Digital BW, The Print

I'm dusting off my old 1160 that I once used with the MIS Quad FS 
inkset. To help me decide if it is worth the effort to update my Epson 
RGB partitioning curves for use with the Epson driver or buy QTR or 
IJC/OPM, I'd like to know the corresponding Dmax for each of the UT-FS 
inks (K, C, M, Y) on EEM/EAM.

 
Dmax for the old Quad FS inkset was very roughly K=1.55, C=1.39, 
M=0.72, and Y=0.52

Also is the UT-FS inkset warmer, cooler, or the same as the Quad FS?

Thanks. jr

The original idea was to have the "new" UT-FS inks be just like the old
ones, so that the same curves, etc. would work.  However, I found the ramps
of each ink were slightly different.  That is, we could match the density at
one point on the ramp, but it'd be a little different at another point.  So,
for top notch results, new curves or profiles are needed.

 

Paul

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

 

 

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
Randall
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 7:34 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] MIS UT-FS vs old Quad FS

 

I'm dusting off my old 1160 that I once used with the MIS Quad FS 
inkset. To help me decide if it is worth the effort to update my Epson 
RGB partitioning curves for use with the Epson driver or buy QTR or 
IJC/OPM, I'd like to know the corresponding Dmax for each of the UT-FS 
inks (K, C, M, Y) on EEM/EAM.

Dmax for the old Quad FS inkset was very roughly K=1.55, C=1.39, 
M=0.72, and Y=0.52

Also is the UT-FS inkset warmer, cooler, or the same as the Quad FS?

Thanks. jr

 



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

Thanks Paul, I assumed this would be the case.

Can you share the dMax of each of the UT-FS inks on EEM (or similar) 
and overall subjectively do they have the same degree of "warmness"?

jr


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

...So, for top notch results, new curves or profiles are needed.

Jeff,

>Can you share the dMax of each of the UT-FS inks on EEM 
>(or similar) and overall subjectively do they have the 
> same degree of "warmness"?

I didn't find exact numbers for you.  Your initial readings in the last post
were close, but the K was a bit low, and the C a bit high.  As to the
warmness, again, I can't give you a better description than that the
original targets were the same.  

> What do you think of the idea of combining the UT-FS 
> inkset with either the UT2 or UT7 cold toners and running 
>them through my 1280? Any +/- ?

I'm not sure what your goals are here.  The UT-FS is actually an old density
distribution that is not optimized for modern printers.  The lightest and
second lightest inks are very close, and leave too much of a gap to the
C-position dark gray, in my view. If you're goal is to have a smoother
inkset than the UT2, I'd pull the sepia and put FS-Y there. 

OF course, now that the UT-3D inkset appears to be within what PrintFIXPro
can profile, an alternative that is looking very interesting is to put the
3D inkset in the 1280 and use profiling software to control it. 

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com