Digital BW, The Print

Hello guys , I just wanted to first say " hello " to the group. This
is my first post here and I heard about this place from a nice
gentleman on the dpreview forums . When I brought up the topic of 
using a printer to coat a print with a gloss or matt coating he
informed me that people in this group had been using that method for
years and that it indeed did work. And I will say , I'm thankful for
the experience newbie's like me can learn from ,  due to your hard work.

This brings me to my question. Will gloss coating using WJ824 on a dye
based print improve the fading ? I really hope so , because I love how
dye based inks look. That and I don't have any money for an
r800-r2400.  I have two r320's and blank refillable cartridges for
both units. I tried spraying prints with coats but I didn't like the
smells and the printer yields much more even results. These dye prints
will be for family photo albums and some for hanging. And if I can ,
selling my 8x10's on eBay. I use Epson premium glossy.

Has anyone got good , lasting results .. at least better then normal
Epson dye prints . Using glop coating ? using multiple coats of glop
is no issue for me. I have tons of the stuff.

Hello Jason;

We have been expwerimenting with glop a bit here and there, but I 
don't think anyone is using it on dye inks. I in fact ran a test 
print using MIS R800 glop, Epson premium glossy and dyes a while 
back, and it seemed to hurt the print longevity substantially- I got 
fade and magenta shift in a matter of a few days in my 'south 
window' test.

I understand, however, that some people are using the MIS Pro pigs 
in R200 printers with good results, and many are doing B&W with 
grayscale pigs of one brand or another, so the printers are capable 
of using pigments. I know the gamut isn't the same, but it has 
improved a lot, and with a luster/semigloss paper the ink doesn't 
look so much like its just sitting on the surface; you might 
consider going that route for anything you don't want to replace a 
few years from now.

Steve Karafyllakis

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jason shanks" 
<prissweb@...> wrote:
>
> Hello guys , I just wanted to first say " hello " to the group. 
This
> is my first post here and I heard about this place from a nice
> gentleman on the dpreview forums . When I brought up the topic of 
> using a printer to coat a print with a gloss or matt coating he
> informed me that people in this group had been using that method 
for
> years and that it indeed did work. And I will say , I'm thankful 
for
> the experience newbie's like me can learn from ,  due to your hard 
work.
> 
> This brings me to my question. Will gloss coating using WJ824 on a 
dye
> based print improve the fading ? I really hope so , because I love 
how
> dye based inks look. That and I don't have any money for an
> r800-r2400.  I have two r320's and blank refillable cartridges for
> both units. I tried spraying prints with coats but I didn't like 
the
> smells and the printer yields much more even results. These dye 
prints
> will be for family photo albums and some for hanging. And if I 
can ,
> selling my 8x10's on eBay. I use Epson premium glossy.
> 
> Has anyone got good , lasting results .. at least better then 
normal
> Epson dye prints . Using glop coating ? using multiple coats of 
glop
> is no issue for me. I have tons of the stuff.
>

Thank you very much for that speedy reply. Hmm , so the dyes didn't
react well with the glop ? Sad to hear. I don't have any pigment based
inks right now , nor do I know which work best. It's great to get
confirmation on this printer's capability using pigments. I've heard
this before on dpreview, but the poster didn't elaborate much. The
only pigment based printer I ever owned was a cx5400 and it had a
waste tube problem , that and clogging. One thing I remember from
using that printer is that some areas that had lots of black in them ,
came out with a copper looking sheen . Almost like I used metallic ink
. Is this bronzing ? And would gloping cure this ? If I can get my
r320 ( from what I understand , the r200 to the r320 are basically the
same printer with extra's ) to at least be on par with my cx5400 in
terms of print quality , then all would be worth it . hmmm , you
mentioned pigment ink sitting on the surface ? Sort of like it was
painted on , embossed looking ? Would gloping over this remove that
effect? 

I use to build scale models . One method I would use to make the
decals look like they were flat , was to varnish the kit with krylon
clear gloss. This would make a new surface with decal and kit looking
as one. Is gloping pigmented prints like this ?



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Steven
Karafyllakis" <stevekphoto@...> wrote:

>
> Hello Jason;
> 
> We have been expwerimenting with glop a bit here and there, but I 
> don't think anyone is using it on dye inks. I in fact ran a test 
> print using MIS R800 glop, Epson premium glossy and dyes a while 
> back, and it seemed to hurt the print longevity substantially- I got 
> fade and magenta shift in a matter of a few days in my 'south 
> window' test.
> 
> I understand, however, that some people are using the MIS Pro pigs 
> in R200 printers with good results, and many are doing B&W with 
> grayscale pigs of one brand or another, so the printers are capable 
> of using pigments. I know the gamut isn't the same, but it has 
> improved a lot, and with a luster/semigloss paper the ink doesn't 
> look so much like its just sitting on the surface; you might 
> consider going that route for anything you don't want to replace a 
> few years from now.
> 
> Steve Karafyllakis
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jason shanks" 
> <prissweb@> wrote:
> >
> > Hello guys , I just wanted to first say " hello " to the group. 
> This
> > is my first post here and I heard about this place from a nice
> > gentleman on the dpreview forums . When I brought up the topic of 
> > using a printer to coat a print with a gloss or matt coating he
> > informed me that people in this group had been using that method 
> for
> > years and that it indeed did work. And I will say , I'm thankful 
> for
> > the experience newbie's like me can learn from ,  due to your hard 
> work.
> > 
> > This brings me to my question. Will gloss coating using WJ824 on a 
> dye
> > based print improve the fading ? I really hope so , because I love 
> how
> > dye based inks look. That and I don't have any money for an
> > r800-r2400.  I have two r320's and blank refillable cartridges for
> > both units. I tried spraying prints with coats but I didn't like 
> the
> > smells and the printer yields much more even results. These dye 
> prints
> > will be for family photo albums and some for hanging. And if I 
> can ,
> > selling my 8x10's on eBay. I use Epson premium glossy.
> > 
> > Has anyone got good , lasting results .. at least better then 
> normal
> > Epson dye prints . Using glop coating ? using multiple coats of 
> glop
> > is no issue for me. I have tons of the stuff.
> >
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jason shanks" 
<prissweb@...> wrote:
>> nor do I know which work best. 

I'm using the MIS Pro, which are K3 equivalents and are available in 
2oz bottles. They are better suited to glossy papers than the older 
C-series Durabright inks or the first gen. Ultrachromes. If your 
refillable carts are spongless, you can try them without sactificing 
the carts, they will wash out well enough to use with other inks.

> The
> only pigment based printer I ever owned was a cx5400 and it had a
> waste tube problem , that and clogging. One thing I remember from
> using that printer is that some areas that had lots of black in 
them ,
> came out with a copper looking sheen . Almost like I used metallic 
ink
> . Is this bronzing ? 

Yes, this is bronzing, and glop would eliminate it. However, the K3 
generation inks and their clones use an improved  base liquid that 
doesn't produce much bronzing. On glossy papers there is stil a bit 
of gloss differential- less gloss in the clear highlights where 
there is no ink, so you MIGHT choose to use the glop anyway.

> If I can get my
> r320 ( from what I understand , the r200 to the r320 are basically 
the
> same printer with extra's ) to at least be on par with my cx5400 in
> terms of print quality , 

Yes, the R200, 220, 300, 320, 340 are all basically the same 
machine, but you won't have to settle for the print quality of the 
four-ink cx5400. Any one of these models will do much finer work 
than the C-series, though you would probably have to do more 
cleaning cycles than with dye inks. That seems to be the price one 
has to pay for using pigs, and it holds true for the machines that 
are designed for it as well.

>> hmmm , you
> mentioned pigment ink sitting on the surface ? Sort of like it was
> painted on , embossed looking ? Would gloping over this remove that
> effect? 

Yes, the glop would work in about the same way, though it doesn't 
offer nearly the protection of a lacquer or acrylic spray, and 
doesn't seem to do much towards extending the archival qualities of 
a print. 

As I said, the newer inks don't suffer much from bronzing or gloss 
differential, so very few of us are still using it unless its in an 
R800-R1800 on auto for color. Just doesn't seem to be worth the 
trouble any more.

Regards,

Steve Karafyllakis

"  As I said, the newer inks don't suffer much from bronzing or gloss
differential, so very few of us are still using it unless its in an
R800-R1800 on auto for color. Just doesn't seem to be worth the
trouble any more.

Regards,

Steve Karafyllakis "


so with the newer inks and printers it serves no purpose ? what about
protection ? i use to hear stories about pigment ink rubing off. would
glop help against this ?

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Steven 
Karafyllakis" <stevekphoto@...> wrote:
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "jason shanks" 
> <prissweb@> wrote:
> >> nor do I know which work best. 
> 
> I'm using the MIS Pro, which are K3 equivalents....

From what I have read on the MIS website(and having used MIS in the 
past), the MIS Pro is an improvment on their MIS7600 inks and are 
actually for K2 type printers. The MIS equivalent to Epsons K3 is MIS 
K4

KeithR

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Keith R."
<kjrslr@...> wrote:
>

> 
> From what I have read on the MIS website(and having used MIS in the 
> past), the MIS Pro is an improvment on their MIS7600 inks and are 
> actually for K2 type printers. The MIS equivalent to Epsons K3 is MIS 
> K4
> 
> KeithR
>

They are built on the same clear base, but the tint of the light
colors is slightly different. Maybe a different yellow too, can't
quite remember at the moment.

Actually two of the MIS PRO and K4 colors are the same ink. But I
can't remember which ones and the MIS Forum, which contains the
answer, is down now. They both use Eboni of course. 

Sorry for continuing the hijack of the original thead.

