Digital BW, The Print

How are people using the Soft Proof with the Create ICC profiles?  I 
find that (using 2.3.2) checking BPC makes no difference in the 
appearance of the image on screen, but that selecting simulate paper 
white washes out the black unrealistically, *particularly in prints 
with large shadow areas.*  In high key or largely mid key images, 
however, the BPC and simulating paper white actually improves the 
accuracy of the preview.  So I find that the settings have to be 
changed (particularly simulate paper white) depending on the image.

On a related issue:  Steve's last post (or was it Tyler's?) suggests 
to me that for those profiling ABW output, what we should be 
profiling is the "light" output which is natively much more linear 
that the "darker," at least in the shadows.  The gamma shift on 
the "light" setting should be taken care of by the profile.  I'm 
going to give that a shot re the black compression issue that Paul 
and others have been talking about.  I am hoping it will also take 
care of some of the shadow "reversals" I have seen with non-Epson 
papers.  V. 2.3.2 will not accept any reversals or even flat spots 
(identical consecutive numbers), but refuses to make a profile with 
the message: "LAB data not in order).

Walt

I should keep my mouth shut because I'm not real up on create icc, but
I think BPC is built in so is always on? The other options like paper
white can be used at will depending on what is most useful at the
time. I think it's washing out your blacks because "black ink"
automatically comes on with it by default. I find it bears more
resemblence to the print on than off, but the initial shock when
turning it on is difficult. Turn away when switching it on, and come
back a minute later, it'll look more acceptable.
Regarding which output to profile, Ernst's post was most revealing.
Despite my arguement earlier than in a hypothetical sense profiling
will equalize out various initial settings or linearizations, it's
best to find a setting that prints as closely as possible "same as
source" as it will when printing with a profile. The first reason is
that it minimizes potential tonal loss. Secondly, the less work the
profile conversion has to do, the better job it will do. Lastly, it
sounds like CreateICC has trouble with reversals, so at the least your
output should progress from light to dark even if gamma is off, as you
suggest. Regarding other problem papers, you might want to play with
media settings as well.
T

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets"
<odets@c...> wrote:

>
> How are people using the Soft Proof with the Create ICC profiles?  I 
> find that (using 2.3.2) checking BPC makes no difference in the 
> appearance of the image on screen, but that selecting simulate paper 
> white washes out the black unrealistically, *particularly in prints 
> with large shadow areas.*  In high key or largely mid key images, 
> however, the BPC and simulating paper white actually improves the 
> accuracy of the preview.  So I find that the settings have to be 
> changed (particularly simulate paper white) depending on the image.
> 
> On a related issue:  Steve's last post (or was it Tyler's?) suggests 
> to me that for those profiling ABW output, what we should be 
> profiling is the "light" output which is natively much more linear 
> that the "darker," at least in the shadows.  The gamma shift on 
> the "light" setting should be taken care of by the profile.  I'm 
> going to give that a shot re the black compression issue that Paul 
> and others have been talking about.  I am hoping it will also take 
> care of some of the shadow "reversals" I have seen with non-Epson 
> papers.  V. 2.3.2 will not accept any reversals or even flat spots 
> (identical consecutive numbers), but refuses to make a profile with 
> the message: "LAB data not in order).
> 
> Walt
>

Tyler-
Thanks for the response.  Yes, I hadn't noticed that "ink black" is 
automatically invoked with "paper color" but that is exactly the 
issue and makes a lot more sense!  That all said, I'm familiar with 
the look-away approach to soft proofing (I've used some Jon Cone 
color setups pretty extensively with soft proofing), but on my setup 
the print blacks, particularly on VFA, are *much* stronger than what 
the soft proof depicts.  On the Cone color setup, the soft proof was 
quite accurate and useful.  So the paper/ink selection improves the 
acccuracy from grays at about 70% and lighter, but misrepresents the 
actual print blacks.

On the other issue, I am going to profile a few papers with the ABW 
Normal and Light settings.  I suspect that Epson designates 
the "Darker" setting as the standard one because it simulates the 
shadow compression of the typical 2.2 file profile and workspace.  
With ICC, of course, this is moot and I know that the light and 
normal settings are much more linear into the shadows than the darker 
setting.  I'll compare the numbers after I do the profiles tomorrow.

Best,
Walt 


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" 
<tyler@t...> wrote:
>
> I should keep my mouth shut because I'm not real up on create icc, 
but
> I think BPC is built in so is always on? The other options like 
paper
> white can be used at will depending on what is most useful at the
> time. I think it's washing out your blacks because "black ink"
> automatically comes on with it by default. I find it bears more
> resemblence to the print on than off, but the initial shock when
> turning it on is difficult. Turn away when switching it on, and come
> back a minute later, it'll look more acceptable.
> Regarding which output to profile, Ernst's post was most revealing.
> Despite my arguement earlier than in a hypothetical sense profiling
> will equalize out various initial settings or linearizations, it's
> best to find a setting that prints as closely as possible "same as
> source" as it will when printing with a profile. The first reason is
> that it minimizes potential tonal loss. Secondly, the less work the
> profile conversion has to do, the better job it will do. Lastly, it
> sounds like CreateICC has trouble with reversals, so at the least 
your
> output should progress from light to dark even if gamma is off, as 
you
> suggest. Regarding other problem papers, you might want to play with
> media settings as well.
> T
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets"
> <odets@c...> wrote:
> >
> > How are people using the Soft Proof with the Create ICC 
profiles?  I 
> > find that (using 2.3.2) checking BPC makes no difference in the 
> > appearance of the image on screen, but that selecting simulate 
paper 
> > white washes out the black unrealistically, *particularly in 
prints 
> > with large shadow areas.*  In high key or largely mid key images, 
> > however, the BPC and simulating paper white actually improves the 
> > accuracy of the preview.  So I find that the settings have to be 
> > changed (particularly simulate paper white) depending on the 
image.
> > 
> > On a related issue:  Steve's last post (or was it Tyler's?) 
suggests 
> > to me that for those profiling ABW output, what we should be 
> > profiling is the "light" output which is natively much more 
linear 
> > that the "darker," at least in the shadows.  The gamma shift on 
> > the "light" setting should be taken care of by the profile.  I'm 
> > going to give that a shot re the black compression issue that 
Paul 
> > and others have been talking about.  I am hoping it will also 
take 
> > care of some of the shadow "reversals" I have seen with non-Epson 
> > papers.  V. 2.3.2 will not accept any reversals or even flat 
spots 
> > (identical consecutive numbers), but refuses to make a profile 
with 

> > the message: "LAB data not in order).
> > 
> > Walt
> >
>

Walt,
Any chance you are using an i1-pro to profile an LCD display?  If so, make
sure it’s set to LCD mode, not CRT in i1match.  Also, if you have the
i1-display2, you might be better off using that on an LCD.

