Digital BW, The Print

Folks-

I've finally gotten a box of Crane Silver Rag and had a quick and 
dirty look.  I did this simply by printing an auto nozzle check 
(solid rectangles) with the MK still in the printer, just wanting to 
see what the ink looked like on the surface.  This is a 4800 with K3 
inks.

If I leave out the MK swatch, the ink is *much* glossier than the 
paper itself--the ink looks like something laminated to the surface 
of the paper.  So, I am imaging that an image would show significant 
gloss differential between very open highlights and more dense areas 
of the image, as well as between dense areas of the image and the 
paper surround.

In comparing the CSR to a few silver gelatin, fiber, gloss, matte-
dried prints, the SR is actually more matte than the fiber paper.  
The gloss of the ink is a closer match to the gelatin paper.

Though the CSR doesn't really look like a matte-dried paper, I like 
the look and find it very "photographic."  But with the K3 inks, I 
can't see that it would be useful without a Print Shield spray or 
something like that.

Any comments on evaluating the paper/ink in this way or on my 
observations?

Thanks,
Walt

-No, No, No, Walt. You can't use MK. It is designed for PK only.

It works great with K3, no gloss differential really and no bronzing.
I actually use it wit K2 and it also looks great. I put a light coat
of Premier Art on it with K2 but not really necessary with K3. My
tests on the 2400 right out of the box with ABW mode were excellent,
awesome dmax for mono and color. A big difference from Premium Luster
relief look with any Ultrachrome for instance.

John

John--

I wasn't intending to actually use the CSR with MK, but just to have a 
look at how the other colors (including the two grays) looked on the 
paper.  Perhaps the nozzle check is somehow different from regular 
printing (more ink?) and is giving me a false impression.  But what I 
see is a very large gloss differential between ink and paper, and in 
certain light, a huge amount of bronzing--at certain angles it's 
difficult to tell the color of the patch because they just 
go "bronze."  So, what I'm trying to avoid here is swapping out the MK 
only to find that I have the same problems in regular printing.  I 
should add that I have printed only with matte papers and mk and am 
unfamiliar with glossy inkjet surfaces.  So perhaps I am less tolerant 
of the "look" than others.

If someone who is priting BW with CSR could print out an auto nozzle 
check and tell me if it is representative of the actual printing I'd be 
very appreciative and would be happy to send some money!  

Walt


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

>
> -No, No, No, Walt. You can't use MK. It is designed for PK only.
> 
> It works great with K3, no gloss differential really and no bronzing.
> I actually use it wit K2 and it also looks great. I put a light coat
> of Premier Art on it with K2 but not really necessary with K3. My
> tests on the 2400 right out of the box with ABW mode were excellent,
> awesome dmax for mono and color. A big difference from Premium Luster
> relief look with any Ultrachrome for instance.
> 
> John
>

> It works great with K3, no gloss differential really and no bronzing.

Ahem... on the basis of various posts about Sliver Rag, I bought a  
box, made one print (on a 2400 w/K3) and... rather obvious gloss  
differential. Yes, it's less pronounced than on other gloss papers  
I've tried, but it's most definitely there. If you don't mind it,  
that's fine, but I don't like prints that produce distracting optical  
effects unless viewed in a certain, optimal way. Another problem (for  
me) is that the surface is very sparkly when viewed in direct light  
(e.g. a gallery spot) at certain angles.

I'm not trying to make my prints look as though they're traditional  
silver gelatin... I just don't want odd visual quirks causing people  
to think more about the printing process than about the image. It's  
otherwise a really good paper (the blacks are great), but I'm going  
to keep waiting for better gloss coatings (and using matte papers)  
for now.

Harry

On Jul 3, 2006, at 6:16 PM, john dean wrote:

> -No, No, No, Walt. You can't use MK. It is designed for PK only.
>
> It works great with K3, no gloss differential really and no bronzing.
> I actually use it wit K2 and it also looks great. I put a light coat
> of Premier Art on it with K2 but not really necessary with K3. My
> tests on the 2400 right out of the box with ABW mode were excellent,
> awesome dmax for mono and color. A big difference from Premium Luster
> relief look with any Ultrachrome for instance.
>
> John
>
>
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Walt,

I'm using the MIS K4 (both in a 2400 and in a 4000, without the LLK  
in the latter) and CSR does exhibit slight bronzing and GD with both  
printers.  As John noted a light coat of Printshield will eliminate  
this problem.  The nozzle check patches exaggerate the bronzing and  
GD.  I've also made comparisons using Hahnemuhle FA Pearl and Innova  
F Type.  The H pearl surface looks almost the same as the CSR (but on  
a whiter paper base) and it also has about the same level of bronzing  
and GD.  Innova F Type has a slightly glossier surface, but exhibits  
essentially no bronzing or GD and unlike the other two papers it does  
not require Printshield treatment.  Except for the surface  
imperfections, the Innova F Type looks most like my air dried silver  
prints.  Recent discussions indicate that there are batches with a  
smoother surface.  Mine was in the boxes with the blue label.  Note  
that all of these comments are specific to MIS K4 inks which tend to  
produce a slightly lower gloss compared to Epson K3.

Carl

On Jul 3, 2006, at 8:23 PM, wwodets wrote:

> Folks-
>
> I've finally gotten a box of Crane Silver Rag and had a quick and
> dirty look.  I did this simply by printing an auto nozzle check
> (solid rectangles) with the MK still in the printer, just wanting to
> see what the ink looked like on the surface.  This is a 4800 with K3
> inks.
>
> If I leave out the MK swatch, the ink is *much* glossier than the
> paper itself--the ink looks like something laminated to the surface
> of the paper.  So, I am imaging that an image would show significant
> gloss differential between very open highlights and more dense areas
> of the image, as well as between dense areas of the image and the
> paper surround.
>
> In comparing the CSR to a few silver gelatin, fiber, gloss, matte-
> dried prints, the SR is actually more matte than the fiber paper.
> The gloss of the ink is a closer match to the gelatin paper.
>
> Though the CSR doesn't really look like a matte-dried paper, I like
> the look and find it very "photographic."  But with the K3 inks, I
> can't see that it would be useful without a Print Shield spray or
> something like that.
>
> Any comments on evaluating the paper/ink in this way or on my
> observations?
>
> Thanks,
> Walt

I appologize Walt. You guys are right.I was wrong.

