Digital BW, The Print

I'm trying a new inkset in my 7500 as a way to simplify my life and,
hopefully, cure the tone shift problem I've experienced in large format
printers running dedicated "blended" B&W inksets.  

 

While it's too soon to be sure, I think the arrangement below is at least
working in terms of ease of profiling and quality results.  It'll take weeks
to know if the tone shift problem has been eliminated or at least
significantly lessened.

 

This approach will only work with a rip, with QTR and IJC being the logical
ones for most B&W printers.

 

Currently, this is what I have loaded in the 7500 (source of ink in
parentheses), and I think it will for fine for all 7000 and 7600 generation
printers:

 

- 4 k's: MK (MIS - Eboni), 

         PK (now MIS, may be Epson later), 

         LK (MIS), 

         LLK (MIS);

 

- Light Cyan -- 50% MIS Light Cyan, 50% clear base for 7500;

     Standard LC recommended for the 7600;

 

- LM (Epson UC, may be Epson Archival later).

 

 

There are no blends of more than one type of pigment in any ink.  As such,
the inkset should be relatively easy to profile and should have the least
amount of color drift between printing sessions.

 

All inks can be off-the-shelf and from multiple sources. For the 7500,
however, I do think the lighter 50% LC ("LLC"?) is worth the effort for
smoother highlights.  It's an easy 1:1 mix of readily available and
compatible cyan pigment and clear base. MIS's cyan pigment appears to be
very good.

 

With both MK and PK loaded, I can print on either matte or glossy paper.

 

With a rip, this approach is similar to the older K2 - rip approaches.
However, here there are 4 carbon inks in the combination I'm trying (3 are
used for glossy printing).

 

It is also similar to the K3 ABW mode approach when yellow is replaced with
carbon.  A rip, however, gives the combo much more flexibility in profiling,
at the expense of somewhat more complexity. 

 

To see a sample set of initial profiling curves (with IJC) for Kirkland see:

http://home1.gte.net/res0a2zt/4K-7500-Kirkland.jpg  (Try Full Screen view if
fuzzy.)

 

It looks like the hard part is to get the carbon core crossovers right
first.  Once the combined carbon curve is straight, it looks like the color
curves can be mostly just straight lines.  I start the color curves just a
bit back from where the LLK starts.  The LLK makes very smooth highlights,
but the cyan pigments, even diluted, are still the most noticeable with a
loupe.  So, I start them at 8 (of 256).  From the start point to the deep
shadows where the color curves head back to where the dmax is optimized,
there are no other dots.  The curves are straight lines.  With the toners
added, I reduced the ink limits of the LK and LLK to bring the points that
were at the top of these curves to their correct density.  The PK ink limit
also needed reducing to get the best dmax.

 

Hopefully once I've made basic matte and glossy carbon curves, this pattern
will continue with other papers.

 

While the highlights under a loupe were slightly smoother with my previous
UT-FSN+ approach, the overall smoothness of the 4K + LM and LLC approach is
better, and the curves are simpler.

 

So, time will tell if this solves the tone shift problem, it looks like this
might be a viable and flexible approach for the older large format hextone
printers.

 

Paul

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



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

Don't forget that you can use all 4 blacks when printing on matte 
paper. That may help you smooth out any rough spots down near full 
black. To smooth out the highlights, skip the medium black, and use llb 
and a mix of llb+glop for your lightest shade. A 1:1 mix might be just 
what you need. Then the PK would help fill in the mid tones. I'm not 
sure how well this would work for glossy, but it should be fine for 
matte (with the right mixing in the RIP).

I wonder how long its going to take MIS to knock off inks for this
thing? I don't imagine that will be an easy task.



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

>
> Don't forget that you can use all 4 blacks when printing on matte 
> paper. That may help you smooth out any rough spots down near full 
> black. To smooth out the highlights, skip the medium black, and use llb 
> and a mix of llb+glop for your lightest shade. A 1:1 mix might be just 
> what you need. Then the PK would help fill in the mid tones. I'm not 
> sure how well this would work for glossy, but it should be fine for 
> matte (with the right mixing in the RIP).
>

John,

>I wonder how long its going to take MIS to knock off inks for this
>thing? I don't imagine that will be an easy task.

MIS's general business model is to supply whatever the market wants.  The
only thing in my current setup that is not a current MIS ink is the UC LM.
Since I use the 7500, I might just use the stock Epson Archival LM in the
future.  I'll probably do some fade testing to see what the best LM is.  (I
may already have that information.)  My current UC LM use is partly based on
what I had on hand and my memory of fade test data that suggests it is the
best.

