Digital BW, The Print

I keep bringing this up from time to time, hoping someone has tried Black Only printing 
with PK and one of these papers...

...anyone?

thanks,
Sarah

Sarah,

For you......just for you, I printed BO on Silver Rag using a 4000 
loaded with 4800 K3 PK, at 2880 dpi.

What would you like to know?

Superb Dmax (>2.5)
Minimal graininess visible to naked eye
Creamy warm color on the warm(ish) paper
Some bronzing/gloss differential; easily eliminated with a single-
pass overcoat of GLOP (50% ink limit). GLOP increases Dmax to >2.65; 
this is the highest Dmax I have EVER measured with pigment inks.

I have not linearized the output, but boy this is definitely a viable 
option for those with printer/driver capable of BO.

Best regards.

Shilesh


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface" 
<sagaface@...> wrote:
>
> I keep bringing this up from time to time, hoping someone has tried 
Black Only printing 

> with PK and one of these papers...
> 
> ...anyone?
> 
> thanks,
> Sarah
>

Shilesh...you're my hero. Thank you!!! I love BO on my 2200 but want larger prints and 
thought I might "upgrade" to the 4000 to use with those papers if someone could tell me 
it might be worth it. Sounds like a "yes" to me.

Oh, happy day!

thanks again for the info.
Sarah



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani" <shileshjani@...> 
wrote:

>
> Sarah,
> 
> For you......just for you, I printed BO on Silver Rag using a 4000 
> loaded with 4800 K3 PK, at 2880 dpi.
> 
> What would you like to know?
> 
> Superb Dmax (>2.5)
> Minimal graininess visible to naked eye
> Creamy warm color on the warm(ish) paper
> Some bronzing/gloss differential; easily eliminated with a single-
> pass overcoat of GLOP (50% ink limit). GLOP increases Dmax to >2.65; 
> this is the highest Dmax I have EVER measured with pigment inks.
> 
> I have not linearized the output, but boy this is definitely a viable 
> option for those with printer/driver capable of BO.
> 
> Best regards.
> 
> Shilesh
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface" 
> <sagaface@> wrote:
> >
> > I keep bringing this up from time to time, hoping someone has tried 
> Black Only printing 
> > with PK and one of these papers...
> > 
> > ...anyone?
> > 
> > thanks,
> > Sarah
> >
>

Oh, blush.

Have you tried any of these papers on your 2200? With the original UC 
PK inks, you are likely to see more gloss differential. In spirit of 
full disclosure, the K3 PK ink is ever so slightly "green-warm" while 
UC PK is "brown-warm".

Shilesh

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface" 
<sagaface@...> wrote:
>
> Shilesh...you're my hero. Thank you!!! I love BO on my 2200 but 
want larger prints and 
> thought I might "upgrade" to the 4000 to use with those papers if 
someone could tell me 
> it might be worth it. Sounds like a "yes" to me.
> 
> Oh, happy day!
> 
> thanks again for the info.
> Sarah
> 
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani" 
<shileshjani@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > Sarah,
> > 
> > For you......just for you, I printed BO on Silver Rag using a 
4000 
> > loaded with 4800 K3 PK, at 2880 dpi.
> > 
> > What would you like to know?
> > 
> > Superb Dmax (>2.5)
> > Minimal graininess visible to naked eye
> > Creamy warm color on the warm(ish) paper
> > Some bronzing/gloss differential; easily eliminated with a single-
> > pass overcoat of GLOP (50% ink limit). GLOP increases Dmax to 
>2.65; 
> > this is the highest Dmax I have EVER measured with pigment inks.
> > 
> > I have not linearized the output, but boy this is definitely a 
viable 
> > option for those with printer/driver capable of BO.
> > 
> > Best regards.
> > 
> > Shilesh
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface" 
> > <sagaface@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I keep bringing this up from time to time, hoping someone has 
tried 

> > Black Only printing 
> > > with PK and one of these papers...
> > > 
> > > ...anyone?
> > > 
> > > thanks,
> > > Sarah
> > >
> >
>

Hello Sarah,

>Shilesh...you're my hero. Thank you!!! I love BO on my 2200 but want 
>larger prints and thought I might "upgrade" to the 4000 to use with 
>those papers if someone could tell me it might be worth it. Sounds 
>like a "yes" to me.
>Oh, happy day!

Sounds like good news.  FWIW, the 4000 is widely considered to be the
best BO machine because of it's more random dither pattern.  It's nice
to hear that on SR the graininess is reduced.  Sounds like a winning
combination.  If you decide to do it please keep us posted on your
progress.


Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani"
<shileshjani@...> wrote:

>
> Oh, blush.
>
> Have you tried any of these papers on your 2200? With the original UC
> PK inks, you are likely to see more gloss differential. In spirit of
> full disclosure, the K3 PK ink is ever so slightly "green-warm" while
> UC PK is "brown-warm".
>
> Shilesh
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface"
> sagaface@ wrote:
> >
> > Shilesh...you're my hero. Thank you!!! I love BO on my 2200 but
> want larger prints and
> > thought I might "upgrade" to the 4000 to use with those papers if
> someone could tell me
> > it might be worth it. Sounds like a "yes" to me.
> >
> > Oh, happy day!
> >
> > thanks again for the info.
> > Sarah
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani"
> <shileshjani@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Sarah,
> > >
> > > For you......just for you, I printed BO on Silver Rag using a
> 4000
> > > loaded with 4800 K3 PK, at 2880 dpi.
> > >
> > > What would you like to know?
> > >
> > > Superb Dmax (>2.5)
> > > Minimal graininess visible to naked eye
> > > Creamy warm color on the warm(ish) paper
> > > Some bronzing/gloss differential; easily eliminated with a single-
> > > pass overcoat of GLOP (50% ink limit). GLOP increases Dmax to
> >2.65;
> > > this is the highest Dmax I have EVER measured with pigment inks.
> > >
> > > I have not linearized the output, but boy this is definitely a
> viable
> > > option for those with printer/driver capable of BO.
> > >
> > > Best regards.
> > >
> > > Shilesh
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface"
> > > <sagaface@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I keep bringing this up from time to time, hoping someone has
> tried
> > > Black Only printing
> > > > with PK and one of these papers...
> > > >
> > > > ...anyone?
> > > >
> > > > thanks,
> > > > Sarah
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Hello Shilesh,

What's your take on SR paper?  Are you using it regularly?  I have
mixed feelings about it, but am interested in any comments you might
have.  I still love the non-glare look of the matte papers, but I was
just looking at some recently printed portfolio prints and discovered
a non-spottable flake.  Another one down the tubes.  I'm getting ready
to reprint it now.  I couldn't possibly count the amount of $ and time
lost to flakes over the years.  