It has been awhile since I did these tests and I don't do black and
white on this paper on a regular basis. I went back and looked at my
8x10 prints done on the 2400 with PK. If you hold these prints at just
the right sharp angle you do see some gloss differential. The optical
effects on the Epson rc papers are far more distracting and coarse though.

I used sheet media for SR and it was completely flat and that was hard
to see, but if the print was not flat it would be more apparent for
sure. The same situation applies to the color prints. When I use this
media I spray it anyway but a lot of people are totally against toxic
sprays and I agree it is disgusting to deal with. 

So it is there. However when sprayed with Premier Art it does
disappear. Since I like my carbon monochome prints done on fine matte
rag papers I'm not that involved with glossy output, and what a dmax
reads on a densitometer is not a real concern for me.

I believe it is also true that these rag glossy papers are in their
infancy and will improve a lot. I think we all agree on that.

John

 




------

> Ahem... on the basis of various posts about Sliver Rag, I bought a  
> box, made one print (on a 2400 w/K3) and... rather obvious gloss  
> differential. Yes, it's less pronounced than on other gloss papers  
> I've tried, but it's most definitely there. If you don't mind it,  
> that's fine, but I don't like prints that produce distracting optical  
> effects unless viewed in a certain, optimal way. Another problem (for  
> me) is that the surface is very sparkly when viewed in direct light  
> (e.g. a gallery spot) at certain angles.
> 
> I'm not trying to make my prints look as though they're traditional  
> silver gelatin... I just don't want odd visual quirks causing people  
> to think more about the printing process than about the image. It's  
> otherwise a really good paper (the blacks are great), but I'm going  
> to keep waiting for better gloss coatings (and using matte papers)  
> for now.
> 
> Harry
> 
> On Jul 3, 2006, at 6:16 PM, john dean wrote:
> 
> > -No, No, No, Walt. You can't use MK. It is designed for PK only.
> >
> > It works great with K3, no gloss differential really and no bronzing.
> > I actually use it wit K2 and it also looks great. I put a light coat
> > of Premier Art on it with K2 but not really necessary with K3. My
> > tests on the 2400 right out of the box with ABW mode were excellent,
> > awesome dmax for mono and color. A big difference from Premium Luster
> > relief look with any Ultrachrome for instance.
> >
> > John
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

John and Harry-

Thanks for the input.  

I am beginning to wonder if we've seen significant variations in the 
surface and gloss of the CSR--Harry's despcription of "sparkle" is 
something many people have mentioned, but I don't really see that.  
The paper shows less gloss than a matte-dried gelatin print in my 
impression, which is the reason the very glossy K3 inks show a gloss 
differential.

To me, the really good matte papers are far preferable for the BW 
work I do.  The CSR may look better than the past PK papers, but it 
(with K3 on it) looks very artificial to me. 

Walt

 


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" 
<deanwork2003@...> wrote:
>
> I appologize Walt. You guys are right.I was wrong.
> 
> It has been awhile since I did these tests and I don't do black and
> white on this paper on a regular basis. I went back and looked at my
> 8x10 prints done on the 2400 with PK. If you hold these prints at 
just
> the right sharp angle you do see some gloss differential. The 
optical
> effects on the Epson rc papers are far more distracting and coarse 
though.
> 
> I used sheet media for SR and it was completely flat and that was 
hard
> to see, but if the print was not flat it would be more apparent for
> sure. The same situation applies to the color prints. When I use 
this
> media I spray it anyway but a lot of people are totally against 
toxic
> sprays and I agree it is disgusting to deal with. 
> 
> So it is there. However when sprayed with Premier Art it does
> disappear. Since I like my carbon monochome prints done on fine 
matte

> rag papers I'm not that involved with glossy output, and what a dmax
> reads on a densitometer is not a real concern for me.
> 
> I believe it is also true that these rag glossy papers are in their
> infancy and will improve a lot. I think we all agree on that.
> 
> John
>

I'll agree with that totally. But I do really like SR for large color
work, for some projects, and that is where I'm using it. To tell you
the truth the texture only bothers me when the prints are small.

john

> To me, the really good matte papers are far preferable for the BW 
> work I do.  The CSR may look better than the past PK papers, but it 
> (with K3 on it) looks very artificial to me. 
> 
> Walt
> 
>  
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "john dean" 
> <deanwork2003@> wrote:
> >
> > I appologize Walt. You guys are right.I was wrong.
> > 
> > It has been awhile since I did these tests and I don't do black and
> > white on this paper on a regular basis. I went back and looked at my
> > 8x10 prints done on the 2400 with PK. If you hold these prints at 
> just
> > the right sharp angle you do see some gloss differential. The 
> optical
> > effects on the Epson rc papers are far more distracting and coarse 
> though.
> > 
> > I used sheet media for SR and it was completely flat and that was 
> hard
> > to see, but if the print was not flat it would be more apparent for
> > sure. The same situation applies to the color prints. When I use 
> this
> > media I spray it anyway but a lot of people are totally against 
> toxic
> > sprays and I agree it is disgusting to deal with. 
> > 
> > So it is there. However when sprayed with Premier Art it does
> > disappear. Since I like my carbon monochome prints done on fine 
> matte
> > rag papers I'm not that involved with glossy output, and what a dmax
> > reads on a densitometer is not a real concern for me.
> > 
> > I believe it is also true that these rag glossy papers are in their
> > infancy and will improve a lot. I think we all agree on that.
> > 
> > John
> >
>

Haven't had the chance to try the new papers yet, but after reading 
Walt's comments, I was wondering if the "gloss issue" he mentions has 
to do with the micro encapsulation of the K3 inks. Has anyone tried 
the MIS K4 inks in a x800(or 2400) on these papers? MIS states that 
their K4 inks are "not as glossy as the Epson K3 inks".
The reason I'm asking is that I'm getting close to point of having to 
get ink for my 4800, and now that MIS has gotten their problems 
resolved with their funnel fill carts, I am once again rethinking the 
K4 inks set.

