Digital BW, The Print

--- Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...> wrote:

> Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 21:12:34 -0800 (PST)
> From: Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Epson 4800 vs. 2400
> question
> To: Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...>
> 
> p.s. BO on the 2200 using either OEM MK (warmer) or
> Eboni (more neutral) onto uncoated Arches Watercolor
> paper (either hot press [smoother] or cold press
> [more
> texture]) produces a very pleasing platinum-like
> print
> suitable for some images that do not require high
> d-max or high sharpness.  This is truly carbon on
> cotton and can look wonderful for the right kind of
> image. 
> 
> Arches is sized with gelatin but is otherwise
> uncoated. The company has been around since 1492,
> has
> been makingthe paper more or less the same way since
> then, and Arches is more or less the standard for
> watercolorists.  I have also used it for gum
> bi-chromate printing and it works very well for that
> as well. It is inexpensive relative to coated papers
> and there are similar gelatin sized but otherwise
> uncoated papers  for even less. e.g. Here in St.
> Paul,MN the local art supply house "Wet Paint" sells
> a
> re-branded watercolor paper from the UK for a quite
> competitive price. N.B Watercolor paper sizes are
> non-standard for the US market and you would need a
> proper paper cutter if you wanted to cut these to
> standard US sizes such as 8.5" and 13" widths.)
> 
> Paul Roark also has some ICC profiles for printing
> on
> Arches with UT2 ink-sets in the R220 - I've been
> intending to give that approach a try in my R220 but
> haven't gotten around to it as yet.  If anyone else
> has tried that - I would be quite interested in
> their
> results.
> 
> This is one of the only areas in which I can add to
> what Clayton has so beautifully put togrther on his
> site - a true gem...
> 
> Michael Vendrell
> 
> --- Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...> wrote:
> 
> > Ginny, I agree with Clayton.  Your questions are
> > good
> > ones that most of us either want to know or enjoy
> > reviewing and adding our $.02 worth...
> > Michael Vendrell, MD
> > 
> > --- Clayton Jones <cj@...> wrote:
> > 
> > > Hello Ginny,
> > > 
> > > >I must admit that the one or two BO good prints
> I
> > > got out of my 
> > > >1280 were, indeed, more pleasing to my eye than
> > > those made with 
> > > >my 1800.  They had a very open, warm toned,
> > > luminous look on 
> > > >Epson Enhanced Matte.
> > > 
> > > Yep.  In spite of its graininess, BO remains
> > popular
> > > with a lot of
> > > photographers.  Over the past few years there
> have
> > > been several
> > > reports of people showing pairs of identical
> > images
> > > printed with BO
> > > and full ink, to laypersons, who chose the BO
> one
> > > because "it looks
> > > better".  It has fine qualities, you just have
> to
> > > choose which images
> > > to use it with.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > >What printer would be most trouble-free
> (blockage
> > > wise) with BO if 
> > > >I wanted to print up to 11X14?
> > > 
> > > The 2200 is a really fine BO printer.  The only
> > > thing better (that I
> > > know of) is the 4000.  It has a more random
> dither
> > > pattern which
> > > results in slightly smoother tones.
> > > 
> > > BTW, I must disagree with the person who
> suggested
> > > to go do some
> > > research on your own - your questions are most
> > > welcome.  It's what
> > > this forum is all about, so ask all you want. 
> > There
> > > are lots of
> > > silent readers who I'm sure will be benefitting
> > from
> > > these
> > > discussions, so you are asking for them as well.
> 
> > > This forum is not
> > > just for the convenience of more experienced
> > users. 
> > > That's my .02 worth.
> > > 
> > > Regards,
> > > Clayton
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Info on black and white digital printing at    
> > > http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection around 
> > http://mail.yahoo.com 
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

Thanks for sharing all this Michael. It is useful for me to learn.
Am I correct that the R220 limits you to 8X10 prints?

