Digital BW, The Print

Michael Reichmann has just written a review of the A3+ HP9180 pigment
ink printer. 8 inks carts holding 27ml of ink each compare to 17ml of
the R2400. It also has 4 user replaceable heads. $699 at BHPhotovideo.

Will this printer finally be a serious competitor to Epson's? Hope so.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/HP-B9180.shtml

Cheers,
Andre

As with a lot of stuff Reichmann writes about, it's the details he
omits that can be just as irritating as the gaffes he creates.

In regarding the B9180, Reichman states: 

"Pigment inks offer a level of permanence not seen from printers which
use dye-based inks. These actually exceed that of any colour
reproduction process yet seen. Prints made using pigment based inks
even rival silver gelatin based prints, (unless selenium or gold toned
and archivally processed). Nevertheless, dye based inks have continued
to improve, and when used with some specialty papers offer archival
ratings of 30 – 70 years. But none can match the 80 – 200 year ratings
of pigment inks on quality paper."

Gosh, that's funny – according to the same source he gets his numbers
for the 9180, my current printer of choice, HP's 8750, the B9180's
Vivera-dye-based stablemate, also scores pretty damn high on the
lightfastness scale, not the "30-70 years" Reichman states.  And,
unlike the B9180, the 8750's three black channels amount to a true
"tri-tone" setup for b/w, as is the case with Epson's 2400.  When you
print in greyscale mode with the 8750, those three inks are the *only*
ones in play;  if you want tones, you can always work in with the
other colors available (there are six more).

For what it's worth, here's what Wilhelm sez:

http://wilhelm-research.com/hp/8750.html

I'm not trumpeting this printer as the be-all/end-all for everyone:
for one thing, it does have one Achilles heel vis-a-vis pigs
(waterfastness, although this hasn't been a major problem for me).  In
addition, if your needs go beyond 13x19", you won't be looking here. 
But the thing works wonderfully for me, particularly for b/w - the
best performance I've ever gotten from any process I've tried, and by
far the least painful (remembering my issues with an Epson 1160 with
third-party inks, I decided "I'd rather switch than fight").  I guess
my problem here is with "reviewer's amnesia". Reichman is hardly alone
in this, although he's something of a repeat offender in his
bedazzlement for the new, while simultaneously glossing over (sorry)
potential issues regarding said new product, while conveniently
forgetting details about the product(s) that came before it.

I like a lot that I hear about the B9180.  But I can't help thinking
that HP has taken one step forward for color printing while taking one
step back for b/w.  *One* grey ink?  This most likely means color is
part of the b/w printing picture here: I've seen good prints made this
way (and made a few myself), but I much prefer keeping those other
inks out.


- Barrett

It is ironic that you fault Reichman for the very thing that you have done.  ;-)

The B9810 used a photo black, a matte black and a light gray for its
B&W prints.  Not one as you have indicated.  The printer is shipping
now and soon there will be a wealth of information and opinions on its
performance.   From what I have heard the 9180 is a big step forward
for B&W and not as you have indicated a step backward.

g

On 9/13/06, Barrett Benton <bwbenton@...> wrote:

>
> I like a lot that I hear about the B9180.  But I can't help thinking
> that HP has taken one step forward for color printing while taking one
> step back for b/w.  *One* grey ink?  This most likely means color is
> part of the b/w printing picture here: I've seen good prints made this
> way (and made a few myself), but I much prefer keeping those other
> inks out.
>
>
> - Barrett
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
-Gary

In a message dated 9/13/06 1:56:29 PM, bwbenton@... writes:


> Gosh, that's funny – according to the same source he gets his numbers
> for the 9180, my current printer of choice, HP's 8750, the B9180's
> Vivera-dye-based stablemate, also scores pretty damn high on the
> lightfastness scale, not the "30-70 years" Reichman states.  And,
> unlike the B9180, the 8750's three black channels amount to a true
> "tri-tone" setup for b/w, as is the case with Epson's 2400.  When you
> print in greyscale mode with the 8750, those three inks are the *only*
> ones in play;  if you want tones, you can always work in with the
> other colors available (there are six more).
> 
I find black-ink-only, or black-and-gray-inks-only to not be enough: the 
tonality is uncontrolled and varies with each media. I find color modes that mix 
light grays from cmY inks not acceptable for B&W either. And printers that 
don't offer reasonable life expectancies on matte/art media are less than 
desirable as well. So, to date, the only printers to get all the right elements for 
good B&W from an OEM color inkset, are the Epson K3s, and the Canon iPF5000. HP 
certainly had developed (as noted) multi-gray technology for previous desktop 
dye ink printers (whether it was an affordable way to print B&W images was 
another matter), but they appear to have stepped back from that with this 
generation of pigment printers.