KeithR 


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "wwodets" 
<odets@...> wrote:
>
> Folks-
> 
> I've finally gotten a box of Crane Silver Rag and had a quick and 
> dirty look.  I did this simply by printing an auto nozzle check 
> (solid rectangles) with the MK still in the printer, just wanting 
to 
> see what the ink looked like on the surface.  This is a 4800 with 
K3 
> inks.
> 
> If I leave out the MK swatch, the ink is *much* glossier than the 
> paper itself--the ink looks like something laminated to the surface 
> of the paper.  So, I am imaging that an image would show 
significant 
> gloss differential between very open highlights and more dense 
areas 

> of the image, as well as between dense areas of the image and the 
> paper surround.
> 
> In comparing the CSR to a few silver gelatin, fiber, gloss, matte-
> dried prints, the SR is actually more matte than the fiber paper.  
> The gloss of the ink is a closer match to the gelatin paper.
> 
> Though the CSR doesn't really look like a matte-dried paper, I like 
> the look and find it very "photographic."  But with the K3 inks, I 
> can't see that it would be useful without a Print Shield spray or 
> something like that.
> 
> Any comments on evaluating the paper/ink in this way or on my 
> observations?
> 
> Thanks,
> Walt
>

See my message below to Walt.  K4 does have lower gloss.

Walt,

I'm using the MIS K4 (both in a 2400 and in a 4000, without the LLK in the latter) and CSR 
does exhibit slight bronzing and GD with both printers.  As John noted a light coat of 
Printshield will eliminate this problem.  The nozzle check patches exaggerate the bronzing 
and GD.  I've also made comparisons using Hahnemuhle FA Pearl and Innova F Type.  The 
H pearl surface looks almost the same as the CSR (but on a whiter paper base) and it also 
has about the same level of bronzing and GD.  Innova F Type has a slightly glossier 
surface, but exhibits essentially no bronzing or GD and unlike the other two papers it does 
not require Printshield treatment.  Except for the surface imperfections, the Innova F Type 
looks most like my air dried silver prints.  Recent discussions indicate that there are 
batches with a smoother surface.  Mine was in the boxes with the blue label.  Note that all 
of these comments are specific to MIS K4 inks which tend to produce a slightly lower gloss 
compared to Epson K3.

Carl

On Jul 3, 2006, at 8:23 PM, wwodets wrote:

Folks-

I've finally gotten a box of Crane Silver Rag and had a quick and
dirty look.  I did this simply by printing an auto nozzle check
(solid rectangles) with the MK still in the printer, just wanting to
see what the ink looked like on the surface.  This is a 4800 with K3
inks.

If I leave out the MK swatch, the ink is *much* glossier than the
paper itself--the ink looks like something laminated to the surface
of the paper.  So, I am imaging that an image would show significant
gloss differential between very open highlights and more dense areas
of the image, as well as between dense areas of the image and the
paper surround.

In comparing the CSR to a few silver gelatin, fiber, gloss, matte-
dried prints, the SR is actually more matte than the fiber paper.
The gloss of the ink is a closer match to the gelatin paper.

Though the CSR doesn't really look like a matte-dried paper, I like
the look and find it very "photographic."  But with the K3 inks, I
can't see that it would be useful without a Print Shield spray or
something like that.

Any comments on evaluating the paper/ink in this way or on my
observations?

Thanks,
Walt


On Jul 4, 2006, at 2:32 PM, Keith R. wrote:

Haven't had the chance to try the new papers yet, but after reading 
Walt's comments, I was wondering if the "gloss issue" he mentions has 
to do with the micro encapsulation of the K3 inks. Has anyone tried 
the MIS K4 inks in a x800(or 2400) on these papers? MIS states that 
their K4 inks are "not as glossy as the Epson K3 inks".
The reason I'm asking is that I'm getting close to point of having to 
get ink for my 4800, and now that MIS has gotten their problems 
resolved with their funnel fill carts, I am once again rethinking the 
K4 inks set.

KeithR 


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

Folks-

I've finally gotten a box of Crane Silver Rag and had a quick and 
dirty look.  I did this simply by printing an auto nozzle check 
(solid rectangles) with the MK still in the printer, just wanting 
to 
see what the ink looked like on the surface.  This is a 4800 with 
K3 
inks.

If I leave out the MK swatch, the ink is *much* glossier than the 
paper itself--the ink looks like something laminated to the surface 
of the paper.  So, I am imaging that an image would show 
significant 
gloss differential between very open highlights and more dense 
areas 
of the image, as well as between dense areas of the image and the 
paper surround.

In comparing the CSR to a few silver gelatin, fiber, gloss, matte-
dried prints, the SR is actually more matte than the fiber paper.  
The gloss of the ink is a closer match to the gelatin paper.

Though the CSR doesn't really look like a matte-dried paper, I like 
the look and find it very "photographic."  But with the K3 inks, I 
can't see that it would be useful without a Print Shield spray or 
something like that.

Any comments on evaluating the paper/ink in this way or on my 
observations?

Thanks,
Wal

Hi Carl,

I've been following this thread with great interest, and your 
comments about using the MIS K4 on an Epson 4000 led me to the 
question: do you, or anyone else, know whether is it possible to use 
them (without the LLK, as in the 4000) on a 7600, and if yes, do 
these inks give less bronzing and GD on glossy photo papers (not only 
Silver Rag and Innova F-Type but also Epson's Premium Luster and 
Premium Semimatte) than the original Ultrachromes? Would the MIS Pro 
inkset give similar results?

