Digital BW, The Print

This my my first post in this group.  I have been lurking and 
receiving the digest for awhile, but now it's time to take the 
plunge.

I just started using an Epson r2400 printer and have some questions 
about using the advanced B&W mode.  Before I go through more ink, 
paper and time, I thought it might be cost-effective to ask here.  
It would be helpful to know if people have found any settings to be 
consistent with certain papers; in particular, Epson Enhanced Matte, 
Watercolor Radiant, Velvet Fine Art, Ultrasmooth Fine Art, and 
Semigloss.

If you are using these papers with the r2400 or any of the other K3 
printers, could you please post for each paper:
-the media type setting (especially if it's not the same as the 
paper)
-print quality
-ink density
and on the settings page:
-tone (light, normal, dark, darker or darkest)
-horizontal and vertical adjustments on the color wheel
-other adjustments that you have found helpful.

Thank you

Hi,

Try this website by one of our members.

http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm

Paul

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "cynthiam_in_fl" 
<4merzers@...> wrote:
>
> This my my first post in this group.  I have been lurking and 
> receiving the digest for awhile, but now it's time to take the 
> plunge.
> 
> I just started using an Epson r2400 printer and have some questions 
> about using the advanced B&W mode.  Before I go through more ink, 
> paper and time, I thought it might be cost-effective to ask here.  
> It would be helpful to know if people have found any settings to be 
> consistent with certain papers; in particular, Epson Enhanced 
Matte, 

> Watercolor Radiant, Velvet Fine Art, Ultrasmooth Fine Art, and 
> Semigloss.
> 
> If you are using these papers with the r2400 or any of the other K3 
> printers, could you please post for each paper:
> -the media type setting (especially if it's not the same as the 
> paper)
> -print quality
> -ink density
> and on the settings page:
> -tone (light, normal, dark, darker or darkest)
> -horizontal and vertical adjustments on the color wheel
> -other adjustments that you have found helpful.
> 
> Thank you
>

I've been to the site and reviewed the materials.  But unless if I 
missed something, he suggests using Velvet Fine Art as the media 
type for all matte papers??  I tried that on the first print I did 
on Enhanced matte; set the media type to VFA then, ink density to -
5% and tone to light, but it came out terrible; very dark in the 
shadows.  So then I went with the Epson defaults with media set to 
enhanced matte, the ink to -5% and it came out much better.  Then 
tried same image with tone set to light, normal and dark and decied 
that at least for Enhanced matte, that the prints looked better when 
set to dark.

Tried using some of Clayton's color wheel corrections, but they 
didn't always seem to work so well.  Depending on the papers, there 
is often a slight color cast which you are supposed to use the color 
wheel to counteract?  So I thought if others found other settings 
that work for them, it would be helpful if they could post them.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "bwinkjet" 
<bwinkjet@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> 
> Try this website by one of our members.
> 
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
> 
> Paul
> 
> --- In 
DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "cynthiam_in_fl" 
> <4merzers@> wrote:
> >
> > This my my first post in this group.  I have been lurking and 
> > receiving the digest for awhile, but now it's time to take the 
> > plunge.
> > 
> > I just started using an Epson r2400 printer and have some 
questions 
> > about using the advanced B&W mode.  Before I go through more 
ink, 
> > paper and time, I thought it might be cost-effective to ask 
here.  
> > It would be helpful to know if people have found any settings to 
be 
> > consistent with certain papers; in particular, Epson Enhanced 
> Matte, 
> > Watercolor Radiant, Velvet Fine Art, Ultrasmooth Fine Art, and 
> > Semigloss.
> > 
> > If you are using these papers with the r2400 or any of the other 
K3 

> > printers, could you please post for each paper:
> > -the media type setting (especially if it's not the same as the 
> > paper)
> > -print quality
> > -ink density
> > and on the settings page:
> > -tone (light, normal, dark, darker or darkest)
> > -horizontal and vertical adjustments on the color wheel
> > -other adjustments that you have found helpful.
> > 
> > Thank you
> >
>

I found ABW to be unreliable, needing slightly different adjustments depending on the 
pictures. I also found it not completely immune to metamerism and not always neutral; 
sometimes with differing tints for highlight, mid-range and shadows. In a word, an 
improvement over previous situation but not what a dedicated B&W photographer looks 
for. With ABW you're back to the old test print system like in the wet darkroom, only more 
expensive. Besides, it seems to be engineered to use as much ink as the paper can absorb. 
I found it to produce very nice prints on Hanhemuhle Photo Rag, though. But, I don't like 
that paper much, because its surface is very hard to write on (difficult to sign) and it uses 
OBA's. It does fade from white to yellow quite rapidly if exposed unframed.