Regards
Ginny

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Michael Vendrell
<mjvendrell2@...> wrote:

>
> 
> 
> --- Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...> wrote:
> 
> > Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 21:12:34 -0800 (PST)
> > From: Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...>
> > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Epson 4800 vs. 2400
> > question
> > To: Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...>
> > 
> > p.s. BO on the 2200 using either OEM MK (warmer) or
> > Eboni (more neutral) onto uncoated Arches Watercolor
> > paper (either hot press [smoother] or cold press
> > [more
> > texture]) produces a very pleasing platinum-like
> > print
> > suitable for some images that do not require high
> > d-max or high sharpness.  This is truly carbon on
> > cotton and can look wonderful for the right kind of
> > image. 
> > 
> > Arches is sized with gelatin but is otherwise
> > uncoated. The company has been around since 1492,
> > has
> > been makingthe paper more or less the same way since
> > then, and Arches is more or less the standard for
> > watercolorists.  I have also used it for gum
> > bi-chromate printing and it works very well for that
> > as well. It is inexpensive relative to coated papers
> > and there are similar gelatin sized but otherwise
> > uncoated papers  for even less. e.g. Here in St.
> > Paul,MN the local art supply house "Wet Paint" sells
> > a
> > re-branded watercolor paper from the UK for a quite
> > competitive price. N.B Watercolor paper sizes are
> > non-standard for the US market and you would need a
> > proper paper cutter if you wanted to cut these to
> > standard US sizes such as 8.5" and 13" widths.)
> > 
> > Paul Roark also has some ICC profiles for printing
> > on
> > Arches with UT2 ink-sets in the R220 - I've been
> > intending to give that approach a try in my R220 but
> > haven't gotten around to it as yet.  If anyone else
> > has tried that - I would be quite interested in
> > their
> > results.
> > 
> > This is one of the only areas in which I can add to
> > what Clayton has so beautifully put togrther on his
> > site - a true gem...
> > 
> > Michael Vendrell
> > 
> > --- Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...> wrote:
> > 
> > > Ginny, I agree with Clayton.  Your questions are
> > > good
> > > ones that most of us either want to know or enjoy
> > > reviewing and adding our $.02 worth...
> > > Michael Vendrell, MD
> > > 
> > > --- Clayton Jones <cj@...> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Hello Ginny,
> > > > 
> > > > >I must admit that the one or two BO good prints
> > I
> > > > got out of my 
> > > > >1280 were, indeed, more pleasing to my eye than
> > > > those made with 
> > > > >my 1800.  They had a very open, warm toned,
> > > > luminous look on 
> > > > >Epson Enhanced Matte.
> > > > 
> > > > Yep.  In spite of its graininess, BO remains
> > > popular
> > > > with a lot of
> > > > photographers.  Over the past few years there
> > have
> > > > been several
> > > > reports of people showing pairs of identical
> > > images
> > > > printed with BO
> > > > and full ink, to laypersons, who chose the BO
> > one
> > > > because "it looks
> > > > better".  It has fine qualities, you just have
> > to
> > > > choose which images
> > > > to use it with.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > >What printer would be most trouble-free
> > (blockage
> > > > wise) with BO if 
> > > > >I wanted to print up to 11X14?
> > > > 
> > > > The 2200 is a really fine BO printer.  The only
> > > > thing better (that I
> > > > know of) is the 4000.  It has a more random
> > dither
> > > > pattern which
> > > > results in slightly smoother tones.
> > > > 
> > > > BTW, I must disagree with the person who
> > suggested
> > > > to go do some
> > > > research on your own - your questions are most
> > > > welcome.  It's what
> > > > this forum is all about, so ask all you want. 
> > > There
> > > > are lots of
> > > > silent readers who I'm sure will be benefitting
> > > from
> > > > these
> > > > discussions, so you are asking for them as well.
> > 
> > > > This forum is not
> > > > just for the convenience of more experienced
> > > users. 
> > > > That's my .02 worth.
> > > > 
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Clayton
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Info on black and white digital printing at    
> > > > http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > > protection around 
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection around 
> > http://mail.yahoo.com 
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>

It limits you to 8.5” wide paper.  I print 8x12 images, for example.

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
ginnylady33
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 9:10 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Fwd: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Epson 4800 vs. 2400 question

Thanks for sharing all this Michael. It is useful for me to learn.
Am I correct that the R220 limits you to 8X10 prints?

Regards
Ginny




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

Interesting.  I have an R220 and never thought of it this way (I was just thinking "letter 
size" in my head).  So, I could do 12x8 on legal sized paper for a nice bit bigger than my 
normal 10" wide on letter size paper, which would be nice/fun for some images.  
Unfortunately, of the Epson papers at least, only their low-end Photo Quality Inkjet paper 
is available in legal.  Are some of the fine art papers (HPR, PA Hot Press, Moab, etc.) 
available in legal size?  Or am I limited to buying bigger sheets and cutting them down?  
John, thanks for your turn-of-phrase, it switched on a lightbulb in my head.