I'm looking for a solution to the problem of printing both color and 
B&W on a photo school environment: we have a 7600 in our student's 
lab, but we can't dedicate it to b&W only. I've been testing using 
QTR to print on these Epson papers: while the print quality is very 
good, the bronzing is evident, and it is not feasible for us to 
switch back and forth between photo and matte black, so we've 
standardized on UC PK black and Epson Photo papers (also, it isn't 
very easy to get other matte, fine art papers here in Brazil). 
Although I know that getting a newer x800 series printer would be 
best, this isn't likely to happen on the near future, due to budget 
restrictions here.

Also, are there any issues we should worry about using MIS (Pro or 
K4) inks on a 7600 regarding clogging, etc? The much lower cost of 
these inks also make them an extremely attractive alternative for us.

Thanks in advance for any suggestions,

Paulo Baptista
Escola de Belas Artes
Universidade Federalde Minas Gerais
Brazil
www.eba.ufmg.br


At 16:16 4/7/2006, you wrote:

>See my message below to Walt. K4 does have lower gloss.
>
>Walt,
>
>I'm using the MIS K4 (both in a 2400 and in a 4000, without the LLK 
>in the latter) and CSR
>does exhibit slight bronzing and GD with both printers. As John 
>noted a light coat of
>Printshield will eliminate this problem. The nozzle check patches 
>exaggerate the bronzing
>and GD. I've also made comparisons using Hahnemuhle FA Pearl and 
>Innova F Type. The
>H pearl surface looks almost the same as the CSR (but on a whiter 
>paper base) and it also
>has about the same level of bronzing and GD. Innova F Type has a 
>slightly glossier
>surface, but exhibits essentially no bronzing or GD and unlike the 
>other two papers it does
>not require Printshield treatment. Except for the surface 
>imperfections, the Innova F Type
>looks most like my air dried silver prints. Recent discussions 
>indicate that there are
>batches with a smoother surface. Mine was in the boxes with the blue 
>label. Note that all
>of these comments are specific to MIS K4 inks which tend to produce 
>a slightly lower gloss
>compared to Epson K3.
>
>Carl

Paulo,

Either the MIS Pro or K4 inks (some of the inks in each set are the  
same) will give less bronzing and GD on Epson RC papers compared to  
Epson UC inks.  I've had no clogging problems with the MIS inks in my  
Epson 4000.

Carl

On Jul 4, 2006, at 5:18 PM, Paulo Baptista wrote:

> Hi Carl,
>
> I've been following this thread with great interest, and your
> comments about using the MIS K4 on an Epson 4000 led me to the
> question: do you, or anyone else, know whether is it possible to use
> them (without the LLK, as in the 4000) on a 7600, and if yes, do
> these inks give less bronzing and GD on glossy photo papers (not only
> Silver Rag and Innova F-Type but also Epson's Premium Luster and
> Premium Semimatte) than the original Ultrachromes? Would the MIS Pro
> inkset give similar results?
>
> I'm looking for a solution to the problem of printing both color and
> B&W on a photo school environment: we have a 7600 in our student's
> lab, but we can't dedicate it to b&W only. I've been testing using
> QTR to print on these Epson papers: while the print quality is very
> good, the bronzing is evident, and it is not feasible for us to
> switch back and forth between photo and matte black, so we've
> standardized on UC PK black and Epson Photo papers (also, it isn't
> very easy to get other matte, fine art papers here in Brazil).
> Although I know that getting a newer x800 series printer would be
> best, this isn't likely to happen on the near future, due to budget
> restrictions here.
>
> Also, are there any issues we should worry about using MIS (Pro or
> K4) inks on a 7600 regarding clogging, etc? The much lower cost of
> these inks also make them an extremely attractive alternative for us.
>
> Thanks in advance for any suggestions,
>
> Paulo Baptista
> Escola de Belas Artes
> Universidade Federalde Minas Gerais
> Brazil
> www.eba.ufmg.br
>
>
> At 16:16 4/7/2006, you wrote:
>
>> See my message below to Walt. K4 does have lower gloss.
>>
>> Walt,
>>
>> I'm using the MIS K4 (both in a 2400 and in a 4000, without the LLK
>> in the latter) and CSR
>> does exhibit slight bronzing and GD with both printers. As John
>> noted a light coat of
>> Printshield will eliminate this problem. The nozzle check patches
>> exaggerate the bronzing
>> and GD. I've also made comparisons using Hahnemuhle FA Pearl and
>> Innova F Type. The
>> H pearl surface looks almost the same as the CSR (but on a whiter
>> paper base) and it also
>> has about the same level of bronzing and GD. Innova F Type has a
>> slightly glossier
>> surface, but exhibits essentially no bronzing or GD and unlike the
>> other two papers it does
>> not require Printshield treatment. Except for the surface
>> imperfections, the Innova F Type
>> looks most like my air dried silver prints. Recent discussions
>> indicate that there are
>> batches with a smoother surface. Mine was in the boxes with the blue
>> label. Note that all
>> of these comments are specific to MIS K4 inks which tend to produce
>> a slightly lower gloss
>> compared to Epson K3.
>>
>> Carl
>

Paulo;

I'm doing exactly what you are thinking about; I have the MIS PRO 
7600 equivalents in my 7600. There is no bronzing to speak of with 
any RC paper I've tried, though there is stil a small amount of GD 
on some papers. The MIS inks are a bit less glossy than Epson K3 so 
they work better on less shiny papers like luster or semi-matte. A 
big improvement in my book!

