Digital BW, The Print

Hi all

Has anyone any experience of this paper.

http://www.paperandinks.com/

Regards
Peter.

Peter,

I've just received some samples. It looks a lot like Crane Museo
Silver Rag, but is smoother than the CMSR beta sample I have. The
D-max of the K3 ABW sample print is a little over 2.2.

I'll make a profile then do some test prints tonight, and report back
in the next day or two.

Best,
Helen

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "bwbonkers"
<PeterDLevis@...> wrote:

>
> Hi all
> 
> Has anyone any experience of this paper.
> 
> http://www.paperandinks.com/
> 
> Regards
> Peter.
>

Helen

Many thanks. Look forward to hear what you think of this paper.

Regards
Peter.

With a name like that it better be exquisite.

john


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "bwbonkers"
<PeterDLevis@...> wrote:

>
> Helen
> 
> Many thanks. Look forward to hear what you think of this paper.
> 
> Regards
> Peter.
>

>Helen
>Many thanks. Look forward to hear what you think of this paper.

Same here.


Regards,
Clayton


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

They're claiming a D-max of 2.7



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

>
> With a name like that it better be exquisite.
> 
> john
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "bwbonkers"
> <PeterDLevis@> wrote:
> >
> > Helen
> > 
> > Many thanks. Look forward to hear what you think of this paper.
> > 
> > Regards
> > Peter.
> >
>

Is there a U.S. distributor of this paper to request samples from?

Chip,

By looking at their website, it doesn't look like they have a US 
distributor.

If you can get samples fron Britain and you like it, maybe you can 
become the exclusive U.S. distributor. Or maybe, even all of North 
America! :>)

Scott

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

>
> Is there a U.S. distributor of this paper to request samples from?
>

Thanks!  :-)

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

>
> Chip,
> 
> By looking at their website, it doesn't look like they have a US 
> distributor.
> 
> If you can get samples fron Britain and you like it, maybe you can 
> become the exclusive U.S. distributor. Or maybe, even all of North 
> America! :>)
> 
> Scott
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "chipcarterdc" 
> <chipcarterdc@> wrote:
> >
> > Is there a U.S. distributor of this paper to request samples from?
> >
>

I just spoke to these guys and will get some samples soon.  The paper will
be available in rolls in the next couple of weeks (although they aren't
really geared up to distribute samples).  They were familiar with Crane's
product and went to some lengths to say that it is not the same thing
(repackaged).  Apparently Danny Chau has been involved in photographic
printing for some time, both traditional and digital.  More info here:

http://www.chaudigital.com/about/

They said they instigated the development of this paper but would not
disclose (unsurprisingly) who they worked with.  It is a PK ink paper with a
"gloss" finish.  Unfortunately, Danny was the "guy to talk to" about the
paper in depth but he was not there.  They could not tell me whether the
paper was a cotton or alpha-cellulose base but kept reiterating that it was
"acid-free".  The paper is available from:

http://www.paperandinks.com/

and rolls will be added shortly.  FYI a 17in roll (forgot to ask length!)
will be £84.95 + 17.5% VAT.

> From: scott_now_coming <scott_now_coming@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 17:03:38 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> Chip,
> 
> By looking at their website, it doesn't look like they have a US
> distributor.
> 
> If you can get samples fron Britain and you like it, maybe you can
> become the exclusive U.S. distributor. Or maybe, even all of North
> America! :>)
> 
> Scott
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "chipcarterdc"
> <chipcarterdc@...> wrote:
>> 
>> Is there a U.S. distributor of this paper to request samples from?

It's smoother than Crane Museo Silver Rag and the slight fibrous
texture is finer than the CMSR beta samples I have. It also seems to
have less spread of glare - ie it shows glare over a lesser range of
angles than CMSR, as the smoother surface would suggest.

Best,
Helen

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> I just spoke to these guys and will get some samples soon.  The
paper will
> be available in rolls in the next couple of weeks (although they aren't
> really geared up to distribute samples).  They were familiar with
Crane's
> product and went to some lengths to say that it is not the same thing
> (repackaged)...

They say it has "a coated fibre surface bonded to an acid-free base".  Not
your normal description of a coated paper.  Does it look different as a
result of this "bonding"?

> From: helen_bach2003 <helenbach@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 18:05:38 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> It's smoother than Crane Museo Silver Rag and the slight fibrous
> texture is finer than the CMSR beta samples I have. It also seems to
> have less spread of glare - ie it shows glare over a lesser range of
> angles than CMSR, as the smoother surface would suggest.
> 
> Best,
> Helen

That sounds quite good!

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@...m, "helen_bach2003" <helenbach@...> 
wrote:

>
> It's smoother than Crane Museo Silver Rag and the slight fibrous
> texture is finer than the CMSR beta samples I have. It also seems to
> have less spread of glare - ie it shows glare over a lesser range of
> angles than CMSR, as the smoother surface would suggest.
> 
> Best,
> Helen

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> They say it has "a coated fibre surface bonded to an acid-free 
base".  Not
> your normal description of a coated paper.  Does it look different 
as a
> result of this "bonding"?
> 


I'm curious if the actual coating is acid-free, as I understand that 
some of the acid-free papers actually have acid in the coatings.

But, as Paul pointed out, Wilhelm testing still gave those "acid-
free" papers a longevity rating of 100-300 yrs.

I know the BC is using an acid free coating on their Chromata White 
canvas, and I think another product or two of theirs.

Just a thought....

Scott

Is there any source in the US for this paper?

Helen,

I a currius to how the "fibra" fell is compared to Cranes silver rag? Does it look and feel as 
much as a fibra print as the Cranes silver rag and does it have a higher dmax as the wrote on 
there web site?

I am getting sampels in a few days, I am therefore interested in hearing wich settings do you 
use with this paper?

Joakim

Today published in the British Journal of Photography:

Title: Da Vinci code green
Feature: news
Date: 15 February 2006



A specialist pro lab has launched a new high-quality inkjet paper it 
claims is indistinguishable from traditional, black-and-white fibre-
based materials.

The Da Vinci Fibre Gloss paper was developed over the last two years 
by Danny Chau, the owner of ChauDigital, with an unnamed manufacturer.

It is 'designed to give inkjet prints the look and feel of a 
traditional black-and-white silver halide fibre paper,' Chau told 
BJP: 'This paper came about because of my personal quest as a black-
and-white printer who has turned to digital. We had been 
experimenting for several years with different paper types and 
coatings but tested out the last batch in June.

We were amazed by the results and did a small run of the paper in 
July.

Clients who have seen it haven't been able to tell the difference 
between this and traditional fibre papers.'

The paper uses an acid free fibre surface which has three coatings to 
protect and hold ink better 'giving more density to colours and 
producing great details in heavy density areas with high visual 
sharpness.' Chau adds that it also boasts a DMax of 2.7, whereas 
traditional fibre papers have a DMax of around 2.3. Chau also says 
that the paper works especially well with Epson UltraChrome K3 ink 
range, with its three grades of black.

The paper is now available by visiting www.chaudigital.com, but will 
also be sold by Permajet as its own brand Fibre Base Gloss 295gsm 
paper.


Source: 

© Incisive Media Investments Ltd 2005

We've just ordered by phone (and I assume you can also do it by email)
from paperandinks.com in the UK: +44 20 7833 8384, so from the US it
is 011 44 20 7833 8384. They aren't taking international orders over
the 'net.

Best,
Helen (in NYC)

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "djpearlman1"
<djpearlman1@...> wrote:

>
>  Is there any source in the US for this paper?
>

UK list members can see the paper, and some sample prints, at the
Focus On Imaging show at the NEC. paperandinks.com will be "near the
Olympus stand" according to Jason Chau (Dan Chau's son, who runs the
paperandinks.com subsidiary of chaudigital).

Regards,

Alan

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulo030947"
<avelino@...> wrote:

>
> Today published in the British Journal of Photography:
> 
> Title: Da Vinci code green
> Feature: news
> Date: 15 February 2006
> 
> 
> 
> A specialist pro lab has launched a new high-quality inkjet paper it 
> claims is indistinguishable from traditional, black-and-white fibre-
> based materials.
> 
> The Da Vinci Fibre Gloss paper was developed over the last two years 
> by Danny Chau, the owner of ChauDigital, with an unnamed manufacturer.
> 
> It is 'designed to give inkjet prints the look and feel of a 
> traditional black-and-white silver halide fibre paper,' Chau told 
> BJP: 'This paper came about because of my personal quest as a black-
> and-white printer who has turned to digital. We had been 
> experimenting for several years with different paper types and 
> coatings but tested out the last batch in June.
> 
> We were amazed by the results and did a small run of the paper in 
> July.
> 
> Clients who have seen it haven't been able to tell the difference 
> between this and traditional fibre papers.'
> 
> The paper uses an acid free fibre surface which has three coatings to 
> protect and hold ink better 'giving more density to colours and 
> producing great details in heavy density areas with high visual 
> sharpness.' Chau adds that it also boasts a DMax of 2.7, whereas 
> traditional fibre papers have a DMax of around 2.3. Chau also says 
> that the paper works especially well with Epson UltraChrome K3 ink 
> range, with its three grades of black.
> 
> The paper is now available by visiting www.chaudigital.com, but will 
> also be sold by Permajet as its own brand Fibre Base Gloss 295gsm 
> paper.
> 
> 
> Source: 
> 
> © Incisive Media Investments Ltd 2005
>

It says DMax 2.2 on the paperandinks.com website - cf 2.7 on 
chaudigital.com. I wonder which is correct?
Steve Gledhill ----- http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk/


alanrew42 wrote:

> UK list members can see the paper, and some sample prints, at the
> Focus On Imaging show at the NEC. paperandinks.com will be "near the
> Olympus stand" according to Jason Chau (Dan Chau's son, who runs the
> paperandinks.com subsidiary of chaudigital).
>
> Regards,
>
> Alan
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "paulo030947"
> <avelino@...> wrote:
> >
> > Today published in the British Journal of Photography:
> >
> > Title: Da Vinci code green
> > Feature: news
> > Date: 15 February 2006
> >
> >
> >
> > A specialist pro lab has launched a new high-quality inkjet paper it
> > claims is indistinguishable from traditional, black-and-white fibre-
> > based materials.
> >
> > The Da Vinci Fibre Gloss paper was developed over the last two years
> > by Danny Chau, the owner of ChauDigital, with an unnamed manufacturer.
> >
> > It is 'designed to give inkjet prints the look and feel of a
> > traditional black-and-white silver halide fibre paper,' Chau told
> > BJP: 'This paper came about because of my personal quest as a black-
> > and-white printer who has turned to digital. We had been
> > experimenting for several years with different paper types and
> > coatings but tested out the last batch in June.
> >
> > We were amazed by the results and did a small run of the paper in
> > July.
> >
> > Clients who have seen it haven't been able to tell the difference
> > between this and traditional fibre papers.'
> >
> > The paper uses an acid free fibre surface which has three coatings to
> > protect and hold ink better 'giving more density to colours and
> > producing great details in heavy density areas with high visual
> > sharpness.' Chau adds that it also boasts a DMax of 2.7, whereas
> > traditional fibre papers have a DMax of around 2.3. Chau also says
> > that the paper works especially well with Epson UltraChrome K3 ink
> > range, with its three grades of black.
> >
> > The paper is now available by visiting www.chaudigital.com, but will
> > also be sold by Permajet as its own brand Fibre Base Gloss 295gsm
> > paper.
> >
> >
> > Source:
> >
> > \ufffd Incisive Media Investments Ltd 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 \ufffdGroup Topic, Rules and Guidelines\ufffd in the 
> Files section:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
>
> BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
> PRINT YAHOO! GROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE \ufffdOWNER\ufffd 
> AND \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE 
> LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, 
> CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, 
> DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER INTANGIBLE 
> LOSSES (EVEN IF THE \ufffdOWNER\ufffd AND \ufffdMODERATORS\ufffd OF DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
> YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), 
> RESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, 
> THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF 
> YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR DATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD 
> PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER 
> MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP.
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Digital wedding photography 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+wedding+photography&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=Umur-3rsLOic7dZMwVL94w> 
> 	Learn digital photography 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Learn+digital+photography&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=emApqtvj0kHQhppIzRrNgw> 
> 	Digital photography college 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+college&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=aIiABJLTZsUnmWBs4mZwuA> 
>
> Digital photography 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=pJmwqgVzec3JGBtWYlPbOg> 
> 	Digital photography web site 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+web+site&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=BMII8rtDZlAtVdZsPhaZqw> 
> 	Digital photography course 
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+course&w1=Digital+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=OrnrutXVhHZu-7E7ccLtuw> 
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>     * Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>       <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint>" on
>       the web.
>     * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>       DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>       <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
>     * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
>       Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

		
___________________________________________________________ 
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com

I'm producing a profile for this paper using my Epson 2100 and
standard Epson UC inks. I'll post some data when I've done this.