--Geoff


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@...m, "John Moody" <moodymz3@...> 
wrote:

>
> It limits you to 8.5" wide paper.  I print 8x12 images, for example.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
> ginnylady33
> Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 9:10 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Fwd: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Epson 4800 vs. 2400 question
> 
> Thanks for sharing all this Michael. It is useful for me to learn.
> Am I correct that the R220 limits you to 8X10 prints?
> 
> Regards
> Ginny
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

I just cut down larger paper on a rotary trimmer, and blow it off with a can
of compressed air I keep next to the trimmer.  I wear Kinetronics
anti-static gloves when cutting matte, and rear-loading my 2200.  I cut
13x19 into 8 ½ x 13, which makes a nice size for 35mm format images.

When trying heavier fine-art papers in your R220 printer, remember it was
not designed to feed thick paper so don’t expect too much.  On paper that
does not load reliably, MuseoMax for example, I always manually load the
paper before printing.  That way the print application never hangs due to a
misfeed.  Also, I lightly press down on the paper with my finger while it
loads; pressing too hard is bad, it takes just the right touch.
I occasionally blow the paper path out to keep the rubber feed rollers dust
free.

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of vmixer42
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 12:27 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] R220 questions WAS Re: Epson 4800 vs. 2400 question

Interesting.  I have an R220 and never thought of it this way (I was just
thinking "letter
size" in my head).  So, I could do 12x8 on legal sized paper for a nice bit
bigger than my
normal 10" wide on letter size paper, which would be nice/fun for some
images.
Unfortunately, of the Epson papers at least, only their low-end Photo
Quality Inkjet paper
is available in legal.  Are some of the fine art papers (HPR, PA Hot Press,
Moab, etc.)
available in legal size?  Or am I limited to buying bigger sheets and
cutting them down?
John, thanks for your turn-of-phrase, it switched on a lightbulb in my head.

--Geoff





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

Thanks John, good advice.  My trimmer only goes up to A4, so I'll try buying some nice 
paper in 13x19 and having an art store cut it down for me.  And yes, I've been perfecting 
that "just right" push on paper over about 250gsm with the R220 ;).  HPR in 308 is always 
a challenge.  Thanks again.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "John Moody" <moodymz3@...> 
wrote:

>
> I just cut down larger paper on a rotary trimmer, and blow it off with a can
> of compressed air I keep next to the trimmer.  I wear Kinetronics
> anti-static gloves when cutting matte, and rear-loading my 2200.  I cut
> 13x19 into 8 ½ x 13, which makes a nice size for 35mm format images.
> 
> When trying heavier fine-art papers in your R220 printer, remember it was
> not designed to feed thick paper so don't expect too much.  On paper that
> does not load reliably, MuseoMax for example, I always manually load the
> paper before printing.  That way the print application never hangs due to a
> misfeed.  Also, I lightly press down on the paper with my finger while it
> loads; pressing too hard is bad, it takes just the right touch.
> I occasionally blow the paper path out to keep the rubber feed rollers dust
> free.
> 
> Best regards,
> John Moody
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of vmixer42
> Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 12:27 PM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] R220 questions WAS Re: Epson 4800 vs. 2400 question
> 
> Interesting.  I have an R220 and never thought of it this way (I was just
> thinking "letter
> size" in my head).  So, I could do 12x8 on legal sized paper for a nice bit
> bigger than my
> normal 10" wide on letter size paper, which would be nice/fun for some
> images.
> Unfortunately, of the Epson papers at least, only their low-end Photo
> Quality Inkjet paper
> is available in legal.  Are some of the fine art papers (HPR, PA Hot Press,
> Moab, etc.)
> available in legal size?  Or am I limited to buying bigger sheets and
> cutting them down?
> John, thanks for your turn-of-phrase, it switched on a lightbulb in my head.
> 
> --Geoff
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Ginny, YEP, you are correct. 8.5" width is the max for
the R220. But it's a great little printer and so cheap
with rebates,promotions, etc. (~$0 to $99) it's easy
to own several with different ink set-ups, etc. And
with Paul Roarks UT2 inks you can print "quad
-tone"[actually 6 black positions with 3 different
dilutions as I understand it) or BO.   See Paul Roarks
site for this info if you're interested. It's a great
companion site for Clayton's.  I personally like the
Warm set which is 100% carbon with Eboni in the K
position.

