Digital BW, The Print

I asked the question a few days ago, but received no replies. 
I'm sorry if this question has been answered, but I can find no
definitive response in the archives.

do I understand this correctly, MIS is now shipping/selling a new UT
mix (FS/FSN/UT2/UT7/EZN) with a different base that has less or almost
no bronzing?

if so, would i be correct in assuming they would require no adjustment
other than what i have already made (in other word, they have the
same densities as the 1st version of UT FSN)?

any help is greatly appreciated.

I think I can answer part of this question.  At the moment, or at
least in the recent past, the situation seems to be a mess.  I have
some new FS-N inks that are astonishingly good on microceramic gloss
papers.  At the same time I got some PK which is the same old stuff
(not bad but definitely not changed).

It took me a while to figure out that I would get much better results
by leaving the PK aside and filling the black cartridge on my 1270
with the FS-N C ink (measured denser and better gloss).  Given the
timing of my order relative to the early posts here on the subject of
the new bases, my guess is that the FS-N inks were the new base, and
the PK was old base (I bought some old base colour inks at the same
time, so the PK could have been intended to go with those.) 

A better idea would have been to change the names (even stick "new
base" labels on the bottles).  I can't guess why MIS would fail to do
that, it makes no sense to me.

Anyway if I am right, the new base inks are superb.   I have no idea
what happens if someone orders a mix of FS or UT and (say) GP inks
along with a pint of PK - would it be old base to match the GP or new
base to match the FS/UT....

The appearance is sufficiently different that I recalibrated
everything (but this was will FS-N C as the black, anyway). Best
glossy pigment inkjet prints I have seen yet. 

Ken

  


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "evanj1969"
<evanj69@b...> wrote:

>
> I asked the question a few days ago, but received no replies. 
> I'm sorry if this question has been answered, but I can find no
> definitive response in the archives.
> 
> do I understand this correctly, MIS is now shipping/selling a new UT
> mix (FS/FSN/UT2/UT7/EZN) with a different base that has less or almost
> no bronzing?
> 
> if so, would i be correct in assuming they would require no adjustment
> other than what i have already made (in other word, they have the
> same densities as the 1st version of UT FSN)?
> 
> any help is greatly appreciated.
>

Yes, bronzing is much better.  I have no idea about adjustments; just pick
up the phone and ask them?

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of evanj1969
Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 2:08 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] new base/new mix .... UT FS/FSN ???

I asked the question a few days ago, but received no replies.
I'm sorry if this question has been answered, but I can find no
definitive response in the archives.

do I understand this correctly, MIS is now shipping/selling a new UT
mix (FS/FSN/UT2/UT7/EZN) with a different base that has less or almost
no bronzing?

if so, would i be correct in assuming they would require no adjustment
other than what i have already made (in other word, they have the
same densities as the 1st version of UT FSN)?

any help is greatly appreciated.





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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "John Moody" 
<moodymz3@y...> wrote:
>
> Yes, bronzing is much better.  I have no idea about adjustments; 
just pick up the phone and ask them?
> 
> Best regards,
> John Moody



thanks for the response guys .... much appreciated.

in response to the phone call to MIS, i have ALWAYS had trouble 
catching the guy that answers all of the technical questions. i tend 
to get a quicker response here, as well as get real world feedback 
from fellow users of the MIS inks. (not to mention Paul's expertise 
in the area, he's seems to ALWAYS have information that's helpful)


thanks again guys. just needed to know if i should wait a bit before 
reordering, but looks like i'm good to reorder.

evanj

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "kenstrain2000" 
<kenstrain2000@y...> wrote:
>
> I think I can answer part of this question.  At the moment, or at
> least in the recent past, the situation seems to be a mess.  I have
> some new FS-N inks that are astonishingly good on microceramic gloss
> papers.  At the same time I got some PK which is the same old stuff
> (not bad but definitely not changed).
> 
> It took me a while to figure out that I would get much better 
results
> by leaving the PK aside and filling the black cartridge on my 1270
> with the FS-N C ink (measured denser and better gloss).  

 
so do i understand this correctly? you are using FS/FSN-Cyan in place 
of PK/PKN?

you getting better results? is this with the density of the %100 
patch, or just in terms of the bronzing in the darker areas?  (or 
both)

i tried FSN-C (K position) in my 1280 when i still had it with no 
luck, this was with when UT FSN was first offered.
do you feel it's worth a try on my 2200?