I once thought that a B&W inkset based on Epson Archival pigments would be
the most lightfast.  MIS was interested and agreed to buy Epson Archival
pigments in volume.  As it turned out, the Epson Archival pigments were not
that great.

However, the point is that in several instances where I wanted to use or
actually started to use non-MIS products, MIS found an equal or superior
substitute within a matter of weeks.  That kind of responsiveness to what
MIS senses is what the market wants or will want is a major reason I've
informally worked with them.  They don't try to simple push what they make
the most money on.

In any case, you can see that my current inclination for large format is to
go forward with off-the-self, competitively available inks as much as
possible.  And where there is a mix required, I want it to be so simple
users or MIS can easily make it with a minimum chance of messing up the mix.


Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Greg,

>Don't forget that you can use all 4 blacks when printing 
>on matte paper.

Yes, that is what I do.

> To smooth out the highlights, skip the medium black, and use llb 
>and a mix of llb+glop for your lightest shade.

The straight LLB is smooth enough for the highlights.  I have found the
major improvement in this approach over my previous Epson driver approaches
is that I can extend the LLB into the shadows and largely cure microbanding
there that has been a problem in the past.  So, a lot of LLB is used, as is
clear in the graph at http://home1.gte.net/res0a2zt/4K-7500-Kirkland.jpg .

Part of the point of this approach is to avoid mixing as much as possible.
Competitively available, off-the-shelf inks is part of the point.  It was
the LC that was just too dense and high gamut in its stock form for the old
7500.  With the 7600, however, it should be fine.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Greg


>... a mix of llb + glop ...

I mixed my own LLK from a standardized LK.  I do not think lighter than LLK
is needed or desirable.  The LLK does a lot of heavy lifting in my profiles.
I think the LLK Epson is using is a good choice of densities.

Using Epson LK as the bench-mark, I standardized the bottle of LK I used by
adding a bit of PK.  In my experience with mixing these inks from each
other, the ratios of the PK, LK, and LLK end up in the 29% to 34% range,
with clear base being the remainder.  

I have not tried Glop to mix with.  I use the MIS base.  I'm not sure if MIS
will sell its new base (slightly yellow and with a bit of an ammonia smell),
but it does, I believe, sell one that is compatible and others on this list
use.

I've also used a generic base mix of just 43% glycerin and 57% distilled
water.  I've made Epson Archival and UC-based B&W inksets with it that work
well.  The ingredients are primary constituents of Epson inks.  I've
balanced the viscosity to the Epson standards.  At a 50:50 mix, there are
enough of the other ingredients in the Epson input inks to do the rest of
what needs doing.  I have not tried it at the larger 1:2 ratio.

I want to separate the base from the rest of the approach.  If some of us
can easily mix from basic inputs, we'll be able to compare which base, for
example, gives the least bronzing or fade tests the best.  There might be
differences.  I've wondered if, for example, the MIS base has a UV filter in
it.  That might explain why MIS inks beat the above-mentioned Epson-based
mixes, but when both types are sprayed with a UV spray they were equal.  The
base is where a lot of the action is.  This allows us also to simply use a
wire-wound rod to standardize our own inksets.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Hi Paul. That is the approach I anticipated trying in my old 1200 for
B&W when I get back to FL in a few weeks. Including the Eboni/PK
pairing. I haven't quite decided what to do about the toning issue. I
don't like greenish casts so was worried about just cyan and was
thinking about using the blue ink from Mis as you, I think, did for
the FSN series. Anyhow, if it works in your 7500, it will work fine in
the 1200.

Regards
Duane



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark"
<paul.roark@...> wrote:

>
>  
> 
> I'm trying a new inkset in my 7500 as a way to simplify my life and,
> hopefully, cure the tone shift problem I've experienced in large format
> printers running dedicated "blended" B&W inksets.  
>  
> 
> Paul
> 
> www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Hi Duane,

> That is the approach I anticipated trying in my old 1200 ...
> I haven't quite decided what to do about the toning issue. 
>I don't like greenish casts so was worried about just cyan 

I agree, cyan alone can't do it.

>and was thinking about using the blue ink from Mis as you, 
>I think, did for the FSN series.

In the original FSN it was a set ration of cyan to magenta.  For the UT-FSN
I went to R800 blue & cyan.  The ratios of the two change from highlights to
shadows.  Note how the more cyan and relatively less magenta is used in the
sample "neutral" profile I posted at
http://home1.gte.net/res0a2zt/4K-7500-Kirkland.jpg .

So, a key to my new 7500 setup is that both a dilute very light cyan and
standard light magenta are used.  This gives me the same type of control I
get in the UT-3D inkset (except easier).