--- ginnylady33 <ginnylady33@...> wrote:

> Thanks for sharing all this Michael. It is useful
> for me to learn.
> Am I correct that the R220 limits you to 8X10
> prints?
> 
> Regards
> Ginny
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com,
> Michael Vendrell
> <mjvendrell2@...> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > --- Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...> wrote:
> > 
> > > Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 21:12:34 -0800 (PST)
> > > From: Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...>
> > > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Epson 4800 vs.
> 2400
> > > question
> > > To: Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...>
> > > 
> > > p.s. BO on the 2200 using either OEM MK (warmer)
> or
> > > Eboni (more neutral) onto uncoated Arches
> Watercolor
> > > paper (either hot press [smoother] or cold press
> > > [more
> > > texture]) produces a very pleasing platinum-like
> > > print
> > > suitable for some images that do not require
> high
> > > d-max or high sharpness.  This is truly carbon
> on
> > > cotton and can look wonderful for the right kind
> of
> > > image. 
> > > 
> > > Arches is sized with gelatin but is otherwise
> > > uncoated. The company has been around since
> 1492,
> > > has
> > > been makingthe paper more or less the same way
> since
> > > then, and Arches is more or less the standard
> for
> > > watercolorists.  I have also used it for gum
> > > bi-chromate printing and it works very well for
> that
> > > as well. It is inexpensive relative to coated
> papers
> > > and there are similar gelatin sized but
> otherwise
> > > uncoated papers  for even less. e.g. Here in St.
> > > Paul,MN the local art supply house "Wet Paint"
> sells
> > > a
> > > re-branded watercolor paper from the UK for a
> quite
> > > competitive price. N.B Watercolor paper sizes
> are
> > > non-standard for the US market and you would
> need a
> > > proper paper cutter if you wanted to cut these
> to
> > > standard US sizes such as 8.5" and 13" widths.)
> > > 
> > > Paul Roark also has some ICC profiles for
> printing
> > > on
> > > Arches with UT2 ink-sets in the R220 - I've been
> > > intending to give that approach a try in my R220
> but
> > > haven't gotten around to it as yet.  If anyone
> else
> > > has tried that - I would be quite interested in
> > > their
> > > results.
> > > 
> > > This is one of the only areas in which I can add
> to
> > > what Clayton has so beautifully put togrther on
> his
> > > site - a true gem...
> > > 
> > > Michael Vendrell
> > > 
> > > --- Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Ginny, I agree with Clayton.  Your questions
> are
> > > > good
> > > > ones that most of us either want to know or
> enjoy
> > > > reviewing and adding our $.02 worth...
> > > > Michael Vendrell, MD
> > > > 
> > > > --- Clayton Jones <cj@...> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Hello Ginny,
> > > > > 
> > > > > >I must admit that the one or two BO good
> prints
> > > I
> > > > > got out of my 
> > > > > >1280 were, indeed, more pleasing to my eye
> than
> > > > > those made with 
> > > > > >my 1800.  They had a very open, warm toned,
> > > > > luminous look on 
> > > > > >Epson Enhanced Matte.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Yep.  In spite of its graininess, BO remains
> > > > popular
> > > > > with a lot of
> > > > > photographers.  Over the past few years
> there
> > > have
> > > > > been several
> > > > > reports of people showing pairs of identical
> > > > images
> > > > > printed with BO
> > > > > and full ink, to laypersons, who chose the
> BO
> > > one
> > > > > because "it looks
> > > > > better".  It has fine qualities, you just
> have
> > > to
> > > > > choose which images
> > > > > to use it with.
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > >What printer would be most trouble-free
> > > (blockage
> > > > > wise) with BO if 
> > > > > >I wanted to print up to 11X14?
> > > > > 
> > > > > The 2200 is a really fine BO printer.  The
> only
> > > > > thing better (that I
> > > > > know of) is the 4000.  It has a more random
> > > dither
> > > > > pattern which
> > > > > results in slightly smoother tones.
> > > > > 
> > > > > BTW, I must disagree with the person who
> > > suggested
> > > > > to go do some
> > > > > research on your own - your questions are
> most
> > > > > welcome.  It's what
> > > > > this forum is all about, so ask all you
> want. 
> > > > There
> > > > > are lots of
> > > > > silent readers who I'm sure will be
> benefitting
> > > > from
> > > > > these
> > > > > discussions, so you are asking for them as
> well.
> > > 
> > > > > This forum is not
> > > > > just for the convenience of more experienced
> > > > users. 
> > > > > That's my .02 worth.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Clayton
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Info on black and white digital printing at 
>   
> > > > > http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >
> __________________________________________________
> > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > > > protection around 
> > > > http://mail.yahoo.com 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >
> __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > > protection around 
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around 
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

