Digital BW, The Print

I am using a softproofing method described by Dan Culbertson 
in "RGB_Softproof_Quad.pdf" (in the Files / Image Processing 
and Workflows section of this group) fairly successfully in 
combination with a Roark warm curve tweaked to yield darker 
shadows and smoother midtones with MIS Variable Mix hextone 
inks. I tweaked the Roark curve (softproofing on) to yield a good 
onscreen 21-step grayscale, and am getting prints that are a very 
close match. However, the RGB softproof and print are not a 
terribly close match to the original grayscale image onscreen 
(both open in separate windows). I'm finding it hard to tweak the 
Roark curve properly to make the softproof 21-step match the 21-
step in the unmodified window (even factoring in the neutral --> 
warm shift). As a result, a final edit must be made to the image 
after softproofing and just prior to printing. I wish I could avoid 
having to target the image this way for printing. Grayscale --> 
softproof --> print consistency would be nice.

Still, I'm really surprised that the softproof so closely matches the 
print, particularly considering that I'm using ColorVision's 
ProfilerPLUS to create the printer profile, and this product is 
made for profiling color, not b&w, let alone the MIS Variable Mix 
inks.

I can't get my head around exactly how ProfilerPLUS is 
translating the VM tones into a profile, or exactly how the red, 
green, and blue curves in Roark's curves work. How, for 
example, does one modify the R, G, & B curves to force the 
Epson driver to use more black ink?

Anyway, this workflow seems promising. I'll keep posting 
questions and report on progress. If this turns out to be a good 
scan-to-print workflow, I'll post the details in this forum. Thanks 
for your support to date.

Jacques Cornell

As a real newbee to quadtone printing who has just installed the MIS 
VM CFS and trying to use the Roark curves I am just wondering how 
anyone can actually match the luminous screen to actual printed 
output?  After quite a bit of fiddling, I realized that there is no 
way to have your monitor white match your paper white or get your 
monitor black to match 100% ink black on the paper... then it gets 
into the lustre of the paper etc... seems pretty hopeless.  I was 
starting to think that the real trick is to get to know your system 
and develop a mental "transfer function" when interpreting your screen 
image for printing, is this not the case?

Thanks for any insight,

Mark

PS  Thanks again to Paul for his devotion to developing curves and 
supporting the VM inkset, I am very impressed so far and love the 
ability to dial in any tone I wish.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "jacques10040" 
<jacques10040@y...> wrote:
...I tweaked the Roark curve (softproofing on) to yield a good 
> onscreen 21-step grayscale, and am getting prints that are a very 
> close match....

Up to a point, I tend to agree with you. Since you are working with a 
luminous screen on the one hand and non-luminous paper on the other, 
you will need to visualize just how much the luminescence of the 
screen will be diminished or not shown in the print. However, you 
should be able to calibrate your monitor to your paper to get a very 
close correspondence between the two with regard to relative tonal 
relationships. 

Chris Hargens

 --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "markhahn2000" 
<markhahn2000@y...> wrote:
> As a real newbee to quadtone printing who has just installed the 
MIS 
> VM CFS and trying to use the Roark curves I am just wondering how 
> anyone can actually match the luminous screen to actual printed 
> output?  After quite a bit of fiddling, I realized that there is no 
> way to have your monitor white match your paper white or get your 
> monitor black to match 100% ink black on the paper... then it gets 
> into the lustre of the paper etc... seems pretty hopeless.  I was 
> starting to think that the real trick is to get to know your system 
> and develop a mental "transfer function" when interpreting your 
screen 

> image for printing, is this not the case?
> 
> Thanks for any insight,
> 
> Mark
> 
> PS  Thanks again to Paul for his devotion to developing curves and 
> supporting the VM inkset, I am very impressed so far and love the 
> ability to dial in any tone I wish.
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "jacques10040" 
> <jacques10040@y...> wrote:
> ...I tweaked the Roark curve (softproofing on) to yield a good 
> > onscreen 21-step grayscale, and am getting prints that are a very 
> > close match....