C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Business Unit
Datacolor Inc.
CDTobie@...
www.colorvision.com


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

In a message dated 9/13/06 2:22:24 PM, gudstrand.list@... writes:


> The B9810 used a photo black, a matte black and a light gray for its
> B&W prints.
> 
While I can envision using both blacks together in some media, that does not 
address the issue of the single gray, which is puzzling for neutral-based 
output. HP's "Three Blacks" marketing term does not make it clear that this is NOT 
like the black, light black, and light light black (by whatever names) that 
Epson and Canon use. Unless the same gray ink is to be used as the basis of 
printing all grays from a very dark gray to the lightest possible gray 
(challenging, in terms of dot coverage and dot visibility) then colored inks would be 
used to fill in at the light end. So, as you note, we'll have to wait until 
outside testers have worked with the printer enough to determine actual black 
generation methods and results to get much of a picture.

C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Business Unit
Datacolor Inc.
CDTobie@...
www.colorvision.com


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

That is one grey, as opposed to the two grey system that HP's dye-based 
printers use (Black + grey, plus light grey).

grey != black. One grey is a two black system (Matte or Photo black + grey).

-Adam


Gary Udstrand wrote:

> 
> 
> It is ironic that you fault Reichman for the very thing that you have 
> done. ;-)
> 
> The B9810 used a photo black, a matte black and a light gray for its
> B&W prints. Not one as you have indicated. The printer is shipping
> now and soon there will be a wealth of information and opinions on its
> performance. From what I have heard the 9180 is a big step forward
> for B&W and not as you have indicated a step backward.
> 
> g
> 
> On 9/13/06, Barrett Benton <bwbenton@... 
> <mailto:bwbenton%40bellatlantic.net>> wrote:
> 
>  >
>  > I like a lot that I hear about the B9180. But I can't help thinking
>  > that HP has taken one step forward for color printing while taking one
>  > step back for b/w. *One* grey ink? This most likely means color is
>  > part of the b/w printing picture here: I've seen good prints made this
>  > way (and made a few myself), but I much prefer keeping those other
>  > inks out.
>  >
>  >
>  > - Barrett

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Udstrand"
<gudstrand.list@...> wrote:
>
> It is ironic that you fault Reichman for the very thing that you
have done.  ;-)
> 
> The B9810 used a photo black, a matte black and a light gray for its
> B&W prints.  Not one as you have indicated.  The printer is shipping
> now and soon there will be a wealth of information and opinions on its
> performance.   From what I have heard the 9180 is a big step forward
> for B&W and not as you have indicated a step backward.

Well, that depends. :-)

You correctly state that the B9180 has photo-black, matte-black, and
light-grey inks; however, unlike the HP 8750 (and Epson 2400), it
sacrifices a second grey ink (Epson refers to it as Light Light
Black) for the ability to switch from matte to glossy print media
without the bother of cart-swapping; whatever media you're printing
on, you only have two of those three carts in play at a time.  

This can be argued one way or the other; I argue that
this is a step backward for the sake of the convenience of not
switching out carts when switching between gloss/semi-gloss and matte
paper.  Others will prefer this arrangement if their work requires
frequent switching between different papers.

Epson has taken a bit of a beating about this regarding their x800
series printers, where they chose to have a single black and two grey
inks, which necessitates swapping out the black cart when switching
from glossy to matte media (or vice versa).  IMO, part of the
reasoning behind the popularity of matte media for inkjet printing in
the first place was simply that, until recently, b/w glossy printing
looked downright awful.  Now, just when printer manufacturers are
getting a handle on the issue of glossy b/w output, they get strung up
by end users because of the need to swap out that glossy K cart when
they want to print matte, on account of the amount of ink wasted inthe
process.  I can sympathise, but only up to a point:  My own use of
matte media was largely pragmatic.  I now have the ability to create
glossy b/w (actually a nice, mild gloss in the case of HP's own media,
as opposed to the garish sheen of other papers) without distracting
artifacts, and with convincing, neutral tonality.  This is exactly
what I've been wating for.  Yet I understand others prefer matte for
aesthetic rather than pragmatic reasons, and the options are out there
for that.  But there are now fewer limits, and more possibilites.


- Barrett

Maybe I was not clear, the B9180 uses all three, both blacks and light
gray ONLY for its B&W prints.


http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1003&message=19947954&q=9180+black+white&qf=m
========from a thread on dpreview========
"> Are you saying the photo black is used along with the matte black
> and gray cartridges when doing B&W on matte papers, as there is no
> light light black as there is in the Epson K3 printers?
>
> I'd assumed that the photo black was used only for the glossy
> family of papers ... .
>