I tried to drive the printer with QTR, still using the K3 inks. QTR has a documented way to 
produce a real calibration, making the printing much more consistent once the calibration 
is nailed. Although an improvement over ABW, I found the calibration quite tedious 
because the K3 grey inks are too warm and need a mix of cyan and magenta to get 
neutral. I find that mix quite difficult to get right.

I also got completely fed up with constantly replacing cartridges. The process is designed 
again to maximize ink waste. Quite often I had to replace extra cartridges because of the 
priming process the printer goes through after each replacement.

I now use Cone's NK7 ink-set with an inkrepublic.com CIS and that seems to be what I was 
looking for. No metamerism, of course, neutral prints, with perfectly neutral grey on Moab 
Entrada Natural and slightly warm on Epson Velvet, but in a beautiful way. The tones are 
very rich, deep, seamless. Much better than anything I have been able to produce with K3. 
I have yet to see a single clog, even after letting the printer idle 2 weeks. The prints are 
simply gorgeous.

I must have picked up this thread mid stream, because I don't know which
printer you're talking about and I'm in the market to buy a new printer,
probably Epson, for B&W. I almost bought a 4800 today..there was a good
trade in on my Pro 4000, but in the end I couldn't justify spending another
$2000 just to get started, and that's using Epson expendables.

 

So, I'm looking for a printer recommendation, how do people feel about the
R2400?

 

Thanks in advance, Alan

 

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
stephane_bosman
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 7:15 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: I gave up

 

I found ABW to be unreliable, needing slightly different adjustments
depending on the 
pictures. I also found it not completely immune to metamerism and not always
neutral; 
sometimes with differing tints for highlight, mid-range and shadows. In a
word, an 
improvement over previous situation but not what a dedicated B&W
photographer looks 
for. With ABW you're back to the old test print system like in the wet
darkroom, only more 
expensive. Besides, it seems to be engineered to use as much ink as the
paper can absorb. 
I found it to produce very nice prints on Hanhemuhle Photo Rag, though. But,
I don't like 
that paper much, because its surface is very hard to write on (difficult to
sign) and it uses 
OBA's. It does fade from white to yellow quite rapidly if exposed unframed.

I tried to drive the printer with QTR, still using the K3 inks. QTR has a
documented way to 
produce a real calibration, making the printing much more consistent once
the calibration 
is nailed. Although an improvement over ABW, I found the calibration quite
tedious 
because the K3 grey inks are too warm and need a mix of cyan and magenta to
get 
neutral. I find that mix quite difficult to get right.

I also got completely fed up with constantly replacing cartridges. The
process is designed 
again to maximize ink waste. Quite often I had to replace extra cartridges
because of the 
priming process the printer goes through after each replacement.

I now use Cone's NK7 ink-set with an inkrepublic.com CIS and that seems to
be what I was 
looking for. No metamerism, of course, neutral prints, with perfectly
neutral grey on Moab 
Entrada Natural and slightly warm on Epson Velvet, but in a beautiful way.
The tones are 
very rich, deep, seamless. Much better than anything I have been able to
produce with K3. 
I have yet to see a single clog, even after letting the printer idle 2
weeks. The prints are 
simply gorgeous.

 



