Yahoo Groups archive
Thread
2006-08-21 by Barry
I'm fairly new to the group. There seems to be a preference toward MIS over Cones B&W inksets. Could someone fill me in on the reason? I'm running 2200, 2400, 9600, 1280 printers with, primarily, Red River papers. Thanks, -Barry
2006-08-21 by Bruce Watson
Barry wrote: > I'm fairly new to the group. There seems to be a preference toward MIS over Cones B&W > inksets. Could someone fill me in on the reason? I'm running 2200, 2400, 9600, 1280 > printers with, primarily, Red River papers. > > Thanks, > -Barry The MIS inksets tend to be variable tones. That is, you can make them go warm or cold depending on how you use them. The Cone inksets are fixed tones. That is, you choose the color of the inkset ahead of time when you buy the inkset. Also, the MIS inks tend to be less expensive than the Cone inks. That said, I'm using the Cone selenium PiezoTones in a 7600 with excellent results. -- Bruce Watson / /
2006-08-21 by John Moody
Im not sure its a preference more than an apparent majority of posts about the many MIS offerings. If you could describe the type and size of images you print, as well as the expected end use, it would help our understanding of what you are looking to achieve. John
-----Original Message----- From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Barry Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 9:51 AM To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Digital BW] Cone v. MIS I'm fairly new to the group. There seems to be a preference toward MIS over Cones B&W inksets. Could someone fill me in on the reason? I'm running 2200, 2400, 9600, 1280 printers with, primarily, Red River papers. Thanks, -Barry [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2006-08-21 by john dean
Definitely not. They have thier own yahoo group- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/piezography3000/?yguid=181774681. I've found the new PiezoTone 6 and 7 shades of carbon neutal to be the smoothest and finest black and white imaging I've ever done. Now they have a sepia multi-channel inkset also that can be used by itself or in conjunction with the neutral set, and people are just now starting to use them for split toning. This is a great inkset for use in just about any printer. Not good for glossy PK output though. John > I'm fairly new to the group. There seems to be a preference toward MIS over
> Cones B&W > inksets. Could someone fill me in on the reason? I'm running 2200, 2400, > 9600, 1280 > printers with, primarily, Red River papers. > > Thanks, > -Barry > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >
2006-08-21 by Eric Neilsen Photo
John, Have you seen any prints from the Sepia inks for the K6/7 inks? There is also a Piezo group at piezobwpro@yahoogroups.com which was set up to help support the ProB&W24 software and the Piezotone inks. It has been very very quite over the last few years. Eric Neilsen Photography 4101 Commerce Street, Suite 9 Dallas, TX 75226 214-827-8301 http://ericneilsenphotography.com Skype : ejprinter _____
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of john dean Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 2:37 PM To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Cone v. MIS Definitely not. They have thier own yahoo group- http://groups. <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/piezography3000/?yguid=181774681.> yahoo.com/group/piezography3000/?yguid=181774681. I've found the new PiezoTone 6 and 7 shades of carbon neutal to be the smoothest and finest black and white imaging I've ever done. Now they have a sepia multi-channel inkset also that can be used by itself or in conjunction with the neutral set, and people are just now starting to use them for split toning. This is a great inkset for use in just about any printer. Not good for glossy PK output though. John > I'm fairly new to the group. There seems to be a preference toward MIS over > Cones B&W > inksets. Could someone fill me in on the reason? I'm running 2200, 2400, > 9600, 1280 > printers with, primarily, Red River papers. > > Thanks, > -Barry > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2006-08-21 by Paul Roark
> ... There seems to be a preference toward MIS over > Cones B&W inksets. Could someone fill me in on the reason? ... I was reluctant to respond to this. I'll try to keep it as objective as possible. What's best for any individual depends on the circumstances. What's best for all of us is that we have 2 good competing sellers of pigment-based B&W inksets, as well as increasing competition from the major printer manufacturers. Some factors have been mentioned -- MIS for glossy, for example. MIS bulk ink sales are very affordable. The Cone Piezo approach tends to emphasize smoothness, for example currently with many different densities of "monochrome" inks. My approaches (which generally use MIS inks but actually started with Piezo inks) tend to emphasize simplicity and cost (for example the C86-88 "EZ" and other similar approaches). My approaches are also geared to flexibility -- the variable-tone (UT2, UT7, etc.) and color managed (beta UT-3D and the experiments with the 2400 Y=Carbon setup) approaches. Cone does good marketing, which I think helps those in the service bureau business. The latest Piezo inks appear to work very well in the large format printers and with matte papers, though I've never had a chance to use or study the results. I stopped using Cone inks due to being banned from discussing my "Variable-piezo" inkset approach on his forum. I probably would have switched to MIS inks due to price once I started doing fade testing. Both MIS and Cone use state of the art pigments that are extremely lightfast. I