Correct , all three are used on Greyscale printing on all Fine Art
media. You can also use all inks if the radio button , "print with
composite" is left checked.
-- 
Neil Snape photographer Paris http://www.neilsnape.com
========================

g

On 9/13/06, CDTobie@... <CDTobie@...> wrote:
> >
> I find black-ink-only, or black-and-gray-inks-only to not be enough: the
> tonality is uncontrolled and varies with each media. I find color modes that mix
> light grays from cmY inks not acceptable for B&W either. And printers that
> don't offer reasonable life expectancies on matte/art media are less than
> desirable as well. So, to date, the only printers to get all the right elements for
> good B&W from an OEM color inkset, are the Epson K3s, and the Canon iPF5000. HP
> certainly had developed (as noted) multi-gray technology for previous desktop
> dye ink printers (whether it was an affordable way to print B&W images was
> another matter), but they appear to have stepped back from that with this
> generation of pigment printers.
>
> C. David Tobie
> Product Technology Manager
> ColorVision Business Unit
> Datacolor Inc.
> CDTobie@...
> www.colorvision.com



-- 
-Gary

That is not true, it uses all three at the same time when printing on
fine art media.  I don't claim to know how it works and I am only
repeating what I have been told by Neil Snape (as close to an expert
on the 9180) as anyone.  I also included a link to his review that has
this information.   He, and me by proxy, may be incorrect but I am
basing my comments on what he has said in regards to his first hand
experience with this printer (He has had this printer for several
months).

My sources may be incorrect however, on what source do you base your statements?

g

On 9/13/06, Barrett Benton <bwbenton@...> wrote:
>
> You correctly state that the B9180 has photo-black, matte-black, and
> light-grey inks; however, unlike the HP 8750 (and Epson 2400), it
> sacrifices a second grey ink (Epson refers to it as Light Light
> Black) for the ability to switch from matte to glossy print media
> without the bother of cart-swapping; whatever media you're printing
> on, you only have two of those three carts in play at a time.


-- 
-Gary

In a message dated 9/13/06 4:42:48 PM, gudstrand.list@... writes:


> Maybe I was not clear, the B9180 uses all three, both blacks and light
> gray ONLY for its B&W prints.
> 
> 

Then this is not a black and white mode, its a carbon pigment tint mode, with 
differing tints on differing media. This can be great, when its what you 
want, but its not a controlled system.

C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Business Unit
Datacolor Inc.
CDTobie@...
www.colorvision.com


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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Udstrand"
<gudstrand.list@...> wrote:
>
> That is not true, it uses all three at the same time when printing on
> fine art media.  I don't claim to know how it works and I am only
> repeating what I have been told by Neil Snape (as close to an expert
> on the 9180) as anyone.  I also included a link to his review that has
> this information.   He, and me by proxy, may be incorrect but I am
> basing my comments on what he has said in regards to his first hand
> experience with this printer (He has had this printer for several
> months).
> 
> My sources may be incorrect however, on what source do you base your
statements?

More or less the same as yours, Gary. :-)

But I just had a chat with someone at HP, and I'll offer a qualified
mea culpa here: it appears that, indeed, all three black inks in the
B9180 get used simultaneously; the "qualified" part stems from the
fact that this comes into play only with matte/fine art papers.  Also,
according to a blog entry by Neil Snape over at Photo-i, the K ink in
this case gets little use – principally for shadow detail.  Printing
on glossy brings us back to using just two inks.  Bizarre as it
sounds, this means we're both right (or wrong, depending:-).

Snape should know a heck of a lot more than either of us at this
stage, so while I'm not exactly waiting with bated breath, I'll be
quite interested in how this new printer shapes up, or not.  I'd still
feel better with a second grey cart, however.


- Barrett

To overcome the Epson-R1800/QTR/fineart/black-only mode's graininess I
used the PK as medium gray and it worked out quite well. I wouldn't be
surprised if this is the same method HP is using for the fineart B/W
printing: MK=black, PK=medium gray, LK=light gray.

And of course when printing on glossy you don't want to use MK at all.

--nick

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Udstrand"
<gudstrand.list@...> wrote:

>
> That is not true, it uses all three at the same time when printing on
> fine art media. ..

That may well be but I don't think it makes sense. I fail to see how using a photo black along with a matte black and light gray is going to make any real difference in print quality. Maybe someone more knowledgeable than I could enlighten me.