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

I've only had the r2400 alittle over a week so the jury is stil 
out.  Color is beautiful but B&W seems to bit a bit more trial and 
error but I think you will have that, too with any of the K3 
printers perhaps unless you use an RIP??
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Alan Kearney" 
<alan_kearney@...> wrote:
>
> I must have picked up this thread mid stream, because I don't know 
which
> printer you're talking about and I'm in the market to buy a new 
printer,
> probably Epson, for B&W. I almost bought a 4800 today..there was a 
good
> trade in on my Pro 4000, but in the end I couldn't justify 
spending another
> $2000 just to get started, and that's using Epson expendables.
> 
>  
> 
> So, I'm looking for a printer recommendation, how do people feel 
about the
> R2400?
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks in advance, Alan
> 
>  
> 
>   _____  
> 
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
> stephane_bosman
> Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 7:15 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: I gave up
> 
>  
> 
> I found ABW to be unreliable, needing slightly different 
adjustments
> depending on the 
> pictures. I also found it not completely immune to metamerism and 
not always
> neutral; 
> sometimes with differing tints for highlight, mid-range and 
shadows. In a
> word, an 
> improvement over previous situation but not what a dedicated B&W
> photographer looks 
> for. With ABW you're back to the old test print system like in the 
wet
> darkroom, only more 
> expensive. Besides, it seems to be engineered to use as much ink 
as the
> paper can absorb. 
> I found it to produce very nice prints on Hanhemuhle Photo Rag, 
though. But,
> I don't like 
> that paper much, because its surface is very hard to write on 
(difficult to
> sign) and it uses 
> OBA's. It does fade from white to yellow quite rapidly if exposed 
unframed.
> 
> I tried to drive the printer with QTR, still using the K3 inks. 
QTR has a
> documented way to 
> produce a real calibration, making the printing much more 
consistent once
> the calibration 
> is nailed. Although an improvement over ABW, I found the 
calibration quite
> tedious 
> because the K3 grey inks are too warm and need a mix of cyan and 
magenta to
> get 
> neutral. I find that mix quite difficult to get right.
> 
> I also got completely fed up with constantly replacing cartridges. 
The
> process is designed 
> again to maximize ink waste. Quite often I had to replace extra 
cartridges
> because of the 
> priming process the printer goes through after each replacement.
> 
> I now use Cone's NK7 ink-set with an inkrepublic.com CIS and that 
seems to
> be what I was 
> looking for. No metamerism, of course, neutral prints, with 
perfectly
> neutral grey on Moab 
> Entrada Natural and slightly warm on Epson Velvet, but in a 
beautiful way.
> The tones are 
> very rich, deep, seamless. Much better than anything I have been 
able to
> produce with K3. 
> I have yet to see a single clog, even after letting the printer 
idle 2

> weeks. The prints are 
> simply gorgeous.
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
I, too, have had the r2400 for about a week, and I'm getting this sinking feeling that it's too 
smart for me. It laughs when I try to feed thick paper through it. It smears when I front load, 
but it works perfectly from the sheet feeder. It gets particular glee when I stumble around in 
ABW. 

It reminds me of being married or having a capricious manager. But I see a specular highlight 
that may be the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.. The great thing about digital is that 
we're striving toward a goal where you can push a button and reach nirvana over and over 
again.

Don't give up. I mastered my Cuisanart coffee pot. There's hope.

Hello Cynthia,

>I've been to the site and reviewed the materials.  But unless if I 
>missed something, he suggests using Velvet Fine Art as the media 
>type for all matte papers??  I tried that on the first print I did 
>on Enhanced matte; set the media type to VFA then, ink density to -
>5% and tone to light, but it came out terrible; very dark in the 
>shadows.  So then I went with the Epson defaults with media set to 
>enhanced matte, the ink to -5% and it came out much better.  Then 
>tried same image with tone set to light, normal and dark and decied 
>that at least for Enhanced matte, that the prints looked better when 
>set to dark.

This is probably my fault for not explaining some things better.  All
of the driver settings are relative to something else.  There are many
possible combinations of settings that will work, but whatever
settings are used for output are dependent to some degree on the
settings that were used to prepare the image. 

In the opening paragraphs the article mentions that the workflow is an
extension of a previously developed one and contains links to previous
articles.  What is not well explained is that the suggested settings
are predicated on an image being worked up using the approach
described in the earlier articles (image profile, printer gamma
setting, etc).  It's quite possible that if an image was worked up
using a different technique then different output settings might be
required.  The material in article #9 is just one side of a two-sided
coin, so to speak.  

In my mind the articles on that page are part of a series, one
building upon another.  But I think I should add something that
explains this better.  Back to your situation, the concepts in the
article will work but you will have to do some experiments and see
what actual settings work best for you.  Those suggested settings
aren't meant to be carved in stone, but are just to help people get
started.  

 
>Tried using some of Clayton's color wheel corrections, but they 
>didn't always seem to work so well.  Depending on the papers, there 
>is often a slight color cast which you are supposed to use the color 
>wheel to counteract?  So I thought if others found other settings 
>that work for them, it would be helpful if they could post them.

A similar situation here.  The effect of the ABW settings can vary
slightly with density (ABW isn't a perfect system).  If your images
have been worked up with a different technique then it's quite likely
that the ABW settings will also differ.  Again, the bottom line is we
must do some experimenting to find what works best for us.  There are
lots and lots of variables.  It's rare that any two people will do
things exactly the same way.  I hope this is of some help.