p.s: as pointed out by others while 8.5" is the max
width - it can print longer - 12" for example , but
you would need to custom cut the paper...Michael
Vendrell

--- Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...> wrote:

> Ginny, YEP, you are correct. 8.5" width is the max
> for
> the R220. But it's a great little printer and so
> cheap
> with rebates,promotions, etc. (~$0 to $99) it's easy
> to own several with different ink set-ups, etc. And
> with Paul Roarks UT2 inks you can print "quad
> -tone"[actually 6 black positions with 3 different
> dilutions as I understand it) or BO.   See Paul
> Roarks
> site for this info if you're interested. It's a
> great
> companion site for Clayton's.  I personally like the
> Warm set which is 100% carbon with Eboni in the K
> position.
> 
> --- ginnylady33 <ginnylady33@...> wrote:
> 
> > Thanks for sharing all this Michael. It is useful
> > for me to learn.
> > Am I correct that the R220 limits you to 8X10
> > prints?
> > 
> > Regards
> > Ginny
> > 
> > --- In
> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com,
> > Michael Vendrell
> > <mjvendrell2@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 21:12:34 -0800 (PST)
> > > > From: Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...>
> > > > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Epson 4800 vs.
> > 2400
> > > > question
> > > > To: Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...>
> > > > 
> > > > p.s. BO on the 2200 using either OEM MK
> (warmer)
> > or
> > > > Eboni (more neutral) onto uncoated Arches
> > Watercolor
> > > > paper (either hot press [smoother] or cold
> press
> > > > [more
> > > > texture]) produces a very pleasing
> platinum-like
> > > > print
> > > > suitable for some images that do not require
> > high
> > > > d-max or high sharpness.  This is truly carbon
> > on
> > > > cotton and can look wonderful for the right
> kind
> > of
> > > > image. 
> > > > 
> > > > Arches is sized with gelatin but is otherwise
> > > > uncoated. The company has been around since
> > 1492,
> > > > has
> > > > been makingthe paper more or less the same way
> > since
> > > > then, and Arches is more or less the standard
> > for
> > > > watercolorists.  I have also used it for gum
> > > > bi-chromate printing and it works very well
> for
> > that
> > > > as well. It is inexpensive relative to coated
> > papers
> > > > and there are similar gelatin sized but
> > otherwise
> > > > uncoated papers  for even less. e.g. Here in
> St.
> > > > Paul,MN the local art supply house "Wet Paint"
> > sells
> > > > a
> > > > re-branded watercolor paper from the UK for a
> > quite
> > > > competitive price. N.B Watercolor paper sizes
> > are
> > > > non-standard for the US market and you would
> > need a
> > > > proper paper cutter if you wanted to cut these
> > to
> > > > standard US sizes such as 8.5" and 13"
> widths.)
> > > > 
> > > > Paul Roark also has some ICC profiles for
> > printing
> > > > on
> > > > Arches with UT2 ink-sets in the R220 - I've
> been
> > > > intending to give that approach a try in my
> R220
> > but
> > > > haven't gotten around to it as yet.  If anyone
> > else
> > > > has tried that - I would be quite interested
> in
> > > > their
> > > > results.
> > > > 
> > > > This is one of the only areas in which I can
> add
> > to
> > > > what Clayton has so beautifully put togrther
> on
> > his
> > > > site - a true gem...
> > > > 
> > > > Michael Vendrell
> > > > 
> > > > --- Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@...> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Ginny, I agree with Clayton.  Your questions
> > are
> > > > > good
> > > > > ones that most of us either want to know or
> > enjoy
> > > > > reviewing and adding our $.02 worth...
> > > > > Michael Vendrell, MD
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- Clayton Jones <cj@...> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Hello Ginny,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > >I must admit that the one or two BO good
> > prints
> > > > I
> > > > > > got out of my 
> > > > > > >1280 were, indeed, more pleasing to my
> eye
> > than
> > > > > > those made with 
> > > > > > >my 1800.  They had a very open, warm
> toned,
> > > > > > luminous look on 
> > > > > > >Epson Enhanced Matte.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Yep.  In spite of its graininess, BO
> remains
> > > > > popular
> > > > > > with a lot of
> > > > > > photographers.  Over the past few years
> > there
> > > > have
> > > > > > been several
> > > > > > reports of people showing pairs of
> identical
> > > > > images
> > > > > > printed with BO
> > > > > > and full ink, to laypersons, who chose the
> > BO
> > > > one
> > > > > > because "it looks
> > > > > > better".  It has fine qualities, you just
> > have
> > > > to
> > > > > > choose which images
> > > > > > to use it with.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > >What printer would be most trouble-free
> > > > (blockage
> > > > > > wise) with BO if 
> > > > > > >I wanted to print up to 11X14?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The 2200 is a really fine BO printer.  The
> > only
> > > > > > thing better (that I
> > > > > > know of) is the 4000.  It has a more
> random
> > > > dither
> > > > > > pattern which
> > > > > > results in slightly smoother tones.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > BTW, I must disagree with the person who
> > > > suggested
> > > > > > to go do some
> > > > > > research on your own - your questions are
> > most
> > > > > > welcome.  It's what
> > > > > > this forum is all about, so ask all you
> > want. 
> > > > > There
> > > > > > are lots of
> > > > > > silent readers who I'm sure will be
> > benefitting
> > > > > from
> > > > > > these
> > > > > > discussions, so you are asking for them as
> > well.
> > > > 
> > > > > > This forum is not
> > > > > > just for the convenience of more
> experienced
> > > > > users. 
> > > > > > That's my .02 worth.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > Clayton
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Info on black and white digital printing
> at 
> >   
> > > > > > http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >
> > __________________________________________________
> > > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best
> spam
> > > > > protection around 
> > > > > http://mail.yahoo.com 
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >
> > __________________________________________________
> > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > > > protection around 
> > > > http://mail.yahoo.com 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >
> __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection around 
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com