I guess the best way to get this calibration better would be to apply 
a RGB curve to Paul's curves.  What is everyone else doing and does 
anyone want to share their's so I have a better starting point?  I am 
using VM medium warm and neutral curves, PC, 1160 and Archival matte.

thanks,

mark

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "tzinzunzan2000" <ldmr@c...> 
wrote:
> Up to a point, I tend to agree with you. Since you are working with 
a 
> luminous screen on the one hand and non-luminous paper on the other, 
> you will need to visualize just how much the luminescence of the 
> screen will be diminished or not shown in the print. However, you 
> should be able to calibrate your monitor to your paper to get a very 
> close correspondence between the two with regard to relative tonal 
> relationships. 
> 
> Chris Hargens
> 
>  --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "markhahn2000" 
> <markhahn2000@y...> wrote:
> > As a real newbee to quadtone printing who has just installed the 
> MIS 
> > VM CFS and trying to use the Roark curves I am just wondering how 
> > anyone can actually match the luminous screen to actual printed 
> > output?  After quite a bit of fiddling, I realized that there is 
no 
> > way to have your monitor white match your paper white or get your 
> > monitor black to match 100% ink black on the paper... then it gets 
> > into the lustre of the paper etc... seems pretty hopeless.  I was 
> > starting to think that the real trick is to get to know your 
system 
> > and develop a mental "transfer function" when interpreting your 
> screen 
> > image for printing, is this not the case?
> > 
> > Thanks for any insight,
> > 
> > Mark
> > 
> > PS  Thanks again to Paul for his devotion to developing curves and 
> > supporting the VM inkset, I am very impressed so far and love the 
> > ability to dial in any tone I wish.
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "jacques10040" 
> > <jacques10040@y...> wrote:
> > ...I tweaked the Roark curve (softproofing on) to yield a good 
> > > onscreen 21-step grayscale, and am getting prints that are a 
very 
> > > close match....

You might want to go back to my post that started this thread last 
night. I am using a monitor calibrated with a ColorVision Spyder 
hardware calibrator, and my printer is profiled with ColorVision's 
ProfilerPLUS software.

Tweaking the Roark curves to make them match the screen is 
putting the cart before the horse. The monitor can reproduce a 
larger gamut of colors and a wider luminance range. You will 
never get a print to match the monitor. Instead, you should 
"dumb down" the monitor to match the very best of what's 
possible on a print. That's what softproofing does - by using a 
printer profile, it tells the monitor to show what the image will 
look like on paper. I adjusted the Roark curves not to make the 
print match the monitor, but to make the print look as good as it 
possibly could. I tried to get both a pleasing image and a smooth 
21-step grayscale. The curve tweaking yielded a good print. The 
printer profiling and use of softproofing in Photoshop yielded a 
monitor display that closely matched the print.

Jacques Cornell
> I guess the best way to get this calibration better would be to 
apply 
> a RGB curve to Paul's curves.  What is everyone else doing 
and does 
> anyone want to share their's so I have a better starting point?  I 
am 
> using VM medium warm and neutral curves, PC, 1160 and 
Archival matte.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> mark
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "tzinzunzan2000" <
ldmr@c...> 
> wrote:
> > Up to a point, I tend to agree with you. Since you are working 
with 
> a 
> > luminous screen on the one hand and non-luminous paper 
on the other, 
> > you will need to visualize just how much the luminescence of 
the 
> > screen will be diminished or not shown in the print. However, 
you 
> > should be able to calibrate your monitor to your paper to get a 
very 
> > close correspondence between the two with regard to 
relative tonal 
> > relationships. 
> > 
> > Chris Hargens
> > 
> >  --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "markhahn2000" 
> > <markhahn2000@y...> wrote:
> > > As a real newbee to quadtone printing who has just 
installed the 
> > MIS 
> > > VM CFS and trying to use the Roark curves I am just 
wondering how 
> > > anyone can actually match the luminous screen to actual 
printed 
> > > output?  After quite a bit of fiddling, I realized that there is 
> no 
> > > way to have your monitor white match your paper white or 
get your 
> > > monitor black to match 100% ink black on the paper... then 
it gets 
> > > into the lustre of the paper etc... seems pretty hopeless.  I 
was 
> > > starting to think that the real trick is to get to know your 
> system 
> > > and develop a mental "transfer function" when interpreting 
your 
> > screen 
> > > image for printing, is this not the case?
> > > 
> > > Thanks for any insight,
> > > 
> > > Mark
> > > 
> > > PS  Thanks again to Paul for his devotion to developing 
curves and 
> > > supporting the VM inkset, I am very impressed so far and 
love the 
> > > ability to dial in any tone I wish.
> > > 
> > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "jacques10040" 
> > > <jacques10040@y...> wrote:
> > > ...I tweaked the Roark curve (softproofing on) to yield a 
good 
> > > > onscreen 21-step grayscale, and am getting prints that 
are a 
> very 
> > > > close match....

"I realized that there is no way to have your monitor white match 
your paper white or get your monitor black to match 100% ink 
black on the paper."

Please reread my original post.

Profiling the printer (with ColorVision's ProfilerPLUS or Monaco 
EZ Color) tells the computer how the data in the file will look 
when output on a your printer with a particular combination of 
paper and ink. Setting up and using softproofing in Photoshop 
tells the monitor to ajust its display to match what the printer 
profile indicates the image would look like if it were printed.