consider them equal (which made the MIS inks very appealing). We are all influenced by our circumstances. So, the fact that I usually get MIS ink for free now does encourage me to experiment with them. But, as you can see from http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/message/79143 I also recommend Epson inks sometimes. Epson PK is giving be a better dmax in this experiment, and Epson magenta has done better than MIS magenta (which I avoid in my B&W inkset formulas). I simply can't afford to do all of what I do if I have to buy all the input inks. The suggested setup for the 2400, above, is my objective best guess at what will give the optimum B&W + limited gamut color solutions for the 4800 and above. It appears to result in excellent B&W (ABW mode) and color-managed RGB workflows. For the large format printers, especially, I'm becoming increasingly inclined to recommend non-blended ink approaches for non-service bureau settings due to the separation of inks in the lines that I've experience with blended inks. I also like the ability to buy off the shelf, inks from competing vendors for all the positions. (I have published entire formulas for making B&W inksets from Epson inks. However, no major player has opted to pick them up due to the cost of the inputs.) So, as usual, between the excellent choices we have (Piezo, MIS, and Epson mostly), what is best depends on one's circumstances, but we all benefit from as much competition as possible among the sellers. Paul www.PaulRoark.com
2006-08-21 by Tyler Boley
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote: > > > > > ... There seems to be a preference toward MIS over > > Cones B&W inksets. Could someone fill me in on the reason? ... > > I was reluctant to respond to this. Me too, but no one else seems to have expressed a perspective similar to mine, so... I use Cone inks and have for some time. I also will be doing my workshop first with Cone next week. I think it's fair top assume most people familiar with me on the lists associate me with Cone. However that is only loose affiliation, I have a long time admiration for Jon's contributions to digital printing and like the products. He knows though, as well as others that know me, I would switch to something else in a heartbeat if the prints were more beautiful. I've used Cone, MIS, Lyson, all kinds of inks over the years, I'm unfaithful. This list started as a place for people to talk non-Cone B&W specifically, as there was no other forum. For a long time Cone users felt a bit persecuted here and went away. Also, Cone's products (I'm trying to say this and stay objective) have evolved to the point that they just work. There is very little list activity anywhere. I'm in regular contact with other users, they are not on these lists. They are printing. You do, of course, hear the occasional horror story, as with any product. I had many experiences that made me leave the other manufacturers behind, they were definitive. I have not posted anything negative about anyone's ink in a long time, except perhaps Lyson's mono inksets. I'm just not going to do that any more unless I find a product is truly a rip off. Fortunately there is more delineation between these two company's products now, and I really think the competition is very healthy. I would strongly advise people to learn as much about the unique qualities of the products, and if at all possible get sample prints from users at the least. You need to find which is most applicable to your needs. The lists are no longer indicative of anything other than the opinions of a specific group of people who happened to congregate for unique reasons. Their nature has evolved dramatically since I wandered into the old leben list years ago without a clue. There is no "best", only a best for you, and that could be temporary. Tyler www.custom-digital.com
2006-08-22 by Ken Carney
Tyler, This is very interesting. I have some "old" Cone prints that are...green. I think the idea was that they were to emulate bromide papers but, they were green. I don't print large prints, an 11 x 15X image size being my largest, so my Epson 2200 with IP6 works well. Assuming, arguendo, that I am using IP6 and its profiles correctly, what improvements would I expect with the Cone K7 inkset and the QTR RIP? My favorite paper is Innova smooth white cotton, which I see is one that produces neutral tones, from the Cone site. I apologize if this question is too vague, but I am thinking of buying a 2400 for color semi-gloss prints and dedicating the 2200 to a b&w inkset. Also, any thoughts about clogging, since I may go 2-3 weeks without printing? The Epson OEM inks seem immune to this treatment. Thx for any help. Regards, Ken Carney www.kencarney.com
> -----Original Message----- > From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tyler > Boley > Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 7:00 PM > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Cone v. MIS > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" > <paul.roark@...