Bob Michaels

Definitely the MIS PRO is an improvement on anything they've had
before. Will try the K4 soon as I just bought a 2400. 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Keith R."
<kjrslr@...> wrote:

> From what I have read on the MIS website(and having used MIS in the 
> past), the MIS Pro is an improvment on their MIS7600 inks and are 
> actually for K2 type printers. The MIS equivalent to Epsons K3 is MIS 
> K4
> 
> KeithR
>

Is there a coat which can improve the lasting power of dyes ?
protection as well. 








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

>
> Actually two of the MIS PRO and K4 colors are the same ink. But I
> can't remember which ones and the MIS Forum, which contains the
> answer, is down now. They both use Eboni of course. 
> 
> Sorry for continuing the hijack of the original thead.
> 
> Bob Michaels
> 
> Definitely the MIS PRO is an improvement on anything they've had
> before. Will try the K4 soon as I just bought a 2400. 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Keith R."
> <kjrslr@> wrote:
> > From what I have read on the MIS website(and having used MIS in the 
> > past), the MIS Pro is an improvment on their MIS7600 inks and are 
> > actually for K2 type printers. The MIS equivalent to Epsons K3 is MIS 
> > K4
> > 
> > KeithR
> >
>

I use 822 on glossy prints made with both K3 and Ultrachrome
(2200/4000) inks. It works well with both inks, improving the D-max,
separating the shadow detail and eliminating gloss differential. I was
told by Weink that it would not provide significant protection against
UV. Two coats do provide physical protection, if allowed to dry
thoroughly - I've used it on test postcards using Innova F-Type and
Crane Museo Silver Rag and it has improved the abrasion resistance of
both.

Best,
Helen

Hi Helen;

I'm under the impression that the MIS glop is one or the other of the 
weink glops, do you know if that's true, and if so which one? I'd like 
to give the other one a try if that's the case.

Steve Karafyllakis


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

>
> I use 822 on glossy prints made with both K3 and Ultrachrome
> (2200/4000) inks. It works well with both inks, improving the D-max,
> separating the shadow detail and eliminating gloss differential. I was
> told by Weink that it would not provide significant protection against
> UV. Two coats do provide physical protection, if allowed to dry
> thoroughly - I've used it on test postcards using Innova F-Type and
> Crane Museo Silver Rag and it has improved the abrasion resistance of
> both.
> 
> Best,
> Helen
>

Keith,

My mistake, but I'm pretty sure only in terms of designation-the MIS 
Pro, current R1800/800 inks and the K4 inks are (I think)all chemicaly 
the same generation, different only in tint and densities. I may be 
wrong, but you're welcome to call tech support at MIS and check-I'd be 
curious to have a definite answer.
Bottom line is, if they are the same chemically, they'll go down on the 
paper similarly, and be affected by any given glop/spray in the same 
way.

Steve Karafyllakis.

> past), the MIS Pro is an improvment on their MIS7600 inks and are 
> actually for K2 type printers. The MIS equivalent to Epsons K3 is MIS 
> K4
> 
> KeithR
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Steven 
Karafyllakis" <stevekphoto@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Helen;
> 
> I'm under the impression that the MIS glop is one or the other of the 
> weink glops, do you know if that's true, and if so which one? I'd 
like 
> to give the other one a try if that's the case.
> 
> Steve Karafyllakis
> 
> 


Mis GLOP and Weink GLOP are the same product. The 822 is only sold by 
Weink, for some reason MIS never carried it. I have been told that the 
822 (Krystal Topkote) has been killed, but I have not actually asked 
anyone at Image Specialists to confirm this. The info came from a 
fairly reliable person, so it is most likely very true.

I'm afraid that I don't know anything about the MIS glop, so I can't
say whether or not it is the same as either Weink/Image Specialists
822 or 824. Since reading Greg's news of the demise of 822 I've been
told by Image Specialists that 822 has not been discontinued and that
824 is not intended as a replacement for it.

Best,
Helen


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

>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Steven 
> Karafyllakis" <stevekphoto@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Helen;
> > 
> > I'm under the impression that the MIS glop is one or the other of the 
> > weink glops, do you know if that's true, and if so which one? I'd 
> like 
> > to give the other one a try if that's the case.
> > 
> > Steve Karafyllakis
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> Mis GLOP and Weink GLOP are the same product. The 822 is only sold by 
> Weink, for some reason MIS never carried it. I have been told that the 
> 822 (Krystal Topkote) has been killed, but I have not actually asked 
> anyone at Image Specialists to confirm this. The info came from a 
> fairly reliable person, so it is most likely very true.
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Helen Bach"
<helenbach@...> wrote:
Since reading Greg's news of the demise of 822 I've been
> told by Image Specialists that 822 has not been discontinued and that
> 824 is not intended as a replacement for it.
> 
> Best,
> Helen
> 


That's good news. I thought it was odd since you get such different
results with the two products.