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones"
<cj@...> wrote:

>
> Hello Sarah,
>
> >Shilesh...you're my hero. Thank you!!! I love BO on my 2200 but want
> >larger prints and thought I might "upgrade" to the 4000 to use with
> >those papers if someone could tell me it might be worth it. Sounds
> >like a "yes" to me.
> >Oh, happy day!
>
> Sounds like good news.  FWIW, the 4000 is widely considered to be the
> best BO machine because of it's more random dither pattern.  It's nice
> to hear that on SR the graininess is reduced.  Sounds like a winning
> combination.  If you decide to do it please keep us posted on your
> progress.
>
>
> Regards,
> Clayton
>
>
> Info on black and white digital printing at
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
>

Hmmm....nothing in that other post for some reason.

Shilesh...I haven't yet tried any of the new papers in my 2200....it's simply a $$ issue for 
me right now, but I hope to perhaps this coming month. My HPR/Eboni/BO printing is 
such a no brainer and I can't afford too much experimentation, though I'm itching to.

Um....green-warm vs. brwon-warm.....yuck . They both sound awful. Does MIS have a 
more nuetral alternative PK?

Thanks so much for the dialogue on this....with everyone so geeked out on Epson ABW it 
appears BO has fallen a bit by the wayside. Understandably, I guess. But I'm hoping to 
stick with BO for awhile because my work is so well suited to it (high contrast, not much 
expanse of mid-tones).

So, thanks once again!
Sarah


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani" <shileshjani@...> 
wrote:

>
> Oh, blush.
> 
> Have you tried any of these papers on your 2200? With the original UC 
> PK inks, you are likely to see more gloss differential. In spirit of 
> full disclosure, the K3 PK ink is ever so slightly "green-warm" while 
> UC PK is "brown-warm".
> 
> Shilesh
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface" 
> <sagaface@> wrote:
> >
> > Shilesh...you're my hero. Thank you!!! I love BO on my 2200 but 
> want larger prints and 
> > thought I might "upgrade" to the 4000 to use with those papers if 
> someone could tell me 
> > it might be worth it. Sounds like a "yes" to me.
> > 
> > Oh, happy day!
> > 
> > thanks again for the info.
> > Sarah
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani" 
> <shileshjani@> 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Sarah,
> > > 
> > > For you......just for you, I printed BO on Silver Rag using a 
> 4000 
> > > loaded with 4800 K3 PK, at 2880 dpi.
> > > 
> > > What would you like to know?
> > > 
> > > Superb Dmax (>2.5)
> > > Minimal graininess visible to naked eye
> > > Creamy warm color on the warm(ish) paper
> > > Some bronzing/gloss differential; easily eliminated with a single-
> > > pass overcoat of GLOP (50% ink limit). GLOP increases Dmax to 
> >2.65; 
> > > this is the highest Dmax I have EVER measured with pigment inks.
> > > 
> > > I have not linearized the output, but boy this is definitely a 
> viable 
> > > option for those with printer/driver capable of BO.
> > > 
> > > Best regards.
> > > 
> > > Shilesh
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface" 
> > > <sagaface@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I keep bringing this up from time to time, hoping someone has 
> tried 
> > > Black Only printing 
> > > > with PK and one of these papers...
> > > > 
> > > > ...anyone?
> > > > 
> > > > thanks,
> > > > Sarah
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Clayton, thanks for the tip about the 4000's dither pattern...good to know.

I just read your article about SR, and your concerns. So I'm curious when I finally get some 
whether the texture will be an issue for me as well, as I am quite used to and love the 
smoothness of HPR (and Dourian...thanks for that tip, too!). 

Still, those flakes ARE an issue. Will there ever be a perfect paper? If we can put a man on 
the moon....

Sarah




--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" <cj@...> wrote:

>
> Hello Shilesh,
> 
> What's your take on SR paper?  Are you using it regularly?  I have
> mixed feelings about it, but am interested in any comments you might
> have.  I still love the non-glare look of the matte papers, but I was
> just looking at some recently printed portfolio prints and discovered
> a non-spottable flake.  Another one down the tubes.  I'm getting ready
> to reprint it now.  I couldn't possibly count the amount of $ and time
> lost to flakes over the years.  
> 
> Regards,
> Clayton
> 
> 
> Info on black and white digital printing at    
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
>

Talk is talk, I have one BO(1270) that I'm happy with.

gar

  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of sagaface
  Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 6:06 PM
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: [Digital BW] Re: new papers (Silver Rag, Innova, 'Muhle) and BO
printing?


  Hmmm....nothing in that other post for some reason.

  Shilesh...I haven't yet tried any of the new papers in my 2200....it's
simply a $$ issue for
  me right now, but I hope to perhaps this coming month. My HPR/Eboni/BO
printing is
  such a no brainer and I can't afford too much experimentation, though I'm
itching to.

  Um....green-warm vs. brwon-warm.....yuck . They both sound awful. Does MIS
have a
  more nuetral alternative PK?

  Thanks so much for the dialogue on this....with everyone so geeked out on
Epson ABW it
  appears BO has fallen a bit by the wayside. Understandably, I guess. But
I'm hoping to
  stick with BO for awhile because my work is so well suited to it (high
contrast, not much
  expanse of mid-tones).

  So, thanks once again!
  Sarah

  --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani"
<shileshjani@...>
  wrote:
  >
  > Oh, blush.
  >
  > Have you tried any of these papers on your 2200? With the original UC
  > PK inks, you are likely to see more gloss differential. In spirit of
  > full disclosure, the K3 PK ink is ever so slightly "green-warm" while
  > UC PK is "brown-warm".
  >
  > Shilesh
  >
  > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface"
  > <sagaface@> wrote:
  > >
  > > Shilesh...you're my hero. Thank you!!! I love BO on my 2200 but
  > want larger prints and
  > > thought I might "upgrade" to the 4000 to use with those papers if
  > someone could tell me
  > > it might be worth it. Sounds like a "yes" to me.
  > >
  > > Oh, happy day!
  > >
  > > thanks again for the info.
  > > Sarah
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani"
  > <shileshjani@>
  > > wrote:
  > > >
  > > > Sarah,
  > > >
  > > > For you......just for you, I printed BO on Silver Rag using a
  > 4000
  > > > loaded with 4800 K3 PK, at 2880 dpi.
  > > >
  > > > What would you like to know?
  > > >
  > > > Superb Dmax (>2.5)
  > > > Minimal graininess visible to naked eye
  > > > Creamy warm color on the warm(ish) paper
  > > > Some bronzing/gloss differential; easily eliminated with a single-
  > > > pass overcoat of GLOP (50% ink limit). GLOP increases Dmax to
  > >2.65;
  > > > this is the highest Dmax I have EVER measured with pigment inks.
  > > >
  > > > I have not linearized the output, but boy this is definitely a
  > viable
  > > > option for those with printer/driver capable of BO.
  > > >
  > > > Best regards.
  > > >
  > > > Shilesh
  > > >
  > > >
  > > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface"
  > > > <sagaface@> wrote:
  > > > >
  > > > > I keep bringing this up from time to time, hoping someone has
  > tried
  > > > Black Only printing
  > > > > with PK and one of these papers...
  > > > >
  > > > > ...anyone?
  > > > >
  > > > > thanks,
  > > > > Sarah
  > > > >
  > > >
  > >
  >



  


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

MIS K4 PK is warm brown or try MIS PKN (neutral/cool).  I think that  
the warm PK works well with the creamy warm hue of silver rag.  If  
you prefer neutral or cool then use Hahnemuhle FA Pearl or Innova FB  
instead of silver rag with the MIS PKN.