Walt

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Gary Udstrand [mailto:gudstrand.list@...]
>Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 10:32 AM
>To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: HP Photosmart Pro B9180 review at LL
>
>Maybe I was not clear, the B9180 uses all three, both blacks and light
>gray ONLY for its B&W prints.
>
>
>http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1003&message=19947954&q=9180+black+white&qf=m
>========from a thread on dpreview========
>"> Are you saying the photo black is used along with the matte black
>> and gray cartridges when doing B&W on matte papers, as there is no
>> light light black as there is in the Epson K3 printers?
>>
>> I'd assumed that the photo black was used only for the glossy
>> family of papers ... .
>>
>
>Correct , all three are used on Greyscale printing on all Fine Art
>media. You can also use all inks if the radio button , "print with
>composite" is left checked.
>-- 
>Neil Snape photographer Paris http://www.neilsnape.com
>========================
>
>g
>
>On 9/13/06, CDTobie@... <CDTobie@...> wrote:
>> >
>> I find black-ink-only, or black-and-gray-inks-only to not be enough: the
>> tonality is uncontrolled and varies with each media. I find color modes that mix
>> light grays from cmY inks not acceptable for B&W either. And printers that
>> don't offer reasonable life expectancies on matte/art media are less than
>> desirable as well. So, to date, the only printers to get all the right elements for
>> good B&W from an OEM color inkset, are the Epson K3s, and the Canon iPF5000. HP
>> certainly had developed (as noted) multi-gray technology for previous desktop
>> dye ink printers (whether it was an affordable way to print B&W images was
>> another matter), but they appear to have stepped back from that with this
>> generation of pigment printers.
>>
>> C. David Tobie
>> Product Technology Manager
>> ColorVision Business Unit
>> Datacolor Inc.
>> CDTobie@colorvision.com
>> www.colorvision.com
>
>
>
>-- 
>-Gary

Walt,

When used on matte papers, the PK ink has a lower density than the MK 
ink. So essentially you have in order of decreasing density MK, PK, 
and LK. Viola, that is a 3 ink set up. On Glossy (RC) papers, only PK 
and LK can be used.

Shilesh

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Walt Mucha" 
<wkm@...> wrote:
>
> That may well be but I don't think it makes sense. I fail to see 
how using a photo black along with a matte black and light gray is 
going to make any real difference in print quality. Maybe someone 
more knowledgeable than I could enlighten me.
> 
> Walt
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Gary Udstrand [mailto:gudstrand.list@...]
> >Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 10:32 AM
> >To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: HP Photosmart Pro B9180 review at LL
> >
> >Maybe I was not clear, the B9180 uses all three, both blacks and 
light
> >gray ONLY for its B&W prints.
> >
> >
> >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?
forum=1003&message=19947954&q=9180+black+white&qf=m
> >========from a thread on dpreview========
> >"> Are you saying the photo black is used along with the matte 
black
> >> and gray cartridges when doing B&W on matte papers, as there is 
no
> >> light light black as there is in the Epson K3 printers?
> >>
> >> I'd assumed that the photo black was used only for the glossy
> >> family of papers ... .
> >>
> >
> >Correct , all three are used on Greyscale printing on all Fine Art
> >media. You can also use all inks if the radio button , "print with
> >composite" is left checked.
> >-- 
> >Neil Snape photographer Paris http://www.neilsnape.com
> >========================
> >
> >g
> >
> >On 9/13/06, CDTobie@... <CDTobie@...> wrote:
> >> >
> >> I find black-ink-only, or black-and-gray-inks-only to not be 
enough: the
> >> tonality is uncontrolled and varies with each media. I find 
color modes that mix
> >> light grays from cmY inks not acceptable for B&W either. And 
printers that
> >> don't offer reasonable life expectancies on matte/art media are 
less than
> >> desirable as well. So, to date, the only printers to get all the 
right elements for
> >> good B&W from an OEM color inkset, are the Epson K3s, and the 
Canon iPF5000. HP
> >> certainly had developed (as noted) multi-gray technology for 
previous desktop
> >> dye ink printers (whether it was an affordable way to print B&W 
images was
> >> another matter), but they appear to have stepped back from that 
with this

> >> generation of pigment printers.
> >>
> >> C. David Tobie
> >> Product Technology Manager
> >> ColorVision Business Unit
> >> Datacolor Inc.
> >> CDTobie@...
> >> www.colorvision.com
> >
> >
> >
> >-- 
> >-Gary
>

Thanks Peter.  Interesting that I've been using Ken Lee's duotones plus some 
that I created with his as a base for several years.  However, he's just 
updated his duotone page this August so that was nice to find.  I had never 
seen Paul Butzi's site and that was quite helpful.  Thanks so much.

Diane

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "zonepeter" <zonepeter@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 10:39 PM
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: HP Photosmart Pro B9180 review at LL


Diane,
If you are interested in printing in RGB, you might check out Paul
Butzi's site and Ken Lee's site.  They each have articles about using
RGB curves for mono printing and each offer some interesting curves
for toning.
I have never tried this method, and I undrestand you need good
profiles to make it work, but it might get you closer to what you are
looking for.

