hope to 
> be able to give back to the community someday.
> 
> Best.
> 
> Josh
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> 
> wrote:
> > Well it depends.  (Personally I don't use the Channel Mixer method as I find
> > it restricting.  I prefer to use the Split Channels method and consequently
> > I get a greyscale file.  I use GG 2.2 because I can bounce into Adobe RGB
> > for PK Sharpener and back to greyscale without vexing the file too much.  I
> > do not store this output sharpened file and so my B&W image is stored in
> > greyscale with its lower storage and work size.  I do not print using Paul's
> > curves.)  It depends on your workflow (as Clayton said in an earlier mail).
> > If the rest of your workflow is expecting a gamma of 2.2 and you use a
> > colour space with a different gamma then you will run into problems if you
> > are not colour managing your output to the printer (ie selecting a printer
> > profile with Let Photoshop Determine Colors at the printing stage): in this
> > case your selection of workspace matters.  I believe Paul does all his
> > curves work for an Adobe RGB space and hence working in ProPhoto is not a
> > good idea if you want to use his methodology.  Clayton uses DotGain 20%
> > because he too doesn't colour manage his output and he finds that this
> > workspace matches his print space the best.  My bet is that a workspace of
> > GG2.2 or Adobe RGB is the underlying assumption in the non colour managed
> > Epson Adv B&W workflow.
> > 
> > BUT the core point of this conversation has been that a No Color
> > Management/Same as Source workflow is now rather dated (perhaps with the key
> > exception of Paul's workflow - see below *).  Anyone printing to a
> > linearised greyscale, such as those using QTR, IJC/OPM and Epson Adv B&W, or
> > those printing to a non-linearised greyscale, such as those using Black Only
> > printing, would do well to avail themselves of the little but powerful
> > module included with QTR called QTR Create ICC.  This module allows you to
> > profile the luminance of your printer's greyscale production and store it as
> > an ICC profile.  So when you come to print you can Let Photoshop Determine
> > Colors and convert the image file from whatever colour space you are using
> > for the file or workspace to a printer/output space that reflects your, well
> > err, printer output.  In this case it doesn't matter whether you have a
> > greyscale image tagged as GG2.2, GG1.8, DG20%, Adobe RGB, ProPhoto RGB or
> > any other.  When it leaves Photoshop it will be converted to a profile which
> > reflects your printer setup.  This is just like a colour (colour managed)
> > workflow.  The one difference is that it makes no attempt to output manage
> > hue - your greyscale hue is determined by the RIP or driver and ink/paper
> > setup you use to generate it.  In other words, there is no attempt to
> > maintain your nice neutral image on screen as neutral in the printer if you
> > have, say, selected a warm QTR curve.  Only the luminance axis is managed
> > and the print comes out warm as you wanted.  While this is the case, Roy is
> > working on a way to allow you to soft proof hue with the same ICC profile.
> > So when you set up a soft proof in the normal fashion in Photoshop you will
> > see the hue of the profiled printer setup (eg QTR with a warm curve selected
> > or Epson Adv B&W set to warm and darker - whichever settings you profiled
> > with QTR Create ICC) and the impact of the luminance management (the
> > compression to the reduced dynamic range of the printer) - for example a
> > nice warm image as it would print (reduced dynamic range and all).  THIS IS
> > AN EXTREMELY POWERFUL TOOL AND WELL WORTH THE COST OF QTR ON ITS 
OWN.  
> Even
> > if you are not using QTR as your RIP/driver, if you have an Eye-One Photo
> > and hence can use MeasureTool to read a step wedge printed using whatever
> > workflow you use, then you can likely benefit from using QTR Create ICC
> > (especially if you have a lumpy non linear output like black only).
> > 
> > Steve
> > 
> > 
> > * I noted Paul's RGB curve workflow as a possible exception because I
> > haven't fully thought it through.  Paul, in essence, targets a particular
> > greyscale profile with his curves.  This is quite different from getting
> > what you get with, say, black only (by this I mean you aren't able to change
> > the luminance profile of the greyscale generated by your printer in black
> > only mode - it is a black box and you get what you get) or managing, through
> > linearisation, your greyscale output.  Paul's curves in effect define the
> > transformation from workspace to print space.  With the other methods the
> > print space is constructed independently of the workspace (with the minor
> > exception that Clayton hunted out a workspace which best matched the print
> > space - a good starting point).  QTR Create ICC was designed to use colour
> > theory to manage the transformation between two independent spaces.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > From: Howard Shaw <glassman@b...>
> > > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 08:08:56 +0100
> > > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: B/W on the 9600
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Steve Kale wrote:
> > >> ...   If you are using Channel Mixer to convert to B&W
> > >> and want to be able to retrace your steps then saving this step as a layer
> > >> will, I believe, require you to keep the document in RGB.  This isn't such a
> > >> big deal except for the extra size etc.  If you are not worried about
> > >> keeping this layer then I would flatten and then go to GG 2.2 greyscale.
> > >> You can then easily save the document then bounce to Adobe RGB (which has 
a
> > >> gamma of 2.2) for your Photokit output sharpen and then print - discarding
> > >> the output sharpened file once it has printed.
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > > What is the advantage of converting to GG2.2 if you're workflow requires
> > > you to convert back to RGB? The same applies when using Paul Roark's
> > > curves for example. Retaining the original colour file and being able to
> > > alter the channel mixer settings etc right up until print time surely
> > > outweighs any advantage in converting?
> > > 
> > > Howard
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 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 ³Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines² 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 ³OWNER² 
AND
> > > ³MODERATORS² 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  ³OWNER² AND 
> ³MODERATORS² 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
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >  
> > > 
> > >

> From: joshhackney <joshhackney@...>
 
>  When you use your QTR
> create ICC 
> profiles with PS set to "Let PS determine colors", are you printing through
> QTR, or are you 
> bypassing QTR and going straight to the print driver?

QTR is the printer driver.


>If you use the icc
> profile you create
> with QTR create ICC AND print through QTR, aren't you converting your file
> twice?  (I'm not 
> sure if "converting" in the previous sentence was the proper word, but I think
> you get the 
> idea).  At first I thought you were bypassing QTR, but judging from your
> latest comments 
> about hue, it seems that you are in fact using the ICC profile and QTR.

I use QTR Create ICC to create profiles for both QTR and Epson Adv B&W.

The file is not converted twice.  It is simply converted once from the
storage file profile (usually the same as the workspace) to the print space
at printing.  Quadtone RIP simply drives the printer - ie it is through this
that we control which inks are used in what amount to make a greyscale.  A
part of this process is "linearisation" but this is not profiling.  Think of
linearisation as a final step in constructing a greyscale - specifically
smoothing this greyscale out so there is an even progression (rather than
bumpy) from dMin to dMax.  QTR Create ICC then PROFILES this smoothed
greyscale (much in the same way you profile your Epson driver colour
output).  Once we have profiled it with an ICC profile we can use PS's
colour management module to convert the image file to this output space.

So QTR Create ICC is completely independent of QTR.  It simply profiles
greyscale printer output and helps us manage the tonal compression from a
broad workspace to a narrower print space.  QTR Create ICC can (and should)
be used with Epson Adv B&W output, Black Only output, IJC/OPM output etc.

I hope this helps.

Steve