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > ... There seems to be a preference toward MIS over > > > Cones B&W inksets. Could someone fill me in on the reason? ... > > > > I was reluctant to respond to this. > > Me too, but no one else seems to have expressed a perspective similar > to mine, so... > I use Cone inks and have for some time. I also will be doing my > workshop first with Cone next week. I think it's fair top assume most > people familiar with me on the lists associate me with Cone. However > that is only loose affiliation, I have a long time admiration for > Jon's contributions to digital printing and like the products. He > knows though, as well as others that know me, I would switch to > something else in a heartbeat if the prints were more beautiful. I've > used Cone, MIS, Lyson, all kinds of inks over the years, I'm unfaithful. > > This list started as a place for people to talk non-Cone B&W > specifically, as there was no other forum. For a long time Cone users > felt a bit persecuted here and went away. Also, Cone's products (I'm > trying to say this and stay objective) have evolved to the point that > they just work. There is very little list activity anywhere. I'm in > regular contact with other users, they are not on these lists. They > are printing. You do, of course, hear the occasional horror story, as > with any product. > > I had many experiences that made me leave the other manufacturers > behind, they were definitive. I have not posted anything negative > about anyone's ink in a long time, except perhaps Lyson's mono > inksets. I'm just not going to do that any more unless I find a > product is truly a rip off. > > Fortunately there is more delineation between these two company's > products now, and I really think the competition is very healthy. > I would strongly advise people to learn as much about the unique > qualities of the products, and if at all possible get sample prints > from users at the least. You need to find which is most applicable to > your needs. The lists are no longer indicative of anything other than > the opinions of a specific group of people who happened to congregate > for unique reasons. Their nature has evolved dramatically since I > wandered into the old leben list years ago without a clue. > > There is no "best", only a best for you, and that could be temporary. > Tyler > www.custom-digital.com
2006-08-22 by Eric Neilsen
Ken, I was not a person in charge of ink buying at a studio that was invested in Cone Ink and software, but a user. The earlier Cone "archival" inks did indeed fade and turn greenish. I did not jump on that band wagon, but have been a user of the next generation inks, Piezo Tone after Sundance and have not seen any of those prints fade or turn green. I have blended the cool tones and the Sepia set, but mostly just straight sepia set for years now with IP 5.0, 5.5, 5.6, and 6.0. I have also played with QTR and have not been able to match print smoothness of an IP print with QTR and the Epson 7000 with Piezo Sepia set. I have not tried the MIS inks because there are only so many hours in a day and customers already started selling their "platinum looking" ink jets. Fade data on MIS??? I don't know. I do know that some of the best help is offered by users rather than makers of inks and ink jet printers. If this group seems more supportive of MIS, perhaps it is because they were better supported? Ultimately though, the only way to know is look at some prints made with both on a range of papers by skilled users that can share their insights. Eric Neilsen Photography 4101 Commerce Street Suite 9 Dallas, TX 75226 http://e.neilsen.home.att.net http://ericneilsenphotography.com _____
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Ken Carney Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 10:00 PM To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Cone v. MIS Tyler, This is very interesting. I have some "old" Cone prints that are...green. I think the idea was that they were to emulate bromide papers but, they were green. I don't print large prints, an 11 x 15X image size being my largest, so my Epson 2200 with IP6 works well. Assuming, arguendo, that I am using IP6 and its profiles correctly, what improvements would I expect with the Cone K7 inkset and the QTR RIP? My favorite paper is Innova smooth white cotton, which I see is one that produces neutral tones, from the Cone site. I apologize if this question is too vague, but I am thinking of buying a 2400 for color semi-gloss prints and dedicating the 2200 to a b&w inkset. Also, any thoughts about clogging, since I may go 2-3 weeks without printing? The Epson OEM inks seem immune to this treatment. Thx for any help. Regards, Ken Carney www.kencarney.com > -----Original Message----- > From: DigitalBlackandWhit <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com> eThePrint@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhit <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com> eThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tyler > Boley > Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 7:00 PM > To: DigitalBlackandWhit <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com> eThePrint@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Cone v. MIS > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhit <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com> eThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" > <paul.roark@...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > ... There seems to be a preference toward MIS over > > > Cones B&W inksets. Could someone fill me in on the reason? ... > > > > I was reluctant to respond to this. > > Me too, but no one else seems to have expressed a perspective similar > to mine, so... > I use Cone inks and have for some time. I also will be doing my > workshop first with Cone next week. I think it's fair top assume most > people familiar with me on the lists associate me with Cone. However > that is only loose affiliation, I have a long time admiration for > Jon's contributions to digital printing and like the products. He > knows though, as well as others that know me, I would switch to > something else in a heartbeat if the prints were more beautiful. I've > used Cone, MIS, Lyson, all kinds of inks over the years, I'm unfaithful. > > This list started as a place for