Peter

I used to visit Luminous Landscape a great deal. I  respected
Michael's opinions and reviews a lot. Then I really got burned. I read
his glowing review of the 2200 and how stunning the prints were for
both B&W and color. At the time, I was doing a lot of color printing
for people who wanted the prints on high gloss paper.
 I bought the printer based on his review, set it up and made a few
color prints on various high gloss papers. Wow! What awful bronzing!
It was terrible. Embarrassing. I could not understand just how the
heck Michael's review made no mention whatsoever of the obviously
visible bronzing on glossy paper. How could he possible miss it?
 The unit went for sale on Ebay and sold immediately since it was in
high demand and truly 'like new'. I went back to making gorgeous high
gloss prints on my old printer.
  Sorry, but I'll never again trust the guy as a reviewer. He missed
something that was easy and obvious for anyone at all to notice in
minutes. Admittedly, I might be harsh, but this was not a subtle
matter or something hard to catch. 
  Also, his review stated "metamerism---NOT" for the 2200 which was
untrue as well.
  (still grumbling)
  Howard



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Barrett Benton"
<bwbenton@...> wrote:

>
> As with a lot of stuff Reichmann writes about, it's the details he
> omits that can be just as irritating as the gaffes he creates.
> 
> In regarding the B9180, Reichman states: 
> 
> "Pigment inks offer a level of permanence not seen from printers which
> use dye-based inks. These actually exceed that of any colour
> reproduction process yet seen. Prints made using pigment based inks
> even rival silver gelatin based prints, (unless selenium or gold toned
> and archivally processed). Nevertheless, dye based inks have continued
> to improve, and when used with some specialty papers offer archival
> ratings of 30 – 70 years. But none can match the 80 – 200 year ratings
> of pigment inks on quality paper."
> 
> Gosh, that's funny – according to the same source he gets his numbers
> for the 9180, my current printer of choice, HP's 8750, the B9180's
> Vivera-dye-based stablemate, also scores pretty damn high on the
> lightfastness scale, not the "30-70 years" Reichman states.  And,
> unlike the B9180, the 8750's three black channels amount to a true
> "tri-tone" setup for b/w, as is the case with Epson's 2400.  When you
> print in greyscale mode with the 8750, those three inks are the *only*
> ones in play;  if you want tones, you can always work in with the
> other colors available (there are six more).
> 
> For what it's worth, here's what Wilhelm sez:
> 
> http://wilhelm-research.com/hp/8750.html
> 
> I'm not trumpeting this printer as the be-all/end-all for everyone:
> for one thing, it does have one Achilles heel vis-a-vis pigs
> (waterfastness, although this hasn't been a major problem for me).  In
> addition, if your needs go beyond 13x19", you won't be looking here. 
> But the thing works wonderfully for me, particularly for b/w - the
> best performance I've ever gotten from any process I've tried, and by
> far the least painful (remembering my issues with an Epson 1160 with
> third-party inks, I decided "I'd rather switch than fight").  I guess
> my problem here is with "reviewer's amnesia". Reichman is hardly alone
> in this, although he's something of a repeat offender in his
> bedazzlement for the new, while simultaneously glossing over (sorry)
> potential issues regarding said new product, while conveniently
> forgetting details about the product(s) that came before it.
> 
> I like a lot that I hear about the B9180.  But I can't help thinking
> that HP has taken one step forward for color printing while taking one
> step back for b/w.  *One* grey ink?  This most likely means color is
> part of the b/w printing picture here: I've seen good prints made this
> way (and made a few myself), but I much prefer keeping those other
> inks out.
> 
> 
> - Barrett
>

In a message dated 9/13/06 8:46:40 PM, wkm@... writes:


> That may well be but I don't think it makes sense. I fail to see how using 
> a photo black along with a matte black and light gray is going to make any 
> real difference in print quality. Maybe someone more knowledgeable than I could 
> enlighten me.
> 

As I noted yesterday, double blacks may come into play for some media, but   
are not a replacement for two levels of gray. That must be replaced by some 
other technology (varible dot size breakthourgh?) if the printer is to print 
without colored inks or visible dither in the light grays.

C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Business Unit
Datacolor Inc.
CDTobie@...
www.colorvision.com


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

In a message dated 9/13/06 9:50:18 PM, shileshjani@... writes:


> When used on matte papers, the PK ink has a lower density than the MK
> ink. So essentially you have in order of decreasing density MK, PK,
> and LK. Viola, that is a 3 ink set up. On Glossy (RC) papers, only PK
> and LK can be used.
> 
In order for this to work, the density of the one gray ink must be quite 
dark, as it has to take over from the photo black, similar to the way Espon light 
black takes over from either full black. This is similar to how a 
2100/2200/7600/9600 works. It is not similar to how a 2400/4800/7800/9800 or Canon iPF5000 
works with an even lighter gray ink to take over for the lightest tones; 
otherwise they must either be printed using color ink, or show grain from light 
application of the darker gray ink. There is no magic at the black end that can 
make up for not having two gray inks: that requires magic at the light gray 
end. I'll be interested to see what gray magic HP has come up with.

C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Business Unit
Datacolor Inc.
CDTobie@...
www.colorvision.com


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

In a message dated 9/14/06 12:41:06 AM, bwscans@... writes:


> "Illuminant metameric on photo media especially B&W"
> 
> Can any one explain what this means?
> 

It means that when you move from one type of viewing light to another, the 
colors change color, and the grays lose neutrality. This would tend to imply 
that the light grays are derived from color inks, not light gray ink, which is 
the issue we've been discussing here for the last day or two...