Steve Karafyllakis

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Paulo Baptista 
<paulo.baptista@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Carl,
> 
> I've been following this thread with great interest, and your 
> comments about using the MIS K4 on an Epson 4000 led me to the 
> question: do you, or anyone else, know whether is it possible to 
use 
> them (without the LLK, as in the 4000) on a 7600, and if yes, do 
> these inks give less bronzing and GD on glossy photo papers (not 
only 
> Silver Rag and Innova F-Type but also Epson's Premium Luster and 
> Premium Semimatte) than the original Ultrachromes? Would the MIS 
Pro 
> inkset give similar results?
> 
> I'm looking for a solution to the problem of printing both color 
and 
> B&W on a photo school environment: we have a 7600 in our student's 
> lab, but we can't dedicate it to b&W only. I've been testing using 
> QTR to print on these Epson papers: while the print quality is 
very 
> good, the bronzing is evident, and it is not feasible for us to 
> switch back and forth between photo and matte black, so we've 
> standardized on UC PK black and Epson Photo papers (also, it isn't 
> very easy to get other matte, fine art papers here in Brazil). 
> Although I know that getting a newer x800 series printer would be 
> best, this isn't likely to happen on the near future, due to 
budget 
> restrictions here.
> 
> Also, are there any issues we should worry about using MIS (Pro or 
> K4) inks on a 7600 regarding clogging, etc? The much lower cost of 
> these inks also make them an extremely attractive alternative for 
us.
> 
> Thanks in advance for any suggestions,
> 
> Paulo Baptista
> Escola de Belas Artes
> Universidade Federalde Minas Gerais
> Brazil
> www.eba.ufmg.br
> 
> 
> At 16:16 4/7/2006, you wrote:
> 
> >See my message below to Walt. K4 does have lower gloss.
> >
> >Walt,
> >
> >I'm using the MIS K4 (both in a 2400 and in a 4000, without the 
LLK 
> >in the latter) and CSR
> >does exhibit slight bronzing and GD with both printers. As John 
> >noted a light coat of
> >Printshield will eliminate this problem. The nozzle check patches 
> >exaggerate the bronzing
> >and GD. I've also made comparisons using Hahnemuhle FA Pearl and 
> >Innova F Type. The
> >H pearl surface looks almost the same as the CSR (but on a whiter 
> >paper base) and it also
> >has about the same level of bronzing and GD. Innova F Type has a 
> >slightly glossier
> >surface, but exhibits essentially no bronzing or GD and unlike 
the 
> >other two papers it does
> >not require Printshield treatment. Except for the surface 
> >imperfections, the Innova F Type
> >looks most like my air dried silver prints. Recent discussions 
> >indicate that there are
> >batches with a smoother surface. Mine was in the boxes with the 
blue 
> >label. Note that all
> >of these comments are specific to MIS K4 inks which tend to 
produce 

> >a slightly lower gloss
> >compared to Epson K3.
> >
> >Carl
>

...
>I'm looking for a solution to the problem of printing both color and 
>B&W on a photo school environment ...

I'm obviously a fan of blended B&W inks due to lack of dots and increased
longevity.  So, the core LK and LLK of the Ut-3D inkset is actually a
blended B&W inkset that is just slightly warm on H. Photo Rag.  Although I
have not seen MIS production  samples of this, a beta batch that was a bit
off nonetheless was able to be profiled by Tom B. in a 9600.

The point is that the UT-3D LK and LLK will, hopefully, allow K2 and K3
printer owners to have close to the best of both worlds -- full color and a
blended, near-neutral core.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Paul, I'm looking at moving away from Epson K2 inks in a 2200 to MIS Pro. I
print both B&W and colour from a single printer, and was intrigued by your
comments below. Are you suggesting there is enough colour content in the
UT-3D inks to do a colour print comparable to Epson K2? 

I admit that I've only looked at the UT-3D ink posts in passing, but a quick
read of your PDF, and the MIS info, leaves me a bit unclear wrt colour
printing. Could you share a bit more in this area?

Thanks,

Terry.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On 
> Behalf Of Paul Roark
> ...
> >I'm looking for a solution to the problem of printing both color and 
> >B&W on a photo school environment ...
> 
> I'm obviously a fan of blended B&W inks due to lack of dots 
> and increased longevity.  So, the core LK and LLK of the 
> Ut-3D inkset is actually a blended B&W inkset that is just 
> slightly warm on H. Photo Rag.  Although I have not seen MIS 
> production  samples of this, a beta batch that was a bit off 
> nonetheless was able to be profiled by Tom B. in a 9600.
> 
> The point is that the UT-3D LK and LLK will, hopefully, allow 
> K2 and K3 printer owners to have close to the best of both 
> worlds -- full color and a blended, near-neutral core.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com

Hi Paul,

I'm the original poster of this thread; I did ask about using the 
full MIS PRO inkset or perhaps using the MIS K4 black and gray inks 
(K and LK) on a 7600, aiming to print both color and B&W (through 
QTR) with less bronzing and GD on Epson's photo papers (basically 
Premium Luster and Premium Semimatte) and, eventually, the new rag 
photo papers like Silver Rag and Innova F-Type. From what I've 
undestood of your comments, the UT-3D grays (LK and LLK) could be 
used on the 7600 in place of Epson's UC K and LK. Am I getting it 
right? (of course, we would have to re-profile our papers - we use a 
Colorvision PrintFix Pro to do this, both for color and for QTR 
linearization).

If this is not the case, do you think the normal MIS PRO inkset would 
give us less bronzing and gloss differential on these papers than the 
original Epson UC inks? Or maybe using Epson's new K3 black and light 
black inks (as suggested in another post by Shilesh Jani) on the 
7600's UC carts would be a better solution (Epson inks are easier to 
buy in Brazil) ?