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Paul,

I am trying to understand more about the choice of rips and in your post you
said;

"This approach will only work with a rip, with QTR and IJC being the logical
ones for most B&W printers"

Would StudioPrint not be another logical choice or is there a problem with
Studioprint?
Which rip would you use if you were not too concerned about cost?

Txs,

Mike

On 02/10/06, Paul Roark <paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> I'm trying a new inkset in my 7500 as a way to simplify my life and,
> hopefully, cure the tone shift problem I've experienced in large format
> printers running dedicated "blended" B&W inksets.
>
> While it's too soon to be sure, I think the arrangement below is at least
> working in terms of ease of profiling and quality results. It'll take
> weeks
> to know if the tone shift problem has been eliminated or at least
> significantly lessened.
>
> This approach will only work with a rip, with QTR and IJC being the
> logical
> ones for most B&W printers.
>
> Currently, this is what I have loaded in the 7500 (source of ink in
> parentheses), and I think it will for fine for all 7000 and 7600
> generation
> printers:
>
> - 4 k's: MK (MIS - Eboni),
>
> PK (now MIS, may be Epson later),
>
> LK (MIS),
>
> LLK (MIS);
>
> - Light Cyan -- 50% MIS Light Cyan, 50% clear base for 7500;
>
> Standard LC recommended for the 7600;
>
> - LM (Epson UC, may be Epson Archival later).
>
> There are no blends of more than one type of pigment in any ink. As such,
> the inkset should be relatively easy to profile and should have the least
> amount of color drift between printing sessions.
>
> All inks can be off-the-shelf and from multiple sources. For the 7500,
> however, I do think the lighter 50% LC ("LLC"?) is worth the effort for
> smoother highlights. It's an easy 1:1 mix of readily available and
> compatible cyan pigment and clear base. MIS's cyan pigment appears to be
> very good.
>
> With both MK and PK loaded, I can print on either matte or glossy paper.
>
> With a rip, this approach is similar to the older K2 - rip approaches.
> However, here there are 4 carbon inks in the combination I'm trying (3 are
> used for glossy printing).
>
> It is also similar to the K3 ABW mode approach when yellow is replaced
> with
> carbon. A rip, however, gives the combo much more flexibility in
> profiling,
> at the expense of somewhat more complexity.
>
> To see a sample set of initial profiling curves (with IJC) for Kirkland
> see:
>
> http://home1.gte.net/res0a2zt/4K-7500-Kirkland.jpg (Try Full Screen view
> if
> fuzzy.)
>
> It looks like the hard part is to get the carbon core crossovers right
> first. Once the combined carbon curve is straight, it looks like the color
> curves can be mostly just straight lines. I start the color curves just a
> bit back from where the LLK starts. The LLK makes very smooth highlights,
> but the cyan pigments, even diluted, are still the most noticeable with a
> loupe. So, I start them at 8 (of 256). From the start point to the deep
> shadows where the color curves head back to where the dmax is optimized,
> there are no other dots. The curves are straight lines. With the toners
> added, I reduced the ink limits of the LK and LLK to bring the points that
> were at the top of these curves to their correct density. The PK ink limit
> also needed reducing to get the best dmax.
>
> Hopefully once I've made basic matte and glossy carbon curves, this
> pattern
> will continue with other papers.
>
> While the highlights under a loupe were slightly smoother with my previous
> UT-FSN+ approach, the overall smoothness of the 4K + LM and LLC approach
> is
> better, and the curves are simpler.
>
> So, time will tell if this solves the tone shift problem, it looks like
> this
> might be a viable and flexible approach for the older large format hextone
> printers.
>
> Paul
>
> www.PaulRoark.com <http://www.paulroark.com/>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> 
>


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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Michael King"
<drmrking@...> wrote:
>
> Paul,
> 
> I am trying to understand more about the choice of rips and in your
post you
> said;
> 
> "This approach will only work with a rip, with QTR and IJC being the
logical
> ones for most B&W printers"
> 
> Would StudioPrint not be another logical choice or is there a
problem with
> Studioprint?
> Which rip would you use if you were not too concerned about cost?
> 
> Txs,
> 
> Mike


Studio Print should work fine for anyone that already owns it. The
cost is the factor that leaves it out for most people.

Yes, for me it was just a cost and familiarity issue.  I assume many of the
rips can do the same thing.

 

Paul

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

 

 

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Greg
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 7:58 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] New large format approach -- 4K+

 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhit
<mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint%40yahoogroups.com>
eThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Michael King"
<drmrking@...> wrote:
>
> Paul,
> 
> I am trying to understand more about the choice of rips and in your
post you
> said;
> 
> "This approach will only work with a rip, with QTR and IJC being the
logical
> ones for most B&W printers"
> 
> Would StudioPrint not be another logical choice or is there a
problem with
> Studioprint?
> Which rip would you use if you were not too concerned about cost?
> 
> Txs,
> 
> Mike

Studio Print should work fine for anyone that already owns it. The
cost is the factor that leaves it out for most people.