Make sure they wear gloves at the art store; a single fingerprint on the
matte coating will show when printed, not before
..

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of vmixer42
Sent: Monday, February 06, 2006 1:14 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] R220 questions

Thanks John, good advice.  My trimmer only goes up to A4, so I'll try buying
some nice
paper in 13x19 and having an art store cut it down for me.  And yes, I've
been perfecting
that "just right" push on paper over about 250gsm with the R220 ;).  HPR in
308 is always
a challenge.  Thanks again.





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

Great info Michael. Thanks for sharing it.
Ginny


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Michael Vendrell
<mjvendrell2@...> wrote:

>
> Ginny, YEP, you are correct. 8.5" width is the max for
> the R220. But it's a great little printer and so cheap
> with rebates,promotions, etc. (~$0 to $99) it's easy
> to own several with different ink set-ups, etc. And
> with Paul Roarks UT2 inks you can print "quad
> -tone"[actually 6 black positions with 3 different
> dilutions as I understand it) or BO.   See Paul Roarks
> site for this info if you're interested. It's a great
> companion site for Clayton's.  I personally like the
> Warm set which is 100% carbon with Eboni in the K
> position.
> 
> --- ginnylady33 <ginnylady33@...> wrote:
> 
> > Thanks for sharing all this Michael. It is useful
> > for me to learn.
> > Am I correct that the R220 limits you to 8X10
> > prints?
> > 
> > Regards
> > Ginny
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com,
> > Michael Vendrell
> > <mjvendrell2@> wrote:
> > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 21:12:34 -0800 (PST)
> > > > From: Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@>
> > > > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Epson 4800 vs.
> > 2400
> > > > question
> > > > To: Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@>
> > > > 
> > > > p.s. BO on the 2200 using either OEM MK (warmer)
> > or
> > > > Eboni (more neutral) onto uncoated Arches
> > Watercolor
> > > > paper (either hot press [smoother] or cold press
> > > > [more
> > > > texture]) produces a very pleasing platinum-like
> > > > print
> > > > suitable for some images that do not require
> > high
> > > > d-max or high sharpness.  This is truly carbon
> > on
> > > > cotton and can look wonderful for the right kind
> > of
> > > > image. 
> > > > 
> > > > Arches is sized with gelatin but is otherwise
> > > > uncoated. The company has been around since
> > 1492,
> > > > has
> > > > been makingthe paper more or less the same way
> > since
> > > > then, and Arches is more or less the standard
> > for
> > > > watercolorists.  I have also used it for gum
> > > > bi-chromate printing and it works very well for
> > that
> > > > as well. It is inexpensive relative to coated
> > papers
> > > > and there are similar gelatin sized but
> > otherwise
> > > > uncoated papers  for even less. e.g. Here in St.
> > > > Paul,MN the local art supply house "Wet Paint"
> > sells
> > > > a
> > > > re-branded watercolor paper from the UK for a
> > quite
> > > > competitive price. N.B Watercolor paper sizes
> > are
> > > > non-standard for the US market and you would
> > need a
> > > > proper paper cutter if you wanted to cut these
> > to
> > > > standard US sizes such as 8.5" and 13" widths.)
> > > > 
> > > > Paul Roark also has some ICC profiles for
> > printing
> > > > on
> > > > Arches with UT2 ink-sets in the R220 - I've been
> > > > intending to give that approach a try in my R220
> > but