The combination of printer profiling and softproofing makes the 
onscreen image match what the print will look like. It works very 
well for me. The monitor needs to be accurately calibrated (with 
a hardware calibrator (again, ColorVision and Monaco are good, 
reasonably priced options) in order to achieve good fidelity. The 
monitor can, indeed, match paper white and ink black - its range 
is far greater than that of paper and ink. A print will never look like 
a nice, bright, contrasty, saturated onscreen image, but the 
onscreen image can be made to resemble the more limited 
range that's possible in a print. That's what softproofing does.

Further, note that my adjustments to the Roark curves have 
nothing to do with screen-to-print matching. I tweaked the curves 
simply to improve my print output. The softproof faithfully 
reflected those tweaks in the onscreen image.

Hope that clarifies a few things.

Jacques Cornell


> As a real newbee to quadtone printing who has just installed 
the MIS 
> VM CFS and trying to use the Roark curves I am just wondering 
how 
> anyone can actually match the luminous screen to actual 
printed 
> output?  After quite a bit of fiddling, I realized that there is no 
> way to have your monitor white match your paper white or get 
your 
> monitor black to match 100% ink black on the paper... then it 
gets 
> into the lustre of the paper etc... seems pretty hopeless.  I was 
> starting to think that the real trick is to get to know your system 
> and develop a mental "transfer function" when interpreting your 
screen 
> image for printing, is this not the case?
> 
> Thanks for any insight,
> 
> Mark
> 
> PS  Thanks again to Paul for his devotion to developing curves 
and 
> supporting the VM inkset, I am very impressed so far and love 
the 
> ability to dial in any tone I wish.
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "jacques10040" 
> <jacques10040@y...> wrote:
> ...I tweaked the Roark curve (softproofing on) to yield a good 
> > onscreen 21-step grayscale, and am getting prints that are a 
very 
> > close match....

Ok, a friend of mine is getting the Monaco system in a couple days so 
maybe I'll use that to work on my monitor... but still, how do you 
calibrate your screen to your quadtone printer?  Hope I'm not being a 
total simplton, but if the answer was *that* simple I'm sure I would 
have found it already.

mark

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "jacques10040" 
...
> Profiling the printer (with ColorVision's ProfilerPLUS or Monaco 
> EZ Color) tells the computer how the data in the file will look 
> when output on a your printer with a particular combination of 
> paper and ink. Setting up and using softproofing in Photoshop 
> tells the monitor to ajust its display to match what the printer 
> profile indicates the image would look like if it were printed.
> 
> The combination of printer profiling and softproofing makes the 
> onscreen image match what the print will look like. It works very 
> well for me. The monitor needs to be accurately calibrated (with 
> a hardware calibrator (again, ColorVision and Monaco are good, 
> reasonably priced options) in order to achieve good fidelity. The 
> monitor can, indeed, match paper white and ink black - its range 
> is far greater than that of paper and ink. A print will never look 
like 
> a nice, bright, contrasty, saturated onscreen image, but the 
> onscreen image can be made to resemble the more limited 
> range that's possible in a print. That's what softproofing does.
> 
> Further, note that my adjustments to the Roark curves have 
> nothing to do with screen-to-print matching. I tweaked the curves 
> simply to improve my print output. The softproof faithfully 
> reflected those tweaks in the onscreen image.
> 
> Hope that clarifies a few things.
> 
> Jacques Cornell
> 
> 
> > As a real newbee to quadtone printing who has just installed 
> the MIS 
> > VM CFS and trying to use the Roark curves I am just wondering 
> how 
> > anyone can actually match the luminous screen to actual 
> printed 
> > output?  After quite a bit of fiddling, I realized that there is 
no 
> > way to have your monitor white match your paper white or get 
> your 
> > monitor black to match 100% ink black on the paper... then it 
> gets 
> > into the lustre of the paper etc... seems pretty hopeless.  I was 
> > starting to think that the real trick is to get to know your 
system 

> > and develop a mental "transfer function" when interpreting your 
> screen 
> > image for printing, is this not the case?
> > 
> > Thanks for any insight,
> > 
> > Mark
> > 
> > PS  Thanks again to Paul for his devotion to developing curves 
> and 
> > supporting the VM inkset, I am very impressed so far and love 
> the 
> > ability to dial in any tone I wish.
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "jacques10040" 
> > <jacques10040@y...> wrote:
> > ...I tweaked the Roark curve (softproofing on) to yield a good 
> > > onscreen 21-step grayscale, and am getting prints that are a 
> very 
> > > close match....