Carl

On Sep 25, 2006, at 9:05 PM, sagaface wrote:

> Hmmm....nothing in that other post for some reason.
>
> Shilesh...I haven't yet tried any of the new papers in my  
> 2200....it's simply a $$ issue for
> me right now, but I hope to perhaps this coming month. My HPR/Eboni/ 
> BO printing is
> such a no brainer and I can't afford too much experimentation,  
> though I'm itching to.
>
> Um....green-warm vs. brwon-warm.....yuck . They both sound awful.  
> Does MIS have a
> more nuetral alternative PK?
>
> Thanks so much for the dialogue on this....with everyone so geeked  
> out on Epson ABW it
> appears BO has fallen a bit by the wayside. Understandably, I  
> guess. But I'm hoping to
> stick with BO for awhile because my work is so well suited to it  
> (high contrast, not much
> expanse of mid-tones).
>
> So, thanks once again!
> Sarah
>
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani"  
> <shileshjani@...>
> wrote:
>>
>> Oh, blush.
>>
>> Have you tried any of these papers on your 2200? With the original UC
>> PK inks, you are likely to see more gloss differential. In spirit of
>> full disclosure, the K3 PK ink is ever so slightly "green-warm" while
>> UC PK is "brown-warm".
>>
>> Shilesh
>>
>> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface"
>> <sagaface@> wrote:
>>>
>>> Shilesh...you're my hero. Thank you!!! I love BO on my 2200 but
>> want larger prints and
>>> thought I might "upgrade" to the 4000 to use with those papers if
>> someone could tell me
>>> it might be worth it. Sounds like a "yes" to me.
>>>
>>> Oh, happy day!
>>>
>>> thanks again for the info.
>>> Sarah
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani"
>> <shileshjani@>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Sarah,
>>>>
>>>> For you......just for you, I printed BO on Silver Rag using a
>> 4000
>>>> loaded with 4800 K3 PK, at 2880 dpi.
>>>>
>>>> What would you like to know?
>>>>
>>>> Superb Dmax (>2.5)
>>>> Minimal graininess visible to naked eye
>>>> Creamy warm color on the warm(ish) paper
>>>> Some bronzing/gloss differential; easily eliminated with a single-
>>>> pass overcoat of GLOP (50% ink limit). GLOP increases Dmax to
>>> 2.65;
>>>> this is the highest Dmax I have EVER measured with pigment inks.
>>>>
>>>> I have not linearized the output, but boy this is definitely a
>> viable
>>>> option for those with printer/driver capable of BO.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards.
>>>>
>>>> Shilesh
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface"
>>>> <sagaface@> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I keep bringing this up from time to time, hoping someone has
>> tried
>>>> Black Only printing
>>>>> with PK and one of these papers...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...anyone?
>>>>>
>>>>> thanks,
>>>>> Sarah
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>

Sara,

If I were you, I would first try the MIS PKN ink on your 2200 with 
Silver Rag (or others). That way you know exactly what to expect if 
you were to go with the 4000. One thing about the 4000 is that gives 
one of the smoothest BO print, even when using MK at 1440 dpi. It is 
much less dotty than equivalent from 2200.

If you are happy with Eboni/HPR BO, you will certainly have the 
ability to keep that on a 4000, along with the PK of your choice.

Epson MK, UC PK, and K3 PK are all warm inksets.

Let me know if you want me to send the print to you.

Shilesh

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface" 
<sagaface@...> wrote:
>
> Hmmm....nothing in that other post for some reason.
> 
> Shilesh...I haven't yet tried any of the new papers in my 
2200....it's simply a $$ issue for 
> me right now, but I hope to perhaps this coming month. My 
HPR/Eboni/BO printing is 
> such a no brainer and I can't afford too much experimentation, 
though I'm itching to.
> 
> Um....green-warm vs. brwon-warm.....yuck . They both sound awful. 
Does MIS have a 
> more nuetral alternative PK?
> 
> Thanks so much for the dialogue on this....with everyone so geeked 
out on Epson ABW it 
> appears BO has fallen a bit by the wayside. Understandably, I 
guess. But I'm hoping to 
> stick with BO for awhile because my work is so well suited to it 
(high contrast, not much 
> expanse of mid-tones).
> 
> So, thanks once again!
> Sarah
> 
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani" 
<shileshjani@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > Oh, blush.
> > 
> > Have you tried any of these papers on your 2200? With the 
original UC 
> > PK inks, you are likely to see more gloss differential. In spirit 
of 
> > full disclosure, the K3 PK ink is ever so slightly "green-warm" 
while 
> > UC PK is "brown-warm".
> > 
> > Shilesh
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface" 
> > <sagaface@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Shilesh...you're my hero. Thank you!!! I love BO on my 2200 but 
> > want larger prints and 
> > > thought I might "upgrade" to the 4000 to use with those papers 
if 
> > someone could tell me 
> > > it might be worth it. Sounds like a "yes" to me.
> > > 
> > > Oh, happy day!
> > > 
> > > thanks again for the info.
> > > Sarah
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh 
Jani" 
> > <shileshjani@> 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Sarah,
> > > > 
> > > > For you......just for you, I printed BO on Silver Rag using a 
> > 4000 
> > > > loaded with 4800 K3 PK, at 2880 dpi.
> > > > 
> > > > What would you like to know?
> > > > 
> > > > Superb Dmax (>2.5)
> > > > Minimal graininess visible to naked eye
> > > > Creamy warm color on the warm(ish) paper
> > > > Some bronzing/gloss differential; easily eliminated with a 
single-
> > > > pass overcoat of GLOP (50% ink limit). GLOP increases Dmax to 
> > >2.65; 
> > > > this is the highest Dmax I have EVER measured with pigment 
inks.
> > > > 
> > > > I have not linearized the output, but boy this is definitely 
a 
> > viable 
> > > > option for those with printer/driver capable of BO.
> > > > 
> > > > Best regards.
> > > > 
> > > > Shilesh
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In 
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface" 
> > > > <sagaface@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I keep bringing this up from time to time, hoping someone 
has 

> > tried 
> > > > Black Only printing 
> > > > > with PK and one of these papers...
> > > > > 
> > > > > ...anyone?
> > > > > 
> > > > > thanks,
> > > > > Sarah
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Clayton,

All of these new papers are really very good. The reason I like SR is 
that paper white is easier to find a suitable overmat for framing. 
The Hahnemule paper is much too cool for my taste, yet it also 
produces stunning prints. Same goes for Innova F Gloss (not as cool).