side note (if it matters) ... i've been using PKN (K position) and 
FSN-C (in light K position). both are more neutral than the PK & 
light PK, and the FSN-C is around the same density as the light K. 
that also means i end up with only 4 inks (PKN/C-C/M-C/M-Y) as 
opposed to 6-7. i feel the prints are just as smooth as when trying 
to use 6-7 different inks, but i'm only interested in a neutral print 
for everything i do.


thanks for the input
evanj

> so do i understand this correctly? you are using FS/FSN-Cyan in place 
> of PK/PKN?
Yes, if C is the darkest one (subject to memory failure).  There was
one other post on this forum, shortly after I bought my latest PK,
FS-N inks by someone else who observed the darkest FS grey was denser
than PK. 

I do not have a proper densitometer, but by both visual comparison and
profiled scan the FS-N dark gray was somewhat denser than the  PK (I
hesitate to put a number on it as I don't trust my calibration at
densities greater than about 2).  

Probably this is only a temporary measure until I get some new base
PK, but I have not decided yet. (I'll get some new base PK to use with
MISPRO for "other purposes".)  

> 
> you getting better results? is this with the density of the %100 
> patch, or just in terms of the bronzing in the darker areas?  (or 
> both)
yes both.  

> 
> i tried FSN-C (K position) in my 1280 when i still had it with no 
> luck, this was with when UT FSN was first offered.
> do you feel it's worth a try on my 2200?
I don't see why not, but I don't have a 2200.

> 
> side note (if it matters) ... i've been using PKN (K position) and 
> FSN-C (in light K position). both are more neutral than the PK & 
> light PK, and the FSN-C is around the same density as the light K. 
> that also means i end up with only 4 inks (PKN/C-C/M-C/M-Y) as 
> opposed to 6-7. i feel the prints are just as smooth as when trying 
> to use 6-7 different inks, but i'm only interested in a neutral print 
> for everything i do.
Yes, I find the hue of (new?) FSN-C is wonderful too, and I am content
with 3 inks for the moment (3"C"s, 2"M"s and a "Y"). 

Ken

> do I understand this correctly, MIS is now shipping/selling a new UT
> mix (FS/FSN/UT2/UT7/EZN) with a different base that has less or almost
> no bronzing?

Yes.  The improvement seems to be more on some papers than others, and MIS
still has some old stock that it is selling off that is made with the old
base.

> 
> if so, would i be correct in assuming they would require no adjustment
> other than what i have already made (in other word, they have the
> same densities as the 1st version of UT FSN)?
> 

That is what MIS appears to have assumed, but it is not my experience.  I
think the new color inks are a higher load formula that may have affected
the toners.  If this is the case, the toned inks may have shifted toward
cool a bit.  Has anyone noticed a shift? 

There are now 2 very distinct families of PK also.  The MIS Pro PK is high
load, and the MIS 2400 PK is a lower load.  (MIS 2400 PK is about the same
as a mix of 50% MP PK and 50% LK -- a major difference.)   MIS will have to
be careful with the mixes that use PK.  If the loads of the PK are not what
they were when the formulas were made, the resulting densities could be
significantly affected.  (Why the 2400, as well as the R200, cannot handle
the higher load PK is a question I suspect only an Epson tech in Japan could
answer.  The R200 dusts with the high-load MP PK.  I had to make a new and
unique PK mix for the R200 to get reasonable glossy paper performance.)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

With apologies to MIS I would like to correct my post which contains
several errors. 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "kenstrain2000"
<kenstrain2000@y...> wrote:
>
> I think I can answer part of this question.  At the moment, or at
> least in the recent past, the situation seems to be a mess.  I have
> some new FS-N inks that are astonishingly good on microceramic gloss
> papers.  At the same time I got some PK which is the same old stuff
> (not bad but definitely not changed).
I realise I got what I ordered, according to my order history
(although the ink label is a bit ambiguous).
> 
> It took me a while to figure out that I would get much better results
> by leaving the PK aside and filling the black cartridge on my 1270
> with the FS-N C ink (measured denser and better gloss).
True.
>  Given the
> timing of my order relative to the early posts here on the subject of
> the new bases, my guess is that the FS-N inks were the new base
False, my order date was prior to the new base becoming available.


> Anyway if I am right, the new base inks are superb.   
I was wrong, so I have no idea what the new base inks are like. I am
surprised at how good my results are with the old FS-N ones compared
to other's descriptions though. 

Sorry if, through my confusion, I misled.

Ken