Thanks in advance,
Paulo


At 13:39 12/7/2006, you wrote:

>...
> >I'm looking for a solution to the problem of printing both color and
> >B&W on a photo school environment ...
>
>I'm obviously a fan of blended B&W inks due to lack of dots and increased
>longevity. So, the core LK and LLK of the Ut-3D inkset is actually a
>blended B&W inkset that is just slightly warm on H. Photo Rag. Although I
>have not seen MIS production samples of this, a beta batch that was a bit
>off nonetheless was able to be profiled by Tom B. in a 9600.
>
>The point is that the UT-3D LK and LLK will, hopefully, allow K2 and K3
>printer owners to have close to the best of both worlds -- full color and a
>blended, near-neutral core.
>
>Paul
>www.PaulRoark.com

Terry,

> I print both B&W and colour from a single printer, and 
> was intrigued by your comments below. 

>Are you suggesting there is enough colour content in the
>UT-3D inks to do a colour print comparable to Epson K2? 

No, the UT-3D inkset cannot print color.  It's a B&W inkset.

What I've tried to do is get a couple birds with one stone.  The UT-3D LK
and LLK inks are blended B&W inks that are relatively neutral.  They plus an
appropriate black ink can make a good B&W by themselves -- like a neutral
monotone B&W inkset, which they are.  As such, with a rip you can print a
pure or mostly blended B&W with a k2 or k3 printer and avoid the color dots.


I'm assuming many will leave the color inks in the k2 and k3 printers for
the obvious full color printing advantage.  So, the "core" LK and LLK in the
UT-3D have a dual purpose -- be used in that inkset and also be used by
color + B&W printers to replace the warm Lk and LLK inks that are usually
used.  These warm carbon LK and LLK require color dots.  These are what I
want to get rid of or reduce in significance.

So, it'll take a rip for B&W, and it'll take some custom profiling for
color, but the UT-3D LK and LLK plus the MIS Pro (or maybe even the OEM)
color inks may result in a system that can get close to having the best of
both worlds.  We'll see.

Don’t try to print color with the full UT-3D inkset.  It is definitely a
dedicated B&W inkset with a tiny gamut.

If you give this a try, let me know how it works.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On 
> Behalf Of Paul Roark
> ...
> >I'm looking for a solution to the problem of printing both color and 
> >B&W on a photo school environment ...
> 
> I'm obviously a fan of blended B&W inks due to lack of dots 
> and increased longevity. So, the core LK and LLK of the 
> Ut-3D inkset is actually a blended B&W inkset that is just 
> slightly warm on H. Photo Rag. Although I have not seen MIS 
> production samples of this, a beta batch that was a bit off 
> nonetheless was able to be profiled by Tom B. in a 9600.
> 
> The point is that the UT-3D LK and LLK will, hopefully, allow 
> K2 and K3 printer owners to have close to the best of both 
> worlds -- full color and a blended, near-neutral core.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com

Paulo,

>... From what I've understood of your comments, 
> the UT-3D grays (LK and LLK) could be 
>used on the 7600 in place of Epson's UC K and LK.

No, in the 7600 you could only replace the LK with the 3D-LK.  You'll still
need an appropriate black ink.

Obviously in the k2 printers the highlights might show the LK dots -- as
usual -- unless color inks are added.  However, in large prints I think the
dots may be, in the long run, less objectionable than the color dots.  

It's just another option to consider.

> of course, we would have to re-profile our papers ...

Yes.

>... do you think the normal MIS PRO inkset would 
>give us less bronzing and gloss differential on these papers 
>than the original Epson UC inks? 

Yes, that usually seems to be the case.  The Epson encapsulated particles
give a slightly better dmax on many glossy papers whereas the MIS un-coated
particles give less gloss (usually what I prefer) and less bronzing.
Attempts to combine the Epson PK with the MIS midtones has usually resulted
in a rough cross-over there that is not pleasing.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 


At 13:39 12/7/2006, you wrote:

>...
> >I'm looking for a solution to the problem of printing both color and
> >B&W on a photo school environment ...
>
>I'm obviously a fan of blended B&W inks due to lack of dots and increased
>longevity. So, the core LK and LLK of the Ut-3D inkset is actually a
>blended B&W inkset that is just slightly warm on H. Photo Rag. Although I
>have not seen MIS production samples of this, a beta batch that was a bit
>off nonetheless was able to be profiled by Tom B. in a 9600.
>
>The point is that the UT-3D LK and LLK will, hopefully, allow K2 and K3
>printer owners to have close to the best of both worlds -- full color and a
>blended, near-neutral core.
>
>Paul
>www.PaulRoark.com

Excellent. . .  now I understand where you're coming from. 

To confirm, the configuration for a 2200 would include a standard MIS
Pro colour inkset but with the UT-3D LK substituting for the Pro LK.
Ebony and/or Photo Black would be used as appropriate based on the
media (I assume that w/o the UT-3D LLK that PK would be needed for
glossy).

The benefit to this config is minimal colour pigment since the K and
LK are near-neutral (no need to neutralize). Toning can still occur as
would normally be done within a RIP like Quadtone, although if warming
most prints became the norm it would likely mean the Pro LK was a
better choice.

Do I have all this straight?

My other option would be to use the full UT-3D set for B&W and the MIS
Pro inks for colour. This would be optimal from a results perspective,
but would be inconvenient and waste ink. However, is there enough
benefit to this approach to warrant considering it?

Thanks,

Terry.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> Terry,
> 
> > I print both B&W and colour from a single printer, and 
> > was intrigued by your comments below. 
> 
> >Are you suggesting there is enough colour content in the
> >UT-3D inks to do a colour print comparable to Epson K2? 
> 
> No, the UT-3D inkset cannot print color.  It's a B&W inkset.
> 
> What I've tried to do is get a couple birds with one stone.  The
UT-3D LK
> and LLK inks are blended B&W inks that are relatively neutral.  They
plus an
> appropriate black ink can make a good B&W by themselves -- like a
neutral
> monotone B&W inkset, which they are.  As such, with a rip you can
print a
> pure or mostly blended B&W with a k2 or k3 printer and avoid the
color dots.
> 
> 
> I'm assuming many will leave the color inks in the k2 and k3
printers for
> the obvious full color printing advantage.  So, the "core" LK and
LLK in the
> UT-3D have a dual purpose -- be used in that inkset and also be used by
> color + B&W printers to replace the warm Lk and LLK inks that are
usually
> used.  These warm carbon LK and LLK require color dots.  These are
what I
> want to get rid of or reduce in significance.
> 
> So, it'll take a rip for B&W, and it'll take some custom profiling for
> color, but the UT-3D LK and LLK plus the MIS Pro (or maybe even the OEM)
> color inks may result in a system that can get close to having the
best of