C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Business Unit
Datacolor Inc.
CDTobie@...
www.colorvision.com


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

In a message dated 9/14/06 5:24:46 AM, nghin@... writes:


> To overcome the Epson-R1800/QTR/fineart/black-only mode's graininess I
> used the PK as medium gray and it worked out quite well. I wouldn't be
> surprised if this is the same method HP is using for the fineart B/W
> printing: MK=black, PK=medium gray, LK=light gray.
> 
And where would this leave them for gloss and luster media where PK= black, 
and LK= medium gray? There's no third element here to print the light gray 
areas neutrally. From the metamerism comments, one could imply color inks are used 
to print light grays, but that will have to be determined later, as its 
certainly not in the specs or early reviews.

C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Business Unit
Datacolor Inc.
CDTobie@...
www.colorvision.com


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

In a message dated 9/14/06 8:16:03 AM, gudstrand.list@... writes:


> From the review:
> 
> "My favourite by far is the HP Smooth Fine Art. On photo media the B&W
> is composite only (wish this would change in a driver update) which
> although is neutral in controlled lighting for which the print
> lighting conditions are targeted for, they are quite illuminant
> metameric. I have created special B&W profiles for different lighting,
> so it is possible to target the print for the light but don't expect
> B&W prints on photo media to be colour constant. Colour repro mask
> illuminant metamerism so it is in line with other printers in this
> regard but no where near as constant as a traditional darkroom colour
> print."
> 
Thats as close to a description of light grays formed from color inks as I 
could ask for... as noted, it doesn't keep you from printing relatively neutral 
images, only flexible ones that can withstand differing light sources. 
Creating "special B&W profiles" is exactly what PrintFIX PRO 2.0 will offer, but its 
ideal when these are only needed for the user's choice of tints, not for 
compensating for lighting conditions.

C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Business Unit
Datacolor Inc.
CDTobie@...
www.colorvision.com


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

Yes, that's enough to push me away from the HP.  I had read Neil's review 
also--and his posts on the dpreview printer forum.  It appears to me that 
its the 2400 or nothing for now since the Canon is not the size printer I 
need.  I have access to larger format printing with the newer large format 
Epson and I don't too often print larger than 11 x 17 or 13 x 19 (with 
borders--I don't print borderless).

Diane

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <CDTobie@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 10:13 AM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: HP Photosmart Pro B9180 review at LL



In a message dated 9/14/06 12:41:06 AM, bwscans@... writes:


> "Illuminant metameric on photo media especially B&W"
>
> Can any one explain what this means?
>

It means that when you move from one type of viewing light to another, the
colors change color, and the grays lose neutrality. This would tend to imply
that the light grays are derived from color inks, not light gray ink, which 
is
the issue we've been discussing here for the last day or two...

C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Business Unit
Datacolor Inc.
CDTobie@...
www.colorvision.com


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



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











-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.3/447 - Release Date: 9/13/2006

I am of the same opinion as you are Howard. Sometimes I re-read the review of the 2200 
and ask myself just what was he looking at to say that there was no gloss differential? If I 
cross my eyes enough I don't see any either.
Most of the reviews that I have read of the past few years though have made me feel like 
most of them should be approached as you would road kill. With a very long stick and 
upwind of it.
I think also that product reviewers be required by law to disclose any financial support or 
other arrangements they have with the manufacturers they are writing about. Something 
like what what people pushing stocks are now required to reveal. I think that it could lead 
to a little more transparency maybe? That is a big maybe though.
Of course then you have to deal with the sock puppets and hired guns. 

Larry

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "how786" <how786@...> wrote:

>
>   I used to visit Luminous Landscape a great deal. I  respected
> Michael's opinions and reviews a lot. Then I really got burned. I read
> his glowing review of the 2200 and how stunning the prints were for
> both B&W and color. At the time, I was doing a lot of color printing
> for people who wanted the prints on high gloss paper.
>  I bought the printer based on his review, set it up and made a few
> color prints on various high gloss papers. Wow! What awful bronzing!
> It was terrible. Embarrassing. I could not understand just how the
> heck Michael's review made no mention whatsoever of the obviously
> visible bronzing on glossy paper. How could he possible miss it?
>  The unit went for sale on Ebay and sold immediately since it was in
> high demand and truly 'like new'. I went back to making gorgeous high
> gloss prints on my old printer.
>   Sorry, but I'll never again trust the guy as a reviewer. He missed
> something that was easy and obvious for anyone at all to notice in
> minutes. Admittedly, I might be harsh, but this was not a subtle
> matter or something hard to catch. 
>   Also, his review stated "metamerism---NOT" for the 2200 which was
> untrue as well.
>   (still grumbling)
>   Howard

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Tyler Boley [mailto:tyler@...]
>Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 06:40 AM
>To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [Digital BW] Re: HP Photosmart Pro B9180 review at LL

>I have yet to see any review from Reichman that demands as much as an
>advanced worker from these producrs. Some of the reviews and work I've
>seen there are even entry level, though those they are generally not his.
>No doubt the site is a help to people, but there's no replacement for
>these lists and the experience here, particularly for printing.