 



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

> >... a mix of llb + glop ...

>I mixed my own LLK from a standardized LK. ...

>I have not tried Glop to mix with. I use the MIS base. 
>I'm not sure if MIS will sell its new base (slightly yellow
> and with a bit of an ammonia smell), 

MIS will not sell its new base.

>but it does, I believe, sell one that is compatible ...

MIS sells a clear base, but they say it is for matte paper only.  I mixed
some LLK with it and it appears to work, but the glossy prints suffer from
serious bronzing.

I tried a mix of LLK (1 part LK to 2 parts base) using Glop as the base.
The good news is that the glossy print was very good in terms of its
relative lack of bronzing.  However, this morning the yellow nozzles of the
printer it was tested in (a 220) were (and still are) badly clogged.  It
could be a coincidence, but I doubt it.  This printer has never had a
serious clog.

For those who do use Glop, what experience do you have with clogs?  I think
I stopped using it in part due to my concerns with such.

The bottom line, however, is that the market really needs a good base for
mixing these pigments.  The old clear base is unacceptable for glossy paper.
On the other hand, it'd probably be fine if the amount of it used is very
small. 

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

> For those who do use Glop, what experience do you have with clogs?

I have Glop permanently in the yellow position in my 2100. It's often
unused for weeks at a time as most of my prints are matte, but I've never
had any clogging problems. I'm using tea coloured Glop that I bought from
MIS last year or early this year.

--
Daniel Staver
http://daniel.staver.no

Paul and?or anyone else,

Is your local Costco still carrying (our favorite!) Kirkland Sig. 
8.5x11" paper?

My local Costco (Rt 271 in Ohio) has stopped carrying it. A guy at 
customer service said that all Costco's are different , in that they 
don't all carry the same products.

I recently returned from a trip from out west and papssed several 
Costco's but didn't bother stopping since I didn't have room to 
transport the paper back home with me (I always bought 1 or 2 cases at 
a time).

Just curious.
Thanks,
Scott

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> 
> MIS will not sell its new base.
> 
> >but it does, I believe, sell one that is compatible ...
> 
> MIS sells a clear base, but they say it is for matte paper only.  I 
mixed
> some LLK with it and it appears to work, but the glossy prints 
suffer from
> serious bronzing.
> 


I could probably dig up the email from Walter at Image Specialists if 
need be, but he said it would be less than ideal to dilute the newer 
gloss base inks with the older base! I get the idea that it could be 
very bad. He said to use the GLOP (WJ824 I think) for the newer inks 
that Image Specialists produces. If MIS is telling you that you 
should use the old base, then either they are using a different ink, 
or they are giving bad advice! The only ink that he told me to use 
with the old base (WJ820?)is the matte black ink! Take it for what 
it's worth, and (again) if someone doesn't believe where this info 
came from, I'll see if I still have the email from Walter, or I'll 
contact him again and ask him to drop in and give his opinion 
directly. Walter is one of the chemists/engineers at Image 
Specialists.

I'm still getting it on the California Central Coast.  Also, I've been using the Kirkland 4x6 for the family photos.  It, however, is apparently not the same as the 81/2 x 11 since the 4x6 is made in the US.  I use the same profile for both.
   
  Tom Baker

scott_now_coming <scott_now_coming@yahoo.com> wrote:
          Paul and?or anyone else,

Is your local Costco still carrying (our favorite!) Kirkland Sig. 
8.5x11" paper?

My local Costco (Rt 271 in Ohio) has stopped carrying it. A guy at 
customer service said that all Costco's are different , in that they 
don't all carry the same products.

I recently returned from a trip from out west and papssed several 
Costco's but didn't bother stopping since I didn't have room to 
transport the paper back home with me (I always bought 1 or 2 cases at 
a time).

Just curious.
Thanks,
Scott



         


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

The Kirkland 8-1/2 x 11 can be purchased from MIS (www.inksupply.com).  
It can also be ordered online directly from Costco.   Costco  
non-members must pay a  surcharge, but the price is still very 
attractive.  (Costco's shipping and handling fee's pretty high, however).

Craig
Washington, DC

I'm in SC and I just bought another pack last week..
Pierre-Olivier
PS: I think you can order it on line at Costco.com too

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tom Baker" <tbaker1328@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 1:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] OT- Costco still carry Kirkland paper?


I'm still getting it on the California Central Coast.  Also, I've been using 
the Kirkland 4x6 for the family photos.  It, however, is apparently not the 
same as the 81/2 x 11 since the 4x6 is made in the US.  I use the same 
profile for both.

