Digital BW, The Print

I've been using QTR but I recently tried to do a black only (BO) print directly from Photoshop CS with the settings as described in the Clayton Jones article (http://www.cjcom.net/articles/digiprn3b.htm) using Epson Matte Black ink.

The image I got was much warmer then I like (and was expecting). I did a test prints on both Epson Heavyweight Matte paper and Hahnemühle Photo Rag. The PR print is brighter as one might expect but both are warmer then I expect. 

Is this normal? The article referred to using Eboni ink. Would this produce significant differences from the Epson ink?

Also, when comparing the same print made on PR with QTR there is a rather obvious increase in apparent sharpness of the print (I'm making ~8.5x11" prints). Under a loupe the QTR print is much smoother.

This brings up maybe the bigger question... why use BO printing over a RIP at all?

Dave.
-- 
David Keenan, ausdlk@... on 9/24/2005

Eboni will give less warmth. Why use BO? Although I find QTR images smoother
they certainly look less sharp to me and seem to have less pop than BO
prints. BO does not work for all prints and that is why I sometimes use QTR.
However when BO does work it works well, IMO. Just more snap and "wow!"
factor oftentimes.
 Richard

 On 9/24/05, David Keenan <ausdlk@...> wrote:
>
> I've been using QTR but I recently tried to do a black only (BO) print
> directly from Photoshop CS with the settings as described in the Clayton
> Jones article (http://www.cjcom.net/articles/digiprn3b.htm) using Epson
> Matte Black ink.
>
> The image I got was much warmer then I like (and was expecting). I did a
> test prints on both Epson Heavyweight Matte paper and Hahnemühle Photo Rag.
> The PR print is brighter as one might expect but both are warmer then I
> expect.
>
> Is this normal? The article referred to using Eboni ink. Would this
> produce significant differences from the Epson ink?
>
> Also, when comparing the same print made on PR with QTR there is a rather
> obvious increase in apparent sharpness of the print (I'm making ~8.5x11"
> prints). Under a loupe the QTR print is much smoother.
>
> This brings up maybe the bigger question... why use BO printing over a RIP
> at all?
>
> Dave.
> --
> David Keenan, ausdlk@... on 9/24/2005
>
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>    - 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<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/>.
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>


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

UC is warmer than Eboni. This is exaggerated with warm paper IMO. I
like it...reminds me of Agfa's Portriga Rapid :-)

In little prints (eg 6X9") black-only "dots" tend to dominate, going
so far as to obscure some detail. Sometimes this is nice, makes some
images look snappy. In our recent black-only print exchange a print
that began as 6X7cm negative obviously lost detail in favor of "snap"
due to black-only's simulated grain...IMO the same image printed via
QTR would have had more detail on the tiny 8.5X11 paper, but might not
have looked as dramatic.

In larger prints the dots remain same size as in small prints, don't
enlarge like silver grain. The dots get forgotten Vs grain or image
details in larger prints:  bigger prints can literally look sharper
than small ones. 

Black-only is sometimes preferable for the artificial "snap" it adds
to some images. It's a subtle graphic effect that sometimes helps images.

IMO IMO IMO
 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, David Keenan
<ausdlk@s...> wrote:
> I've been using QTR but I recently tried to do a black only (BO)
print directly from Photoshop CS with the settings as described in the
Clayton Jones article (http://www.cjcom.net/articles/digiprn3b.htm)
using Epson Matte Black ink.
> 
> The image I got was much warmer then I like (and was expecting). I
did a test prints on both Epson Heavyweight Matte paper and Hahnemühle
Photo Rag. The PR print is brighter as one might expect but both are
warmer then I expect. 
> 
> Is this normal? The article referred to using Eboni ink. Would this
produce significant differences from the Epson ink?
> 
> Also, when comparing the same print made on PR with QTR there is a
rather obvious increase in apparent sharpness of the print (I'm making
~8.5x11" prints). Under a loupe the QTR print is much smoother.
> 
> This brings up maybe the bigger question... why use BO printing over
a RIP at all?

> 
> Dave.
> -- 
> David Keenan, ausdlk@s... on 9/24/2005

What is exactly "artificial" about the snap in BO prints? Snap is snap. How
it's created (contrast, sharpness, etc.) does not matter. Just curious what
you mean by that....
 Richard


 On 9/25/05, djon43 <djon43@...> wrote:
>
> UC is warmer than Eboni. This is exaggerated with warm paper IMO. I
> like it...reminds me of Agfa's Portriga Rapid :-)
>
> In little prints (eg 6X9") black-only "dots" tend to dominate, going
> so far as to obscure some detail. Sometimes this is nice, makes some
> images look snappy. In our recent black-only print exchange a print
> that began as 6X7cm negative obviously lost detail in favor of "snap"
> due to black-only's simulated grain...IMO the same image printed via
> QTR would have had more detail on the tiny 8.5X11 paper, but might not
> have looked as dramatic.
>
> In larger prints the dots remain same size as in small prints, don't
> enlarge like silver grain. The dots get forgotten Vs grain or image
> details in larger prints: bigger prints can literally look sharper
> than small ones.
>
> Black-only is sometimes preferable for the artificial "snap" it adds
> to some images. It's a subtle graphic effect that sometimes helps images.
>
> IMO IMO IMO
>
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, David Keenan
> <ausdlk@s...> wrote:
> > I've been using QTR but I recently tried to do a black only (BO)
> print directly from Photoshop CS with the settings as described in the
> Clayton Jones article (http://www.cjcom.net/articles/digiprn3b.htm)
> using Epson Matte Black ink.
> >
> > The image I got was much warmer then I like (and was expecting). I
> did a test prints on both Epson Heavyweight Matte paper and Hahnemühle
> Photo Rag. The PR print is brighter as one might expect but both are
> warmer then I expect.
> >
> > Is this normal? The article referred to using Eboni ink. Would this
> produce significant differences from the Epson ink?
> >
> > Also, when comparing the same print made on PR with QTR there is a
> rather obvious increase in apparent sharpness of the print (I'm making
> ~8.5x11" prints). Under a loupe the QTR print is much smoother.
> >
> > This brings up maybe the bigger question... why use BO printing over
> a RIP at all?
> >
> > Dave.
> > --
> > David Keenan, ausdlk@s... on 9/24/2005
>
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>    - 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<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/>.
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>