I think one needs to consider the target audience for these reviews. they are generally for the amateur and not, accomplished advanced amateur/pros.
In the early days of Luminous Landscape Reichman was a pretty unbiased reviewer. I think he and others eventually fall prey to the lure of free stuff, advertisers for their sites and even a spot on the payroll. Most companies are not going to send preview samples of their hardware/software to folks who are not going to consistently stress the positive and gloss over or ignore the negative aspects of their products.
Some of the better known personalities are on the company payroll as consultants and paid spokespersons so one must be wary of endorsements from these folks. The model has been around for a long time. Ever see a magazine give a bad product review to a company that is one of their advertisers? As you pointed out, it is wise to wait and hear from some of the more accomplished and every day users of this and other pieces of equipment.

Walt

Dear Larry,

  Thank you for your candor and for your humor. The line about 'road
kill' was simply hilarious. You touched upon an area I thought of but
was reluctant to post; namely, 'financial support'. 
  This issue is rampant everywhere especially in medicine where the
docs are often given 'financial incentives' (AKA bribes) in order to
use/promote a product. The Editor in Chief of the New England Journal
of Medicine recently resigned and then wrote an expose about the
pharmaceutical industry and their close financial ties to the docs and
most of the studies the supposedly neutral journals publish. Some
jopurnals have actually refused negative articles about a product that
they receive huge ads for! The result is that a killer drug like Vioxx
could be marketed and remain on  the market 4 years after MSD had
received numerous reports of cardiac deaths due to the product. You
don't want to get me started on this one. Virtually ALL the drug
companies keep killer-drugs on the market as long as they possibly
can. You would not believe how unethical their decisions can be and
how many people die annually as a result. (JAMA says 137,000)
  Heck, the 'lobbying' system, AKA bribery, is a legal part of our
govenment.
  Sorry for the rant. Being a physician, this whole area is infuriating.

  Again, your tone and tempered,candid post are refreshing.

   Regards
    Howard


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "kraazy_larry"
<lwangelin@...> wrote:
>
> I am of the same opinion as you are Howard. Sometimes I re-read the
review of the 2200 
> and ask myself just what was he looking at to say that there was no
gloss differential? If I 
> cross my eyes enough I don't see any either.
> Most of the reviews that I have read of the past few years though
have made me feel like 
> most of them should be approached as you would road kill. With a
very long stick and 
> upwind of it.
> I think also that product reviewers be required by law to disclose
any financial support or 
> other arrangements they have with the manufacturers they are writing
about. Something 
> like what what people pushing stocks are now required to reveal. I
think that it could lead 
> to a little more transparency maybe? That is a big maybe though.
> Of course then you have to deal with the sock puppets and hired guns. 
> 
> Larry
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "how786"
<how786@> wrote:

> >
> >   I used to visit Luminous Landscape a great deal. I  respected
> > Michael's opinions and reviews a lot. Then I really got burned. I read
> > his glowing review of the 2200 and how stunning the prints were for
> > both B&W and color. At the time, I was doing a lot of color printing
> > for people who wanted the prints on high gloss paper.
> >  I bought the printer based on his review, set it up and made a few
> > color prints on various high gloss papers. Wow! What awful bronzing!
> > It was terrible. Embarrassing. I could not understand just how the
> > heck Michael's review made no mention whatsoever of the obviously
> > visible bronzing on glossy paper. How could he possible miss it?
> >  The unit went for sale on Ebay and sold immediately since it was in
> > high demand and truly 'like new'. I went back to making gorgeous high
> > gloss prints on my old printer.
> >   Sorry, but I'll never again trust the guy as a reviewer. He missed
> > something that was easy and obvious for anyone at all to notice in
> > minutes. Admittedly, I might be harsh, but this was not a subtle
> > matter or something hard to catch. 
> >   Also, his review stated "metamerism---NOT" for the 2200 which was
> > untrue as well.
> >   (still grumbling)
> >   Howard
>

I want to say though, that he has the respect of many as being without
agenda, or bias for any commercial reason.
I've heard that from several who seem to know something about him.
Perhaps it's mostly a user level issue.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Walt Mucha"
<wkm@...> wrote:
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Tyler Boley [mailto:tyler@...]
> >Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 06:40 AM
> >To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [Digital BW] Re: HP Photosmart Pro B9180 review at LL
> 
> >I have yet to see any review from Reichman that demands as much as an
> >advanced worker from these producrs. Some of the reviews and work I've
> >seen there are even entry level, though those they are generally
not his.
> >No doubt the site is a help to people, but there's no replacement for
> >these lists and the experience here, particularly for printing.
> 
> 
> I think one needs to consider the target audience for these reviews.
they are generally for the amateur and not, accomplished advanced
amateur/pros.
> In the early days of Luminous Landscape Reichman was a pretty
unbiased reviewer. I think he and others eventually fall prey to the
lure of free stuff, advertisers for their sites and even a spot on the
payroll. Most companies are not going to send preview samples of their
hardware/software to folks who are not going to consistently stress
the positive and gloss over or ignore the negative aspects of their
products.
> Some of the better known personalities are on the company payroll as
consultants and paid spokespersons so one must be wary of endorsements
from these folks. The model has been around for a long time. Ever see
a magazine give a bad product review to a company that is one of their
advertisers? As you pointed out, it is wise to wait and hear from some
of the more accomplished and every day users of this and other pieces
of equipment.

> 
> Walt
>

AND I'LL REFER YOU BACK ONE OR MORE GENERATIONS . . .  when he was soft petaling the Epson 870/1270 orange fade/ozone problems.  I never look at his site any more.
   
  Another Howard (not the person who initiated this thread)
  

kraazy_larry <lwangelin@...> wrote:
          I am of the same opinion as you are Howard. Sometimes I re-read the review of the 2200 
and ask myself just what was he looking at to say that there was no gloss differential? If I 
cross my eyes enough I don't see any either.
Most of the reviews that I have read of the past few years though have made me feel like 
most of them should be approached as you would road kill. With a very long stick and 
upwind of it.
I think also that product reviewers be required by law to disclose any financial support or 
other arrangements they have with the manufacturers they are writing about. Something 
like what what people pushing stocks are now required to reveal. I think that it could lead 
to a little more transparency maybe? That is a big maybe though.
Of course then you have to deal with the sock puppets and hired guns. 

Larry

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "how786" <how786@...> wrote:
>
> I used to visit Luminous Landscape a great deal. I respected
> Michael's opinions and reviews a lot. Then I really got burned. I read
> his glowing review of the 2200 and how stunning the prints were for
> both B&W and color. At the time, I was doing a lot of color printing
> for people who wanted the prints on high gloss paper.
> I bought the printer based on his review, set it up and made a few
> color prints on various high gloss papers. Wow! What awful bronzing!
> It was terrible. Embarrassing. I could not understand just how the
> heck Michael's review made no mention whatsoever of the obviously
> visible bronzing on glossy paper. How could he possible miss it?
> The unit went for sale on Ebay and sold immediately since it was in
> high demand and truly 'like new'. I went back to making gorgeous high
> gloss prints on my old printer.
> Sorry, but I'll never again trust the guy as a reviewer. He missed
> something that was easy and obvious for anyone at all to notice in
> minutes. Admittedly, I might be harsh, but this was not a subtle
> matter or something hard to catch. 
> Also, his review stated "metamerism---NOT" for the 2200 which was
> untrue as well.
> (still grumbling)
> Howard



         

 		
---------------------------------
 All-new Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster.

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

Shilesh Jani wrote:

> When used on matte papers, the PK ink has a lower density than the MK 
> ink. So essentially you have in order of decreasing density MK, PK, 
> and LK. Viola, that is a 3 ink set up. On Glossy (RC) papers, only PK 
> and LK can be used.
> 
> Shilesh

Correct,  I have a similar ink setup on my Epson 9000. 3 only
for glossy media, 4 for mat.  The strange thing is that when I
print with 4: Eboni, PK, two grey inks, on mat canvas but
varnish that canvas with Lascaux varnish to a gloss state, it
is very difficult to get the Eboni  to a higher Dmax than the PK.
That ink influences the gloss even with real thick layers of
varnish on top of the mat canvas. So in the end it is easier 
to use no Eboni even then.

Ernst

-- 

                    --
           Ernst Dinkla


www.pigment-print.com
(         unvollendet         )

gudstrand.list@... writes: > Are you saying that the HP cannot print 
black and white with variable toning?  I thought that the use of the colored 
inks with B&W was the default in the HP print driver.  Have you used the HP?

> 

CDTobie@...: No but I hope to work with them next week at Photokina. 
Their own description is that the B&W mode uses only black and gray inks. The 
experience of those  on this list is that such prints tend to be 'carbon tinted' 
not neutral, and that the exact tint varies with the media in question. Thats 
what using bits of  color ink along with blacks and grays is all about... >

I have an early 9180, but it's inaccessible at the moment. Trying to 
remember, seems I could print "grayscale" (only black and gray) or "composite" (colors 
mixed in) from the driver. I agree with most of the reviewers who say the 
all-black B&Ws are really neutral. However, they're balanced for D50 like the 
8750.

So I'm not giving you very solid info here, but it's worth every penny. ;-)

Harald Johnson