  Tom Baker

scott_now_coming <scott_now_coming@...> wrote:
          Paul and?or anyone else,

Is your local Costco still carrying (our favorite!) Kirkland Sig.
8.5x11" paper?

My local Costco (Rt 271 in Ohio) has stopped carrying it. A guy at
customer service said that all Costco's are different , in that they
don't all carry the same products.

I recently returned from a trip from out west and papssed several
Costco's but didn't bother stopping since I didn't have room to
transport the paper back home with me (I always bought 1 or 2 cases at
a time).

Just curious.
Thanks,
Scott






[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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
 
>> MIS will not sell its new base.
...
>> MIS sells a clear base, but they say it is for matte paper only. 
>> I mixed some LLK with it and it appears to work, but the 
>> glossy prints suffer from serious bronzing.
> 

Greg wrote, in part:

>... email from Walter at Image Specialists ...
> said to use the GLOP (WJ824 I think) for the newer inks ...

I used a base made of 50% Glop and 50% old clear base, and the mix took care
of most of the bronzing that plagues the old base.  I would say this might
be a good way for people to dilute the LC, for example, to the 50% LC I use
in my new 7500 approach. I think the new base has some ammonia in it to help
prevent clogs.  In experimenting, about 1 - 1.5% ammonia (from Ace hardware)
seems to give about the same degree of ammonia smell that is in the new
inks.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

I need to modify a previous post.

Greg previously noted: 

> ... Walter at Image Specialists ... said to use the 
> GLOP (WJ824 ...) [as a dilution base] for the 
> newer inks that Image Specialists produces. ... 
> Walter is one of the chemists/engineers at Image Specialists.

I had previously noted that MIS does not sell its new base, the old base
bronzes very badly when used on gloss paper, and my experiments with the
Glop I had on hand produced clogging when used as a dilution base. (In fact,
it appeared to cause more clogging even when used as Glop.)

Now it appears that the clogging when used as a base may have been due to a
coincidental printer problem, but more importantly, the Glop I had appears
to be an older beta version.  Greg sent me the Glop he had (WJ 824 from
Image Specialists, I believe), and that Glop is a very different product.
The older Glop I had was the color of dark beer and did not smell like the
current batch of inks from MIS.  The Glop Greg has looks like light beer and
smells just like the newer MIS inks.  So, I'm not in a position to say the
Walter at IS is not correct.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> I need to modify a previous post.
> 
> Greg previously noted: 
> 
> > ... Walter at Image Specialists ... said to use the 
> > GLOP (WJ824 ...) [as a dilution base] for the 
> > newer inks that Image Specialists produces. ... 
> > Walter is one of the chemists/engineers at Image Specialists.
> 
> I had previously noted that MIS does not sell its new base, the old 
base
> bronzes very badly when used on gloss paper, and my experiments 
with the
> Glop I had on hand produced clogging when used as a dilution base. 
(In fact,
> it appeared to cause more clogging even when used as Glop.)
> 
> Now it appears that the clogging when used as a base may have been 
due to a
> coincidental printer problem, but more importantly, the Glop I had 
appears
> to be an older beta version.  Greg sent me the Glop he had (WJ 824 
from
> Image Specialists, I believe), and that Glop is a very different 
product.
> The older Glop I had was the color of dark beer and did not smell 
like the
> current batch of inks from MIS.  The Glop Greg has looks like light 
beer and
> smells just like the newer MIS inks.  So, I'm not in a position to 
say the
> Walter at IS is not correct.
> 


For those following this thread, here is another place to get the 
Image Specialists inks:

http://www.uink.com/

I sent them an email late last night, and also got a reply late last 
night that follows:

-------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for your inquiry. 
  
WeInk, LLC is not owned by MediaStreet. 
  

WeInk, LLC sold two domain names to MediaStreet, weink.com and 
getinkexpress.com. We have refocused our product lines towards 
wholesale bulk ink and retail wide format printer supplies as well as 
dry ink based printing supplies, bring out of retirement the domain 
name UINK.com.

  

All Endura and Enchrome inks are manufactured by Image Specialists. 
Currently we do not use any other manufacturer for inkjet inks we 
sell other than IS.

  
John Mills - Manager 
1-804-674-6921 
WeInk, LLC Richmond, VA USA 
--------------------------------------------------------

The GLOP (Image Specialists WJ824) is currently $144 per US GALLON, I 
didn't check the price for the 500ml bottle, but most of the newer 
pigment inks were $53.00 per 500ml, which is not that far above cost.

It should also be noted again that MIS now lists Image Specialists 
inks for sale by the IS part number, though I have not compared 
prices.