Regards,
Clayton


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

Hello Stephane,

I agree with your observations, but would put different emphasis on them.

>I found ABW to be unreliable, 

Actually I find it very reliable.  It definitely has the quirks you
mention, but they are consistent.  It took me a while, but once I got
it figured out I found I can work with it very efficiently.  I waste
very little paper, many times nailing it first try.


>...sometimes with differing tints for highlight, mid-range and shadows. 

Yes, definitely it's greatest shortcoming.  But as I mentioned in my
article, I've found certain settings for each paper where things
harmonize very nicely.  You just have to do some testing and find the
sweet spots.


>In a word, an improvement over previous situation 

A huge improvement, and hopefully not the last.  It's not perfect, but
is very very good and very workable with a bit of patience and some
testing (like any system).  I fully expect Epson will improve on it,
especially with the competition heating up.


>...but not what a dedicated B&W photographer looks for. 

Just depends on what one is willing to put up with.  I'd rather deal
with it's quirks than use a RIP with the requisite curves and
profiling, or use Cone inks which eliminates variable tone and
requires a CIS to keep the cost down.   I too am getting gorgeous
prints, and find it to be efficient and reliable.   Once I got my
testing done and got things figured out it was Katy Bar The Door. 
Nowadays I just make prints and concentrate on the photography. 
Printer concerns are nearly nonexistent.

Regards,
Clayton


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

Hello Mbutler,

>Don't give up. I mastered my Cuisanart coffee pot. There's hope.

LOL!  Got a good chuckle from your remarks.

>I, too, have had the r2400 for about a week, and I'm getting this 
>sinking feeling that it's too smart for me. It laughs when I try to 
>feed thick paper through it. It smears when I front load, 
>but it works perfectly from the sheet feeder. 

I can load over 300gsm papers easily with the top feeder.  It just
requires getting a feel for the perfect nudge to get it into the jaws
of the grabber.  Adding a bit of curve into the paper's leading edge
also helps.  Just a tiny bit.


>It gets particular glee when I stumble around in ABW. 

Please see my reply to Stephane.  Give it some time and patience and
do some testing and you'll see that you're smarter than it is.


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 Cynthia,
> 
> >I've been to the site and reviewed the materials.  But unless if 
I 
> >missed something, he suggests using Velvet Fine Art as the media 
> >type for all matte papers??  I tried that on the first print I 
did 
> >on Enhanced matte; set the media type to VFA then, ink density 
to -
> >5% and tone to light, but it came out terrible; very dark in the 
> >shadows.  So then I went with the Epson defaults with media set 
to 
> >enhanced matte, the ink to -5% and it came out much better.  Then 
> >tried same image with tone set to light, normal and dark and 
decied 
> >that at least for Enhanced matte, that the prints looked better 
when 
> >set to dark.
> 
> This is probably my fault for not explaining some things better.  
All
> of the driver settings are relative to something else.  There are 
many
> possible combinations of settings that will work, but whatever
> settings are used for output are dependent to some degree on the
> settings that were used to prepare the image. 
> 
> In the opening paragraphs the article mentions that the workflow 
is an
> extension of a previously developed one and contains links to 
previous
> articles.  What is not well explained is that the suggested 
settings
> are predicated on an image being worked up using the approach
> described in the earlier articles (image profile, printer gamma
> setting, etc).  It's quite possible that if an image was worked up
> using a different technique then different output settings might be
> required.  The material in article #9 is just one side of a two-
sided
> coin, so to speak.  
> 
> In my mind the articles on that page are part of a series, one
> building upon another.  But I think I should add something that
> explains this better.  Back to your situation, the concepts in the
> article will work but you will have to do some experiments and see
> what actual settings work best for you.  Those suggested settings
> aren't meant to be carved in stone, but are just to help people get
> started.  

Hi Clayton,
I was hoping you would add your two cents.  Actually, I think I may 
have made an error in what I spoke to above about how my first test 
print using Epson Enhanced with Velvet Fine Art as the media type 
resulted in very blocked up shadows.  It was the first B&W print I 
had done and I suspect that in the Print Preview panel, that I may 
have forgotten to changed it to no color management.  So I probably 
ended up adding whatever profile I used in addition to the ABW 
controls??  At any rate, I tried your suggestions again using VFA as 
the paper type with Moab Kayenta and Epson Watercolor Radiant and 
found that the results were much better; the blacks were clearly 
deeper than when using the same ABW controls but with the 
manufacturere's suggested paper type especially noticeable in larger 
expanses of black.  The only difference is that I found that setting 
the tone to light was washed out, but I suspect that this may vary 
from paper to paper.  I think the Watercolor Radiant behaves better 
if you give it more ink whereas I find that I back off with other 
papers. 