Much has been made of these papers, and my own impression is that 
they have a certain tactile, perhaps snob value too (expensive, SR is 
all cotton, etc). Once behind glass, and under good lighting, most 
any old RC papers will be just as good. I just completed a series of 
prints for Tom O'Connell's exchange on Office Depot Professional 
Platinium Series Brilliant Matte (RC paper), and the prints are just 
as compelling as on SR or Innova F. Not as impressive to hold though.

The matte papers, William Turner being my favorite, are so much 
easier to live with under mixed, uncontrolled lighting. But put an RC 
paper under gallery-type spots, and they blow away the matte papers. 
I mean really blow them away - how can you compare Dmax of 2.5+ to 
1.6 on the same wall. As has been said often, it must be like 
comparing silver prints to Pt/Pd; different looks, but can be made 
equally compelling in the right printers hands.

I am finishing printing some 12x15 and 9x18 prints to send to Roy 
Harrington. All were printed on SR, all with a pronounced brown-
magenta tone (kinda like LensWork, but not exactly) created with QTR. 
I am applying Krystal TopKote on a second pass to do away with gloss 
differential. Dmax is 2.5+. I like them, damn the reflections.

Best.

Shilesh

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" 
<cj@...> wrote:
>
> Hello Shilesh,
> 
> What's your take on SR paper?  Are you using it regularly?  I have
> mixed feelings about it, but am interested in any comments you might
> have.  I still love the non-glare look of the matte papers, but I 
was
> just looking at some recently printed portfolio prints and 
discovered
> a non-spottable flake.  Another one down the tubes.  I'm getting 
ready
> to reprint it now.  I couldn't possibly count the amount of $ and 
time

> lost to flakes over the years.  
> 
> Regards,
> Clayton
> 
> 
> Info on black and white digital printing at    
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
>

Sara,

Another note: I have a strong suspicion that if you compare Eboni 
prints on the same paper using 2200 and 4000 printers, they will not 
look alike. Yup, I think the way each of these prints dithers the BO 
can influence print hue.

It has been a while since we had a BO exchange. But I distinctly 
remember that my OEM MK print on Entrada Warm made with a 4000 looked 
different from someone else's print made on the same paper, but with 
a 2200. Perhaps Clayton can pull the prints out and comment on them.

Shilesh

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani" 
<shileshjani@...> wrote:
>
> Sara,
> 
> If I were you, I would first try the MIS PKN ink on your 2200 with 
> Silver Rag (or others). That way you know exactly what to expect if 
> you were to go with the 4000. One thing about the 4000 is that 
gives 
> one of the smoothest BO print, even when using MK at 1440 dpi. It 
is 
> much less dotty than equivalent from 2200.
> 
> If you are happy with Eboni/HPR BO, you will certainly have the 
> ability to keep that on a 4000, along with the PK of your choice.
> 
> Epson MK, UC PK, and K3 PK are all warm inksets.
> 
> Let me know if you want me to send the print to you.
> 
> Shilesh
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface" 
> <sagaface@> wrote:
> >
> > Hmmm....nothing in that other post for some reason.
> > 
> > Shilesh...I haven't yet tried any of the new papers in my 
> 2200....it's simply a $$ issue for 
> > me right now, but I hope to perhaps this coming month. My 
> HPR/Eboni/BO printing is 
> > such a no brainer and I can't afford too much experimentation, 
> though I'm itching to.
> > 
> > Um....green-warm vs. brwon-warm.....yuck . They both sound awful. 
> Does MIS have a 
> > more nuetral alternative PK?
> > 
> > Thanks so much for the dialogue on this....with everyone so 
geeked 
> out on Epson ABW it 
> > appears BO has fallen a bit by the wayside. Understandably, I 
> guess. But I'm hoping to 
> > stick with BO for awhile because my work is so well suited to it 
> (high contrast, not much 
> > expanse of mid-tones).
> > 
> > So, thanks once again!
> > Sarah
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh 
Jani" 
> <shileshjani@> 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Oh, blush.
> > > 
> > > Have you tried any of these papers on your 2200? With the 
> original UC 
> > > PK inks, you are likely to see more gloss differential. In 
spirit 
> of 
> > > full disclosure, the K3 PK ink is ever so slightly "green-warm" 
> while 
> > > UC PK is "brown-warm".
> > > 
> > > Shilesh
> > > 
> > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface" 
> > > <sagaface@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Shilesh...you're my hero. Thank you!!! I love BO on my 2200 
but 
> > > want larger prints and 
> > > > thought I might "upgrade" to the 4000 to use with those 
papers 
> if 
> > > someone could tell me 
> > > > it might be worth it. Sounds like a "yes" to me.
> > > > 
> > > > Oh, happy day!
> > > > 
> > > > thanks again for the info.
> > > > Sarah
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh 
> Jani" 
> > > <shileshjani@> 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Sarah,
> > > > > 
> > > > > For you......just for you, I printed BO on Silver Rag using 
a 
> > > 4000 
> > > > > loaded with 4800 K3 PK, at 2880 dpi.
> > > > > 
> > > > > What would you like to know?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Superb Dmax (>2.5)
> > > > > Minimal graininess visible to naked eye
> > > > > Creamy warm color on the warm(ish) paper
> > > > > Some bronzing/gloss differential; easily eliminated with a 
> single-
> > > > > pass overcoat of GLOP (50% ink limit). GLOP increases Dmax 
to 
> > > >2.65; 
> > > > > this is the highest Dmax I have EVER measured with pigment 
> inks.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I have not linearized the output, but boy this is 
definitely 

> a 
> > > viable 
> > > > > option for those with printer/driver capable of BO.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Best regards.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Shilesh
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In 
> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface" 
> > > > > <sagaface@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I keep bringing this up from time to time, hoping someone 
> has 
> > > tried 
> > > > > Black Only printing 
> > > > > > with PK and one of these papers...
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > ...anyone?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > thanks,
> > > > > > Sarah
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Shilesh...all your info has been most appreciated, including what you just wrote to Clayton. 
I would indeed love to see the SR print off the 4000...how do we do that? Should I send 
you a self-adressed envelope?