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of wwodets
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 1:25 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Create ICC Soft Proofing question . . .

Tyler-
Thanks for the response.  Yes, I hadn't noticed that "ink black" is
automatically invoked with "paper color" but that is exactly the
issue and makes a lot more sense!  That all said, I'm familiar with
the look-away approach to soft proofing (I've used some Jon Cone
color setups pretty extensively with soft proofing), but on my setup
the print blacks, particularly on VFA, are *much* stronger than what
the soft proof depicts.  On the Cone color setup, the soft proof was
quite accurate and useful.  So the paper/ink selection improves the
acccuracy from grays at about 70% and lighter, but misrepresents the
actual print blacks.

On the other issue, I am going to profile a few papers with the ABW
Normal and Light settings.  I suspect that Epson designates
the "Darker" setting as the standard one because it simulates the
shadow compression of the typical 2.2 file profile and workspace.
With ICC, of course, this is moot and I know that the light and
normal settings are much more linear into the shadows than the darker
setting.  I'll compare the numbers after I do the profiles tomorrow.

Best,
Walt




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

I've been following the linearization threads, on and off, and it's been very 
informative. Not to muddy the waters further, but in hopes of knowing what 
people's thoughts are on this, I'd raise a question about the implementation of 
linearization for inkjet printing.

Since linearization is supposed to return a machine to a known state, in part 
defined by other factors like ink limits, wouldn't it make more sense for 
this to be an onboard function of the printer? I'm not an engineer, but it would 
seem that designing and implementing an automatic/semiautomatic routine 
through the print driver or onboard software would be relatively simple. On the 
digital capture side of things, it does seem that manufacturers are just beginning 
to "get" what serious photographers want it; not more pixels, but better 
pixels and improved workflow (from onboard camera controls through Raw processing 
and image file organization). 

Barring some unknown and difficult engineering issue, why doesn't Epson 
provide a linearization function in the print utilities? If the machine could 
simply be returned to it's know state it would simplify the entire process of 
authoring accurate print profiles and help assure that data is flowing   through 
the system properly. It would also improve the accuracy of the print profiles 
they supply.

Any engineers or ubergeeks want to address this? I'd be interested in your 
opinions.



Bill Kennedy
Associate Professor of Photography
St. Edward's University
Austin, Texas


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

The new HPs do that now.

How it works
HP Designjet printers and HP Indigo presses use closed-loop color
calibration as the principle of
measuring and monitoring color. A color sensor measures reflected energy
from primary color tiles
that are illuminated with a narrow-band light source (a LED in the case of
HP Designjet printers, an inline
densitometer in the case of HP Indigo presses).

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
BKPhoto@...
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 2:09 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Create ICC Soft Proofing question . . .

I've been following the linearization threads, on and off, and it's been
very
informative. Not to muddy the waters further, but in hopes of knowing what
people's thoughts are on this, I'd raise a question about the implementation
of
linearization for inkjet printing.

Since linearization is supposed to return a machine to a known state, in
part
defined by other factors like ink limits, wouldn't it make more sense for
this to be an onboard function of the printer? I'm not an engineer, but it
would
seem that designing and implementing an automatic/semiautomatic routine
through the print driver or onboard software would be relatively simple. On
the
digital capture side of things, it does seem that manufacturers are just
beginning
to "get" what serious photographers want it; not more pixels, but better
pixels and improved workflow (from onboard camera controls through Raw
processing
and image file organization).

Barring some unknown and difficult engineering issue, why doesn't Epson
provide a linearization function in the print utilities? If the machine
could
simply be returned to it's know state it would simplify the entire process
of
authoring accurate print profiles and help assure that data is flowing
through
the system properly. It would also improve the accuracy of the print
profiles
they supply.

Any engineers or ubergeeks want to address this? I'd be interested in your
opinions.



Bill Kennedy
Associate Professor of Photography
St. Edward's University
Austin, Texas





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

BKPhoto@... wrote:
> I've been following the linearization threads, on and off, and it's been very 
> informative. Not to muddy the waters further, but in hopes of knowing what 
> people's thoughts are on this, I'd raise a question about the implementation of 
> linearization for inkjet printing.
> 
> Since linearization is supposed to return a machine to a known state, in part 
> defined by other factors like ink limits, wouldn't it make more sense for 
> this to be an onboard function of the printer? I'm not an engineer, but it would 
> seem that designing and implementing an automatic/semiautomatic routine 
> through the print driver or onboard software would be relatively simple. On the 
> digital capture side of things, it does seem that manufacturers are just beginning 
> to "get" what serious photographers want it; not more pixels, but better 
> pixels and improved workflow (from onboard camera controls through Raw processing 
> and image file organization). 
> 
> Barring some unknown and difficult engineering issue, why doesn't Epson 
> provide a linearization function in the print utilities? If the machine could 
> simply be returned to it's know state it would simplify the entire process of 
> authoring accurate print profiles and help assure that data is flowing   through 
> the system properly. It would also improve the accuracy of the print profiles 
> they supply.
> 
> Any engineers or ubergeeks want to address this? I'd be interested in your 
> opinions.
> 
> 
> 
> Bill Kennedy
> Associate Professor of Photography
> St. Edward's University
> Austin, Texas

Automatic calibration on the printer itself would indeed be 
very nice. However that would mean a spectrometer embedded in 
the hardware and that would add to the price. It has been done 
though on printers from other manufacturers. The best so far 
on Epsons has been the automatic nozzle control on the 10000CF.