people to talk non-Cone B&W > specifically, as there was no other forum. For a long time Cone users > felt a bit persecuted here and went away. Also, Cone's products (I'm > trying to say this and stay objective) have evolved to the point that > they just work. There is very little list activity anywhere. I'm in > regular contact with other users, they are not on these lists. They > are printing. You do, of course, hear the occasional horror story, as > with any product. > > I had many experiences that made me leave the other manufacturers > behind, they were definitive. I have not posted anything negative > about anyone's ink in a long time, except perhaps Lyson's mono > inksets. I'm just not going to do that any more unless I find a > product is truly a rip off. > > Fortunately there is more delineation between these two company's > products now, and I really think the competition is very healthy. > I would strongly advise people to learn as much about the unique > qualities of the products, and if at all possible get sample prints > from users at the least. You need to find which is most applicable to > your needs. The lists are no longer indicative of anything other than > the opinions of a specific group of people who happened to congregate > for unique reasons. Their nature has evolved dramatically since I > wandered into the old leben list years ago without a clue. > > There is no "best", only a best for you, and that could be temporary. > Tyler > www.custom-digital.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2006-08-22 by dgattarino
> > (I have published entire formulas for making B&W inksets from Epson inks. > However, no major player has opted to pick them up due to the cost of the > inputs.) > Hello Paul, where did you publish the formulas you mentioned in your post? I am doing several experiments myself and like to compare with yours. Thanks. Cheers Daniela
2006-08-22 by Paul Roark
Daniela, It was on this list, but I don't know the message #. I did the exercise fairly early to be sure there was an alternative to MIS pigments in case those prices were increased unduly. As it happens, MIS did not raise prices, so my incentives to have second sources decreased substantially. Paul www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/> _____
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of dgattarino Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 7:04 AM To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Cone v. MIS > > (I have published entire formulas for making B&W inksets from Epson inks. > However, no major player has opted to pick them up due to the cost of the > inputs.) > Hello Paul, where did you publish the formulas you mentioned in your post? I am doing several experiments myself and like to compare with yours. Thanks. Cheers Daniela [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2006-08-22 by Tyler Boley
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Ken Carney" <kcarney1@...> wrote: > > > Tyler, > > This is very interesting. I have some "old" Cone prints that are...green. That was a troublesome inkset for many. I have about 50 finished matted prints here made from them that, believe it or not, are still just fine and they are pretty old. Some have been on the wall under plexi for years. Those of mine that did change were exposed bare to direct sunlight for long periods, and they went lighter and redder. They all had an initial change from a more olive tone in the first 12 hours or so, and also dried down. You must have experienced a phenomenon referred to back then as the greenies. I believe it was caused by elements in the inks separating out in certain cartridges or CISs particularly if left to sit inactive. I never had the problem and my knowledge of it is anecdotal. Those days are gone. > I think the idea was that they were to emulate bromide papers but, they were > green. I don't print large prints, an 11 x 15X image size being my largest, > so my Epson 2200 with IP6 works well. Assuming, arguendo, that I am using > IP6 and its profiles correctly, what improvements would I expect with the > Cone K7 inkset and the QTR RIP? I can only speculate. I don't use the K7 sets and have only seen prints from friends. The very best thing you can do is have someone here make a print for you to compare directly with your own print. I would expect far less evidence of the printer artifacts, dots etc., nearly none in fact. But these differences, that may be spectacular to me, sometimes are inconsequential to others so I hesitate to make suggestions. We had an open house here once where I smugly held up a IP UC print next to a quad print as though the quad superiority was blatant. Half the people were knowingly nodding their heads, the other half were scratching their heads, like, ...and?.. > My favorite paper is Innova smooth white > cotton, which I see is one that produces neutral tones, from the Cone site. > I apologize if this question is too vague, but I am thinking of buying a > 2400 for color semi-gloss prints and dedicating the 2200 to a b&w inkset. > Also, any thoughts about clogging, since I may go 2-3 weeks without > printing? The Epson OEM inks seem immune to this treatment. Thx for any > help. I would ask for user input about that, I've heard they are pretty trouble free. Ask on the QTR list, I think there are more users over there. For B&W prints that appeal to me, there is a clear superiority with prints made with monochromatic inksets, and from a technical standpoint I think they are the right tool for the job. Making subtle prints with dots of highly saturated color inks makes no sense to me, as making mono prints with type C papers in the darkroom didn't either. But this is a subject worthy of a novel I won't begin here, and individual user needs have to be included in the evaluation. Tyler