And I will take your advice and try out the PK on my 2200 first. I like the brightness of HPR 
but am leaning towward trying SR because I'm just not crazy about OBA's, even though 
everyone says the issue isn't as dire as previously thought.

Oh....just read your addendum.....hmmm. I wish I knew someone with a 4000 so I could 
test/compare. Well, it's looking like the 4000 for me anyway as I need to print larger. 
Hopefully I will like BO on it as much as the 2200, even if the tone is slightly different.

Another question: where do you put the Topkote and how is it used? A second pass? Is 
there any place on the net that gives a full explanation of how to do this? Completely new 
to me.

Thanks again, and let me know about the print. Very curious to see it.
Sarah



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani" <shileshjani@...> 
wrote:

>
> Sara,
> 
> If I were you, I would first try the MIS PKN ink on your 2200 with 
> Silver Rag (or others). That way you know exactly what to expect if 
> you were to go with the 4000. One thing about the 4000 is that gives 
> one of the smoothest BO print, even when using MK at 1440 dpi. It is 
> much less dotty than equivalent from 2200.
> 
> If you are happy with Eboni/HPR BO, you will certainly have the 
> ability to keep that on a 4000, along with the PK of your choice.
> 
> Epson MK, UC PK, and K3 PK are all warm inksets.
> 
> Let me know if you want me to send the print to you.
> 
> Shilesh
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface" 
> <sagaface@> wrote:
> >
> > Hmmm....nothing in that other post for some reason.
> > 
> > Shilesh...I haven't yet tried any of the new papers in my 
> 2200....it's simply a $$ issue for 
> > me right now, but I hope to perhaps this coming month. My 
> HPR/Eboni/BO printing is 
> > such a no brainer and I can't afford too much experimentation, 
> though I'm itching to.
> > 
> > Um....green-warm vs. brwon-warm.....yuck . They both sound awful. 
> Does MIS have a 
> > more nuetral alternative PK?
> > 
> > Thanks so much for the dialogue on this....with everyone so geeked 
> out on Epson ABW it 
> > appears BO has fallen a bit by the wayside. Understandably, I 
> guess. But I'm hoping to 
> > stick with BO for awhile because my work is so well suited to it 
> (high contrast, not much 
> > expanse of mid-tones).
> > 
> > So, thanks once again!
> > Sarah
> > 
> > 
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani" 
> <shileshjani@> 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Oh, blush.
> > > 
> > > Have you tried any of these papers on your 2200? With the 
> original UC 
> > > PK inks, you are likely to see more gloss differential. In spirit 
> of 
> > > full disclosure, the K3 PK ink is ever so slightly "green-warm" 
> while 
> > > UC PK is "brown-warm".
> > > 
> > > Shilesh
> > > 
> > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface" 
> > > <sagaface@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Shilesh...you're my hero. Thank you!!! I love BO on my 2200 but 
> > > want larger prints and 
> > > > thought I might "upgrade" to the 4000 to use with those papers 
> if 
> > > someone could tell me 
> > > > it might be worth it. Sounds like a "yes" to me.
> > > > 
> > > > Oh, happy day!
> > > > 
> > > > thanks again for the info.
> > > > Sarah
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh 
> Jani" 
> > > <shileshjani@> 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Sarah,
> > > > > 
> > > > > For you......just for you, I printed BO on Silver Rag using a 
> > > 4000 
> > > > > loaded with 4800 K3 PK, at 2880 dpi.
> > > > > 
> > > > > What would you like to know?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Superb Dmax (>2.5)
> > > > > Minimal graininess visible to naked eye
> > > > > Creamy warm color on the warm(ish) paper
> > > > > Some bronzing/gloss differential; easily eliminated with a 
> single-
> > > > > pass overcoat of GLOP (50% ink limit). GLOP increases Dmax to 
> > > >2.65; 
> > > > > this is the highest Dmax I have EVER measured with pigment 
> inks.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I have not linearized the output, but boy this is definitely 
> a 
> > > viable 
> > > > > option for those with printer/driver capable of BO.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Best regards.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Shilesh
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In 
> DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface" 
> > > > > <sagaface@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I keep bringing this up from time to time, hoping someone 
> has 
> > > tried 
> > > > > Black Only printing 
> > > > > > with PK and one of these papers...
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > ...anyone?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > thanks,
> > > > > > Sarah
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

> 
> For you......just for you, I printed BO on Silver Rag using a 4000 
> loaded with 4800 K3 PK, at 2880 dpi.
> 

This sounds interesting... but:
Is it possible to load a 4800 K3 PK cartridge into an 4000?
2880 dpi with a 4000? using QTR? (EPSON driver does not offer 2880dpi)

Thanks 
Gerd.

Carl...thanks for that ink information. It's very helpful.

Sarah


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Carl Schofield <list@...> wrote:

>
> MIS K4 PK is warm brown or try MIS PKN (neutral/cool).  I think that  
> the warm PK works well with the creamy warm hue of silver rag.  If  
> you prefer neutral or cool then use Hahnemuhle FA Pearl or Innova FB  
> instead of silver rag with the MIS PKN.
> 
> Carl
> 
> On Sep 25, 2006, at 9:05 PM, sagaface wrote:
> 
> > Hmmm....nothing in that other post for some reason.
> >
> > Shilesh...I haven't yet tried any of the new papers in my  
> > 2200....it's simply a $$ issue for
> > me right now, but I hope to perhaps this coming month. My HPR/Eboni/ 
> > BO printing is
> > such a no brainer and I can't afford too much experimentation,  
> > though I'm itching to.
> >
> > Um....green-warm vs. brwon-warm.....yuck . They both sound awful.  
> > Does MIS have a
> > more nuetral alternative PK?
> >
> > Thanks so much for the dialogue on this....with everyone so geeked  
> > out on Epson ABW it
> > appears BO has fallen a bit by the wayside. Understandably, I  
> > guess. But I'm hoping to
> > stick with BO for awhile because my work is so well suited to it  
> > (high contrast, not much
> > expanse of mid-tones).
> >
> > So, thanks once again!
> > Sarah
> >
> >
> > --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani"  
> > <shileshjani@>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Oh, blush.
> >>
> >> Have you tried any of these papers on your 2200? With the original UC
> >> PK inks, you are likely to see more gloss differential. In spirit of
> >> full disclosure, the K3 PK ink is ever so slightly "green-warm" while
> >> UC PK is "brown-warm".
> >>
> >> Shilesh
> >>
> >> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface"
> >> <sagaface@> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Shilesh...you're my hero. Thank you!!! I love BO on my 2200 but
> >> want larger prints and
> >>> thought I might "upgrade" to the 4000 to use with those papers if
> >> someone could tell me
> >>> it might be worth it. Sounds like a "yes" to me.
> >>>
> >>> Oh, happy day!
> >>>
> >>> thanks again for the info.
> >>> Sarah
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani"
> >> <shileshjani@>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Sarah,
> >>>>
> >>>> For you......just for you, I printed BO on Silver Rag using a
> >> 4000
> >>>> loaded with 4800 K3 PK, at 2880 dpi.
> >>>>
> >>>> What would you like to know?
> >>>>
> >>>> Superb Dmax (>2.5)
> >>>> Minimal graininess visible to naked eye
> >>>> Creamy warm color on the warm(ish) paper
> >>>> Some bronzing/gloss differential; easily eliminated with a single-
> >>>> pass overcoat of GLOP (50% ink limit). GLOP increases Dmax to
> >>> 2.65;
> >>>> this is the highest Dmax I have EVER measured with pigment inks.
> >>>>
> >>>> I have not linearized the output, but boy this is definitely a
> >> viable
> >>>> option for those with printer/driver capable of BO.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best regards.
> >>>>
> >>>> Shilesh
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sagaface"
> >>>> <sagaface@> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I keep bringing this up from time to time, hoping someone has
> >> tried
> >>>> Black Only printing
> >>>>> with PK and one of these papers...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ...anyone?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> thanks,
> >>>>> Sarah
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
>