Last month Epson introduced ColorBase for the 
9800/7800/4800/2400 models and combined with a separate 
Spectrometer this is the best you can get in calibration on 
Epson printers now. It isn't done automatically, the 
calibration data isn't kept in the firmware of the printer but 
at least it means a calibrated base for the Epson driver + the 
Epson Stylus RIP. I was a surprised that it wasn't extended to 
support third party RIPs too but the Colorsync list seemed 
surprised with the introduction so I doubt third party RIP 
manufacturers were informed at all. We discussed Colorbase 
some weeks ago.
                    --
           Ernst Dinkla


www.pigment-print.com
(         unvollendet         )

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "John Moody" 
<moodymz3@y...> wrote:
>
> Walt,
> Any chance you are using an i1-pro to profile an LCD display?  If so, 
make
> sure it's set to LCD mode, not CRT in i1match.  Also, if you have the
> i1-display2, you might be better off using that on an LCD.
> 
> Best regards,
> John Moody


I've pretty much decided that the i1 pro is too heavy for my LCD, I 
don't get a good profile with it, or at least not as good as I think it 
should be. In many respects the crumby Spyder(original) does a better 
job, but not all respects. I think the size and weight of the thing is 
getting in the way and deforming the display slightly.

> Automatic calibration on the printer itself would indeed be 
> very nice. However that would mean a spectrometer embedded in 
> the hardware and that would add to the price. It has been done 
> though on printers from other manufacturers. 

HP Designjet 130 has this feature, and it's inexpensive Vs 4000/4800.
Can't comment from experience, but good printers report happiness.
There are paper questions (wrinkling, moisture etc) but the black was
 universally reported to be better than Epson's, at least prior to 4800. 

http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsights/pi031/HP_Designjet_30.html

>                     --
>            Ernst Dinkla
> 
> 
> www.pigment-print.com
> (         unvollendet         )
>

FYI Epson Tech UK said this is not a linearization of the printer.

It's interesting to note that the 4800 maintenance manual says the 4800
supports "Colorimetric Calibration" which "corrects not only the weight of
ink droplets which differs according to the characteristics of [the]
individual printhead but variable factors such as drive circuit and voltage,
which provides a higher accuracy calibration.  The calibration is performed
by printing a correction pattern with a completed product and measuring the
color of the pattern using a calibrator." The correction value is written to
the NVRAM on the main board.  "The printer driver reads the correction value
stored in the NVRAM during printing, and correct[s] the dot generation
amount for each dot size in the print data."

I wonder if this is in effect what Colorlab does with the "correction value"
read not from the NVRAM but rather from wherever it is stored on your
computer.  Personally I do not understand it.

> From: Ernst Dinkla <E.Dinkla@...>

> 
> Automatic calibration on the printer itself would indeed be
> very nice. However that would mean a spectrometer embedded in
> the hardware and that would add to the price. It has been done
> though on printers from other manufacturers. The best so far
> on Epsons has been the automatic nozzle control on the 10000CF.
> 
> Last month Epson introduced ColorBase for the
> 9800/7800/4800/2400 models and combined with a separate
> Spectrometer this is the best you can get in calibration on
> Epson printers now. It isn't done automatically, the
> calibration data isn't kept in the firmware of the printer but
> at least it means a calibrated base for the Epson driver + the
> Epson Stylus RIP. I was a surprised that it wasn't extended to
> support third party RIPs too but the Colorsync list seemed
> surprised with the introduction so I doubt third party RIP
> manufacturers were informed at all. We discussed Colorbase
> some weeks ago.
>                     --
>            Ernst Dinkla

Re display calibration, another trick if you have an i1 Photo is to get the
reference file from PM 5 and use that by just renaming it and putting it in
the i1 Match folder.  It then does a more extensive set of 99 observations.
PM 5 display calibration for free.

> From: Greg <dfaprinting@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 18:48:25 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Create ICC Soft Proofing question . . .
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "John Moody"
> <moodymz3@y...> wrote:
>> 
>> Walt,
>> Any chance you are using an i1-pro to profile an LCD display?  If so,
> make
>> sure it's set to LCD mode, not CRT in i1match.  Also, if you have the
>> i1-display2, you might be better off using that on an LCD.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> John Moody
> 
> 
> I've pretty much decided that the i1 pro is too heavy for my LCD, I
> don't get a good profile with it, or at least not as good as I think it
> should be. In many respects the crumby Spyder(original) does a better
> job, but not all respects. I think the size and weight of the thing is
> getting in the way and deforming the display slightly.
>

> From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 17:10:58 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Create ICC Soft Proofing question . . .
> 
> I should keep my mouth shut because I'm not real up on create icc, but
> I think BPC is built in so is always on?

Only outbound to printer.  Not to the display and hence a soft proof must
invoke it.

> From: wwodets <odets@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 15:16:44 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Create ICC Soft Proofing question . . .
> 
> How are people using the Soft Proof with the Create ICC profiles?  I
> find that (using 2.3.2) checking BPC makes no difference in the
> appearance of the image on screen, but that selecting simulate paper
> white washes out the black unrealistically, *particularly in prints
> with large shadow areas.*

Unfortunately this is "real".  Look away when you hit the button.  As a
test, take an ICC profile for colour output to the same paper and compare
the look of the soft proof.  I would be surprised that Adobe's
implementation of these features has not been checked and approved by many,
many colour gurus.