And if anyone feels like getting into a fight, please help me out 
here:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?
forum=1003&message=20492041 You'll find that the poster oftens spends 
great amounts of energy trying to put down any third party inks, 
especially those from Image Specialists (and indirectly MIS). Many 
people (myself included) have run there own "seat of the pants" fade 
tests and found them to be good enough.

In a message dated 10/17/2006 2:03:08 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
dfaprinting@... writes:


For  those following this thread, here is another place to get the 
Image  Specialists inks:

http://www.uink.com/

I sent them an email late  last night, and also got a reply late last 
night that  follows:




FWIW, I've been using the Image Specialist inks in my 7500 for some time,  
and the results are stunning, with NO problems with the printer. I use MIS  
funnel-fill carts, and I plan to switch over my 7600 and my 4800 to the same  
respective systems.
Great stuff.
 
Richard (Brooklyn)


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

Greg sent me the Glop he had (WJ 824 from Image Specialists, I believe).
The Glop Greg has looks like light beer and smells just like the newer MIS
inks.

I had previously noted that MIS does not sell its new base, and the old base
bronzes very badly when used on gloss paper.

Following up on Walter's suggestions, below, I have now mixed some light
carbon ink using the Glop Greg sent to me.  It seems to print just like the
light carbon from MIS.  So far, there seem to be no problems.  So, it might
make a good base for those who want to dilute MIS inks where MIS does not
sell the dilution you're looking for (like the 50% MIS Light Cyan I
currently have in my 7500).

For background, see below.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 




Greg previously noted: 

> ... Walter at Image Specialists ... said to use the 
> GLOP (WJ824 ...) [as a dilution base] for the 
> newer inks that Image Specialists produces ... 
> Walter is one of the chemists/engineers at Image Specialists.

And,

> ... here is another place to get the Image Specialists inks:

>  http://www.uink.com/  [gallon sizes]

> ...  WeInk, LLC ... refocused ... towards  
> wholesale bulk ink and retail wide format printer supplies ...
> [using] the domain name UINK.com.

> All Endura and Enchrome inks are manufactured by Image Specialists. 

> ... MIS now lists Image Specialists inks for sale by the IS 
> part number ...

See http://www.inksupply.com/bulk  [for smaller sizes]

See http://www.image-specialists.com/GlobalDistributors.htm for other
distributors.

I think the key to stress is that if the ink you have uses a 
different (old) base, that you shouldn't use the GLOP to dilute it, 
and of course the reverse is true.

Have you printed with that new mix yet? Just wondering how it looks. 
The brief time that I used the UltraPro inks with luster paper I was 
fairly impressed. I never tried it with glossy because both those 
types of papers don't appeal to me. I simply had a roll of luster on 
hand, and treated as test paper. Gamut turned out to be similar to an 
R1800 when I compared profiles that I made for my 9500 to profiles I 
had made for someone's R1800.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> 
> Greg sent me the Glop he had (WJ 824 from Image Specialists, I 
believe).
> The Glop Greg has looks like light beer and smells just like the 
newer MIS
> inks.
> 
> I had previously noted that MIS does not sell its new base, and the 
old base
> bronzes very badly when used on gloss paper.
> 
> Following up on Walter's suggestions, below, I have now mixed some 
light
> carbon ink using the Glop Greg sent to me.  It seems to print just 
like the
> light carbon from MIS.  So far, there seem to be no problems.  So, 
it might
> make a good base for those who want to dilute MIS inks where MIS 
does not
> sell the dilution you're looking for (like the 50% MIS Light Cyan I
> currently have in my 7500).
> 
> For background, see below.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Greg previously noted: 
> 
> > ... Walter at Image Specialists ... said to use the 
> > GLOP (WJ824 ...) [as a dilution base] for the 
> > newer inks that Image Specialists produces ... 
> > Walter is one of the chemists/engineers at Image Specialists.
> 
> And,
> 
> > ... here is another place to get the Image Specialists inks:
> 
> >  http://www.uink.com/  [gallon sizes]
> 
> > ...  WeInk, LLC ... refocused ... towards  
> > wholesale bulk ink and retail wide format printer supplies ...
> > [using] the domain name UINK.com.
> 
> > All Endura and Enchrome inks are manufactured by Image 
Specialists. 
> 
> > ... MIS now lists Image Specialists inks for sale by the IS 
> > part number ...
> 
> See http://www.inksupply.com/bulk  [for smaller sizes]
> 
> See http://www.image-specialists.com/GlobalDistributors.htm for 
other
> distributors.
>

Greg,

>Have you printed with that new mix yet? Just wondering how it looks.