2006-08-23 by dlruckus
Daniela. Try Message #23225. It refers to a UC based Quad formula from Paul. Regards Duane --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote:
> > Daniela, > > > > It was on this list, but I don't know the message #. I did the exercise > fairly early to be sure there was an alternative to MIS pigments in case > those prices were increased unduly. As it happens, MIS did not raise > prices, so my incentives to have second sources decreased substantially. > > > > > > Paul > > www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/> > > > > > > _____ > > From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of > dgattarino > Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 7:04 AM > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Cone v. MIS > > > > > > > (I have published entire formulas for making B&W inksets from Epson > inks. > > However, no major player has opted to pick them up due to the cost > of the > > inputs.) > > > > Hello Paul, > > where did you publish the formulas you mentioned in your post? > I am doing several experiments myself and like to compare with yours. > Thanks. > > Cheers > Daniela > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >
2006-08-23 by Paul Roark
That message was not the one I had in mind. There is also at least one UC-based formula out there, I believe. With the advent of the LLK, we can probably make all my inksets from Epson inks. I've also published a dilution base that uses only disclosed chemicals in the UC inkset. So, the chances of incompatibilies are minimized. I've put this in a short pdf on relative viscosity comparisons and the method I use. See http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/Viscosity_Comparisons.pdf Paul www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/> _____
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of dlruckus Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 8:17 PM To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Cone v. MIS Daniela. Try Message #23225. It refers to a UC based Quad formula from Paul. Regards Duane --- In DigitalBlackandWhit <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com> eThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote: > > Daniela, > > > > It was on this list, but I don't know the message #. I did the exercise > fairly early to be sure there was an alternative to MIS pigments in case > those prices were increased unduly. As it happens, MIS did not raise > prices, so my incentives to have second sources decreased substantially. > > > > > > Paul > > www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroar <http://www.paulroark.com/> k.com/> > > > > > > _____ > > From: DigitalBlackandWhit <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com> eThePrint@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhit <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com> eThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of > dgattarino > Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 7:04 AM > To: DigitalBlackandWhit <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com> eThePrint@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Cone v. MIS > > > > > > > (I have published entire formulas for making B&W inksets from Epson > inks. > > However, no major player has opted to pick them up due to the cost > of the > > inputs.) > > > > Hello Paul, > > where did you publish the formulas you mentioned in your post? > I am doing several experiments myself and like to compare with yours. > Thanks. > > Cheers > Daniela > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2006-08-23 by dlruckus
Yes. I have a Hextone mix formula from you that used 7600 Epson inks or MIs clones, in my notes but didn't note the message#. Note just states that the older machines would be at a disadvantage with it due to darker middle inks. Regards Duane --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote: > > That message was not the one I had in mind. There is also at least one > UC-based formula out there, I believe. > > > > With the advent of the LLK, we can probably make all my inksets from Epson > inks. > > > > I've also published a dilution base that uses only disclosed chemicals in > the UC inkset. So, the chances of incompatibilies are minimized. I've put > this in a short pdf on relative viscosity comparisons and the method I use. > See http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/Viscosity_Comparisons.pdf > > > > Paul > > www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/> > > > > > > _____ > > From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of dlruckus > Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 8:17 PM > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Cone v. MIS > > > > Daniela. > Try Message #23225. It refers to a UC based Quad formula from Paul. > > Regards > Duane > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhit > <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com> > eThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" > <paul.roark@> wrote: > > > > Daniela, > > > > > > > > It was on this list, but I don't know the message #. I did the exercise > > fairly early to be sure there was an alternative to MIS pigments in case > > those prices were increased unduly. As it happens, MIS did not raise > > prices, so my incentives to have second sources decreased substantially. > > > > > > > > > > > > Paul > > > > www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroar <http://www.paulroark.com/> k.com/>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > _____ > > > > From: DigitalBlackandWhit > <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com> > eThePrint@yahoogroups.com > > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhit > <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com> > eThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of > > dgattarino > > Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 7:04 AM > > To: DigitalBlackandWhit > <mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com> > eThePrint@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Cone v. MIS > > > > > > > > > > > > (I have published entire formulas for making B&W inksets from Epson > > inks. > > > However, no major player has opted to pick them up due to the cost > > of the > > > inputs.) > > > > > > > Hello Paul, > > > > where did you publish the formulas you mentioned in your post? > > I am doing several experiments myself and like to compare with yours. > > Thanks. > > > > Cheers > > Daniela > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >
2006-08-23 by Roy Harrington
I think message #53503 is the one you want. It's a UT7-like formula from UC inks. Roy --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote:
> > Daniela, > > It was on this list, but I don't know the message #. I did the exercise > fairly early to be sure there was an alternative to MIS pigments in case > those prices were increased unduly. As it happens, MIS did not raise > prices, so my incentives to have second sources decreased substantially. > > > Paul > > www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/> > > > _____ > > From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of > dgattarino > Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2006 7:04 AM > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Cone v. MIS > > > > > > > (I have published entire formulas for making B&W inksets from Epson > inks. > > However, no major player has opted to pick them up due to the cost > of the > > inputs.) > > > > Hello Paul, > > where did you publish the formulas you mentioned in your post? > I am doing several experiments myself and like to compare with yours. > Thanks. > > Cheers > Daniela >
2006-09-13 by James Haney
I have experimented extensively with both on Epson 1160, 2200 and finally 7600 printers. I currently use Piezotone Museum Black, with both the Selenium and Carbon Sepia ink sets. QTR allows me to blend between these two and I just built a split tone version mixing the sets. The control of tone is not radical, but allows for fine tuning within the range of warm to somewhat cool. I had the greenies with first edition Cone inks Moved to Piezotones but wanted the ability to vary tone I experimented with MIS UT2, and UT7 but had problems with mis-labled cartridges on 3 occasions, leaky cartridges, unavailable inks and carts that had bad chips and would not work. I finally settled on the configuration mentioned above. It seems that hardly anyone else had the QC issues I experienced with MIS so they seem to have gotten their act together, but at this point I have been printing happily for 2 years with my current configuration and am too busy making prints (and money) to experiment as I used to be. I really enjoyed the absolute control of tone I had with the UT7 inks. My 2 cents. James Haney On Aug 21, 2006, at 8:51 AM, Barry wrote: > I'm fairly new to the group. There seems to be a preference toward > MIS over Cones B&W > inksets. Could someone fill me in on the reason? I'm running 2200, > 2400, 9600, 1280 > printers with, primarily, Red River papers. > > Thanks, > -Barry > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2006-09-13 by Craig Roberts
I've never used the Piezography inks, but enjoy printing with the MIS UT2 series. I'm very happy with the results. For the sake of economy I buy the ink in bulk and refill my spongeless cartridges by hand. It's very easy to do, takes just a few minutes and saves tons of money. Although I've gotten a bad cartridge from MIS, manually refiling also avoids factory QC problems. Craig Roberts Washington, DC
2006-09-13 by Craig Roberts
I should have said I've NEVER gotten a bad cartridge from MIS (and of course I engage in refilling, not "refiling". :-) Craig
2006-09-13 by Michael Vendrell
I have had several issues with MIS quality control including mislabeled carts (e.g Neutral ink in what was supposed to be warm), non-functioning chips, etc. But when properly done by MIS, Paul Roark's ink-sets and techniques have worked well for me both in a C86 and R220. But I must also add that when I first got my NK7's for my 2200 from cone the inks were fine but the profiles they posted in QTR were REALLY wrong. They did however 'discover' their error shortly afterward and first make available for the asking and later post corrected profiles in the latest version of QTR. Both can make beautiful prints with ease of use and variable tone nod going to MIS and smoothness nod going to Cone. No reason not to try both and make up your own mind or do as I do and use both depending on what I want for the individual image and situation. But in both cases you must look at what comes out and be sure everything is as it's supposed to be. Michael Vendrell --- Craig Roberts <crgrbrts@...> wrote: > I've never used the Piezography inks, but enjoy > printing with the MIS > UT2 series. I'm very happy with the results. > > For the sake of economy I buy the ink in bulk and > refill my spongeless > cartridges by hand. It's very easy to do, takes > just a few minutes and > saves tons of money. Although I've gotten a bad > cartridge from MIS, > manually refiling also avoids factory QC problems. > > Craig Roberts > Washington, DC > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com