My workflow is to shoot raw, do whatever adjustments I would do in 
the raw converter as if it were a color image and then bring into 
Photoshop(CS2)where I use various actions (whichever one seems to 
work the best magic)which are based on channel mixer ( like using 
predetermined recipes; takes out a lot of the guess work) enhance 
tones with curves and if it helps the image, will use the eyedropper 
to set white, grey and black points.

>  
> >Tried using some of Clayton's color wheel corrections, but they 
> >didn't always seem to work so well.  Depending on the papers, 
there 
> >is often a slight color cast which you are supposed to use the 
color 
> >wheel to counteract?  So I thought if others found other settings 
> >that work for them, it would be helpful if they could post them.
> 
> A similar situation here.  The effect of the ABW settings can vary
> slightly with density (ABW isn't a perfect system).  If your images
> have been worked up with a different technique then it's quite 
likely
> that the ABW settings will also differ.  Again, the bottom line is 
we
> must do some experimenting to find what works best for us.  There 
are
> lots and lots of variables.  It's rare that any two people will do
> things exactly the same way.  I hope this is of some help.

Although I have not gotten this far in my  re-experimentation, I 
suspect now that I might be working closer to your workflow by using 
VFA as the paper type, (that is what you are suggesting for all 
matte paper, right?) using a lighter tone than the default of 
normal, that your suggested color wheel numbers may work better.  
It's at least a place to start.

Thanks for responding to my post.
 
Regards,
Cynthia

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

Clayton,

Thanks for your helpful input and glad for you you got better success than me with ABW.

I would just like to mention that with NK7 you get different tones by using different papers. 
Neutral on Moab Entrada Natural (has to be seen, absolutely gorgeous!) and nicely warm on 
Epson Velvet, well in line with the creamier look of that paper.

With QTR and NK7, no test print, it really makes digital printing a pleasure.

Regarding MIS I had severe clogs with he Ebony black in my 2100 and that didn't make me 
feel like going back to them. I had tried MIS because they are much cheaper than Cone but in 
the end, well, NK7 was too luring.

I concur you need a CIS to make Cone inks economical. I use the one from inkrepublic.com.

Of course, I am not interested in printing colour.

Hello Cynthia,

>...I may have forgotten to change it to no color management...

That would certainly change things <g>.


>I tried your suggestions again using VFA as the paper type with Moab 
>Kayenta and Epson Watercolor Radiant and found that the results were 
>much better; the blacks were clearly deeper than when using the same 
>ABW controls but with the manufacturere's suggested paper type...

I have no explanation for it, but just from experimenting I found that
VFA seems to work best for all the matte papers I tried.  The results
are really beautiful.


>My workflow is to shoot raw, do whatever adjustments I would do in 
>the raw converter as if it were a color image and then bring into 
>Photoshop(CS2)where I use various actions (whichever one seems to 
>work the best magic)which are based on channel mixer...

Understood.  Another thing to keep in mind (and this is the part
referred to in the earlier articles [someone reading the 2400 article
by itself may miss this]) is that these settings assume an image is
worked up using DG20 (or something close to that, I use DG18) as the
image profile.  Whatever BW conversion technique is used, when the
final conversion to grayscale mode is done, the image is converted
with the profile that is specified for grayscale in the Color Settings
window.  If this is set to something other than DG20 (or close to it),
the resulting image will be different (even though it looks the same
on screen) and the recommended printer settings may not produce the
best results.  

What is explained in the earlier articles is that the entire workflow,
from grayscale conversion to final print, is all interdependent. 
Other settings can be used (for example, some people use GG2.2 for the
image and Dark or Darker for the Tone setting[Printer Gamma in non-ABW
drivers]).  It isn't religion.  I recommend these particular settings
simply because I found that they produce the best result.  For
example, I found that using GG2.2/Dark (or Darker, I forget which)
produces a similar density print but with more blocked up shadows,
where DG18/Light is much more open and easier to control.

BTW, you can't test this by assigning a different profile to an
already converted image.  You have to convert a color image twice,
once with each profile (and saved with different file names), then
apply the same workup to both, then try the various printer settings
on them.