Yes, on glossy paper MIS inks diluted with the Glop have the same very low
bronzing that the MIS inks have.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

This new non-blended ink approach has sat in my 7500 for 2 weeks now.  So,
to see how stable the tones were, I printed a test strip, read the patches
with the PrintFixPro Spectro and graphed the Lab A and B values with Excel.
I've overlaid the graphs, matching the paper white and black points to
adjust for spectro reading errors to at least some extent.  The results are
posted at 

http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/7500_4K+_PA-N1_B_14_Days.jpg and

http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/7500_4K+_PA-N1_A_14_Days.jpg

I'm very pleased with the results.  The deviations shown on the graphs are
close to the expected random errors from different dry times, the spectro
and other factors.

So, this is the inkset I'll be using in the 7500 for a while.  It gives me
full Lab A and B controls, and appears to be very stable.

The old 7500, with its relatively large and non-variable dots, does show a
very fine grained dot structure on test strips when viewed with the
strongest reading glasses.  However, for display prints, I think the
smoothness is fine.  Compared to the blended inkset I was using previously,
the current one is about 15% less smooth according to the average Standard
Deviation measures of 1600 dpi scans.  Again, the fine grained structure of
the image is essentially irrelevant to me for display prints.  The stability
of the tones and full Lab A and B controls are far more important.

So, I'm very happy with this combination at this point.

For the details of the inkset, see below.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 



On October 01, 2006 I wrote: 

>I'm trying a new inkset in my 7500 as a way to simplify my 
>life and, hopefully, cure the tone shift problem I've 
>experienced in large format printers running dedicated 
>"blended" B&W inksets. 

...

>This approach will only work with a rip, with QTR and IJC being 
>the logical ones for most B&W printers.

>Currently, this is what I have loaded in the 7500 (source 
>of ink in parentheses), and I think it will for fine for 
>all 7000 and 7600 generation printers:

> 4 k's: 

> - MK (MIS - Eboni), 

> - PK (now MIS, may be Epson later), 

> - LK (MIS), 

> - LLK (MIS);

Plus colors:

> - Light Cyan -- 50% MIS Light Cyan, 50% clear base for 7500;

> - LM (Epson UC, may be Epson Archival later).

> There are no blends of more than one type of pigment in any ink. 
> As such, the inkset should be relatively easy to profile and 
> should have the least amount of color drift between printing sessions.

> All inks can be off-the-shelf and from multiple sources. For 
> the 7500, however, I do think the lighter 50% LC ("LLC"?) 
> is worth the effort for smoother highlights. It's an easy 
> 1:1 mix of readily available and compatible cyan pigment and 
> clear base [or Glop]. MIS's cyan pigment appears to be very good.

> With both MK and PK loaded, I can print on either matte or glossy paper.

...

Paul,

Are you willing to share you IJC profiles ?

Txs,

Mike


On 21/10/06, Paul Roark <paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
>   This new non-blended ink approach has sat in my 7500 for 2 weeks now.
> So,
> to see how stable the tones were, I printed a test strip, read the patches
> with the PrintFixPro Spectro and graphed the Lab A and B values with
> Excel.
> I've overlaid the graphs, matching the paper white and black points to
> adjust for spectro reading errors to at least some extent. The results are
> posted at
>
> http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/7500_4K+_PA-N1_B_14_Days.jpg and
>
> http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/7500_4K+_PA-N1_A_14_Days.jpg
>
> I'm very pleased with the results. The deviations shown on the graphs are
> close to the expected random errors from different dry times, the spectro
> and other factors.
>
> So, this is the inkset I'll be using in the 7500 for a while. It gives me
> full Lab A and B controls, and appears to be very stable.
>
> The old 7500, with its relatively large and non-variable dots, does show a
> very fine grained dot structure on test strips when viewed with the
> strongest reading glasses. However, for display prints, I think the
> smoothness is fine. Compared to the blended inkset I was using previously,
> the current one is about 15% less smooth according to the average Standard
> Deviation measures of 1600 dpi scans. Again, the fine grained structure of
> the image is essentially irrelevant to me for display prints. The
> stability
> of the tones and full Lab A and B controls are far more important.
>
> So, I'm very happy with this combination at this point.
>
> For the details of the inkset, see below.
>
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>
> On October 01, 2006 I wrote:
>
> >I'm trying a new inkset in my 7500 as a way to simplify my
> >life and, hopefully, cure the tone shift problem I've
> >experienced in large format printers running dedicated
> >"blended" B&W inksets.
>
> ...
>
> >This approach will only work with a rip, with QTR and IJC being
> >the logical ones for most B&W printers.
>
> >Currently, this is what I have loaded in the 7500 (source
> >of ink in parentheses), and I think it will for fine for
> >all 7000 and 7600 generation printers:
>
> > 4 k's:
>
> > - MK (MIS - Eboni),
>
> > - PK (now MIS, may be Epson later),
>
> > - LK (MIS),
>
> > - LLK (MIS);
>
> Plus colors:
>
> > - Light Cyan -- 50% MIS Light Cyan, 50% clear base for 7500;
>
> > - LM (Epson UC, may be Epson Archival later).
>
> > There are no blends of more than one type of pigment in any ink.
> > As such, the inkset should be relatively easy to profile and
> > should have the least amount of color drift between printing sessions.
>
> > All inks can be off-the-shelf and from multiple sources. For
> > the 7500, however, I do think the lighter 50% LC ("LLC"?)
> > is worth the effort for smoother highlights. It's an easy
> > 1:1 mix of readily available and compatible cyan pigment and
> > clear base [or Glop]. MIS's cyan pigment appears to be very good.
>
> > With both MK and PK loaded, I can print on either matte or glossy paper.
>
> ...
>
> 
>