While I don't really disagree with what's been said, I will point out 
that Brett and Edward Weston gave up platinum printing in favor of 
silver gelatin printing, mainly for the increased tonal range. Of course 
great work can be done on all sorts of media, but it doesn't follow that 
we shouldn't be excited about new developments.

Gerd,

See Message #78407.

Shilesh

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "gerdmuller535" 
<gerdmuller@...> wrote:

>
> > 
> > For you......just for you, I printed BO on Silver Rag using a 4000 
> > loaded with 4800 K3 PK, at 2880 dpi.
> > 
> 
> This sounds interesting... but:
> Is it possible to load a 4800 K3 PK cartridge into an 4000?
> 2880 dpi with a 4000? using QTR? (EPSON driver does not offer 2880dpi)
> 
> Thanks 
> Gerd.
>

Shilesh,

Thanks for your thoughts.  I have printed on all three, plus have seen
many of Steve Karaf.'s prints on a variety of other glossy papers, as
he does a lot of experimenting and we compare notes frequently.  


>All of these new papers are really very good. The reason I like SR 
>is that paper white is easier to find a suitable overmat for framing.
>The Hahnemule paper is much too cool for my taste, yet it also 
>produces stunning prints. Same goes for Innova F Gloss (not as cool).

Agreed about SR paper color, but aside from that I much prefer the H
version of the three.  I dislike the Innova surface patterns.  That's
my problem - while these papers are closer, nobody has yet made the
paper that has it all.  I love the look, feel and lack of reflections
of matte, but love the dmax of the other.  Sigh.  

This afternoon Steve Karafyllakis and I were looking at some old
darkroom work prints on Oriental Seagull and Ilford MGFB, and we
agreed that the nice combination of gloss and texture, what Steve
described as a pleasing "organic" look, still hasn't been achieved,
even with these new papers.  They just aren't there yet.


>Once behind glass, and under good lighting, most any old RC papers 
>will be just as good. 

Yes, glazing definitely covers a lot of sins and evens things out.


>I just completed a series of prints for Tom O'Connell's exchange on 
>Office Depot Professional Platinium Series Brilliant Matte (RC 
>paper), and the prints are just as compelling as on SR or Innova F. 
>Not as impressive to hold though.

And that's an important factor for me, as my favorite way to enjoy
photos is hand viewing as part of a boxed portfolio.  The feedback I'm
getting re the textured matte paper is very positive (gorgeous,
elegant, etc).  SR feels sort of tacky and alien (even smells weird),
and the HFAP is cold and smooth (in emotional terms, as opposed to
warm and fuzzy).  Yet there's no denying, as you state, hung next to
glossy under good light they get blown away.


>As has been said often, it must be like comparing silver prints to 
>Pt/Pd; different looks, but can be made equally compelling in the 
>right printers hands.

Yes, exactly. I love the matte prints I'm getting, and in general look
and feel they resemble the platinum prints of Steiglitz, Laura Gilpen
and others who's works I admire greatly.  Until something capable of
doing the job comes along I'm going to continue to use matte papers.

Isn't it amazing how far we've come and we're still not satisfied
<ggg>.  I'm confident we'll get there.  It's just a matter of time.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh Jani" <shileshjani@...> 
wrote:
>
>...But put an RC 
> paper under gallery-type spots, and they blow away the matte papers. 
> I mean really blow them away - how can you compare Dmax of 2.5+ to 
> 1.6 on the same wall. As has been said often, it must be like 
> comparing silver prints to Pt/Pd; different looks, but can be made 
> equally compelling in the right printers hands.

Shilesh, I'm not picking on you, your post is simply at hand and easily used to make a 
point. In fact, the rest of your post, which I have conveniently snipped, indicates you 
probably agree.

So onward-

I see these kinds of opinions stated primarily by photographers, rarely other artists. I think 
most of us really need to get out from in front of our computers and test prints and get 
out and see some master work.
We just spent several hours at the SFMOMA. After hours of paintings and other mediums 
with all kinds of physical materials qualities, brought alive by amazing workers each in 
their own way, we come to the Modotti/Weston exhibit. There were platinums and silver by 
both artists mixed together. Perhaps the previous hours had beat down our photo print 
preconceptions and opened our eyes, but there seemed to be no difference at all. You 
either liked each one or not on it's own terms. In fact, I never even thought about it until 
days later reading your post.
Nothing really blew anything else away, I mean really.
We all have a lot to learn from our eyes, instead of our brains, when it comes to materials 
and craftsmanship. This relates to the other thread about what makes a great B&W print as 
well.
It's become obvious to me over the years that photographers isolate themselves in their 
own world detrimantally. In fact, when you read about the Modottis and Westins and 
others who set the standards of our media, they hung with other artists of all kinds, rarely 
other photographers.
Tyler

PS- there were inkjet prints at the SFMOMA, and they were simpley called inkjet.