>The only difference is that I found that setting the tone to light 
>was washed out, but I suspect that this may vary from paper to 
>paper.  I think the Watercolor Radiant behaves better if you give 
>it more ink whereas I find that I back off with other papers. 

I never tried that paper, but keep in mind that the Tone control
(Light, Dark, Darker, etc) does not really mean "more ink" or less
ink.  It changes the printer gamma setting.  In essence it is like an
adjustment curve being applied to the output data.  It affects the
contrast as well as density of the print (which will likely mess up
all your hard work).  If a paper really needs more or less ink than
another, the place to adjust that is the Ink Config/Density setting
(the one the article recommends be set to -5%).  

I keep the Tone control on Light for everything.  In this workflow it
is meant to match the printer output to the image profile, not to be a
control for making a print adjustment.  For consistency in workflow
and LPF (Life Pleasantness Factor), once you have decided how you want
to work, these two settings should remain fixed.  They are the
foundation for the entire workflow.  If you go to switching them
around from one image to another your life as a printer becomes much
more complex and unpleasant (and you would be well advised to buy a
home blood pressure monitor) <g>.


 
>Although I have not gotten this far in my re-experimentation, I 
>suspect now that I might be working closer to your workflow by using 
>VFA as the paper type, (that is what you are suggesting for all 
>matte paper, right?)

Yes, for whatever reason, to my eye it does a beautiful (and better)
job with all the matte papers I tried (VFA, Dourian, PR, Aurora,
Condor, Merlin, Kayenta - all the usual suspects).  I just leave it on
VFA and forget about it.

And BTW, except for paper type, all the recommended settings work fine
with Silver Rag, etc., with paper type Premium Glossy giving the most
open shadows (with PK ink of course).


>using a lighter tone than the default of 
>normal, that your suggested color wheel numbers may work better.  
>It's at least a place to start.

I recommend anyone getting started to do lots of experiments and test
everything.  That's the only way to fully grasp how the system works
and what effects the various controls have (and, thus, how to get what
you want from it).   Otherwise you're just groping around in the dark.
I post the settings to help people get started and get good results
right away, but also encourage people not to take them as gospel.  The
only way to move beyond belief to knowledge is to do your own testing
and see the results.

 
>Thanks for responding to my post.

You're welcome, and good luck.  Let us know how it goes.


Regards,
Clayton


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

Hi Stephane,

>Thanks for your helpful input and glad for you you got better 
>success than me with ABW.

You're welcome.  I hope I didn't give the impression that I was saying
my results are better than K7 inks.  I was concerned that your remarks
might give someone the impression that K3/ABW is not a good system,
and I was trying to balance that by saying that with care it can
produce top notch results.  I was not implying that K3 is "better".  I
have an aversion to RIPS/curves/profiles and such and am willing to
work with the K3/ABW ideosyncrasies (every system has them), and if I
could not have made it give very fine results I wouldn't be using it.
It really is an excellent system, and I also respect and admire your
willingness to take another path.



>I would just like to mention that with NK7 you get different tones 
>by using different papers. 

Yes, understood.  I printed primarily Eboni BO for several years and
kept an entire stable of papers for that purpose (see article #5, "The
Great Paper Chase" at the link below).  So I am very familiar with
that approach and still have a fondness for it.  It has a lot to be
said for it.  But I confess I've gotten hooked on the easy variable
tone of ABW and prefer the flexibility.


> Neutral on Moab Entrada Natural (has to be seen, absolutely
>gorgeous!) and nicely warm on Epson Velvet, well in line with the 
>creamier look of that paper. With QTR and NK7, no test print, it 
>really makes digital printing a pleasure.

I have seen some K7 examples and agree the quality is top notch.  No
disagreement there.


>Of course, I am not interested in printing colour.

Same here.  I've been purely a BW printer for years.

Regards,
Clayton


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

Hello Clayton 
> Another thing to keep in mind (and this is the part
> referred to in the earlier articles [someone reading the 2400 
> article by itself may miss this]) is that these settings assume an 
> image is worked up using DG20 (or something close to that, I use 
> DG18) as the image profile.  Whatever BW conversion technique is 
> used, when the final conversion to grayscale mode is done, the 
>image is converted with the profile that is specified for grayscale 
>in the Color Settings window. 
 
I may have missed something key, here.  After doing my BW conversion 
in Photoshop and all other adjustments, should I be saving a 
grayscale version of the file by going to Image, mode, grayscale and 
send a grayscale image to the printer?

Have been doing lots of experimentation.  Feels like my house is 
being overrun by 4x6 B&W printouts!


Regards,
Cynthia

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "cynthiam_in_fl" <4merzers@...> 
wrote:
>
> Hello Clayton 
> > Another thing to keep in mind (and this is the part
> > referred to in the earlier articles [someone reading the 2400 
> > article by itself may miss this]) is that these settings assume an 
> > image is worked up using DG20 (or something close to that, I use 
> > DG18) as the image profile.  Whatever BW conversion technique is 
> > used, when the final conversion to grayscale mode is done, the 
> >image is converted with the profile that is specified for grayscale 
> >in the Color Settings window. 
>  
> I may have missed something key, here.  After doing my BW conversion 
> in Photoshop and all other adjustments, should I be saving a 
> grayscale version of the file by going to Image, mode, grayscale and 
> send a grayscale image to the printer?
> 
> Have been doing lots of experimentation.  Feels like my house is 
> being overrun by 4x6 B&W printouts!
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Cynthia
>

I'll add my plea for help. I don't want to hijack Cynthia, but I sense that were at about the 
same spot on the learning curve, maybe.

You have to be in rgb to use abw, right? Plus, I can't seem to get my r2400 to give me the 
option of vfa. it's grayed out. I'm missing something, too. Probably pretty obvious, but I 
think I've followed your articles to the letter.

Thanks much,
Mike

Cynthia,

>I may have missed something key, here.  After doing my BW conversion 
>in Photoshop and all other adjustments, should I be saving a 
>grayscale version of the file by going to Image, mode, grayscale and 
>send a grayscale image to the printer?

It's not a matter of "should", there are lots of ways to do BW
printing.  But my entire workflow is based upon using grayscale files.
 What is key in this approach (because it is not a calibrated
workflow) is the idea that the screen image is adjusted to match the
print in order to get good WYSIWYG (with a calibrated approach, the
output is adjusted, via icc profiles, etc, to match the screen image).
 The idea here is that the image has certain values which are sent to
the printer.  If the print doesn't match the screen version, the
screen version is adjusted to better match the print.  This adjustment
can be fine tuned, if needed, via the canned grayscale image profiles
(dot gain and gray gamma of various fixed values) and the ability to
easily create custom dot gain profiles if one of these is not accurate
enough (for example, I use DG 18%, because 20 was a tad too dark and
15% was too light).  

This approach requires that a printer gamma setting (the Tone setting
in ABW) be chosen which is a good match to the image profile.  As
mentioned earlier, some people use GG2.2/Darker, but I find that
DG20(or DG18)/Light has more open shadows.  So there is a balance
between these two opposing forces that must be struck.  The ability to
make custom DG curves is great because what actually works best can
vary depending on the monitor and/or video card (and who knows what
else).  A custom DG curve allows us to really fine tune the system,
and is why I was emphasizing that these settings not be changed (this
is all really very simple, it sounds complex to write about it).

So, if the file is kept in RGB mode, these grayscale profiles are not
in effect.  It's a completely different system and doesn't have the
same kind of controls.  So it's quite possible that these recommended
driver settings will not produce the best results (I can't say for
certain because I don't work in RGB, so don't have any good
experience).  Some people like working in RGB because they can do
visible toning of the image (such as gold toning or split toning). 
This is, in effect, color printing.  I don't care for that kind of
toning, so I work in grayscale mode and use ABW to do the print
toning.  Another advantage of grayscale is the files are 1/3 the size
of RGB.  I'm not saying grayscale is better, it's just a matter of
what kind of results you want and how you want to get there.  Another
requirement of this approach is setting the driver to No Color
Management.  If that is turned off, what is the need for an RGB image?

So, again, I'm not saying grayscale is better.  This workflow is just
a very good, easy, efficient system that produces gorgeous results and
avoids having to deal with calibration and color management stuff. 
It's about as easy and straightforward as it gets.

If you'd like to give it a try, all of the above is explained in
detail in articles #3 and #4.  While they are focused on BO printing,
what's in there forms the foundation of the whole approach.  It takes
longer to read it than it takes to do it.  Basically you go into Color
Settings and make sure the Grayscale setting is Dot Gain 20%.  Then,
any image converted to grayscale will have the DG20 image profile. 
After you work up the image, send it to the printer with Tone at
Light, Ink Config at -5%, paper type a VFA, Best Photo, and see what
happens.  That's the essence of the whole approach.

Got to go now.  Let us know what happens.

Regards,
Clayton


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
















 
> Have been doing lots of experimentation.  Feels like my house is 
> being overrun by 4x6 B&W printouts!

Mike:
Velvet Fine Art is a matte paper so make sure that the black matte cartrdge is installed, not 
the photo matte.

Cynthia

Hello Mike,

>I'll add my plea for help. I don't want to hijack Cynthia...

It's not hijacking, you're welcome to join in.  It's what this forum
is for.


>You have to be in rgb to use abw, right? 

No, not at all.  You can use ABW with RGB or grayscale files.  I
prefer grayscale files because it fits the workflow I use, but others
use RGB with other kinds of approaches.   


>Plus, I can't seem to get my r2400 to give me the option of vfa. 
>it's grayed out. 

Hmm, do you have matte black or photo black ink installed?  VFA is a
matte paper, maybe it doesn't show up with PK installed.  Does anyone
else know about this?

Regards,
Clayton


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

Clayton, forgive me for butting in here but I think that when you 
say, "Ink Config at -5%, you really mean (and please correct me if 
I'm wrong) hit the "Paper Config" button, then change the Color 
Density to -5%. On your website you also refer to this button as 
the "Ink Config" button, but I think you mean the "Paper Config" 
button.

Again, I hope I'm not missing something - your website has been 
invaluable to me in coming to grips with my R2400.

Best,

Ted

> If you'd like to give it a try, all of the above is explained in
> detail in articles #3 and #4.  While they are focused on BO 
printing,
> what's in there forms the foundation of the whole approach.  It 
takes
> longer to read it than it takes to do it.  Basically you go into 
Color

> Settings and make sure the Grayscale setting is Dot Gain 20%.  Then,
> any image converted to grayscale will have the DG20 image profile. 
> After you work up the image, send it to the printer with Tone at
> Light, Ink Config at -5%, paper type a VFA, Best Photo, and see what
> happens.  That's the essence of the whole approach.
> 
> Got to go now.  Let us know what happens.
> 
> Regards,
> Clayton

Hello Ted,

>...I think that when you say, "Ink Config at -5%, you really 
>mean (and please correct me if I'm wrong) hit the "Paper Config" 
>button, then change the Color Density to -5%. On your website 
>you also refer to this button as the "Ink Config" button, but 
>I think you mean the "Paper Config" button.

Maybe you have a different version of the driver.  In mine, along the
bottom row of the "Main" tabpage are 4 buttons: "Reset Defaults",
Online Supplies", "Ink Config" and "Basic".  Does yours not have those?

 
> - your website has been invaluable to me in coming to grips with my 
>R2400.

Glad it's been helpful.

Regards,
Clayton


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

Hi Clayton -

You wrote: 

> Maybe you have a different version of the driver.  In mine, along 
the
> bottom row of the "Main" tabpage are 4 buttons: "Reset Defaults",
> Online Supplies", "Ink Config" and "Basic".  Does yours not have 
those?

Ah, that explains it - the four buttons on the bottom row on my 
version of the driver are: "Reset Defaults", "Technical 
Support", "Paper Config", and "Basic".

It could be that I have an early version of the driver as I purchased 
my R2400 soon after they were released or that the Australian (Or UK) 
version is different. 

Sorry for inference that you had erred. I should have known better. :)

Many thanks,

Ted

Hello Ted,

>Ah, that explains it - the four buttons on the bottom row on my 
>version of the driver are: "Reset Defaults", "Technical 
>Support", "Paper Config", and "Basic".

Hmm, interesting.  My Ink config button opens a window with sliders
for Color Density and Drying Time, what does the Paper Config button do?


>It could be that I have an early version of the driver as I purchased 
>my R2400 soon after they were released 

This version is 5.51 (bottom of Maintenance tabpage).


>or that the Australian (Or UK) version is different. 

The UK version of the 2200 driver is different than American...never
understood why they would do that.

Regards,
Clayton


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

Hi Clayton

> Hmm, interesting.  My Ink config button opens a window with sliders
> for Color Density and Drying Time, what does the Paper Config button 
do?

Same as your Ink Config button - Color density and drying time.

> This version is 5.51 (bottom of Maintenance tabpage).

My version is also 5.51 - must be another example of a different driver 
for those in the UK and Australia. As you say, it seems a bit silly. 
Things are complicated enough without throwing things like that in the 
pot.

Thanks again,

Ted