>In high key or largely mid key images,
> however, the BPC and simulating paper white actually improves the
> accuracy of the preview.  So I find that the settings have to be
> changed (particularly simulate paper white) depending on the image.
> 
> On a related issue:  Steve's last post (or was it Tyler's?) suggests
> to me that for those profiling ABW output, what we should be
> profiling is the "light" output which is natively much more linear
> that the "darker," at least in the shadows.  The gamma shift on
> the "light" setting should be taken care of by the profile.  I'm
> going to give that a shot re the black compression issue that Paul
> and others have been talking about.  I am hoping it will also take
> care of some of the shadow "reversals" I have seen with non-Epson
> papers.  V. 2.3.2 will not accept any reversals or even flat spots
> (identical consecutive numbers), but refuses to make a profile with
> the message: "LAB data not in order).


Your issue here is that there REALLY is a crunch of shadow compression in
your (un-managed) printer response.  This would be fixed if you could
linearize the output.  So yes you need to try to use the printer controls to
get separation in the shadows perhaps by lowering ink density (adding more
ink is not resulting in more density so back it off a little).  QTR ICC has
a check built in to make sure it is being fed sensible data - there is a
limit to what a profile can fix.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> FYI Epson Tech UK said this is not a linearization of the printer.
> 
> It's interesting to note that the 4800 maintenance manual says the 
4800


Where did you get the manual for that machine?

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
>
> Re display calibration, another trick if you have an i1 Photo is to 
get the
> reference file from PM 5 and use that by just renaming it and putting 
it in
> the i1 Match folder.  It then does a more extensive set of 99 
observations.
> PM 5 display calibration for free.
>

 
Thanks, I might have to try that.

Now that would be telling...

> From: Greg <dfaprinting@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 19:35:08 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] 4800 service manual
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@b...> wrote:
>> 
>> FYI Epson Tech UK said this is not a linearization of the printer.
>> 
>> It's interesting to note that the 4800 maintenance manual says the
> 4800
> 
> 
> Where did you get the manual for that machine?
>

Does anyone on the list have the key sequence to reset the maint. tank on the R1800.

 

William


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

Steve,

I think you will find that the look of the 'simulate paper white' in 
Photoshop's softproof is a factor of the profile-making program, not 
Photoshop. My old version of Colorvision's ProfilerPro had the facility of 
editing the amount of the paper white simulation in the profile. If I 
remember rightly, all one is doing is changing the black and white points in 
the reverse profile table for that particular paper profile. So you can make 
the profile, and therefore the softproof, match your perception of 'real'.

Bob Frost.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Kale" <stevekale@...>
>
> How are people using the Soft Proof with the Create ICC profiles?  I
> find that (using 2.3.2) checking BPC makes no difference in the
> appearance of the image on screen, but that selecting simulate paper
> white washes out the black unrealistically, *particularly in prints
> with large shadow areas.*

Unfortunately this is "real".  Look away when you hit the button.  As a
test, take an ICC profile for colour output to the same paper and compare
the look of the soft proof.  I would be surprised that Adobe's
implementation of these features has not been checked and approved by many,
many colour gurus.

I don't know for sure but it should simply read the wtpt tag in the profile
and then map monitor white to that media white.  There is no "amount of
simulation tag" that I am aware of so I suspect ProfilerPro simply edited
the wtpt tag or something similar.  It's not part of the LUTs and so editing
wtpt may not affect anything else.

> From: Bob Frost <bob@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 21:11:07 +0100
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Create ICC Soft Proofing question . . .
> 
> Steve,
> 
> I think you will find that the look of the 'simulate paper white' in
> Photoshop's softproof is a factor of the profile-making program, not
> Photoshop. My old version of Colorvision's ProfilerPro had the facility of
> editing the amount of the paper white simulation in the profile. If I
> remember rightly, all one is doing is changing the black and white points in
> the reverse profile table for that particular paper profile. So you can make
> the profile, and therefore the softproof, match your perception of 'real'.
> 
> Bob Frost.
> 
>

>
Yes, I agree, but it is not the output of the printer that is not 
linearized, it is the output of the ABW driver + printer.  That is why 
I am trying a profile on the light and normal settings in the driver.  
I believe that the normal setting is the linearized output per Epson's 
calibration and that is why "normal" is "darker."  I'll report the 
numbers.

I'll try the color profile for interest re the screen match.


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
> Your issue here is that there REALLY is a crunch of shadow 
compression in
> your (un-managed) printer response.  This would be fixed if you could
> linearize the output.  So yes you need to try to use the printer 
controls to
> get separation in the shadows perhaps by lowering ink density (adding 
more
> ink is not resulting in more density so back it off a little).  QTR 
ICC has
> a check built in to make sure it is being fed sensible data - there 
is a
> limit to what a profile can fix.
>

WILLIAM WILSON wrote:

>Does anyone on the list have the key sequence to reset the maint. tank on the R1800.
>
> 
>
>William
>
>
>[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.
> 
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
Can not be reset by Key Sequence. Has to be reset from Epson Service 
Adjustment Program.
Joseph Cettina
Laguna Service Inc

Yes I understand.  Do you have a color density slider under paper
configuration?  If so try lowering the overall ink load with this.

> From: wwodets <odets@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 20:40:52 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Create ICC Soft Proofing question . . .
> 
>> 
> Yes, I agree, but it is not the output of the printer that is not
> linearized, it is the output of the ABW driver + printer.  That is why
> I am trying a profile on the light and normal settings in the driver.
> I believe that the normal setting is the linearized output per Epson's
> calibration and that is why "normal" is "darker."  I'll report the
> numbers.
> 
> I'll try the color profile for interest re the screen match.

Have any of you used backlit films?  I'm wanting to put some prints in a 
store window against the glass.  Any recommendations / cautions / etc?


	A r t h u r    F i n k    P h o t o g r a p h y
	-----------------------------------------------
	Ten New Island Avenue         land 207.766.5722
	Peaks Island, Maine 04108     cell 207.615.5722
	www.arthurfinkphoto.com  af@...

	 Photographing people, places, objects, events

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@b...> wrote:
The overall ink load with VFA, EEM, and HPR (almost) is fine.  I have 
reduced ink load with the ink load adjustment in the driver and this 
doesn't correct non-linearities.  Nor does the "density" slider.  The 
light, normal, dark, etc.  setting in the driver seems about shadow 
compression and the darker setting is what is compressing the 
shadows.  You can see this in simply visually examining printed test 
strips.  I believe that this is the correct control to use and will 
report the numbers tomorrow.