Tyler Boley wrote:
> I see these kinds of opinions stated primarily by photographers, rarely other artists. I think 
> most of us really need to get out from in front of our computers and test prints and get 
> out and see some master work.
> We just spent several hours at the SFMOMA. After hours of paintings and other mediums 
> with all kinds of physical materials qualities, brought alive by amazing workers each in 
> their own way, we come to the Modotti/Weston exhibit. There were platinums and silver by 
> both artists mixed together. Perhaps the previous hours had beat down our photo print 
> preconceptions and opened our eyes, but there seemed to be no difference at all. You 
> either liked each one or not on it's own terms. In fact, I never even thought about it until 
> days later reading your post.
> Nothing really blew anything else away, I mean really.
> We all have a lot to learn from our eyes, instead of our brains, when it comes to materials 
> and craftsmanship. This relates to the other thread about what makes a great B&W print as 
> well.
> It's become obvious to me over the years that photographers isolate themselves in their 
> own world detrimantally. In fact, when you read about the Modottis and Westins and 
> others who set the standards of our media, they hung with other artists of all kinds, rarely 
> other photographers.
> Tyler
>
> PS- there were inkjet prints at the SFMOMA, and they were simpley called inkjet.
>   
Don't you think using logic in a situation like this is, well, unfair? 
It just takes the steam right out of a good rant. How can I stomp my 
foot and scream like a banshee if you're going to be, well, reasonable 
and all? You're just taking the fun out of it. And these insightful 
ideas about getting out and seeing masterworks of all kinds, not just 
photographs. Tyler, what *are* we going to do with you?

For those of you who can't tell (and you know who you are), the above is 
sarcasm laced with irony. It's meant to make you laugh!

On a serious note, I would add to Tyler's sage advice about regular 
visits to see master works of all kinds that it's probably a good idea 
to go outside and soak up some of what nature has to offer as well. 
Stare at a flower. Watch a bee working its tail off gathering pollen. 
Look at how light shows the texture of a rock by creating shadows. 
Investigate how water in the stream flows around the rocks. Think about 
how to make a photograph that induces in the viewer how you feel about it.

I'm just saying in complete agreement with Tyler that Dmax is a tiny 
part of the big picture (pun intended).
-- 
Bruce Watson
/











/

Tyler,

I have no problem with the "spirit" of your message, and I generally 
agree with you. I retrospect, I should have said was "when placed 
side-by-side under studio/gallery lights, the difference between 
matte and RC prints is REALLY, REALLY apparent." Is one better? I 
don't know. What I do know is that low tonal range prints (call 
them "flat"; not a pejorative) have a definite place in our arsenal. 
Now if we could rid the RC type papers (I much prefer the term "high 
Dmax") of the damn reflections, we would be closer to the ideal 
medium.

I am surrounded by galze-framed prints in my office; all made on 
William Turner, and I have NEVER felt the need to pull them down, to 
replace them with High Dmax equivalents.

Shilesh

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Boley" 
<tyler@...> wrote:
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Shilesh 
Jani" <shileshjani@> 
> wrote:
> >
> >...But put an RC 
> > paper under gallery-type spots, and they blow away the matte 
papers. 
> > I mean really blow them away - how can you compare Dmax of 2.5+ 
to 
> > 1.6 on the same wall. As has been said often, it must be like 
> > comparing silver prints to Pt/Pd; different looks, but can be 
made 
> > equally compelling in the right printers hands.
> 
> Shilesh, I'm not picking on you, your post is simply at hand and 
easily used to make a 
> point. In fact, the rest of your post, which I have conveniently 
snipped, indicates you 
> probably agree.
> 
> So onward-
> 
> I see these kinds of opinions stated primarily by photographers, 
rarely other artists. I think 
> most of us really need to get out from in front of our computers 
and test prints and get 
> out and see some master work.
> We just spent several hours at the SFMOMA. After hours of 
paintings and other mediums 
> with all kinds of physical materials qualities, brought alive by 
amazing workers each in 
> their own way, we come to the Modotti/Weston exhibit. There were 
platinums and silver by 
> both artists mixed together. Perhaps the previous hours had beat 
down our photo print 
> preconceptions and opened our eyes, but there seemed to be no 
difference at all. You 
> either liked each one or not on it's own terms. In fact, I never 
even thought about it until 
> days later reading your post.
> Nothing really blew anything else away, I mean really.
> We all have a lot to learn from our eyes, instead of our brains, 
when it comes to materials 
> and craftsmanship. This relates to the other thread about what 
makes a great B&W print as 
> well.
> It's become obvious to me over the years that photographers 
isolate themselves in their 
> own world detrimantally. In fact, when you read about the Modottis 
and Westins and 
> others who set the standards of our media, they hung with other 
artists of all kinds, rarely 
> other photographers.
> Tyler
> 
> PS- there were inkjet prints at the SFMOMA, and they were simpley 
called inkjet.
>

Those in the L.A. area really ought to see this exhibit of Mark Laita's work
printed by Bowhaus on Silver Rag.  It combines some great photos with the
latest paper technology.  It's impressive.


http://www.faheykle
<http://www.faheykleingallery.com/featured_artists/laita/laita_frames.htm>
ingallery.com/featured_artists/laita/laita_frames.htm

It runs through Oct 14th.

 

Paul

www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/>  

 

 

 

 

Paul

www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/>  

 



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

But Peter, I don't think that says much about materials as a rule, I think it says something 
about the Westons, and their recognition of the new materials ability to be used to better 
express their particular visions. The other side to that story is that Frederick Evans ceased 
photographing altogether when he could no longer get platinum papers, considering the 
new materials incapable of making a decent print.
Instead of being two oposite viewpoints about materials, I think they are both saying 
exactly the same thing.

But you are absolutely right, the new materisals are viable and definitely to be excited 
about.

And Bruce, don't worry, you've stepped up the the plate with wisdom many times here, 
making some lame attempt by me unnecessary. Your point about seeing is the really the 
whole deal isn't it? Why we began in the first place, and so easily forgotten. Feels so silly to 
have to be reminded.
Tyler

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter De Smidt <pdesmidt@...> 
wrote:

>
> While I don't really disagree with what's been said, I will point out 
> that Brett and Edward Weston gave up platinum printing in favor of 
> silver gelatin printing, mainly for the increased tonal range. Of course 
> great work can be done on all sorts of media, but it doesn't follow that 
> we shouldn't be excited about new developments.
>

Thanks guys for the debate. It really says much about how we should approach our art.

Woody Spedden

----- Original Message ----
From: Tyler Boley <tyler@...>
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 6:03:27 PM
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: new papers (Silver Rag, Innova, 'Muhle) and BO printing?

                           But Peter, I don't think that says much about materials as a rule, I think it says something 
 about the Westons, and their recognition of the new materials ability to be used to better 
 express their particular visions. The other side to that story is that Frederick Evans ceased 
 photographing altogether when he could no longer get platinum papers, considering the 
 new materials incapable of making a decent print.
 Instead of being two oposite viewpoints about materials, I think they are both saying 
 exactly the same thing.
 










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

Shilesh;

As you know I've been testing RC papers also, looking for an 
acceptable compromise between dmax, tone, surface, etc.

> Now if we could rid the RC type papers (I much prefer the 
term "high 
> Dmax") of the damn reflections, we would be closer to the ideal 
> medium.