> both worlds.  We'll see.
> 
> Don't try to print color with the full UT-3D inkset.  It is definitely a
> dedicated B&W inkset with a tiny gamut.
> 
> If you give this a try, let me know how it works.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com

Terry,

>To confirm, the configuration for a 2200 would include a standard MIS
>Pro colour inkset but with the UT-3D LK substituting for the Pro LK.
>Ebony and/or Photo Black would be used as appropriate based on the
>media (I assume that w/o the UT-3D LLK that PK would be needed for
>glossy).

Yes, that's correct.  Recall that for color new color profiles will be
needed.  If you have a profiling system, however, initial feedback is that
the system should be well within range.

For neutral B&W, I prefer a PKN to PK.  The 3D-M is, in fact, a PKN.

>The benefit to this config is minimal colour pigment since the K and
>LK are near-neutral (no need to neutralize).

Yes, sort of.  There is probably still the same amount of color, but since
it's blended into the carbon there will be minimal or no bright color dots,
and the blended LK should be significantly more lightfast than the separate
pure carbon LK and separate color ink dots.

>Toning can still occur as would normally be done within a RIP ...

Yes, again, sort of.  For near neutral prints I'd put no color in the
highlights, because that is where they show and the paper color dominates
there anyway.  For midtone and below, you can go cooler with cyan and
magenta added. 

>... although if warming most prints became the norm it would 
>likely mean the Pro LK was a better choice.

Exactly.  I would not recommend this combo if you like warmer prints.  You
don't want to add yellow as a normal practice.

> My other option would be to use the full UT-3D ...
> is there enough benefit to this approach to warrant considering it?

It really depends on your personal situation.  If the 3D LK and LLK used on
the papers you like give you what you want, then it's certainly an easy and
convenient way to go if you also print color.  I think this is a large
market, but I probably won't use it that way.  For the B&W only
perfectionist, the UT-3D would probably be preferred. 

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> Terry,
> 
> > I print both B&W and colour from a single printer, and 
> > was intrigued by your comments below. 
> 
> >Are you suggesting there is enough colour content in the
> >UT-3D inks to do a colour print comparable to Epson K2? 
> 
> No, the UT-3D inkset cannot print color. It's a B&W inkset.
> 
> What I've tried to do is get a couple birds with one stone. The
UT-3D LK
> and LLK inks are blended B&W inks that are relatively neutral. They
plus an
> appropriate black ink can make a good B&W by themselves -- like a
neutral
> monotone B&W inkset, which they are. As such, with a rip you can
print a
> pure or mostly blended B&W with a k2 or k3 printer and avoid the
color dots.
> 
> 
> I'm assuming many will leave the color inks in the k2 and k3
printers for
> the obvious full color printing advantage. So, the "core" LK and
LLK in the
> UT-3D have a dual purpose -- be used in that inkset and also be used by
> color + B&W printers to replace the warm Lk and LLK inks that are
usually
> used. These warm carbon LK and LLK require color dots. These are
what I
> want to get rid of or reduce in significance.
> 
> So, it'll take a rip for B&W, and it'll take some custom profiling for
> color, but the UT-3D LK and LLK plus the MIS Pro (or maybe even the OEM)
> color inks may result in a system that can get close to having the
best of

> both worlds. We'll see.
> 
> Don't try to print color with the full UT-3D inkset. It is definitely a
> dedicated B&W inkset with a tiny gamut.
> 
> If you give this a try, let me know how it works.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com

Hi Paul,
thanks for your explanations . As I understand  it now, it seems the 
best approach for our school environment (to print both color and 
usually neutral B&W on "photo" papers with a 7600) would be to use 
MIS PKN black (UTPKN-4) and the UT-3D LK (to minimize color dots) 
together with the normal MIS PRO color inks (CcMmY). Is it correct? 
Do you think that the OEM Epson color inks could be used with MIS PKN 
and UT LK?
Best regards,
Paulo
(I'm quoting below part of a related reply from you to Terry Ritz)

At 22:08 13/7/2006, you wrote:

>Terry,
> >To confirm, the configuration for a 2200 would include a standard MIS
> >Pro colour inkset but with the UT-3D LK substituting for the Pro LK.
> >Ebony and/or Photo Black would be used as appropriate based on the
> >media (I assume that w/o the UT-3D LLK that PK would be needed for
> >glossy).
>Yes, that's correct. Recall that for color new color profiles will be
>needed. If you have a profiling system, however, initial feedback is that
>the system should be well within range.
>For neutral B&W, I prefer a PKN to PK. The 3D-M is, in fact, a PKN.

> As I understand it now, it seems the 
>best approach for our school environment (to print both color and 
>usually neutral B&W on "photo" papers with a 7600) would be to use 
>MIS PKN black (UTPKN-4) and the UT-3D LK (to minimize color dots) 
>together with the normal MIS PRO color inks (CcMmY). Is it correct?

I think that such an approach will ultimately be a good way to get neutral
B&W prints with no color dots from a printer that can also make color
prints.

For a school, I'm wondering if you need to go to that extent.  Recall that
there may be existing profiles for the standard MIS Pro inkset that use the
standard warm LK and use the color inks.  I'm hedging a bit here now for two
reasons -- the profiles for the standard setup might currently exist for QTR
or IJC, and I'm not sure MIS is really ready to ship the 3D-LK.  

>Do you think that the OEM Epson color inks could be used with 
>MIS PKN and UT LK?