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Gledhill
<stephengledhill@...> wrote:

>
> It says DMax 2.2 on the paperandinks.com website - cf 2.7 on 
> chaudigital.com. I wonder which is correct?
> Steve Gledhill ----- http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk/
> 
>

I asked them that very question.  The 2.2 is incorrect.

(Please trim posts)

> From: Steve Gledhill <stephengledhill@...>

> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> It says DMax 2.2 on the paperandinks.com website - cf 2.7 on
> chaudigital.com. I wonder which is correct?
> Steve Gledhill ----- http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk/

Please, no numbers.  We'd rather guess.  ;-)

> From: alanrew42 <Alan-Rew@...>

> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> I'm producing a profile for this paper using my Epson 2100 and
> standard Epson UC inks. I'll post some data when I've done this.

There is some detailless shadow on the ABW sample print that measures
2.22, but that might not be the best the paper can do - though it
should be, given that this is a sample print.

I've made one profile with IJC/OPM so far and managed to get 2.38
before coating and 2.49 after coating with Krystal Topkote. Profile
made with my K3 inks in a 2200, D-max achieved with PK and a little
R800 blue.

Best,
Helen

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Gledhill
<stephengledhill@...> wrote:

>
> It says DMax 2.2 on the paperandinks.com website - cf 2.7 on 
> chaudigital.com. I wonder which is correct?
> Steve Gledhill ----- http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk/
>

Helen, how are you using K3 inks in your 2200? The unmodified
2100/2200 of course uses UC inks (which I suppose should be called
'K2'). Are you using a CIS to achieve this? I'm intrigued, because I'd
like to be able to try K3 in my 2100, but can't figure out which other
ink I'd have to leave out to achieve this...
TIA
ALan

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "helen_bach2003"
<helenbach@...> wrote:

>
> There is some detailless shadow on the ABW sample print that measures
> 2.22, but that might not be the best the paper can do - though it
> should be, given that this is a sample print.
> 
> I've made one profile with IJC/OPM so far and managed to get 2.38
> before coating and 2.49 after coating with Krystal Topkote. Profile
> made with my K3 inks in a 2200, D-max achieved with PK and a little
> R800 blue.
> 
> Best,
> Helen

OK, to make it more fun, I'll post them in installments :-)

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

>
> Please, no numbers.  We'd rather guess.  ;-)
> 
> 
> > From: alanrew42 <Alan-Rew@...>
> 
> > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> > 
> > I'm producing a profile for this paper using my Epson 2100 and
> > standard Epson UC inks. I'll post some data when I've done this.
>

I may have sent this question twice:  Would you mind sharing where 
you got the sample print?

Al Charbonneau
--- In 
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "helen_bach2003" 
<helenbach@...> wrote:
>
> There is some detailless shadow on the ABW sample print that 
measures

> 2.22, but that might not be the best the paper can do - though it
> should be, given that this is a sample print.
> 
> I've made one profile with IJC/OPM so far and managed to get 2.38
> before coating and 2.49 after coating with Krystal Topkote. Profile
> made with my K3 inks in a 2200, D-max achieved with PK and a little
> R800 blue.
> 
> Best,
> Helen
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Gledhill
> <stephengledhill@> wrote:
> >
> > It says DMax 2.2 on the paperandinks.com website - cf 2.7 on 
> > chaudigital.com. I wonder which is correct?
> > Steve Gledhill ----- http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk/
> >
>

Hi Al,

I emailed sales@... and asked for samples. They sent
sample A4 paper and a sample print to us in New York.

The D-max of 2.7 was obtained with K3 inks, according to Jason Chau at
  Paper and Inks.

Best,
Helen

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

>
> I may have sent this question twice:  Would you mind sharing where 
> you got the sample print?
> 
> Al Charbonneau
> --- In 
> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "helen_bach2003" 
> <helenbach@> wrote:
> >
> > There is some detailless shadow on the ABW sample print that 
> measures
> > 2.22, but that might not be the best the paper can do - though it
> > should be, given that this is a sample print.
> > 
> > I've made one profile with IJC/OPM so far and managed to get 2.38
> > before coating and 2.49 after coating with Krystal Topkote. Profile
> > made with my K3 inks in a 2200, D-max achieved with PK and a little
> > R800 blue.
> > 
> > Best,
> > Helen
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Gledhill
> > <stephengledhill@> wrote:
> > >
> > > It says DMax 2.2 on the paperandinks.com website - cf 2.7 on 
> > > chaudigital.com. I wonder which is correct?
> > > Steve Gledhill ----- http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk/
> > >
> >
>

Call them up and ask for one....

> From: al_charbonneau <al_charbonneau@...>

> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> I may have sent this question twice:  Would you mind sharing where
> you got the sample print?
> 
> Al Charbonneau

Helen,

Thank you for postings re this paper. I just got the latest Print 
Exchange, and I must say I am impressed with your K3 inkset on a 
2200 with TopKote, etc. A couple of questions:

(1) How exactly do you use the K3 LC and R800 B inks to neutralize 
the K3 grays?. Are these toning inks applied throughout the 
grayscale ramp?
(2) Where did you buy the TopKote?

Best regards and keep up the cutting-edge stuff.

Shilesh

--- In 
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "helen_bach2003" 
<helenbach@...> wrote:
>
> There is some detailless shadow on the ABW sample print that 
measures

> 2.22, but that might not be the best the paper can do - though it
> should be, given that this is a sample print.
> 
> I've made one profile with IJC/OPM so far and managed to get 2.38
> before coating and 2.49 after coating with Krystal Topkote. Profile
> made with my K3 inks in a 2200, D-max achieved with PK and a little
> R800 blue.
> 
> Best,
> Helen
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Gledhill
> <stephengledhill@> wrote:
> >
> > It says DMax 2.2 on the paperandinks.com website - cf 2.7 on 
> > chaudigital.com. I wonder which is correct?
> > Steve Gledhill ----- http://www.virtuallygrey.co.uk/
> >
>

Hi Alan,

To save you having to search back through the archives, here is a
brief summary of my use of K3 inks in a 2200.

Ink set: 
MK from 4000/4800 (same ink)
K3 PK from 4800
K3 LK from 4800
K3 LLK from 4800
K3 LC from 4800
Krystal Topkote
Blue from R800 

Initial tests done with K3 LM, then R800 red and in what is now the KT
position. Used MIS refillable cartridges. Now that I've settled on an
ink set I am switching to an Inkvillage CIS. I use IJC/OPM for the
image printing at 360 ppi, and the Epson driver in high speed for the
KT overcoat, at 288 ppi, not that it matters. I had been using Septone
inks in a Niagara II, via IJC/OPM. I was quite happy with that system
for matte paper, but not for glossy.

January's print exchange will be arriving with the participants very
soon, and there should be one of my glossy 2200/K3 prints in there –
I'll leave it up to them to judge whether or not it is worth doing
when there are so many other good B&W solutions out there.

Best,
Helen


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "alanrew42"
<Alan-Rew@...> wrote:

>
> Helen, how are you using K3 inks in your 2200? The unmodified
> 2100/2200 of course uses UC inks (which I suppose should be called
> 'K2'). Are you using a CIS to achieve this? I'm intrigued, because I'd
> like to be able to try K3 in my 2100, but can't figure out which other
> ink I'd have to leave out to achieve this...
> TIA
> ALan

Thanks Helen for your detailed reply, which has saved me a lot of list
searching. I'm very impressed with the lengths to which you've gone to
achieve your ideal B&W print. With a system like IJC/OPM I guess
you'll be able to find out the 'real' dmax of DVFG, which no doubt
will be substantially higher than whatever I get with my humble Epson
driver with UC inks :-(
Regards,
Alan

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Helen Bach"
<helenbach@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Alan,
> 
> To save you having to search back through the archives, here is a
> brief summary of my use of K3 inks in a 2200.
> 
<snip>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani" 
<shileshjani@...> wrote:
>> (2) Where did you buy the TopKote?
> 


you can get smaller amounts at http://www.weink.com and larger 
amounts at http://www.getinkexpress.com product number for get ink 
express is gie822 or this link 
http://www.getinkexpress.com/catalog/gie822_krystal_topkote_protective
_clear_finish_for_inkjet_prints_4417628.htm

I'm not sure what the WeInk part number is and at $29 for 500ml it 
may not be worth the bother for the smaller bottle.

I just received a few sample sheets of this paper and their test image.
Annoyingly the sheets were bent in the post and I am going to have to
flatten them out somehow before printing on it.  The test image included a
step wedge and 100% K measures Lab 4.9, -0.2, -0.2.  So not quite the 2.7D
they themselves claim but a nice result nonetheless.  Actually I just took a
soft cloth and buffed the step wedge.  100% K now measures L* 4.0.  Paper
white measures 96.9, 0.8, -4.7.  Is it very much whiter than Crane's Silver
Rag.  The test image is simply said to be an RGB file and was apparently
printed on a 4800 with K3 ink via the Epson colour driver (not Epson Adv
B&W).  To my eye, there is considerable bronzing in the test image in the
lighter areas.  

While the surface is definitely a gloss rather than semi-matte, I think they
have definitely got it a lot better than Crane.  It's hard to describe and
communicate these things but the Da Vinci surface looks a lot more natural
and doesn't have the "sparkle" that Silver Rag has.  The texture is more
pronounced than the Crane surface but more natural.  The Da Vinci paper is
not a cotton rag base but rather a 300gsm "acid free alpha cellulose".  It
does not have the pronounced curl of Silver Rag.

The Da Vinci sounds really nice, except for the bronzing. If they used
Epson k3 inks there shouldn't be any at all. In my test of Silver Rag
with the K3 set for black and white I had neither bronzing or gloss
differences. Of course this issue of "sparkle" with SR is annoying. I
find it far more noticeble with smaller black and white prints than
large (16x20 up)color prints which I think is a good use for this paper.

There is definitely a big market for the most perfect media that gives
this deep dimensionality that glossy papers can provide without
surface distractions. The race is on.

I have three prints laid out on my table this am made from the same
greyscale file.

Ultrachrome K2-QTR on Hahnemuhle Museum Etching

Cone K6 on the same paper

and Silver Rag with K3 inkset

They all look good but the SR shown in the same context has truely
great dimentsion and a damax that makes the others look like platinum
prints by comparison. Interestingly enough, both of the Hahnemuhle
prints look sharper though, even when one is printed on an Epson 7000
and this is a fairly textured paper.