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

Mike, 

>Are you willing to share you IJC profiles ?

Yes, of course.  I don’t have a lot, but my impression is that once good
carbon curve (for the carbon cross-overs) and neutral curve (for the LM & LC
distribution) are done, the blending slider can do the intermediate tones.
I currently have Premier Art Hot Press 205 (sheets -- the last roll I had
printed differently and my new roll has not arrived), and CSR.  I have at
least reasonably good drafts of EEM and Kirkland.  I've put my profiles
folder in a Zip file at http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/IJC-OPM%20Profiles.zip
See if you can save it to your desktop and un-zip it OK.  The newer profiles
will be the ones to use.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

___________________

On 21/10/06, Paul Roark <paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> This new non-blended ink approach has sat in my 7500 for 2 weeks now.
> So,
> to see how stable the tones were, I printed a test strip, read the patches
> with the PrintFixPro Spectro and graphed the Lab A and B values with
> Excel.
> I've overlaid the graphs, matching the paper white and black points to
> adjust for spectro reading errors to at least some extent. The results are
> posted at
>
> http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/7500_4K+_PA-N1_B_14_Days.jpg and
>
> http://home1.gte.net/res09aij/7500_4K+_PA-N1_A_14_Days.jpg
>
> I'm very pleased with the results. The deviations shown on the graphs are
> close to the expected random errors from different dry times, the spectro
> and other factors.
>
> So, this is the inkset I'll be using in the 7500 for a while. It gives me
> full Lab A and B controls, and appears to be very stable.
>
> The old 7500, with its relatively large and non-variable dots, does show a
> very fine grained dot structure on test strips when viewed with the
> strongest reading glasses. However, for display prints, I think the
> smoothness is fine. Compared to the blended inkset I was using previously,
> the current one is about 15% less smooth according to the average Standard
> Deviation measures of 1600 dpi scans. Again, the fine grained structure of
> the image is essentially irrelevant to me for display prints. The
> stability
> of the tones and full Lab A and B controls are far more important.
>
> So, I'm very happy with this combination at this point.
>
> For the details of the inkset, see below.
>
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>
> On October 01, 2006 I wrote:
>
> >I'm trying a new inkset in my 7500 as a way to simplify my
> >life and, hopefully, cure the tone shift problem I've
> >experienced in large format printers running dedicated
> >"blended" B&W inksets.
>
> ...
>
> >This approach will only work with a rip, with QTR and IJC being
> >the logical ones for most B&W printers.
>
> >Currently, this is what I have loaded in the 7500 (source
> >of ink in parentheses), and I think it will for fine for
> >all 7000 and 7600 generation printers:
>
> > 4 k's:
>
> > - MK (MIS - Eboni),
>
> > - PK (now MIS, may be Epson later),
>
> > - LK (MIS),
>
> > - LLK (MIS);
>
> Plus colors:
>
> > - Light Cyan -- 50% MIS Light Cyan, 50% clear base for 7500;
>
> > - LM (Epson UC, may be Epson Archival later).
>
> > There are no blends of more than one type of pigment in any ink.
> > As such, the inkset should be relatively easy to profile and
> > should have the least amount of color drift between printing sessions.
>
> > All inks can be off-the-shelf and from multiple sources. For
> > the 7500, however, I do think the lighter 50% LC ("LLC"?)
> > is worth the effort for smoother highlights. It's an easy
> > 1:1 mix of readily available and compatible cyan pigment and
> > clear base [or Glop]. MIS's cyan pigment appears to be very good.
>
> > With both MK and PK loaded, I can print on either matte or glossy paper.
>
> ...
>
> 
>

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