I don't know.  I don't think there are any chemical incompatibilities, but
I've found in trying to use Epson PK with MIS midtones there is a rough
transition from the un-coated MIS pigments to the coated Epson ones.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 





 (I'm quoting below part of a related reply from you to Terry Ritz)

At 22:08 13/7/2006, you wrote:

>Terry,
> >To confirm, the configuration for a 2200 would include a standard MIS
> >Pro colour inkset but with the UT-3D LK substituting for the Pro LK.
> >Ebony and/or Photo Black would be used as appropriate based on the
> >media (I assume that w/o the UT-3D LLK that PK would be needed for
> >glossy).
>Yes, that's correct. Recall that for color new color profiles will be
>needed. If you have a profiling system, however, initial feedback is that
>the system should be well within range.
>For neutral B&W, I prefer a PKN to PK. The 3D-M is, in fact, a PKN.

I'm not sure if this answers the question or not, but I called MIS today to
ask about the availability of UT-3D inks, preloaded in 2200 cartridges. They
should be available in about a week I was told. She said they wanted to make
sure to get them "right".

Terry.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On 
> Behalf Of Paul Roark

>  I'm hedging a bit here now for two reasons -- 
> the profiles for the standard setup might currently exist for 
> QTR or IJC, and I'm not sure MIS is really ready to ship the 3D-LK.

Paulo,

I just had an experience with the 7600 and the mixed k4/MIS Pro 
mixed inkset that might relevant and save you some trouble. I had 
mentioned earlier that I was using the M-Pro color; I am also using 
the K4 PK and LK; until recently I did not have a spectro and good 
profiling spftware, so I always assumed that the mediocre scanner-
based software I was using was responsible for the difficult and 
inconsistent profiles I was getting. When I got the Colorvision 
Printfix Pro package, I expected all that to go away, but while I 
got very good profiles for my R340 and R1800, the 7600 problem got 
much worse. MIS tech support tells me they also have never 
succesfully profiled a 7600 with the K4 inks in it, and that I 
should switch back to the MIS Pro PK and LK.  C.D. Tobie 
(Colorvision) tells me the density and blend zone for each inkset 
must be different enough that they don't overlap properly to produce 
a smooth ramp. IMHO you will probably have less headaches if you 
stick with a uniform inkset and work out a few custom curves where 
you need to, using QTR. If you're using the light inks for 
neutralizing, color dots won't be very visible anyway, except under 
high magnification. This problem may not affect you with the PKN-LKN 
you're thinking about, (or it might) but if you have trouble getting 
good color, keep it in mind.

Best Regards,

Steven Karafyllakis

-- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Paulo Baptista 
<paulo.baptista@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Paul,
> thanks for your explanations . As I understand  it now, it seems 
the 
> best approach for our school environment (to print both color and 
> usually neutral B&W on "photo" papers with a 7600) would be to use 
> MIS PKN black (UTPKN-4) and the UT-3D LK (to minimize color dots) 
> together with the normal MIS PRO color inks (CcMmY). Is it 
correct?

Hi Paul,

At 21:03 14/7/2006, you wrote:
>For a school, I'm wondering if you need to go to that extent. Recall that
>there may be existing profiles for the standard MIS Pro inkset that use the
>standard warm LK and use the color inks. I'm hedging a bit here now for two
>reasons -- the profiles for the standard setup might currently exist for QTR
>or IJC, and I'm not sure MIS is really ready to ship the 3D-LK.

Thanks for the advice; I haven't actually looked at the availability 
of these inks, and was just wondering what the alternatives could be. 
I'll see if I can get the normal MIS Pro inkset here in Brazil, and 
try it first. We use that printer for our students'  work, and I also 
use it to print my own personal work, so I may try this ink mix later.
Thanks also for everyone that contributed to this discussion.
All the best,
Paulo

Steven,
thank you very much for the tip; I think I'll try the standard MIS 
Pro inkset and adjust/create the necessary profiles for  color and 
B&W using QTR (I have just started doing so with a PrintFix Pro 
package). From what has been discussed here, this setup should allow 
us to print with less bronzing and gloss differential than the Epson 
inks, and still save us some money.
Best regards,
Paulo

At 00:57 15/7/2006, you wrote:

>Paulo,
>
>I just had an experience with the 7600 and the mixed k4/MIS Pro
>mixed inkset that might relevant and save you some trouble. I had
>mentioned earlier that I was using the M-Pro color; I am also using
>the K4 PK and LK; until recently I did not have a spectro and good
>profiling spftware, so I always assumed that the mediocre scanner-
>based software I was using was responsible for the difficult and
>inconsistent profiles I was getting. When I got the Colorvision
>Printfix Pro package, I expected all that to go away, but while I
>got very good profiles for my R340 and R1800, the 7600 problem got
>much worse. MIS tech support tells me they also have never
>succesfully profiled a 7600 with the K4 inks in it, and that I
>should switch back to the MIS Pro PK and LK. C.D. Tobie
>(Colorvision) tells me the density and blend zone for each inkset
>must be different enough that they don't overlap properly to produce
>a smooth ramp. IMHO you will probably have less headaches if you
>stick with a uniform inkset and work out a few custom curves where
>you need to, using QTR. If you're using the light inks for
>neutralizing, color dots won't be very visible anyway, except under
>high magnification. This problem may not affect you with the PKN-LKN
>you're thinking about, (or it might) but if you have trouble getting
>good color, keep it in mind.
>
>Best Regards,
>
>Steven Karafyllakis
>
>-- In 
><mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, 
>Paulo Baptista
><paulo.baptista@...> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Paul,
> > thanks for your explanations . As I understand it now, it seems
>the
> > best approach for our school environment (to print both color and
> > usually neutral B&W on "photo" papers with a 7600) would be to use
> > MIS PKN black (UTPKN-4) and the UT-3D LK (to minimize color dots)
> > together with the normal MIS PRO color inks (CcMmY). Is it
>correct?



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