John




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> 
> I just received a few sample sheets of this paper and their test image.
> Annoyingly the sheets were bent in the post and I am going to have to
> flatten them out somehow before printing on it.  The test image
included a
> step wedge and 100% K measures Lab 4.9, -0.2, -0.2.  So not quite
the 2.7D
> they themselves claim but a nice result nonetheless.  Actually I
just took a
> soft cloth and buffed the step wedge.  100% K now measures L* 4.0. 
Paper
> white measures 96.9, 0.8, -4.7.  Is it very much whiter than Crane's
Silver
> Rag.  The test image is simply said to be an RGB file and was apparently
> printed on a 4800 with K3 ink via the Epson colour driver (not Epson Adv
> B&W).  To my eye, there is considerable bronzing in the test image
in the
> lighter areas.  
> 
> While the surface is definitely a gloss rather than semi-matte, I
think they
> have definitely got it a lot better than Crane.  It's hard to
describe and
> communicate these things but the Da Vinci surface looks a lot more
natural
> and doesn't have the "sparkle" that Silver Rag has.  The texture is more
> pronounced than the Crane surface but more natural.  The Da Vinci
paper is
> not a cotton rag base but rather a 300gsm "acid free alpha
cellulose".  It
> does not have the pronounced curl of Silver Rag.
>

> While the surface is definitely a gloss rather than semi-matte, I 
think they
> have definitely got it a lot better than Crane.  It's hard to 
describe and
> communicate these things but the Da Vinci surface looks a lot more 
natural
> and doesn't have the "sparkle" that Silver Rag has.  The texture is 
more
> pronounced than the Crane surface but more natural.  The Da Vinci 
paper is
> not a cotton rag base but rather a 300gsm "acid free alpha 
cellulose".  It
> does not have the pronounced curl of Silver Rag.


two things - the newer sample of SR I got a week or so ago was much 
smoother and with much less "pebble" or "sparkle" than the first 
batch I got (though the coating was a touch uneven - obviously it's 
still being tweaked). I'd put it about 89% close to a sort 
of "eggshell" look on these samples.

Second, I thought the curl was a problem at first - especially when I 
been cutting smaller sizes from rolls - but it seems to go through 
the printer okay, and when it's inked it dries really flat for me. I 
know on Museo Max they also coated the back to counteract the paper 
curl - with SR, on my printing, the inked surface seems to negate the 
curl

I don't currently have PK ink loaded in my 4800 to do a proper comparison.
I just printed an image with my 2100 and the Nanochromes on Da Vinci and
could not see any bronzing at all.  This was a warm toned image printed with
the Epson driver and a colour profile I had made for the Nanos for Epson
Premium Semi-gloss.  Looks pretty good.  Lying flat on the desk, though, I
am still not sure what all the fuss is about with these papers vs, say,
Epson Premium Semi-matte which I think has a lovely soft finish.  Personally
I still think the "chase" is for decent dMax on true matte papers.  These
new "photo" papers will appeal, though, to many of those with wet darkroom
backgrounds.  There is, however, a lot more to come in this space over the
next few months....

> From: john dean <deanwork2003@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 18:38:21 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> The Da Vinci sounds really nice, except for the bronzing. If they used
> Epson k3 inks there shouldn't be any at all. In my test of Silver Rag
> with the K3 set for black and white I had neither bronzing or gloss
> differences. Of course this issue of "sparkle" with SR is annoying. I
> find it far more noticeble with smaller black and white prints than
> large (16x20 up)color prints which I think is a good use for this paper.
> 
> There is definitely a big market for the most perfect media that gives
> this deep dimensionality that glossy papers can provide without
> surface distractions. The race is on.
> 
> I have three prints laid out on my table this am made from the same
> greyscale file.
> 
> Ultrachrome K2-QTR on Hahnemuhle Museum Etching
> 
> Cone K6 on the same paper
> 
> and Silver Rag with K3 inkset
> 
> They all look good but the SR shown in the same context has truely
> great dimentsion and a damax that makes the others look like platinum
> prints by comparison. Interestingly enough, both of the Hahnemuhle
> prints look sharper though, even when one is printed on an Epson 7000
> and this is a fairly textured paper.
> 
> John

Actually I might have to take this back.   I just printed the same image on
a sample (original batch?) of Crane Silver Rag.  There is definitely a
surface reflection/refraction characteristic of the Da Vinci that is not
there on Silver Rag.  I'm looking at two warm prints which doesn't help but
I'd say that there is bronzing in the Da Vinci print.  I'll try a couple of
neutral prints...

> From: Steve Kale <stevekale@...>

> 
> I don't currently have PK ink loaded in my 4800 to do a proper comparison.
> I just printed an image with my 2100 and the Nanochromes on Da Vinci and
> could not see any bronzing at all.

You know I think he may have something there. I just opened a new
batch of 8.5x11 Silver Rag that Crane just sent me and compared the
surface the the earlier batch. It is smoother, and slightly less
creamy warm it looks like to me.

I'm going to do a print on it right now and see what's up and post
what I see.

As for WHY fiber rag glossy, it isn't just a nostalgia for the silver
days, the problem a lot of have is with RC media period. No matter
what Wilhelm's or anyone else's fade data shows, plastic media dries
out and cracks over time. I have plenty of type c prints, both color
and black and white that are 25 years old and degrading. I processed
these myself in trays with perfect washing (yes the color type c ones
too, ugh) and the substrate looks bad. It could be that plastic inkjet
media will fare better 25 years from now but I wouldn't risk it
personally. Besides that I hate the plastic look of rc unless it is
behind glass permanently.

John

-You would see bronzing with pigments first, not dyes like Nanochrome.

Agreed.  

Re RC, I hear you.  But then remember these are coatings and quite hard
coatings at that, sitting on the surface of rag/alpha cellulose substrate.
The only real difference is that there's no resin barrier between the
coating and the substrate.  Who knows if they too won't crack over time.....
Personally I am interested to see how some "infused" versions look... ;-)

> From: john dean <deanwork2003@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 19:58:48 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> -You would see bronzing with pigments first, not dyes like Nanochrome.
> 
> 
>

The texture on the new batch is slightly finer, though with the same
pattern and sheen. It appears that they are trying to perfect it. I'll
use it for big things but probably not small sizes at this point.

john



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

>
> You know I think he may have something there. I just opened a new
> batch of 8.5x11 Silver Rag that Crane just sent me and compared the
> surface the the earlier batch. It is smoother, and slightly less
> creamy warm it looks like to me.
> 
> I'm going to do a print on it right now and see what's up and post
> what I see.

John,

Can you explain why the texture/"sparkle" on SR is less objectionable at bigger sizes?  I'm 
having trouble figuring out why this would be the case.

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

>
> The texture on the new batch is slightly finer, though with the same
> pattern and sheen. It appears that they are trying to perfect it. I'll
> use it for big things but probably not small sizes at this point.
> 
> john
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean"
> <deanwork2003@> wrote:
> >
> > You know I think he may have something there. I just opened a new
> > batch of 8.5x11 Silver Rag that Crane just sent me and compared the
> > surface the the earlier batch. It is smoother, and slightly less
> > creamy warm it looks like to me.
> > 
> > I'm going to do a print on it right now and see what's up and post
> > what I see.
>

Chip,


What I did was print several 8x10's on SR, black and white and
color,different printers, etc, and when the prints are not viewed
totally flat they have that glare issue. The 16x20's I did I am
viewing at about 2.5 to 3 feet distance and the texture is simply not
an issue for me and the whole thing appears smooth. The color gamut is
awesome as is the dmax. If you put your nose up to it you'll see that
texture. But to be fair, this same situation is what I experience with
Epson Premium Luster's texture. I did a job on that this week, several
30x40's. From a normal distace they looked spectacular, but up close
that texture just looks a little mechanical. Same with Silver Rag.
Once either of these is behind glass they function just fine. I would
like to see the texture disapper completely, but that isn't going to
stop me from starting to use it.

This 16x20 was a color print on a 9600, not a black and white print,
if that makes any difference.

John




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "chipcarterdc"
<chipcarterdc@...> wrote:
>
> John,
> 
> Can you explain why the texture/"sparkle" on SR is less
objectionable at bigger sizes?  I'm 
> having trouble figuring out why this would be the case.
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean"
<deanwork2003@> 

> wrote:
> >
> > The texture on the new batch is slightly finer, though with the same
> > pattern and sheen. It appears that they are trying to perfect it. I'll
> > use it for big things but probably not small sizes at this point.
> > 
> > john
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean"
> > <deanwork2003@> wrote:
> > >
> > > You know I think he may have something there. I just opened a new
> > > batch of 8.5x11 Silver Rag that Crane just sent me and compared the
> > > surface the the earlier batch. It is smoother, and slightly less
> > > creamy warm it looks like to me.
> > > 
> > > I'm going to do a print on it right now and see what's up and post
> > > what I see.
> >
>

Steve,


Can you take your fingernail (asuming you have any!)and scratch off 
ink from the surface of the DaVinci?

I had my wife thry this on the Crane SR and the ink wasn't removed. 
The paper was in-dented from the scratching, but the ink was 
not "scratched off". 

I was really impressed.

Scott


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> Agreed.  
> 
> Re RC, I hear you.  But then remember these are coatings and quite 
hard
> coatings at that, sitting on the surface of rag/alpha cellulose 
substrate.
> The only real difference is that there's no resin barrier between 
the
> coating and the substrate.  Who knows if they too won't crack over 
time.....
> Personally I am interested to see how some "infused" versions 
look... ;-)
> 
> 
> > From: john dean <deanwork2003@...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 19:58:48 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> > 
> > -You would see bronzing with pigments first, not dyes like 
Nanochrome.

> > 
> > 
> >
>

OK, here are my not-at-all-exciting measurements. Taken with Eye-One
Pro Rev. B on top of a blank sample of the same media. 4 readings
averaged.

Epson 2100 + UC inks, Photo Black Ink, 'Premium Semiglossy', 2880, NCA
RGB 0,0,0 measures 
Lab 13.7, -0.7, -3.8 which is _not_ very black really (an Ilford
Galerie Smooth Gloss profile I made with UC measures 5, 0, -3 with PK).

My paper white measurements are virtually identical to Steve's:
Lab 96.6, 0.7, -4.6

Using all the colours to print an RGB step wedge gives no more shadow
detail than other glossy papers I've used with this ink. This is done
using a profile made with the TC9.18 target; I might try one of the
bigger Atkinson targets some time, but at the moment I'm a bit
underwhelmed with the Da Vinci results using UC ink.

This is OT for a B&W list, but the colour gamut is no better than
other glossy papers I've profiled, although there is slightly more red
gamut than my current favourite glossy paper.

The 'almost glossy' look is a bit like the old Epson 'Glossy Paper -
Photo Weight', although that paper is smoother with less texture.

It looks like K3 inks are needed to get the best out of this paper.

Regards,

Alan

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "alanrew42"
<Alan-Rew@...> wrote:

>
> OK, to make it more fun, I'll post them in installments :-)
>

John wrote:

> ... No matter
> what Wilhelm's or anyone else's fade data shows, plastic media dries
> out and cracks over time...

Steve wrote:

>...
> The only real difference is that there's no resin barrier between the
> coating and the substrate.

Do we have clear statements from the manufacturers about whether or not
there are barriers -- polyethylene or otherwise -- in these papers?

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Silly question but are you sure you printed on the right side of the paper?

> From: alanrew42 <Alan-Rew@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 02:06:20 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> OK, here are my not-at-all-exciting measurements. Taken with Eye-One
> Pro Rev. B on top of a blank sample of the same media. 4 readings
> averaged.
> 
> Epson 2100 + UC inks, Photo Black Ink, 'Premium Semiglossy', 2880, NCA
> RGB 0,0,0 measures
> Lab 13.7, -0.7, -3.8 which is _not_ very black really (an Ilford
> Galerie Smooth Gloss profile I made with UC measures 5, 0, -3 with PK).
> 
> My paper white measurements are virtually identical to Steve's:
> Lab 96.6, 0.7, -4.6
> 
> Using all the colours to print an RGB step wedge gives no more shadow
> detail than other glossy papers I've used with this ink. This is done
> using a profile made with the TC9.18 target; I might try one of the
> bigger Atkinson targets some time, but at the moment I'm a bit
> underwhelmed with the Da Vinci results using UC ink.
> 
> This is OT for a B&W list, but the colour gamut is no better than
> other glossy papers I've profiled, although there is slightly more red
> gamut than my current favourite glossy paper.
> 
> The 'almost glossy' look is a bit like the old Epson 'Glossy Paper -
> Photo Weight', although that paper is smoother with less texture.
> 
> It looks like K3 inks are needed to get the best out of this paper.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Alan
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "alanrew42"
> <Alan-Rew@...> wrote:
>> 
>> OK, to make it more fun, I'll post them in installments :-)

That's certainly my understanding.  If you tear either Crane SR or Da Vinci
you can not see a thin plastic barrier unlike when you do the same to Epson
Premium Semi-Matte.  My question for those with greater experience with RC
longevity is: was it the resin barrier that cracked or the coating sitting
on it (or both)?

> From: Paul Roark <paul.roark@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 22:49:18 -0800
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Crane SR & Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> 
> John wrote:
> 
>> ... No matter
>> what Wilhelm's or anyone else's fade data shows, plastic media dries
>> out and cracks over time...
> 
> Steve wrote:
> 
>> ...
>> The only real difference is that there's no resin barrier between the
>> coating and the substrate.
> 
> Do we have clear statements from the manufacturers about whether or not
> there are barriers -- polyethylene or otherwise -- in these papers?
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com

You can not scratch the ink off (but the texture of the substrate is of
course marked).

> From: scott_now_coming <scott_now_coming@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 23:45:23 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> Steve,
> 
> 
> Can you take your fingernail (asuming you have any!)and scratch off
> ink from the surface of the DaVinci?
> 
> I had my wife thry this on the Crane SR and the ink wasn't removed.
> The paper was in-dented from the scratching, but the ink was
> not "scratched off".
> 
> I was really impressed.
> 
> Scott
>

Steve
I'm reasonably sure that it was originally the polythene layer (it was
plasticised) that cracked (e.g.in original ILFORD RC papers), but the
worst of those problems were solved decades ago - of course some
manufacturers took longer to find their own more stable solution.  I
did not realise it was still a major concern. 

John
I am, genuinely, curious to know what the recent evidence is to the
contrary (i.e. papers designed in the last two decades or so, from
companies that care about longevity - ILFORD recent MG RC, FUJI
Crystal Archive,...?).  Polythene in a pure form can be quite stable
(it does not "dry out"), so it is mainly a question of controlling the
necessary additives.  Are there some pointers for things to read on
this subject, that contradict the general impression that is given of
the bases lasting tolerably well compared to the dyes?

Ken 





--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> That's certainly my understanding.  If you tear either Crane SR or
Da Vinci
> you can not see a thin plastic barrier unlike when you do the same
to Epson
> Premium Semi-Matte.  My question for those with greater experience
with RC
> longevity is: was it the resin barrier that cracked or the coating
sitting

> on it (or both)?
> 

> > John wrote:
> > 
> >> ... No matter
> >> what Wilhelm's or anyone else's fade data shows, plastic media dries
> >> out and cracks over time...

It's not a silly question, it's a good one! Yes I did use the right
side of the paper. The two sides are (fortunately) very different,
unlike some other papers.

IMO the problems I've seen are due to the Epson 2100 driver. All
profiles I've produced for this driver have the same issue with
shadows blocking up. Note also that just because a 4800 Epson driver
in 'premium semiglossy' mode gives good results, this doesn't mean
that a 2100/2200 driver in 'premium semiglossy' mode will, because the
ink limits, ink curves, black generation etc for the 4800 driver will
be different from those of the 2100/2200 (and of course the K3 ink is
very different from 'K2').

I might try another media setting e.g. glossy paper photo weight.
I'll feed back any data I get just for the benefit of the list (if
only to warn people off if it doesn't work :-)).

So I think with a 2100/2200 the way to go for good shadow detail and
rich blacks is to use a different driver or RIP, and then ideally do
your own pre-linearisation in the RIP before profiling. Which is in
fact what most people on this list seem to be doing.

IJC/OPM looks interesting, but I do colour as well as B&W and I want a
RIP that handles either - so maybe ImagePrint is the way for me to go.

Anyway, I hope your results with DaVinci on your 4800 are good. Third
party paper manufacturers need support & encouragement.

Regards,

Alan

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> Silly question but are you sure you printed on the right side of the
paper?
> 
>

I did my tests on a 2100 with the media set to Premium Semigloss.  No
problem with shadow detail even though I was using Nano inks and a profile
for EPSG.  But I must say I don't like this paper because of the bronzing.

Forget Imageprint and take a good look at Colorburst (CMYK profiling
embedded for free).

> From: alanrew42 <Alan-Rew@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 13:50:19 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> It's not a silly question, it's a good one! Yes I did use the right
> side of the paper. The two sides are (fortunately) very different,
> unlike some other papers.
> 
> IMO the problems I've seen are due to the Epson 2100 driver. All
> profiles I've produced for this driver have the same issue with
> shadows blocking up. Note also that just because a 4800 Epson driver
> in 'premium semiglossy' mode gives good results, this doesn't mean
> that a 2100/2200 driver in 'premium semiglossy' mode will, because the
> ink limits, ink curves, black generation etc for the 4800 driver will
> be different from those of the 2100/2200 (and of course the K3 ink is
> very different from 'K2').
> 
> I might try another media setting e.g. glossy paper photo weight.
> I'll feed back any data I get just for the benefit of the list (if
> only to warn people off if it doesn't work :-)).
> 
> So I think with a 2100/2200 the way to go for good shadow detail and
> rich blacks is to use a different driver or RIP, and then ideally do
> your own pre-linearisation in the RIP before profiling. Which is in
> fact what most people on this list seem to be doing.
> 
> IJC/OPM looks interesting, but I do colour as well as B&W and I want a
> RIP that handles either - so maybe ImagePrint is the way for me to go.
> 
> Anyway, I hope your results with DaVinci on your 4800 are good. Third
> party paper manufacturers need support & encouragement.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Alan
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@...> wrote:
>> 
>> Silly question but are you sure you printed on the right side of the
> paper?
>>

Steve,

I think that you hit the nail squarely on the head. ImagePrint doesn't 
let you do any linearization or grayscale profiles. You're at the mercy 
of ColorBurst for a one size fits all linearization. One for matte 
paper, one for gloss on the 2200/2100.

ColorBurst also has a more liberal licensing policy. Try the ColorBurst 
15 day full working version. You might be impressed.

If you are sure you want ImagePrint I have a version 6.0 license for 
the 2200 if your interested? Contact me off list for details.

Larry

On Feb 18, 2006, at 8:00 AM, Steve Kale wrote:

> Forget Imageprint and take a good look at Colorburst (CMYK profiling
> embedded for free).

I think you meant Imageprint....

A few things on Colorburst and sorry if this runs a little off-topic.  The
demo version is not the latest and greatest.  The latest pre-release version
has embedded the Monaco CMYK profiling engine and so if you have an X-Rite
spectro you can make CMYK profiles.  (Carl Schofield just bought this recent
version and perhaps will comment.)  They expect to support Gretag Macbeth
devices in the future, particularly given the merger, but they're not sure
when.  ITSupplies have the RIP at a very competitive price.

> From: Larry Wangelin <lwangelin@...>

> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper


> You're at the mercy
> of ColorBurst for a one size fits all linearization. One for matte
> paper, one for gloss on the 2200/2100.

Steve,

I really meant ColorByte but ImagePrint fits also. Sorry for the 
confusion.

Larry

On Feb 18, 2006, at 9:08 AM, Steve Kale wrote:

> I think you meant Imageprint....

If it relys on a plastisizer for retaining flexibility, the chemical
will eventualy leach out into the substrait and the resin will become
brittle and subject to cracking. The length of time for this is
dependent on what the resin is ,what plastisizer chemicals are used,
the environment it is exposed to and so on. Think plastic dashboards
on automobiles and what happens to them with sunlight over time.
(Might take longer in UK ?? :-))

Regards.
Duane




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> That's certainly my understanding.  If you tear either Crane SR or
Da Vinci
> you can not see a thin plastic barrier unlike when you do the same
to Epson
> Premium Semi-Matte.  My question for those with greater experience
with RC
> longevity is: was it the resin barrier that cracked or the coating
sitting

> on it (or both)?
> 
>

Thanks, that's good sign.

Looks like we're going  into a whole new, higher quality level of 
inkjet paper.

These guys claim to be beta test some new papers like Crane Silver 
Rag (I wonder if one of them is the DaVinci):

"We also posted a quick preview here. Actually as we speak we know at 
least 2 more papers of this type and are testing one other right now. 
These are exciting times for fine art printers."

http://www.outbackphoto.com/


Scott


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> You can not scratch the ink off (but the texture of the substrate 
is of
> course marked).
> 
> 
> > From: scott_now_coming <scott_now_coming@...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 23:45:23 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> > 
> > Steve,
> > 
> > 
> > Can you take your fingernail (asuming you have any!)and scratch 
off
> > ink from the surface of the DaVinci?
> > 
> > I had my wife thry this on the Crane SR and the ink wasn't 
removed.

> > The paper was in-dented from the scratching, but the ink was
> > not "scratched off".
> > 
> > I was really impressed.
> > 
> > Scott
> >
>

Kodak's story (working from memory here) with respect to the RC cracking was
that the OBAs were originally titanium dioxide.  They put out a strong
oxidant that attacked the polyethylene and cracked it.  In response, a
number of companies put anti-oxidants in the coating to deal with this
problem, but they yellowed.  Now, presumably, there is a combination of less
reactive OBAs and non-yellowing anti-oxidants that solve the RC problems --
according to the manufacturers.

Polyethylene is apparently a broad category of materials, within which there
can be significant performance differences.  Whether what is used in the
papers is up to the job might depend on more than just what the common name
is for the material.

One industry person I spoke with thought the new technology did involve a
barrier, but it might not be polyethylene.

Lots of uncertainty here ..., but who's to say the matte paper coatings
don't have their own time bombs ticking in them.  Sadly, accelerated age
testing is even more speculative than fade testing.  Air-borne pollutants
are major and uncertain variables that can't all be predicted and tested.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

That is very preceptive Paul. We tend to put them all in one category
when, fact is, we don't know what is in them.

As to Kodak, they have no credibility with me. I discussed this issue
with the reps as recently as 5 years ago. They never cared about the
long term. I have a friend who is a fairly well known photographer in
the NY gallery scene. He still does type c prints that have text
written under them so he has a lot of white paper showing inside the
framed, matted pieces. Hell all the prints that I've seen that are
even a few years old have yellowed in those whites. You would have
thought 30 years would have been enought time for Kodak to figure out
the issues.

With Premium Luster though, we probably don't know, could be better,
I'm not counting on it. I won't tell my clients this stuff will last
as long as rag, I just don't believe it.

As to airborne chemicals, that is when the spraying is essential, but
we need a non-toxic substitute for what we have now.

I haven't heard anything that would lead me to belive that the
non-acid coatings for piezzo inkjet output are suspect that much,
although Wilhelm's ratings for non-coated rag were higher years ago.
What is in these coatings, starch, gelatin, or a combination of the two. 

By the way, I really like this new Hahnemuhle Museum Etching  paper.
No oba content and it is plenty white enought for me.

John

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@...> wrote:
> I did my tests on a 2100 with the media set to Premium Semigloss.  No
> problem with shadow detail even though I was using Nano inks and a
profile
> for EPSG.  But I must say I don't like this paper because of the
bronzing.

Thanks for the info Steve. Was the ICC profile made using Nano inks,
and with the driver in PSG / 'no color adjustment' mode?

If so, it sounds like the Nano inks give better shadow detail with the
Epson driver than the Epson UC inks.

> Forget Imageprint and take a good look at Colorburst (CMYK profiling
> embedded for free).

Will this work with my GMB Eye-One Pro?

If not, could I just pre-linearise Colorburst somehow, then make a
CMYK profile using GMB ProfileMaker Pro? This sounds really interesting.

TIA

Alan

> From: alanrew42 <Alan-Rew@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 18:32:37 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@...> wrote:
>> I did my tests on a 2100 with the media set to Premium Semigloss.  No
>> problem with shadow detail even though I was using Nano inks and a
> profile
>> for EPSG.  But I must say I don't like this paper because of the
> bronzing.
> 
> Thanks for the info Steve. Was the ICC profile made using Nano inks,
> and with the driver in PSG / 'no color adjustment' mode?

Yes.
> 
> If so, it sounds like the Nano inks give better shadow detail with the
> Epson driver than the Epson UC inks.

I found this generally not to be the case as the ink limits in the 2100
driver are not really ideal for the Nanos.  But on Da Vinci paper with the
Prem Semigloss setting the prints looked ok in this respect.

> 
>> Forget Imageprint and take a good look at Colorburst (CMYK profiling
>> embedded for free).
> 
> Will this work with my GMB Eye-One Pro?
> 
> If not, could I just pre-linearise Colorburst somehow, then make a
> CMYK profile using GMB ProfileMaker Pro? This sounds really interesting.

We are in the same boat.  You can linearise with your i1 BUT current
environments were made with UV filtered spectros so really you need to make
your own environments from scratch (not too hard).  At the moment you can
not use the i1 for CMYK profiling but they expect to add the capability to
use other spectros some time in the future.  This is my current stumbling
block, in addition to the fact that there may be no software adjustment for
UV (as is the case with GM's software).  Carl Schofield bought an X-Rite
pulse and the RIP and was very impressed with the output for both B&W and
colour.

Hope this helps

Steve

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

> 
> We are in the same boat.  You can linearise with your i1 BUT current
> environments were made with UV filtered spectros so really you need 
to make
> your own environments from scratch (not too hard).  At the moment 
you can
> not use the i1 for CMYK profiling but they expect to add the 
capability to
> use other spectros some time in the future.  

Since it uses the Profiler engine, you will still need a UV filtered 
spectro. In all the years that Xrite/Monaco has had to change things, 
they still consider the job of filtering best left to the hardware.

However, if you own PMP (or any other CMYK profile creation software) 
you should be able to use CMYK profiles generated from it in the RIP. 
Linearization may or may not be possible, that all depends on whether 
they allow you to enter values by hand. Most manufacturers have cut 
this feature, which is really too bad as it then locks you into using 
their approved hardware.

Last I looked Colorburst had no built in B&W mode like ColorByte.
THis is not to say you couldn't make a custom ink setup and profile
for decent B&W with UCs and Colorburst, but I don't believe there is a
canned mode for it like ImagePrint.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Larry Wangelin
<lwangelin@...> wrote:

>
> Steve,
> 
> I think that you hit the nail squarely on the head. ImagePrint doesn't 
> let you do any linearization or grayscale profiles. You're at the mercy 
> of ColorBurst for a one size fits all linearization. One for matte 
> paper, one for gloss on the 2200/2100.
> 
> ColorBurst also has a more liberal licensing policy. Try the ColorBurst 
> 15 day full working version. You might be impressed.
> 
> If you are sure you want ImagePrint I have a version 6.0 license for 
> the 2200 if your interested? Contact me off list for details.
> 
> Larry
> 
> On Feb 18, 2006, at 8:00 AM, Steve Kale wrote:
> 
> > Forget Imageprint and take a good look at Colorburst (CMYK profiling
> > embedded for free).
>

They removed the quadtone capability from the Photo series (it remains in
the Windows Layout series - more expensive) but it prints very good B&W in
colour mode with OEM inks.  So it's not a dedicated B&W ink set solution but
neither is Imageprint.  For the UC inks there are separate B&W and Colour
environments.  (I think this is what you are referring to.)  This was deemed
unnecessary for the K3 inks.  To quote Sarah Smith from Colorburst Tech
Support:

"We found that it was necessary to have two separate profiles (color and
b&w) for the previous UltraChrome series of printers.  A more aggressive
black generation setting produced better monochromatic images, but
sacrificed some color.  However, with the new K3 printers and the addition
of the light black ink, the same black generation setting can be used for
both types of images without sacrificing quality."

The thing I find appealing with Colorburst is that it has the Monaco engine
CMYK profiling (albeit it doesn't support my i1 !). This is a very expensive
add-on for, say, Studioprint.  SP of course seems to have enough options to
make your head swirl and also has quadtone functionality.  I would simply
say that for someone looking at a colour ink RIP then Colorburst merits a
good look and would seem to offer significantly more functionality to
someone with an X-Rite spectro than IP.

> From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 20:24:29 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> Last I looked Colorburst had no built in B&W mode like ColorByte.
> THis is not to say you couldn't make a custom ink setup and profile
> for decent B&W with UCs and Colorburst, but I don't believe there is a
> canned mode for it like ImagePrint.
> Tyler
>

FYI re Colorburst and UV spectros:

"Steve,

We will probably continue to create our profiles with UV devices, and
relinearizing with a non-UV device would always pose a problem in that
situation.  I really don¹t know if there is a possibility that the software
approach to UV compensation would be added to the profiler in SpectralVision
Pro.  My guess at this point would be that it would not, but it¹s way to
early to speculate on that sort of thing.

Sarah"

Lets set Kodak aside (I did not want to single them out in my last
post, but there seems to be decades of evidence against them).

If papers have plasticisers in the barrier there will be problems,
sure - but do they? 

Polyethene homopolymers with long chains can be quite stable in many
environments (but not all). Of course we will rarely be told what is
used, so more evidence would be helpful.  I suspect most of the RC
base we talk about comes from just a few manufacturers.

Modern (non Kodak) RC photo (silver)papers seem to last quite well
(anecdotal and personal experience).

But is there collected evidence concentrating on substrate problems
(apart from Wilhelm)?

Ken


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

>
> That is very preceptive Paul. We tend to put them all in one category
> when, fact is, we don't know what is in them.
> 
> As to Kodak, they have no credibility with me. I discussed this issue
> with the reps as recently as 5 years ago. They never cared about the
> long term. I have a friend who is a fairly well known photographer in
> the NY gallery scene. He still does type c prints that have text
> written under them so he has a lot of white paper showing inside the
> framed, matted pieces. Hell all the prints that I've seen that are
> even a few years old have yellowed in those whites. You would have
> thought 30 years would have been enought time for Kodak to figure out
> the issues.
> 
> With Premium Luster though, we probably don't know, could be better,
> I'm not counting on it. I won't tell my clients this stuff will last
> as long as rag, I just don't believe it.

Their argument is that a software adjustment for UV will only be done for
the Perceptual intent and that there are reasons why you'd want it for
Relative Colorimetric (and possibly Absolute Colorimetric) as well.  So I'm
kind of stuck.  I can do the linearization with my i1 but not the profiles
and the linearization would not be valid for their profiles (which I would
not really want to use anyway).  It's either CB to get the profiling engine
which requires a new spectro or purchase, say, PM5.  One is still cheaper
than the other but it seems a little silly...

> From: Greg <dfaprinting@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 18:55:33 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@...> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> We are in the same boat.  You can linearise with your i1 BUT current
>> environments were made with UV filtered spectros so really you need
> to make
>> your own environments from scratch (not too hard).  At the moment
> you can
>> not use the i1 for CMYK profiling but they expect to add the
> capability to
>> use other spectros some time in the future.
> 
> Since it uses the Profiler engine, you will still need a UV filtered
> spectro. In all the years that Xrite/Monaco has had to change things,
> they still consider the job of filtering best left to the hardware.
> 
> However, if you own PMP (or any other CMYK profile creation software)
> you should be able to use CMYK profiles generated from it in the RIP.
> Linearization may or may not be possible, that all depends on whether
> they allow you to enter values by hand. Most manufacturers have cut
> this feature, which is really too bad as it then locks you into using
> their approved hardware.

I've now profiled DVFG using the 'Glossy Paper Photo Weight' media
setting in the Epson driver for my 2100 using the standard UC inks
with PK installed, 2880 dpi, NCA. TC9.18 target as before, PMP 5.0.5b,
Eye-One Pro Rev.B

Reading the profile with Chromix ColorThink, the black point with
'GPPW' comes out as 
Lab 16 0 -3

which is lighter than the profile I made using the 'Premium Semi
Glossy' setting earlier, for which ColorThink shows the black point in
the profile as being
Lab 12 -1 -4

(this doesn't match my manual measurements posted earlier, but I think
PMP has done some interpolation/extrapolation for the black point).

There is a bit more shadow separation in a 21-step grey wedge printed
using this GPPW profile. The neutrality is also a tiny bit better. But
my earlier conclusion is unchanged: the Epson driver is probably the
limiting factor here in terms of retrieving shadow detail with UC inks
on DVFG. Choosing DVFG over other papers with the Epson 2100 and Epson
driver will probably be based on aesthetic reasons (relating to the
look & feel of the paper) rather than on technical grounds (e.g.
shadow detail). Personally I'm sticking with my previous favourite
glossy paper with this printer 7 driver.

Regards,

Alan

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "alanrew42"
<Alan-Rew@...> wrote:
>
<snip>
> 
> I might try another media setting e.g. glossy paper photo weight.
> I'll feed back any data I get just for the benefit of the list (if
> only to warn people off if it doesn't work :-)).
> 
<snip>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Greg" 
<dfaprinting@...> wrote:
> Since it uses the Profiler engine, you will still need a UV 
filtered 
> spectro. In all the years that Xrite/Monaco has had to change 
things, 
> they still consider the job of filtering best left to the hardware.
> 
> However, if you own PMP (or any other CMYK profile creation 
software) 
> you should be able to use CMYK profiles generated from it in the 
RIP. 
> Linearization may or may not be possible, that all depends on 
whether 
> they allow you to enter values by hand. Most manufacturers have cut 
> this feature, which is really too bad as it then locks you into 
using 
> their approved hardware.
>


NOTE: the above message has about a 12 hour delay!!!

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> Their argument is that a software adjustment for UV will only be 
done for
> the Perceptual intent and that there are reasons why you'd want it 
for
> Relative Colorimetric (and possibly Absolute Colorimetric) as 
well.  

Yes, there are difficluties with using the software form of UV 
correction when using relative rendering. It often shows up as a 
strange purple shift to colors out side the gamut. And it even 
manifests itself with PMP5 generated profiles. To buy just a DTP-20 
spectro is around $875 USD, almost better to buy the full Pulse 
package. Or you could step up to the DTP-70, it's only about $3000 
USD.

Don't they have a bundle with the RIP and spectro?

And there are of course other RIPs to be used if you want to 
experiment, most all of them will still require CMYK profiles.

Alan

I really think something is wrong here.  I can get better than that on matte
paper.  The Nano K ink tends to slightly under-perform Epson PK (UC or K3)
in the dMax stakes and so I'd expect it to be behind the Epson PKs on this
paper.  And I got 5 or thereabouts on the 2100 and with the Epson driver.

Nonetheless I still prefer other ink and paper combinations.  The Da Vinci
paper looks more natural and is whiter than the SR but it seems to bronze
more so.  I still think both loose a lot of shadow detail when ever so
slightly tilted.

I have the same print here (the Elephant Mother and Baby I from
http://homepage.mac.com/stevekale/photography/sabisand1.html ) on 1. Da
Vinci with Nanochromes, 2. Crane Silver Rag with Nanochromes, 3. HPR with
Nanochromes, 4. HPR with Eboni/Epson K3 (Adv B&W on a 4800) and 5. EPSM with
Nanochromes.  All of the Nanochrome prints were done with a colour profile
and the colour driver on my 2100.  (The image is quite good for checking out
shadow detail in the baby elephant below the mother's chest.)  On looks
alone, I would have to say the placing would go as follows:

1. Nanochromes on HPR
2. Nanochromes on EPSM (Epson K3 would likely be a tad better)
3. Eboni/K3 Epson Adv B&W on HPR.
4. Nanochromes on SR
5. Nanochromes on Da Vinci

(I'd like to see Epson K3 on the second and last two but I'd have to do an
ink change in my 4800.)

Placings 2, 3 and 4 all revolve around surface reflection characteristics.
Eboni/K3 on HPR doesn't have quite the punch of Nano on SR but the sheen
means a lot of SR hides a lot of this punch.  Hence EPSM jumping ahead
because I think it has the punch with a better surface look.  HPR is of
course much more fragile and the Nanos have their issues.  I'd like to see a
true matte PK "silver rag" and an archival Nano derivative....

Steve

> From: alanrew42 <Alan-Rew@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 18:15:46 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> I've now profiled DVFG using the 'Glossy Paper Photo Weight' media
> setting in the Epson driver for my 2100 using the standard UC inks
> with PK installed, 2880 dpi, NCA. TC9.18 target as before, PMP 5.0.5b,
> Eye-One Pro Rev.B
> 
> Reading the profile with Chromix ColorThink, the black point with
> 'GPPW' comes out as
> Lab 16 0 -3
> 
> which is lighter than the profile I made using the 'Premium Semi
> Glossy' setting earlier, for which ColorThink shows the black point in
> the profile as being
> Lab 12 -1 -4
> 
> (this doesn't match my manual measurements posted earlier, but I think
> PMP has done some interpolation/extrapolation for the black point).
> 
> There is a bit more shadow separation in a 21-step grey wedge printed
> using this GPPW profile. The neutrality is also a tiny bit better. But
> my earlier conclusion is unchanged: the Epson driver is probably the
> limiting factor here in terms of retrieving shadow detail with UC inks
> on DVFG. Choosing DVFG over other papers with the Epson 2100 and Epson
> driver will probably be based on aesthetic reasons (relating to the
> look & feel of the paper) rather than on technical grounds (e.g.
> shadow detail). Personally I'm sticking with my previous favourite
> glossy paper with this printer 7 driver.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Alan
>

Carl paid $895 for the UV Pulse Spectro (only) from X-Rite.  RIP plus
separate profiling is expensive.  I think I'm going to hang back for now
although I could buy a RIP and outsource the profiling (given I can do the
measurements).

> From: Greg <dfaprinting@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 18:25:05 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper -  Colorburst
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@...> wrote:
>> 
>> Their argument is that a software adjustment for UV will only be
> done for
>> the Perceptual intent and that there are reasons why you'd want it
> for
>> Relative Colorimetric (and possibly Absolute Colorimetric) as
> well.  
> 
> Yes, there are difficluties with using the software form of UV
> correction when using relative rendering. It often shows up as a
> strange purple shift to colors out side the gamut. And it even
> manifests itself with PMP5 generated profiles. To buy just a DTP-20
> spectro is around $875 USD, almost better to buy the full Pulse
> package. Or you could step up to the DTP-70, it's only about $3000
> USD.
> 
> Don't they have a bundle with the RIP and spectro?
> 
> And there are of course other RIPs to be used if you want to
> experiment, most all of them will still require CMYK profiles.

They never did get the quad mono ink capability to work to my knowledge.
I did not know they put in separate B&W environments, that was not an option when I 
played with it some time ago. But yes, that's what I meant.
Whether or not standard K3 CMYK environemts with 100% GCR are optimal for both critical 
mono and color remains to be seen, in my opinion. Certainly they will "work", for both.

ColorBurst and Imageprint are different animals and for different people. I was only 
refering to IPs B&W mode for the original poster, looking for a solution for both from the 
same ink set. I didn't realize Colorburst now has some canned solution along those lines 
as well.

It's hard to believe the i1 would remain unsupported for some of this for long...
The RIP thing in general though, I still insist most don't need it, or the grief that comes 
with it. Some absolutely do, most do not.
Tyler

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

>
> They removed the quadtone capability from the Photo series (it remains in
> the Windows Layout series - more expensive) but it prints very good B&W in
> colour mode with OEM inks.  So it's not a dedicated B&W ink set solution but
> neither is Imageprint.  For the UC inks there are separate B&W and Colour
> environments.  (I think this is what you are referring to.)  This was deemed
> unnecessary for the K3 inks.  To quote Sarah Smith from Colorburst Tech
> Support:
> 
> "We found that it was necessary to have two separate profiles (color and
> b&w) for the previous UltraChrome series of printers.  A more aggressive
> black generation setting produced better monochromatic images, but
> sacrificed some color.  However, with the new K3 printers and the addition
> of the light black ink, the same black generation setting can be used for
> both types of images without sacrificing quality."
> 
> The thing I find appealing with Colorburst is that it has the Monaco engine
> CMYK profiling (albeit it doesn't support my i1 !). This is a very expensive
> add-on for, say, Studioprint.  SP of course seems to have enough options to
> make your head swirl and also has quadtone functionality.  I would simply
> say that for someone looking at a colour ink RIP then Colorburst merits a
> good look and would seem to offer significantly more functionality to
> someone with an X-Rite spectro than IP.
> 
> 
> > From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 20:24:29 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> > 
> > Last I looked Colorburst had no built in B&W mode like ColorByte.
> > THis is not to say you couldn't make a custom ink setup and profile
> > for decent B&W with UCs and Colorburst, but I don't believe there is a
> > canned mode for it like ImagePrint.
> > Tyler
> >
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale 
<stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> Carl paid $895 for the UV Pulse Spectro (only) from X-Rite.  RIP 
plus
> separate profiling is expensive.  I think I'm going to hang back 
for now
> although I could buy a RIP and outsource the profiling (given I can 
do the
> measurements).
> 


Actually, my price was going to be less, they were going to give me 
an additional discount for being a Profiler Platinum owner. I found 
a "new" Pulse UV system with Optix XR2 on ebay for $900, so that 
really couldn't be beat. The XR2 just has a different color case, so 
that it matches the DTP20 spectro.

If you want to look into other RIPs, I would suggest the Evolution 
from www.digifab.com . For the 4800 the price is only $500 USD, and 
it will work with your spectro. Then as you say you could outsource 
the CMYK profiles (at least until the Xrite/GMB purchase is final and 
the product line stabilizes).

You are too talented of a photographer to spend all your time doing tests.

Agree completely.  The only thing that is making me consider one is the fact
that I'd like to not be constrained by the ink limits in the Epson driver
which are of course designed for their inks and media.  It's expensive,
though, to jump out from that box...

> From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 19:45:56 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> They never did get the quad mono ink capability to work to my knowledge.
> I did not know they put in separate B&W environments, that was not an option
> when I 
> played with it some time ago. But yes, that's what I meant.
> Whether or not standard K3 CMYK environemts with 100% GCR are optimal for both
> critical 
> mono and color remains to be seen, in my opinion. Certainly they will "work",
> for both.
> 
> ColorBurst and Imageprint are different animals and for different people. I
> was only 
> refering to IPs B&W mode for the original poster, looking for a solution for
> both from the 
> same ink set. I didn't realize Colorburst now has some canned solution along
> those lines 
> as well.
> 
> It's hard to believe the i1 would remain unsupported for some of this for
> long...
> The RIP thing in general though, I still insist most don't need it, or the
> grief that comes 
> with it. Some absolutely do, most do not.
> Tyler

With QTR you do can do a fine job of limiting density with mono, and
does one really need that for color? I've never experienced a
limitation there with good custom profiles, but everyone has their
standards about this stuff. Now for doing giant runs with super long
print jobs, that is another story. I don't often end up with jobs
longer than 93".I know a guy though who uses Studio Print on the 9600
for super big jobs that takes many hours to rip. He has one of those
auto rollers at the end so he can just go to sleep and in the am all
this canvas work is rolled up on the machine, and he makes $. That
would be nice.

john


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> Agree completely.  The only thing that is making me consider one is
the fact
> that I'd like to not be constrained by the ink limits in the Epson
driver
> which are of course designed for their inks and media.  It's expensive,
> though, to jump out from that box...
> 
> 
> > From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>
> > Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 19:45:56 -0000
> > To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> > 
> > They never did get the quad mono ink capability to work to my
knowledge.
> > I did not know they put in separate B&W environments, that was not
an option
> > when I 
> > played with it some time ago. But yes, that's what I meant.
> > Whether or not standard K3 CMYK environemts with 100% GCR are
optimal for both
> > critical 
> > mono and color remains to be seen, in my opinion. Certainly they
will "work",
> > for both.
> > 
> > ColorBurst and Imageprint are different animals and for different
people. I
> > was only 
> > refering to IPs B&W mode for the original poster, looking for a
solution for
> > both from the 
> > same ink set. I didn't realize Colorburst now has some canned
solution along
> > those lines 
> > as well.
> > 
> > It's hard to believe the i1 would remain unsupported for some of
this for
> > long...
> > The RIP thing in general though, I still insist most don't need
it, or the

> > grief that comes 
> > with it. Some absolutely do, most do not.
> > Tyler
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" <deanwork2003@...> 
wrote:
>
> ... he makes $. That
> would be nice.

I really enjoyed that.
T

Paul Roark wrote:
> Kodak's story (working from memory here) with respect to the RC cracking was
> that the OBAs were originally titanium dioxide.  

Paul, if I recall it correctly, titanium dioxide is a highly
opaque white pigment only but it can not be combined with OBAs
as it reacts with the OBAs causing  yellowing. I saw that
information not so long ago when I checked whether transparent
OBAs exist. TiO2 is still used in thin polyethylene foils to
give the foils a high white opacity  despite their thickness.

They put out a strong
> oxidant that attacked the polyethylene and cracked it.  In response, a
> number of companies put anti-oxidants in the coating to deal with this
> problem, but they yellowed.  Now, presumably, there is a combination of less
> reactive OBAs and non-yellowing anti-oxidants that solve the RC problems --
> according to the manufacturers.
> 
> Polyethylene is apparently a broad category of materials, within which there
> can be significant performance differences.  Whether what is used in the
> papers is up to the job might depend on more than just what the common name
> is for the material.

There are several grades and copolymeres. For foils like that
you would use high density polyethylene. Main problem of
plastics like polyethylene and polypropylene is getting a
bond between the coating and the plastic itself. The foil has
to be corona treated to change the polarity on the surface
after that there's a short time to create the better bond. In
time that may be lost again. Polyethylene will have
plasticisers added if there's a need for more flexibility,
paraffin wax is the more ordinary one. In itself not a nice
material to create a bond on. It also migrates from the
polyethylene in time. For this barrier purpose I do no think
that it is needed, the foil is thin enough to be flexible. For
outdoor use polyethylene has one bad property, it is easily
attacked by UV light that will shorten the long molecules to
shorter ones and make the material brittle in time.

> 
> One industry person I spoke with thought the new technology did involve a
> barrier, but it might not be polyethylene.

Enough other barriers possible and most likely it will be a
sandwich of more plastic foils. PVA for example often is used
in combination with other foil(s) to combine a gas and fluid
barrier in one layer and/or to create a better bond to paper
or coating.

> 
> Lots of uncertainty here ...

Right, you only have to check who supplies what in the coating
industry to know that there are a thousand combinations possible.

Ernst

                    --
           Ernst Dinkla


www.pigment-print.com
(         unvollendet         )

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale <stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> Agree completely.  The only thing that is making me consider one is the fact
> that I'd like to not be constrained by the ink limits in the Epson driver

I'm still unsure about that. Yes indeed, you can open up the color channels based on media 
performance, and of course linearization has got to be a benifit. But it's beginning to look to 
me like lots of ink makes things more difficult for the profiler. I'll know more about this later. 
So far, the cleanest profiles without problems are coming from set-ups with very conservative 
ink levels, individual and total. So are we back to Epson driver performance?
The other thing you can't match is Epson's strange GCR and total ink. Somehow they only 
allow 100% at rgb 000, so only k ink there, but obvioulsy considerably more in dark colors. 
So total ink is "variable". The downside to this is there may not be enough color inks available 
at very dark rich colors like deep browns. You can easily see this with a 3d gamut veiwer of 
an Epson RGB profile vrs a good CMYK profile, it's very skinny near K. Then the question 
becomes, how often do you really miss those colors in the real world? Sometimes all of this is 
just talk.
But the reverse is definitely true, you can't limit more without a RIP for certain media. If you 
want to print beautiful pastel color on something like a japanese paper, there may be no 
Epson media setting that will limit enough.
Tyler

Thanks for the warning Steve. I'll double-check my methodology with
this paper.

Have you actually tried DVFG with the Epson UC inks (Photo Black
installed ) in your 2100 with the Epson driver? If not, I'd be
grateful if you could try the UC PK some time & let me know your
readings for black, for both PSG and GPPW media settings, 2880dpi, NCA.

I'm getting a suspicion, just looking at the printed profiling
targets, that the UC PK is reacting with the paper in an odd way,
depending on the ink load. For the GMB TC9.18 chart I'm using, the
first square, A1 (R,G,B = 0,0,0) looks slightly grey on the GPPW
setting  when viewed at right angles, whereas on the PSG chart it
looks black. It's like the paper can't cope with the ink load with
PK/GPPW/2880/NCA. This would tally with my high L reading for black on
this paper.

I've never seen this before with any glossy paper I've profiled with
my 2100 so far (and I've profiled many successfully, all in NCA mode,
with results as good as, or better than, those of independent
consultants that I used prior to buying my own spectro). The last time
I saw anything as odd as this was with my old Epson 1200 printer and
Ilford Classic glossy paper. That printer used to chuck out loads of
ink in NCA mode and was difficult to profile by any method.

Regards,

Alan

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> Alan
> 
> I really think something is wrong here.  I can get better than that
on matte
> paper.  The Nano K ink tends to slightly under-perform Epson PK (UC
or K3)
> in the dMax stakes and so I'd expect it to be behind the Epson PKs
on this
> paper.  And I got 5 or thereabouts on the 2100 and with the Epson
driver.
> 
> Nonetheless I still prefer other ink and paper combinations.  The Da
Vinci
> paper looks more natural and is whiter than the SR but it seems to
bronze
> more so.  I still think both loose a lot of shadow detail when ever so
> slightly tilted.
> 
> I have the same print here (the Elephant Mother and Baby I from
> http://homepage.mac.com/stevekale/photography/sabisand1.html ) on 1. Da
> Vinci with Nanochromes, 2. Crane Silver Rag with Nanochromes, 3. HPR
with
> Nanochromes, 4. HPR with Eboni/Epson K3 (Adv B&W on a 4800) and 5.
EPSM with
> Nanochromes.  All of the Nanochrome prints were done with a colour
profile
> and the colour driver on my 2100.  (The image is quite good for
checking out
> shadow detail in the baby elephant below the mother's chest.)  On looks
> alone, I would have to say the placing would go as follows:
> 
> 1. Nanochromes on HPR
> 2. Nanochromes on EPSM (Epson K3 would likely be a tad better)
> 3. Eboni/K3 Epson Adv B&W on HPR.
> 4. Nanochromes on SR
> 5. Nanochromes on Da Vinci
> 
> (I'd like to see Epson K3 on the second and last two but I'd have to
do an
> ink change in my 4800.)
> 
> Placings 2, 3 and 4 all revolve around surface reflection
characteristics.
> Eboni/K3 on HPR doesn't have quite the punch of Nano on SR but the sheen
> means a lot of SR hides a lot of this punch.  Hence EPSM jumping ahead
> because I think it has the punch with a better surface look.  HPR is of
> course much more fragile and the Nanos have their issues.  I'd like
to see a

> true matte PK "silver rag" and an archival Nano derivative....
> 
> Steve

Ernst,

This is probably the article I recall: 
http://www.geocities.com/thombell/rcvsfiber.html 

It notes, among other things, "Intensive research at Kodak and among the
other manufacturers finally pointed to the culprit - the white pigment
titanium dioxide (TiO2) that was added to the polyethylene resin layer on
the face side of the print to make it white and reflective. While the prints
were on display, the TiO2 pigment absorbed light energy and generated a very
active form of oxygen that attacked the resin layer and caused the
cracking."

So, the TiO2 was not an OBA but more like what you described.

The author of this article, James M. Reilly, Director of the Image
Permanence Institute, Rochester Institute of Technology, concludes that the
RC papers can be as long lived as the fiber based prints.

But I'm sure that won't stop the skepticism.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ernst
> Dinkla
> Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 1:53 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Crane SR & Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> Paul Roark wrote:
> > Kodak's story (working from memory here) with respect to the RC cracking
> was
> > that the OBAs were originally titanium dioxide.
> 
> Paul, if I recall it correctly, titanium dioxide is a highly
> opaque white pigment only but it can not be combined with OBAs
> as it reacts with the OBAs causing  yellowing. I saw that
> information not so long ago when I checked whether transparent
> OBAs exist. TiO2 is still used in thin polyethylene foils to
> give the foils a high white opacity  despite their thickness.
> 
> They put out a strong
> > oxidant that attacked the polyethylene and cracked it.  In response, a
> > number of companies put anti-oxidants in the coating to deal with this
> > problem, but they yellowed.  Now, presumably, there is a combination of
> less
> > reactive OBAs and non-yellowing anti-oxidants that solve the RC problems
> --
> > according to the manufacturers.
> >
> > Polyethylene is apparently a broad category of materials, within which
> there
> > can be significant performance differences.  Whether what is used in the
> > papers is up to the job might depend on more than just what the common
> name
> > is for the material.
> 
> There are several grades and copolymeres. For foils like that
> you would use high density polyethylene. Main problem of
> plastics like polyethylene and polypropylene is getting a
> bond between the coating and the plastic itself. The foil has
> to be corona treated to change the polarity on the surface
> after that there's a short time to create the better bond. In
> time that may be lost again. Polyethylene will have
> plasticisers added if there's a need for more flexibility,
> paraffin wax is the more ordinary one. In itself not a nice
> material to create a bond on. It also migrates from the
> polyethylene in time. For this barrier purpose I do no think
> that it is needed, the foil is thin enough to be flexible. For
> outdoor use polyethylene has one bad property, it is easily
> attacked by UV light that will shorten the long molecules to
> shorter ones and make the material brittle in time.
> 
> >
> > One industry person I spoke with thought the new technology did involve
> a
> > barrier, but it might not be polyethylene.
> 
> Enough other barriers possible and most likely it will be a
> sandwich of more plastic foils. PVA for example often is used
> in combination with other foil(s) to combine a gas and fluid
> barrier in one layer and/or to create a better bond to paper
> or coating.
> 
> >
> > Lots of uncertainty here ...
> 
> Right, you only have to check who supplies what in the coating
> industry to know that there are a thousand combinations possible.
> 
> Ernst
> 
>                     --
>            Ernst Dinkla
> 
> 
> www.pigment-print.com
> (         unvollendet         )
> 
> 
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 
>

Perhaps they are counting on a certain level of understanding by the user to
apply tools at hand from other applications.  While it is a compromise,
setting density of an image with saturation and level adjustment will
provide end users with the ability to make acceptable prints; and for many
of those users, very acceptable. The more control you give users to access
the controls of ink distribution, the easier it will also be to produce very
poor quality prints.  With the Epson scanner that I have, a 3200, there is a
professional level of adjustments that the user can control.  Perhaps, in
the next set of printer drivers, they will include a professional tab for
those that really want to unlock the door to creative control. That extra
control may however come with a price $$$$, or spelled another way- built in
RIP. 

 

 

 

Eric Neilsen Photography

4101 Commerce Street

Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226

http://e.neilsen.home.att.net

http://ericneilsenphotography.com

 

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tyler
Boley
Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2006 3:54 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper

 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> Agree completely.  The only thing that is making me consider one is the
fact
> that I'd like to not be constrained by the ink limits in the Epson driver

I'm still unsure about that. Yes indeed, you can open up the color channels
based on media 
performance, and of course linearization has got to be a benifit. But it's
beginning to look to 
me like lots of ink makes things more difficult for the profiler. I'll know
more about this later. 
So far, the cleanest profiles without problems are coming from set-ups with
very conservative 
ink levels, individual and total. So are we back to Epson driver
performance?
The other thing you can't match is Epson's strange GCR and total ink.
Somehow they only 
allow 100% at rgb 000, so only k ink there, but obvioulsy considerably more
in dark colors. 
So total ink is "variable". The downside to this is there may not be enough
color inks available 
at very dark rich colors like deep browns. You can easily see this with a 3d
gamut veiwer of 
an Epson RGB profile vrs a good CMYK profile, it's very skinny near K. Then
the question 
becomes, how often do you really miss those colors in the real world?
Sometimes all of this is 
just talk.
But the reverse is definitely true, you can't limit more without a RIP for
certain media. If you 
want to print beautiful pastel color on something like a japanese paper,
there may be no 
Epson media setting that will limit enough.
Tyler





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
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+wedding+photography&w1=Digital+
wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+coll
ege&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photog
raphy+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=Umur-3rsLOic7dZMwVL94w>  wedding photography 

Learn
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Learn+digital+photography&w1=Digital+we
dding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+colleg
e&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photogra
phy+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=emApqtvj0kHQhppIzRrNgw>  digital photography 

Digital
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+college&w1=Digital+
wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+coll
ege&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photog
raphy+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=aIiABJLTZsUnmWBs4mZwuA>  photography college 


Digital
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography&w1=Digital+wedding+
photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+college&w4=D
igital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photography+co
urse&c=6&s=188&.sig=pJmwqgVzec3JGBtWYlPbOg>  photography 

Digital
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+web+site&w1=Digital
+wedding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+col
lege&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photo
graphy+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=BMII8rtDZlAtVdZsPhaZqw>  photography web site 

Digital
<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Digital+photography+course&w1=Digital+w
edding+photography&w2=Learn+digital+photography&w3=Digital+photography+colle
ge&w4=Digital+photography&w5=Digital+photography+web+site&w6=Digital+photogr
aphy+course&c=6&s=188&.sig=OrnrutXVhHZu-7E7ccLtuw>  photography course 

 

  _____  

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS 

 

*	 Visit your group "DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint> " on the web.
  
*	 To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Uns
ubscribe> 
  
*	 Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Service. 

 

  _____  



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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" 
<tyler@...> wrote:
>
> I'm still unsure about that. Yes indeed, you can open up the color 
channels based on media 
> performance, and of course linearization has got to be a benifit. 
But it's beginning to look to 
> me like lots of ink makes things more difficult for the profiler. 
I'll know more about this later. 
> So far, the cleanest profiles without problems are coming from set-
ups with very conservative 
> ink levels, individual and total. So are we back to Epson driver 
performance?
> The other thing you can't match is Epson's strange GCR and total 
ink. Somehow they only 
> allow 100% at rgb 000, so only k ink there, but obvioulsy 
considerably more in dark colors. 
> So total ink is "variable". The downside to this is there may not 
be enough color inks available 
> at very dark rich colors like deep browns. You can easily see this 
with a 3d gamut veiwer of 
> an Epson RGB profile vrs a good CMYK profile, it's very skinny near 
K. Then the question 
> becomes, how often do you really miss those colors in the real 
world? Sometimes all of this is 
> just talk.

OK, most of you can tune out now.

You can get pretty close with certain GCR settings, but you need to 
use a profile app. that lets you make a custom GCR curve. Profiler 
and PMP5 both do. Then you need to understand how the curve does what 
it does. I understand how the Profiler curve works, and can get a 
black only output when I send it a grayscale image. Also keep in mind 
that I use one of the neutral black inks. With the warmer Epson 
black, you will of course get some color inks to make it neutral.

As far as ink limits go... There are some tricks that I use with my 
inks, but I don't know if they apply to the Epson inks, so I won't 
spill all that out for fear of causing confusion. Summary is that not 
all inks hit their maximum density in the same place as their maximum 
chroma. You need to find a good balance between those two values. 
With the rather different inks that I use, you also do not want to 
run the light cyan all the way down to the maximum full cyan as it 
takes away from the blue coverage. The secondary and tertiary (if 
present) ink limits can have a huge effect on the gamut. And then you 
add in the 2 color and 3 color limits, as well as the 4 color limit. 
As far as the skinny near black gamut, that would be your 2 color and 
3 color limits (for the most part). You have a lot less control with 
those limits, since they seem to be a spill over limit of sorts (at 
least with the Evolution RIP).

I purposely kept all this pretty generic so some people that are 
mildly interested would follow things, there is way more detail that 
I could add, but it gets a little complex, and really needs a bunch 
of graphs to support it. I had to learn a very large amount to get 
the inks I'm using to work properly, you learn a lot when the inks 
and printer are not matched. Now I feel that I can get just about any 
configuration to work (if the RIP allows me the control needed), and 
that includes multiple light inks mixed to a single channel where 
there is no "automatic" guidance to mix them. Understanding how the 
RIP is doing it's job is very important, and often the only way to 
know this is to make many different configurations to see which one 
works best. It can be a slow process where gains can be very small.

The situation that I encountered recently involved a need to limit the K ink
channel earlier than the Epson driver and likely let the other inks run a
little further.  This was on HPR.  I guess we are getting very far off topic
now but I'd really value your input on colour RIP output - perhaps via the
WF forum.  I haven't made a purchase yet but I've been tinkering with the
idea...

> From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 21:53:48 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
> <stevekale@...> wrote:
>> 
>> Agree completely.  The only thing that is making me consider one is the fact
>> that I'd like to not be constrained by the ink limits in the Epson driver
> 
> I'm still unsure about that. Yes indeed, you can open up the color channels
> based on media 
> performance, and of course linearization has got to be a benifit. But it's
> beginning to look to
> me like lots of ink makes things more difficult for the profiler. I'll know
> more about this later.
> So far, the cleanest profiles without problems are coming from set-ups with
> very conservative
> ink levels, individual and total. So are we back to Epson driver performance?
> The other thing you can't match is Epson's strange GCR and total ink. Somehow
> they only 
> allow 100% at rgb 000, so only k ink there, but obvioulsy considerably more in
> dark colors. 
> So total ink is "variable". The downside to this is there may not be enough
> color inks available
> at very dark rich colors like deep browns. You can easily see this with a 3d
> gamut veiwer of 
> an Epson RGB profile vrs a good CMYK profile, it's very skinny near K. Then
> the question 
> becomes, how often do you really miss those colors in the real world?
> Sometimes all of this is
> just talk.
> But the reverse is definitely true, you can't limit more without a RIP for
> certain media. If you
> want to print beautiful pastel color on something like a japanese paper, there
> may be no 
> Epson media setting that will limit enough.
> Tyler

You could well be right.  I have Nanochrome dye ink in my 2100 at the moment
and so would need to flush it before popping in Epson Ultrachromes.  Perhaps
someone else can run a quick check with a sample sheet.  One thing to do to
check ink limits is to print the QTR calibration chart (in calibration mode)
and then read the progression of steps.  At least then you'll get a sense of
what peak density can be.

> From: alanrew42 <Alan-Rew@...>
> Reply-To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 23:31:05 -0000
> To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Da Vinci Fibre Gloss Paper
> 
> Thanks for the warning Steve. I'll double-check my methodology with
> this paper.
> 
> Have you actually tried DVFG with the Epson UC inks (Photo Black
> installed ) in your 2100 with the Epson driver? If not, I'd be
> grateful if you could try the UC PK some time & let me know your
> readings for black, for both PSG and GPPW media settings, 2880dpi, NCA.
> 
> I'm getting a suspicion, just looking at the printed profiling
> targets, that the UC PK is reacting with the paper in an odd way,
> depending on the ink load. For the GMB TC9.18 chart I'm using, the
> first square, A1 (R,G,B = 0,0,0) looks slightly grey on the GPPW
> setting  when viewed at right angles, whereas on the PSG chart it
> looks black. It's like the paper can't cope with the ink load with
> PK/GPPW/2880/NCA. This would tally with my high L reading for black on
> this paper.
> 
> I've never seen this before with any glossy paper I've profiled with
> my 2100 so far (and I've profiled many successfully, all in NCA mode,
> with results as good as, or better than, those of independent
> consultants that I used prior to buying my own spectro). The last time
> I saw anything as odd as this was with my old Epson 1200 printer and
> Ilford Classic glossy paper. That printer used to chuck out loads of
> ink in NCA mode and was difficult to profile by any method.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Alan

In a related note. Has anyone else (I know Greg knows) observed how
quickly Crane's Museo Max bottoms out in regard to max black
absorbtion? With K6, compared to all the other papers I've tested, it
reaches its limit quickly and then reverses.The original Museo did the
same thing.

John

I noticed it, definitely. I did not go any farther than a quick
linearization curve to see.
Tyler

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

>
> In a related note. Has anyone else (I know Greg knows) observed how
> quickly Crane's Museo Max bottoms out in regard to max black
> absorbtion? With K6, compared to all the other papers I've tested, it
> reaches its limit quickly and then reverses.The original Museo did the
> same thing.
> 
> John
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> The situation that I encountered recently involved a need to limit
the K ink
> channel earlier than the Epson driver and likely let the other inks
run a
> little further.  This was on HPR.  I guess we are getting very far
off topic
> now but I'd really value your input on colour RIP output - perhaps
via the
> WF forum.  I haven't made a purchase yet but I've been tinkering
with the
> idea...

I'm not sure I can help, I'm in the middle of several similar issues,
all unresolved. Hopefully others would chime in.
There isn't a perfect forum for this, ask here or there and I'll see
if I can confuse matters.
As you no doubt know, impossible to get control of that K channel in
the  Epson driver. But you can try this-
Bring the black point in your file up to your desired print end point
with levels or curves. So comething like 000 becomes 999 or whatever.
Then "undo" it. Now go to edit/fade and bring it back in luminousity
mode and print. THis way you won't have taken away saturated colors
(Those with any 0 in them), just compressed on the neutral axis...
theoretically.
If it achieves the desired result, it could be edited into an RGB profile.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Greg"
<dfaprinting@...> wrote:
...
> OK, most of you can tune out now.
> 
> You can get pretty close with certain GCR settings, but you need to 
> use a profile app. that lets you make a custom GCR curve....

Most do, and I do understand how it works. But even if you manage to
write a curve that copies Epsons, you still won't achieve any setting
that gives 100% total ink in one part of the scale (in this case rgb
000) and say 250% ink in a lighter part of the scale.
By the way, I hope I didn't sugeest that copying the Epson driver
behavior is desirable.
And since total ink amount is our only control of CMY content at max
K, with some inks and papers we can lower our dmax by raising total
ink just to achive gamut.
David Tobie could us tell a lot more about the driver's behavior than
I could.

> As far as ink limits go... There are some tricks that I use with my 
> inks, but I don't know if they apply to the Epson inks, so I won't 
> spill all that out for fear of causing confusion. Summary is that not 
> all inks hit their maximum density in the same place as their maximum 
> chroma.

Right, Epson inks hit max chroma before max density and begin to reverse.

> You need to find a good balance between those two values. 
> With the rather different inks that I use, you also do not want to 
> run the light cyan all the way down to the maximum full cyan as it 
> takes away from the blue coverage.

With SP, light inks are taken out porportionally to the dark component
coming in. Not user changeable. So I would never run into that
particular problem.
A potential problem here is that if you let all light inks run to too
high of an individual percentage (for color printing) you could
unwittingly find yourself with very high total inks in mid range
colors you would not normally suspect. So yes, many issues.

> ... I had to learn a very large amount to get 
> the inks I'm using to work properly,

I can certainly apreciate that.

> ...Understanding how the 
> RIP is doing it's job is very important, and often the only way to 
> know this is to make many different configurations to see which one 
> works best. It can be a slow process where gains can be very small.

I'll admit to burnout right now. I'm going to number (1/1) and sign my
linearization and profile charts and foist them off on an unsuspecting
public for thousands. No one's are quite like mine, and each a one of
a kind.
Tyler

LOL!  Christie's here we come...

> From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>

> 
> I'll admit to burnout right now. I'm going to number (1/1) and sign my
> linearization and profile charts and foist them off on an unsuspecting
> public for thousands. No one's are quite like mine, and each a one of
> a kind.
> Tyler

Just when I was going to abandon this paper as a lost cause, it's
given me a real surprise.

As a last experiment, I printed the GMB small profiling chart (TC2.83)
on my Epson 2100, standard UC inks, standard Epson driver, with media
= PSG, _1440 dpi_, NCA in the Epson driver.

The new profile at 1440 dpi is substantially different compared to the
2880 dpi version I produced earlier with the PSG media setting.

For 1440 dpi, the black point is now Lab 7, 0, -4 (was 12, -1, -4 with
2880 dpi). Still not as good as other glossy papers but more
respectable. But that's not all.

Looking at the profile's RGB tone reproduction curves in Chromix
ColorThink, the curves behave much better near the black end of the
tonal scale, without the crossovers seen at 2880 dpi. In fact the
curves are some of the best-behaved I've seen with any paper.

On an actual test print with this profile there is now visible
separation (just) all the way on a 21-step grey wedge, and the
neutrality is not bad considering the small number of patches used.

So for the Epson 2100/2200 with the Epson driver and UC inks it looks
like 1440 dpi gives much better results, maybe because the amount of
ink and/or dot gain is different at this dpi compared to 2880. 

No doubt the knowledgeable members on this list can chime in with
similar phenomena seen with other papers, but it looks like this paper
is very sensitive to the amount of ink laid down on it. Anybody
evaluating it should check the ink limits very carefully if they're
using a RIP.

I'll now do a TC9.18 based profile & see what happens to the shadow
detail and neutrality.

Regards

Alan


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Steve Kale
<stevekale@...> wrote:
>
> 
> You could well be right.  I have Nanochrome dye ink in my 2100 at
the moment
> and so would need to flush it before popping in Epson Ultrachromes.
 Perhaps
> someone else can run a quick check with a sample sheet.  One thing
to do to
> check ink limits is to print the QTR calibration chart (in
calibration mode)
> and then read the progression of steps.  At least then you'll get a
sense of
> what peak density can be.