> > > > haven't gotten around to it as yet.  If anyone
> > else
> > > > has tried that - I would be quite interested in
> > > > their
> > > > results.
> > > > 
> > > > This is one of the only areas in which I can add
> > to
> > > > what Clayton has so beautifully put togrther on
> > his
> > > > site - a true gem...
> > > > 
> > > > Michael Vendrell
> > > > 
> > > > --- Michael Vendrell <mjvendrell2@> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Ginny, I agree with Clayton.  Your questions
> > are
> > > > > good
> > > > > ones that most of us either want to know or
> > enjoy
> > > > > reviewing and adding our $.02 worth...
> > > > > Michael Vendrell, MD
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- Clayton Jones <cj@> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Hello Ginny,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > >I must admit that the one or two BO good
> > prints
> > > > I
> > > > > > got out of my 
> > > > > > >1280 were, indeed, more pleasing to my eye
> > than
> > > > > > those made with 
> > > > > > >my 1800.  They had a very open, warm toned,
> > > > > > luminous look on 
> > > > > > >Epson Enhanced Matte.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Yep.  In spite of its graininess, BO remains
> > > > > popular
> > > > > > with a lot of
> > > > > > photographers.  Over the past few years
> > there
> > > > have
> > > > > > been several
> > > > > > reports of people showing pairs of identical
> > > > > images
> > > > > > printed with BO
> > > > > > and full ink, to laypersons, who chose the
> > BO
> > > > one
> > > > > > because "it looks
> > > > > > better".  It has fine qualities, you just
> > have
> > > > to
> > > > > > choose which images
> > > > > > to use it with.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > >What printer would be most trouble-free
> > > > (blockage
> > > > > > wise) with BO if 
> > > > > > >I wanted to print up to 11X14?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > The 2200 is a really fine BO printer.  The
> > only
> > > > > > thing better (that I
> > > > > > know of) is the 4000.  It has a more random
> > > > dither
> > > > > > pattern which
> > > > > > results in slightly smoother tones.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > BTW, I must disagree with the person who
> > > > suggested
> > > > > > to go do some
> > > > > > research on your own - your questions are
> > most
> > > > > > welcome.  It's what
> > > > > > this forum is all about, so ask all you
> > want. 
> > > > > There
> > > > > > are lots of
> > > > > > silent readers who I'm sure will be
> > benefitting
> > > > > from
> > > > > > these
> > > > > > discussions, so you are asking for them as
> > well.
> > > > 
> > > > > > This forum is not
> > > > > > just for the convenience of more experienced
> > > > > users. 
> > > > > > That's my .02 worth.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > Clayton
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Info on black and white digital printing at 
> >   
> > > > > > http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >
> > __________________________________________________
> > > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > > > > protection around 
> > > > > http://mail.yahoo.com 
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > >
> > __________________________________________________
> > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > > > protection around 
> > > > http://mail.yahoo.com 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > protection around 
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>