Steve, also plesee see my last post about the soft proofing.  What I 
didn't say there is that the canned Epson color profile provides 
about as good a soft proof as the 2.3.0 profile and a much better one 
than the 2.3.2 profile.  

Walt


>
> Yes I understand.  Do you have a color density slider under paper
> configuration?  If so try lowering the overall ink load with this.
> 
> 
> > From: wwodets <odets@c...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 20:40:52 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Create ICC Soft Proofing question . . .
> > 
> >> 
> > Yes, I agree, but it is not the output of the printer that is not
> > linearized, it is the output of the ABW driver + printer.  That 
is why
> > I am trying a profile on the light and normal settings in the 
driver.
> > I believe that the normal setting is the linearized output per 
Epson's

> > calibration and that is why "normal" is "darker."  I'll report the
> > numbers.
> > 
> > I'll try the color profile for interest re the screen match.
>

Thanks Joseph

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Joseph
Cettina
Sent: 24 October 2005 21:46
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] R1800 maint. reset sequence


WILLIAM WILSON wrote:

>Does anyone on the list have the key sequence to reset the maint. tank on
the R1800.
>
>
>
>William
>
>
>[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.
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Can not be reset by Key Sequence. Has to be reset from Epson Service
Adjustment Program.
Joseph Cettina
Laguna Service Inc



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.

Yahoo! Groups Links

Walt,

I'm curious about your soft-proof comments.  You find the 2.3.0 better
than 2.3.2 ?  I would think the soft-proofs are the same in both as far as the
gray densities -- 2.3.2 just adds color.  (I wouldn't use the Simulate Paper&Ink).

Roy

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets" <odets@c...> 
wrote:

>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
> <stevekale@b...> wrote:
> The overall ink load with VFA, EEM, and HPR (almost) is fine.  I have 
> reduced ink load with the ink load adjustment in the driver and this 
> doesn't correct non-linearities.  Nor does the "density" slider.  The 
> light, normal, dark, etc.  setting in the driver seems about shadow 
> compression and the darker setting is what is compressing the 
> shadows.  You can see this in simply visually examining printed test 
> strips.  I believe that this is the correct control to use and will 
> report the numbers tomorrow.
> 
> Steve, also plesee see my last post about the soft proofing.  What I 
> didn't say there is that the canned Epson color profile provides 
> about as good a soft proof as the 2.3.0 profile and a much better one 
> than the 2.3.2 profile.  
> 
> Walt
> 
> 
> >
> > Yes I understand.  Do you have a color density slider under paper
> > configuration?  If so try lowering the overall ink load with this.
> > 
> > 
> > > From: wwodets <odets@c...>
> > > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 20:40:52 -0000
> > > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Create ICC Soft Proofing question . . .
> > > 
> > >> 
> > > Yes, I agree, but it is not the output of the printer that is not
> > > linearized, it is the output of the ABW driver + printer.  That 
> is why
> > > I am trying a profile on the light and normal settings in the 
> driver.
> > > I believe that the normal setting is the linearized output per 
> Epson's
> > > calibration and that is why "normal" is "darker."  I'll report the
> > > numbers.
> > > 
> > > I'll try the color profile for interest re the screen match.
> >
>

Roy-

Let me elaborate a little further on my use of simulate paper white.  
Despite all the measurements we now do, I think that a print 
establishes its own tonal scale: that, within reason, a print tells 
the viewer what a white is and what a black is.  The highlights in 
the print, however, are directly comparable to the bare paper 
surrounding even a framed print (assuming a signature margin, etc.).  
So the print does not entirely establish the white point, the bare 
paper contributes.  For the blacks, a viewer will be inclined to 
accept the shadows as "black" if there is no black immediately 
adjacent to the print or the viewer is not insisting on a black "from 
memory."  A black mat (or even a black line on the mat edge, 
something framers are increasingly likely to use) can disrupt the 
black point of the print.  For these reasons, I like to use simulate 
paper white so that I have a visual measure of the print white point 
compared to the paper.  The black point in the print is less 
important to me.  I'd love to have a way to use simulate paper white 
(only) in 2.3.2.

Walt



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Harrington" 
<roy@h...> wrote:
>
> Walt,
> 
> I'm curious about your soft-proof comments.  You find the 2.3.0 
better
> than 2.3.2 ?  I would think the soft-proofs are the same in both as 
far as the
> gray densities -- 2.3.2 just adds color.  (I wouldn't use the 
Simulate Paper&Ink).
> 
> Roy
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets" 
<odets@c...> 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
> > <stevekale@b...> wrote:
> > The overall ink load with VFA, EEM, and HPR (almost) is fine.  I 
have 
> > reduced ink load with the ink load adjustment in the driver and 
this 
> > doesn't correct non-linearities.  Nor does the "density" slider.  
The 
> > light, normal, dark, etc.  setting in the driver seems about 
shadow 
> > compression and the darker setting is what is compressing the 
> > shadows.  You can see this in simply visually examining printed 
test 
> > strips.  I believe that this is the correct control to use and 
will 
> > report the numbers tomorrow.
> > 
> > Steve, also plesee see my last post about the soft proofing.  
What I 
> > didn't say there is that the canned Epson color profile provides 
> > about as good a soft proof as the 2.3.0 profile and a much better 
one 
> > than the 2.3.2 profile.  
> > 
> > Walt
> > 
> > 
> > >
> > > Yes I understand.  Do you have a color density slider under 
paper
> > > configuration?  If so try lowering the overall ink load with 
this.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > From: wwodets <odets@c...>
> > > > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 20:40:52 -0000
> > > > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Create ICC Soft Proofing 
question . . .
> > > > 
> > > >> 
> > > > Yes, I agree, but it is not the output of the printer that is 
not
> > > > linearized, it is the output of the ABW driver + printer.  
That 
> > is why
> > > > I am trying a profile on the light and normal settings in the 
> > driver.
> > > > I believe that the normal setting is the linearized output 
per 
> > Epson's
> > > > calibration and that is why "normal" is "darker."  I'll 
report the

> > > > numbers.
> > > > 
> > > > I'll try the color profile for interest re the screen match.
> > >
> >
>

Thanks, Walt.