For me the issue isn't so much the reflections per se, because all 
my work gets shown, sold and hung under glass. What bothers me is 
the quality of the reflections-that hard, machine-like stiple that 
most luster papers have, or that plasticky high gloss of the glossy 
papers. Going through old photo prints again reminded me of just how 
shiny some of those are, but it was never an issue because the 
texture and shine was so much less mechanical, more like skin than 
gelatin or plastic. A warm, attractive surface.

Which got me thinking: That final texture is imparted by the final 
drum the material rolls through when it is being coated, is that not 
right? If anyone knows more about that part of the process, please 
jump in. But if that is true, why can't that same drum texture be 
applied to the inkjet coatings? It seems such an obvious, simple 
easy thing, that there has to be some problem I'm not aware of. Does 
anybody have more info on how the surface texture is created, and 
what the limitations are?

Regards,

Steve Karafyllakis

BTW-I hit a Dmax of 2.79 on a coated glossy paper a couple days 
ago..!!!...

Hi Clayton,

> FWIW, the 4000 is widely considered to be the best BO machine
> because of it's more random dither pattern.

How can something be 'more' random? It is either random or it is not random! 
;)

Bob Frost.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Clayton Jones" <cj@...>

Not exactly. Random processes generate different distributions. For 
example, a normal distribution (bell curve) has many individual
samples near the average value, but a uniform distribution has 
individual samples evenly spaced across all possible values. 

More interesting for printing is that the distribution is not
really random, just constructed to avoid obvious patterns. If you 
actually use random patterns then you get clumps of points 
or holes (where there are few points).  Either looks uneven and bad.

 costa


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

>
> Hi Clayton,
> 
> > FWIW, the 4000 is widely considered to be the best BO machine
> > because of it's more random dither pattern.
> 
> How can something be 'more' random? It is either random or it is not random! 
> ;)
> 
> Bob Frost.
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Clayton Jones" <cj@...>
>

In the digital world random may not be so random. Much like the cards one is
delt in MS Freecell :  )


gar

  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Bob Frost
  Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 5:48 AM
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: new papers (Silver Rag, Innova, 'Muhle) and
BO printing?


  Hi Clayton,

  > FWIW, the 4000 is widely considered to be the best BO machine
  > because of it's more random dither pattern.

  How can something be 'more' random? It is either random or it is not
random!
  ;)

  Bob Frost.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Clayton Jones" <cj@...>



  


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

Bob, Costa,

>>>FWIW, the 4000 is widely considered to be the best BO machine
>>>because of it's more random dither pattern.
 
>>How can something be 'more' random? It is either random or it is 
>not random! 

My words were an attempt to describe what I see.  Other than the 4000,
the best looking BO prints I've seen come from the 2200.  The 4000
prints are a tad less grainy looking.  Under a loupe the 2200 prints
show little groups of dots that look like interwoven short curved
lines with similar orientation.  I call them "squigglies".  The 4000
prints have what looks like just a random sprinkling of dots that
don't form any sort of repeatable pattern.  The 2200 prints are made
up of groups of dots, the 4000 prints are made up of just dots.  FWIW,
my old 870 BO prints and many 1280 ones I've seen were made of shorter
and different shaped strings of dots than the 2200, with more varied
orientation.  Plus, on the 870 and some other printers, each of the
"dots" was actually a pair of tiny dots close together.

The 4000 BO prints always had a slightly more refined look about them.
 My use of "more random" was an attempt, in as few words as possible,
to describe this lack of any recognizable pattern, strings, squigglies
or groups, which I think of as "less random".  I'm not sure how
technically correct this use of "random" is.


>Not exactly. Random processes generate different distributions. For 
>example, a normal distribution (bell curve) has many individual
>samples near the average value, but a uniform distribution has 
>individual samples evenly spaced across all possible values. 

Ok, makes sense.

 
>More interesting for printing is that the distribution is not
>really random, just constructed to avoid obvious patterns. If you 
>actually use random patterns then you get clumps of points 
>or holes (where there are few points).  Either looks uneven and bad.

So it seems my use of "more random" and "less random" as described
above is actually the opposite of what I am trying to describe, is
that correct?

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm


"It really depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is.
- Bill clinton

Clayton,
I think the language you have used makes your point just fine; no need to
change.
That being said, dots being “less ordered”, or “more ordered” seem to be
what you are describing.  Since we have such a range of backgrounds,
language, and location, it is natural to have these communication issues.
Even the technical names of common dither patterns is not much help at all.
Your detailed descriptions are quite clear, thanks.

Best regards,
John Moody

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Clayton
Jones
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 12:43 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] More Or Less Random, and BO printing?

So it seems my use of "more random" and "less random" as described
above is actually the opposite of what I am trying to describe, is
that correct?

Regards,
Clayton



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

Tyler,

>I see these kinds of opinions stated primarily by photographers, 
>rarely other artists. I think most of us really need to get out 
>from in front of our computers and test prints and get out and see 
>some master work.
>It's become obvious to me over the years that photographers isolate 
>themselves in their own world detrimantally. In fact, when you read 
>about the Modottis and Westins and others who set the standards of 
>our media, they hung with other artists of all kinds, rarely 
>other photographers.

I fully agree.  My strongest artistic influence has been my
stepmother, a very accomplished west coast painter, who instilled in
me most of my working concepts re composition, form, space, value,
etc. I maintain a membership in a small arts oriented library (The
Four Arts Library in Palm Beach, Florida) which has a wonderful
collection of monographs of painters.  I will on occasion (usually on
winter afternoons, such as we have in south Florida) spend a late
afternoon in a comfortable chair perusing these books of paintings.  I
admire and look at the works of many photographers, but when I am
photographing it is often the painters' works that I find flitting
about the periphery of my responses to what I'm seeing.


>...we come to the Modotti/Weston exhibit. There were platinums and 
>silver by both artists mixed together. Perhaps the previous hours 
>had beat down our photo print preconceptions and opened our eyes, 
>but there seemed to be no difference at all. You either liked each 
>one or not on it's own terms. In fact, I never even thought about it 
>until days later reading your post.
>Nothing really blew anything else away, I mean really.

I'm happy to hear you say that, as I've found myself being pulled in
both directions as I've been experimenting with the new papers, and, I
think, building it up into a bigger issue than is deserved.  I
love the prints I'm getting from matte papers, yet there is no denying
the effect of greater dmax.  But I've found that some images look
better on these papers, some look worse, and some look equally good on
either.  I'm glad the new printers are making it easier to switch
between MK and PK because it seems like both types of papers will be
around for a long time and using both will become common.

My biggest hope is that R&D on matte papers will continue and the dmax
will improve.

Thanks for your thoughts and observations.

Regards,
Clayton


Info on black and white digital printing at    
http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm