Yahoo Groups archive

Digital BW, The Print

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC

Thread

R220 ink suggestions

R220 ink suggestions

2007-01-15 by david627890

I have been using my R220 with the MIS UT-R2 inkset with both Neutral 
and Warm cartridges now for some time but would like to convert to a 
CFS and bulk inks.  As I like to be able to vary the tone of my images 
on an image by image basis (or even occasionally do split tones) I have 
considered using the warm inks in C/LC and the neutral inks in M/LM (or 
vice versa), however what should I put in the yellow spot?  Is this 
approach sensible or should I just go for the UT-3D?  I would drive 
either using QTR (or Bowhaus if it can drive the R220 - I haven't tried 
yet).

Many thanks in advance for your suggestions.

David Whistance

Re: [Digital BW] R220 ink suggestions

2007-01-15 by Howard Shaw

I would try either the UT7 Sepia or UT-3D Lab A toner if you wanted to 
experiment with either sepia or selenium type toning respectively. 
Alternatively, if you wanted a lighter ink to give you a quadtone set 
up, you could try UT-FS-Y. That would give you a similar tone in the 
highlights to the warm R2 inks and a split tone effect if used with the 
Neutral inks.

As a matter of interest did you ever use UT-FSN inks and if so how does 
the tones of the UT-R2 Neutral inks compare?

Howard

david627890 wrote:
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> I have been using my R220 with the MIS UT-R2 inkset with both Neutral 
> and Warm cartridges now for some time but would like to convert to a 
> CFS and bulk inks.  As I like to be able to vary the tone of my images 
> on an image by image basis (or even occasionally do split tones) I have 
> considered using the warm inks in C/LC and the neutral inks in M/LM (or 
> vice versa), however what should I put in the yellow spot?  Is this 
> approach sensible or should I just go for the UT-3D?  I would drive 
> either using QTR (or Bowhaus if it can drive the R220 - I haven't tried 
> yet).
> 
> Many thanks in advance for your suggestions.
> 
> David Whistance
>

RE: [Digital BW] R220 ink suggestions

2007-01-15 by Paul Roark

In addition to Howard's suggestions, I've been thinking of a light carbon
ink with a bit of red in it to make a warm that is closer to hue 45 - less
yellow than the pure carbon.  This would really be just for those who like
warm prints.  By itself, 4% red mixed with the light carbon of the R2 or 3D
sets makes a good warm.  However, for better quality, we'd probably be
better off with the carbon jets also working (in general, the more jets
being active, the better).  So, it may be that a stronger red mix would be
better.  I have not had time to experiment with they yet, however.

 

In a CFS, you'll also have the large format issues with respect to non-use
of the system being a problem.  For this reason, I'll probably port the 4K+
approach to the 220.  In that type of non-blended approach, I suspect the 3K
+ light m, c and red might be interesting.  As with the 50% LC, I might mix
a more dilute R800 Red for that.  This, of course, would take a rip to run.

 

The bottom line I'm looking at is that a bit of red mixed with carbon makes
a very nice warm tone.  It eliminates the yellow from the current sepia.
The mix can't reach as deep a sepia, but it should be more lightfast and
have less metamerism.

 

Paul

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

 

 

 

 

  _____
Show quoted textHide quoted text
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
david627890
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 6:35 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] R220 ink suggestions

 

I have been using my R220 with the MIS UT-R2 inkset with both Neutral 
and Warm cartridges now for some time but would like to convert to a 
CFS and bulk inks. As I like to be able to vary the tone of my images 
on an image by image basis (or even occasionally do split tones) I have 
considered using the warm inks in C/LC and the neutral inks in M/LM (or 
vice versa), however what should I put in the yellow spot? Is this 
approach sensible or should I just go for the UT-3D? I would drive 
either using QTR (or Bowhaus if it can drive the R220 - I haven't tried 
yet).

Many thanks in advance for your suggestions.

David Whistance

 



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

RE: [Digital BW] R220 ink suggestions

2007-01-15 by David Whistance

Howard

Many thanks for your suggestions.  I may try out the the UT-3D toner as I
like selenium tone prints much more than sepia.

I have never used the UT-FSN inkset.  I did use UT-FS for a while in an
Epson 3000.  Sadly the printer paper feed died or I would still be using it,
for some prints at least.

David
Show quoted textHide quoted text
  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Howard
Shaw
  Sent: 15 January 2007 14:56
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] R220 ink suggestions


  I would try either the UT7 Sepia or UT-3D Lab A toner if you wanted to
  experiment with either sepia or selenium type toning respectively.
  Alternatively, if you wanted a lighter ink to give you a quadtone set
  up, you could try UT-FS-Y. That would give you a similar tone in the
  highlights to the warm R2 inks and a split tone effect if used with the
  Neutral inks.

  As a matter of interest did you ever use UT-FSN inks and if so how does
  the tones of the UT-R2 Neutral inks compare?

  Howard

  david627890 wrote:
  > I have been using my R220 with the MIS UT-R2 inkset with both Neutral
  > and Warm cartridges now for some time but would like to convert to a
  > CFS and bulk inks. As I like to be able to vary the tone of my images
  > on an image by image basis (or even occasionally do split tones) I have
  > considered using the warm inks in C/LC and the neutral inks in M/LM (or
  > vice versa), however what should I put in the yellow spot? Is this
  > approach sensible or should I just go for the UT-3D? I would drive
  > either using QTR (or Bowhaus if it can drive the R220 - I haven't tried
  > yet).
  >
  > Many thanks in advance for your suggestions.
  >
  > David Whistance
  >


  


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

RE: [Digital BW] R220 ink suggestions

2007-01-15 by David Whistance

Paul

Many thanks for your suggestion.  I may just give it a go!  The 3K set
should presumably be reasonably easy to profile in either QTR or IJC and
then it is just a matter of playing with toners to suit?

David
Show quoted textHide quoted text
  -----Original Message-----
  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Paul Roark
  Sent: 15 January 2007 17:54
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: RE: [Digital BW] R220 ink suggestions


  In addition to Howard's suggestions, I've been thinking of a light carbon
  ink with a bit of red in it to make a warm that is closer to hue 45 - less
  yellow than the pure carbon. This would really be just for those who like
  warm prints. By itself, 4% red mixed with the light carbon of the R2 or 3D
  sets makes a good warm. However, for better quality, we'd probably be
  better off with the carbon jets also working (in general, the more jets
  being active, the better). So, it may be that a stronger red mix would be
  better. I have not had time to experiment with they yet, however.

  In a CFS, you'll also have the large format issues with respect to non-use
  of the system being a problem. For this reason, I'll probably port the 4K+
  approach to the 220. In that type of non-blended approach, I suspect the
3K
  + light m, c and red might be interesting. As with the 50% LC, I might mix
  a more dilute R800 Red for that. This, of course, would take a rip to run.

  The bottom line I'm looking at is that a bit of red mixed with carbon
makes
  a very nice warm tone. It eliminates the yellow from the current sepia.
  The mix can't reach as deep a sepia, but it should be more lightfast and
  have less metamerism.

  Paul

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

  _____

  From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
  david627890
  Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 6:35 AM
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
  Subject: [Digital BW] R220 ink suggestions

  I have been using my R220 with the MIS UT-R2 inkset with both Neutral
  and Warm cartridges now for some time but would like to convert to a
  CFS and bulk inks. As I like to be able to vary the tone of my images
  on an image by image basis (or even occasionally do split tones) I have
  considered using the warm inks in C/LC and the neutral inks in M/LM (or
  vice versa), however what should I put in the yellow spot? Is this
  approach sensible or should I just go for the UT-3D? I would drive
  either using QTR (or Bowhaus if it can drive the R220 - I haven't tried
  yet).

  Many thanks in advance for your suggestions.

  David Whistance

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



  


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

Re: [Digital BW] R220 ink suggestions

2007-01-15 by Joost Horsten

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> In addition to Howard's suggestions, I've been thinking of a light 
carbon
> ink with a bit of red in it to make a warm that is closer to hue 45 - 
less
> yellow than the pure carbon.  This would really be just for those who 
like
> warm prints.  By itself, 4% red mixed with the light carbon of the R2 
or 3D
> sets makes a good warm.  

This is perhaps somewat similar to some of my experiments with the UT3D 
lab a toner. I'm not too much into strong selenium tones, but a QTR 
blend of mostly a warm carbon curve with a touch of a lab a curve gives 
a very nice warm tone.

Joost

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.