I don't know why PS adds the ink black with the paper white.  I'll have to
try a few things and see if I can have an effect on that.  

Roy

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets" <odets@c...> 
wrote:

>
> Roy-
> 
> Let me elaborate a little further on my use of simulate paper white.  
> Despite all the measurements we now do, I think that a print 
> establishes its own tonal scale: that, within reason, a print tells 
> the viewer what a white is and what a black is.  The highlights in 
> the print, however, are directly comparable to the bare paper 
> surrounding even a framed print (assuming a signature margin, etc.).  
> So the print does not entirely establish the white point, the bare 
> paper contributes.  For the blacks, a viewer will be inclined to 
> accept the shadows as "black" if there is no black immediately 
> adjacent to the print or the viewer is not insisting on a black "from 
> memory."  A black mat (or even a black line on the mat edge, 
> something framers are increasingly likely to use) can disrupt the 
> black point of the print.  For these reasons, I like to use simulate 
> paper white so that I have a visual measure of the print white point 
> compared to the paper.  The black point in the print is less 
> important to me.  I'd love to have a way to use simulate paper white 
> (only) in 2.3.2.
> 
> Walt
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Harrington" 
> <roy@h...> wrote:
> >
> > Walt,
> > 
> > I'm curious about your soft-proof comments.  You find the 2.3.0 
> better
> > than 2.3.2 ?  I would think the soft-proofs are the same in both as 
> far as the
> > gray densities -- 2.3.2 just adds color.  (I wouldn't use the 
> Simulate Paper&Ink).
> > 
> > Roy
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets" 
> <odets@c...> 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
> > > <stevekale@b...> wrote:
> > > The overall ink load with VFA, EEM, and HPR (almost) is fine.  I 
> have 
> > > reduced ink load with the ink load adjustment in the driver and 
> this 
> > > doesn't correct non-linearities.  Nor does the "density" slider.  
> The 
> > > light, normal, dark, etc.  setting in the driver seems about 
> shadow 
> > > compression and the darker setting is what is compressing the 
> > > shadows.  You can see this in simply visually examining printed 
> test 
> > > strips.  I believe that this is the correct control to use and 
> will 
> > > report the numbers tomorrow.
> > > 
> > > Steve, also plesee see my last post about the soft proofing.  
> What I 
> > > didn't say there is that the canned Epson color profile provides 
> > > about as good a soft proof as the 2.3.0 profile and a much better 
> one 
> > > than the 2.3.2 profile.  
> > > 
> > > Walt
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >
> > > > Yes I understand.  Do you have a color density slider under 
> paper
> > > > configuration?  If so try lowering the overall ink load with 
> this.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > From: wwodets <odets@c...>
> > > > > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > > Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 20:40:52 -0000
> > > > > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Create ICC Soft Proofing 
> question . . .
> > > > > 
> > > > >> 
> > > > > Yes, I agree, but it is not the output of the printer that is 
> not
> > > > > linearized, it is the output of the ABW driver + printer.  
> That 
> > > is why
> > > > > I am trying a profile on the light and normal settings in the 
> > > driver.
> > > > > I believe that the normal setting is the linearized output 
> per 
> > > Epson's
> > > > > calibration and that is why "normal" is "darker."  I'll 
> report the
> > > > > numbers.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'll try the color profile for interest re the screen match.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Roy,

Early on when the grey matte and photo curve came out I put them in my
colour folder and have been using them ever since.

I recently noticed the curves provided in the current version of QTR have a
slightly different creation date 16/2/05 as opposed to 26/01/05

is there any difference between these curves? i.e. if there is, is it worth
going through the images which have the curve applied for printing...?)

thanks

tim a

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Timothy Atherton" 
<tim@K...> wrote:
>
> Roy,
> 
> Early on when the grey matte and photo curve came out I put them in my
> colour folder and have been using them ever since.
> 
> I recently noticed the curves provided in the current version of QTR have a
> slightly different creation date 16/2/05 as opposed to 26/01/05
> 
> is there any difference between these curves? i.e. if there is, is it worth
> going through the images which have the curve applied for printing...?)
> 
> thanks
> 
> tim a
>

I haven't made any changes to those profiles.  
No need to care which is which.

Roy

It's ON topic. Exhibits should be a good market for B&W inkjet prints.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Arthur Fink
<af@a...> wrote:
>
> Have any of you used backlit films?  I'm wanting to put some prints
in a 
> store window against the glass.  Any recommendations / cautions / etc?

Must it be "against the glass"? That requires someone to clean the
glass thoroughly before application.

I've done something comparable using Ciba transparencies (up to
30X30") against lucite: Sprayed the lucite with a particular 3-M spray
adhesive (don't recall which one, then pressed large Cibas in place
with a roller to eliminate bubbles and get good adhesion...I wanted an
adhesive that would be totally transparent, adhere 24/7 for years but
peel off when I wanted to replace...I identified the right industrial
spray adhesive with 3M's advice...free-standing internally-lit Hyatt
Regency exhibits I'd designed, a dozen were in place for around ten
years. 

I did something comparable but less ambitious for a real estate
brokerage chain using a plastic-based B&W Kodak print material
("Translite" comes to mind..might have been the name...nice tonal
scale) AND Kodalith for captions/text/graphics (also used Kodalith for
Hyatt). Instead of attaching to windows with spray adhesive I
built/contracted minimalist/finely-crafted 11X14 lucite envelopes into
which photos could be slid. The downside to this was that the lucite
got dusty and couldn't be cleaned well, whereas Hyatt's exposed
Kodalith and Ciba could be readily cleaned with damp cloths.

Some translucent plastic substrates (plastic "velum" but reportedly
not all varieties) reportedly work well with Epson pigments...I've
seen ads for an inkjet wedding album source offering "velum"..browse
for source...I've been meaning to experiment with some generic local
stationary store velum...

John Kelly
Albuquerque 

> 	A r t h u r    F i n k    P h o t o g r a p h y
> 	-----------------------------------------------
> 	Ten New Island Avenue         land 207.766.5722
> 	Peaks Island, Maine 04108     cell 207.615.5722
> 	www.arthurfinkphoto.com  af@a...
> 
> 	 Photographing people, places, objects, events
>

Backlit film seems very much ON topic for this Group: Exhibits should
be a good market for B&W inkjet prints.

Arthur Fink <af@a...> wrote:
>
> Have any of you used backlit films?  I'm wanting to put some prints
in a 
> store window against the glass.  Any recommendations / cautions / etc?

Must it be "against the glass"? If so you'll need someone to clean the
glass thoroughly before application...possibly a union situation.

I did something comparable using Ciba and Kodalith transparencies (up
to 30X30") against lucite: Sprayed the lucite with a particular 3-M
spray adhesive (don't recall which one, then pressed large Cibas in
place with a roller to eliminate bubbles and get good adhesion...I
wanted an adhesive that would be totally transparent, adhere 24/7 for
years but peel off when I wanted to replace...I identified the right
industrial spray adhesive with 3M's advice...free-standing
internally-lit Hyatt Regency exhibits I'd designed, a dozen were in
place for around ten years. 

I did something comparable but less ambitious for a real estate
brokerage chain using a plastic-based B&W Kodak print material
("Translite" comes to mind..might have been the name...nice tonal
scale) AND Kodalith for captions/text/graphics . Instead of attaching
to windows with spray adhesive I built/contracted
minimalist/finely-crafted 11X14 lucite envelopes into which photos
could be slid. The downside to this was that the lucite got dusty and
couldn't be cleaned well, whereas Hyatt's exposed Kodalith and Ciba
could be readily cleaned with damp cloths.

Some translucent plastic substrates (plastic "velum" but reportedly
not all varieties) reportedly work well with Epson pigments...I've
seen ads for an inkjet wedding album source offering "velum"..browse
for source...I've been meaning to experiment with some generic local
stationary store velum...

John Kelly
Albuquerque 

> 	A r t h u r    F i n k    P h o t o g r a p h y
> 	-----------------------------------------------
> 	Ten New Island Avenue         land 207.766.5722
> 	Peaks Island, Maine 04108     cell 207.615.5722
> 	www.arthurfinkphoto.com  af@a...
> 
> 	 Photographing people, places, objects, events
>

Steve,

It seems that the look of 'Simulate Paper White' is a combination of the 
reverse profile and of Photoshop's treatment of it (as described in my 
previous post). I checked again with my old ProfilerPro manual and it 
clearly says that editing of the black and white points for softproofing can 
only be made before the profile is made from the raw measurement data, and 
from what David Tobie said once, I got the impression that the reverse 
profile was made with these new white and black points instead of with the 
ones read off the paper. The ProfilerPro dialog gave you two boxes with the 
actual white and black points read from the data, and asked if you wanted to 
edit these. It then made the profile, and these edited points were 
incorporated into the reverse profile for softproofing, but not into the 
normal profile for printing. I understand that some of the better profile 
editors also allow more extensive editing of the reverse profile for 
softproofing to get a better match, without changing the normal printing 
profile.

Bob Frost.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Kale" <stevekale@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 9:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Create ICC Soft Proofing question . . .


I don't know for sure but it should simply read the wtpt tag in the profile
and then map monitor white to that media white.  There is no "amount of
simulation tag" that I am aware of so I suspect ProfilerPro simply edited
the wtpt tag or something similar.  It's not part of the LUTs and so editing
wtpt may not affect anything else.

Bob,

The quote from Bruce Fraser was very useful.  I also like a later paragraph after
describing the various Simulate options:

"An obvious question is, which of these three simulations is correct? The truth is, all of 
them are, and none of them are. No proofing system has ever provided a perfect match to 
the final product: We learn to interpret proofs, and therefore, like any other proofs, you 
have to learn to interpret the soft proofs offered by Photoshop. Each one tells you 
something slightly different about the way the image will appear in print. A handy rule of 
thumb, though, is that for glossy stocks, the default view with Paper White and Ink Black 
unchecked will be the closest, while for uncoated stocks, the view with Paper White 
checked will generally be the most accurate." -- Bruce Fraser

I think this is especially important to note -- you must get used to a particular
soft-proofing setup and learn to judge it.  I suspect that I am fairly used to the black
not changing i.e. not dulling down but that doesn't make it more "right".

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

The forward profile I think is pretty fixed -- it has to match white-to-white and black-
to-black.  Its the reverse profile that can be done in various ways.   From reading and
trying variations I think the white end should be "illuminant white" this makes the
default white of the print show as the white of the monitor.  If you were to set it at the
actual white the result would be the same as Simulate Paper White so the checkbox
would do nothing and there would be no way to see monitor white.   The black end
is currently (2.3.2) set at the actual black, but the internal BPC by default maps this to 
monitor black. (Note this is not the BPC you see in the dialog which controls the
forward BPC).   The using of Absolute in the reverse profile would explain why the
two checkboxs Paper White and Ink Black are linked.  Although it seems to me they
could have uncoupled it.  

I also tried mapping the black end into monitor black rather than actual black in the
reverse profile.  This is basically doing the BPC in the reverse profile in the tables.
This allows the Paper White without Ink Black option but of course you can't get the
Ink Black at all since it's already been removed.

Putting the black end somewhere in between the actual and monitor black is an 
interesting idea.   It might be a compromise between the optimistic monitor black
and dull actual black.

Roy


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Frost" <bob@f...> wrote:

>
> Steve,
> 
> It seems that the look of 'Simulate Paper White' is a combination of the 
> reverse profile and of Photoshop's treatment of it (as described in my 
> previous post). I checked again with my old ProfilerPro manual and it 
> clearly says that editing of the black and white points for softproofing can 
> only be made before the profile is made from the raw measurement data, and 
> from what David Tobie said once, I got the impression that the reverse 
> profile was made with these new white and black points instead of with the 
> ones read off the paper. The ProfilerPro dialog gave you two boxes with the 
> actual white and black points read from the data, and asked if you wanted to 
> edit these. It then made the profile, and these edited points were 
> incorporated into the reverse profile for softproofing, but not into the 
> normal profile for printing. I understand that some of the better profile 
> editors also allow more extensive editing of the reverse profile for 
> softproofing to get a better match, without changing the normal printing 
> profile.
> 
> Bob Frost.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Steve Kale" <stevekale@b...>
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 9:21 PM
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Create ICC Soft Proofing question . . .
> 
> 
> I don't know for sure but it should simply read the wtpt tag in the profile
> and then map monitor white to that media white.  There is no "amount of
> simulation tag" that I am aware of so I suspect ProfilerPro simply edited
> the wtpt tag or something similar.  It's not part of the LUTs and so editing
> wtpt may not affect anything else.
>

Maybe an “expert mode tag” in the text file to override the BP to a specific
L* value?

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Roy
Harrington
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 1:16 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Create ICC Soft Proofing question . . .


Bob,

The quote from Bruce Fraser was very useful.  I also like a later paragraph
after
describing the various Simulate options:

"An obvious question is, which of these three simulations is correct? The
truth is, all of
them are, and none of them are. No proofing system has ever provided a
perfect match to
the final product: We learn to interpret proofs, and therefore, like any
other proofs, you
have to learn to interpret the soft proofs offered by Photoshop. Each one
tells you
something slightly different about the way the image will appear in print. A
handy rule of
thumb, though, is that for glossy stocks, the default view with Paper White
and Ink Black
unchecked will be the closest, while for uncoated stocks, the view with
Paper White
checked will generally be the most accurate." -- Bruce Fraser

I think this is especially important to note -- you must get used to a
particular
soft-proofing setup and learn to judge it.  I suspect that I am fairly used
to the black
not changing i.e. not dulling down but that doesn't make it more "right".

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

The forward profile I think is pretty fixed -- it has to match
white-to-white and black-
to-black.  Its the reverse profile that can be done in various ways.   From
reading and
trying variations I think the white end should be "illuminant white" this
makes the
default white of the print show as the white of the monitor.  If you were to
set it at the
actual white the result would be the same as Simulate Paper White so the
checkbox
would do nothing and there would be no way to see monitor white.   The black
end
is currently (2.3.2) set at the actual black, but the internal BPC by
default maps this to
monitor black. (Note this is not the BPC you see in the dialog which
controls the
forward BPC).   The using of Absolute in the reverse profile would explain
why the
two checkboxs Paper White and Ink Black are linked.  Although it seems to me
they
could have uncoupled it.

I also tried mapping the black end into monitor black rather than actual
black in the
reverse profile.  This is basically doing the BPC in the reverse profile in
the tables.
This allows the Paper White without Ink Black option but of course you can't
get the
Ink Black at all since it's already been removed.

Putting the black end somewhere in between the actual and monitor black is
an
interesting idea.   It might be a compromise between the optimistic monitor
black
and dull actual black.

Roy





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

At 1:10 PM +0000 10/25/05, djon43 wrote:
>It's ON topic. Exhibits should be a good market for B&W inkjet prints.
>
>--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Arthur Fink
><af@a...> wrote:
>>
>>  Have any of you used backlit films?  I'm wanting to put some prints
>in a
>  > store window against the glass.  Any recommendations / cautions / etc?
>

My local large-color output house, which I use regularly for output 
in my design life, has a display of all the substates they can print 
on, and it includes backlit films, window clings and window-display 
type products, including the "see-through" stuff that is useful on 
store windows -- because you can still see in and clerks can still 
see out for security reasons.

The place I'm referring to is:

http://obpdigital.com/

Check the materials list link for some names. Not too instuctive, but 
it's a start for you.
-- 

jonathan wills
_______
wills design
portland, oregon, usa

Bob Frost wrote:
I understand that some of the better profile
> editors also allow more extensive editing of the reverse profile for 
> softproofing to get a better match, without changing the normal printing 
> profile.
> 
> Bob Frost.

Kodak's Custom Color Tools will do that but it can also change 
the printing part of the profile without altering the soft 
proof. All the Photoshop tools available like with Dr. Pro but 
without the last's dependence on actions.

http://shop.colourconfidence.com/product.php?xProd=1198

For unknown reasons I paid a lot less several months ago. 
Could be that this is the latest version meanwhile but the 
code is the same.

                    --
           Ernst Dinkla


www.pigment-print.com
(         unvollendet         )

I've been told by multiple sources that Kodak (Encad) Backlight film
works fine, even with pigment inks.
Tyler

Works fine for me.
Mark

On Oct 25, 2005, at 3:10 PM, Tyler Boley wrote:

> I've been told by multiple sources that Kodak (Encad) Backlight film
> works fine, even with pigment inks.
> Tyler
>



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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, WILLIAM WILSON
<wm.wilson@b...> wrote:
>
> 
> Does anyone on the list have the key sequence to reset the maint.
tank on the R1800.

Not handy, but you should be able to reset it via SSC

http://www.ssclg.com/epsone.shtml

Hope this helps

Joe

Thanks Joe got it.

William

  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of koloshor
  Sent: 25 October 2005 20:52
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: [Digital BW] Re: R1800 maint. reset sequence


  --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, WILLIAM WILSON
  <wm.wilson@b...> wrote:
  >
  >
  > Does anyone on the list have the key sequence to reset the maint.
  tank on the R1800.

  Not handy, but you should be able to reset it via SSC

  http://www.ssclg.com/epsone.shtml

  Hope this helps

  Joe





  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

    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]