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

I print using BO recipe from Clayton Jones. Eboni ink really makes a 
BIG difference. It is truly BLACK. Also with his recommendation I use 
Red River Aurora Art Card paper. In one of his articles he mentions 
that this combination produces the maximum Dmax as compared to other 
papers. Try is it is impressive especially at 13x19!!
Vartkes

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Richard Sintchak 
<rich815@g...> wrote:
> What is exactly "artificial" about the snap in BO prints? Snap is 
snap. How
> it's created (contrast, sharpness, etc.) does not matter. Just 
curious what
> you mean by that....
>  Richard
> 
> 
>  On 9/25/05, djon43 <djon43@y...> wrote:
> >
> > UC is warmer than Eboni. This is exaggerated with warm paper IMO. 
I
> > like it...reminds me of Agfa's Portriga Rapid :-)
> >
> > In little prints (eg 6X9") black-only "dots" tend to dominate, 
going
> > so far as to obscure some detail. Sometimes this is nice, makes 
some
> > images look snappy. In our recent black-only print exchange a 
print
> > that began as 6X7cm negative obviously lost detail in favor 
of "snap"
> > due to black-only's simulated grain...IMO the same image printed 
via
> > QTR would have had more detail on the tiny 8.5X11 paper, but 
might not
> > have looked as dramatic.
> >
> > In larger prints the dots remain same size as in small prints, 
don't
> > enlarge like silver grain. The dots get forgotten Vs grain or 
image
> > details in larger prints: bigger prints can literally look sharper
> > than small ones.
> >
> > Black-only is sometimes preferable for the artificial "snap" it 
adds
> > to some images. It's a subtle graphic effect that sometimes helps 
images.
> >
> > IMO IMO IMO
> >
> >
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, David Keenan
> > <ausdlk@s...> wrote:
> > > I've been using QTR but I recently tried to do a black only (BO)
> > print directly from Photoshop CS with the settings as described 
in the
> > Clayton Jones article 
(http://www.cjcom.net/articles/digiprn3b.htm)
> > using Epson Matte Black ink.
> > >
> > > The image I got was much warmer then I like (and was 
expecting). I
> > did a test prints on both Epson Heavyweight Matte paper and 
Hahnemühle
> > Photo Rag. The PR print is brighter as one might expect but both 
are
> > warmer then I expect.
> > >
> > > Is this normal? The article referred to using Eboni ink. Would 
this
> > produce significant differences from the Epson ink?
> > >
> > > Also, when comparing the same print made on PR with QTR there 
is a
> > rather obvious increase in apparent sharpness of the print (I'm 
making
> > ~8.5x11" prints). Under a loupe the QTR print is much smoother.
> > >
> > > This brings up maybe the bigger question... why use BO printing 
over
> > a RIP at all?
> > >
> > > Dave.
> > > --
> > > David Keenan, ausdlk@s... on 9/24/2005
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> >    - Visit your 
group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digi
talBlackandWhiteThePrint>"
> >    on the web.
> >     - To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >    DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-
unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<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/>.
> >
> >
> >  ------------------------------
> >
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Richard,  Some of the "snap" in black-only seems similar to the snap
produced by over-sharpening.. not just a matter of contrast.

Black only is arguably "artificial" Vs QTR in the sense that it's
created *by the printer* rather than in the file by imaging software,
such as Photoshop. 

In small prints b/o sometimes draws attention to itself (seems
artificial) because it lacks tone where the file probably has it..this
can be dramatic and a good thing graphically, as in the very black
faces in our recent print exchange.

In that print exchange I felt several images would have been more
handsome Via QTR (including Clayton's...!), whereas several probably
looked better as black only. I'm undecided about my own image in b/o
Vs QTR...needs a better scan, I didn't do the best possible job. 

Relying on one or the other seems limiting, like exclusively using one
type and size of black and white film for photojournalism, scenic, and
studio work. 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Richard Sintchak
<rich815@g...> wrote:
> What is exactly "artificial" about the snap in BO prints? Snap is
snap. How
> it's created (contrast, sharpness, etc.) does not matter. Just
curious what
> you mean by that....
>  Richard
> 
> 
>  On 9/25/05, djon43 <djon43@y...> wrote:
> >
> > UC is warmer than Eboni. This is exaggerated with warm paper IMO. I
> > like it...reminds me of Agfa's Portriga Rapid :-)
> >
> > In little prints (eg 6X9") black-only "dots" tend to dominate, going
> > so far as to obscure some detail. Sometimes this is nice, makes some
> > images look snappy. In our recent black-only print exchange a print
> > that began as 6X7cm negative obviously lost detail in favor of "snap"
> > due to black-only's simulated grain...IMO the same image printed via
> > QTR would have had more detail on the tiny 8.5X11 paper, but might not
> > have looked as dramatic.
> >
> > In larger prints the dots remain same size as in small prints, don't
> > enlarge like silver grain. The dots get forgotten Vs grain or image
> > details in larger prints: bigger prints can literally look sharper
> > than small ones.
> >
> > Black-only is sometimes preferable for the artificial "snap" it adds
> > to some images. It's a subtle graphic effect that sometimes helps
images.

> >
> > IMO IMO IMO
> >
>