Digital BW, The Print

In a message dated 5/27/07 11:53:17 AM, appert@... writes:


> 
> I am looking for a publication that you might consider to be the bible
> of Black and white digital ink-jet printing. I am specifically
> interested in techniques to control tonal separation along the
> reproduction curve with black only,  3K, and full colour B&W printing.
> It would be a plus if the book in question covered targeting techniques
> which use numbers to densities directly as well as techniques which try
> to correlate monitor display to proofs.
> 

Fortunately "Mastering Digital Black and White" is now out. That will get you 
as much info as you can reasonably expect from a book on the topic. Detailed 
specifics are going to have to be figured out as you go along, or from 
specific questions to lists like this one...

C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Business Division
DataColor Inc.
CDTobie@...
www.colorvision.com


**************************************
 See what's free at 
http://www.aol.com.


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

In a message dated 5/31/2007 2:13:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
appert@... writes:

Just to  clarify,  are we saying then that, the reference book you are  
recommending does provide information on how to use soft-proofing ( or  
perhaps other tools or techniques within the colour management work  
flow that I am not aware of ) to maintain such stringent controls over  
tonal separation through out the chain of data conversions, or are we  
saying such precision is no longer important to you?  Am I  
understanding  you correctly by assuming that this reference you are  
recommending does not cover "same as source" workflows and black ink  
printing? 

thanks again for your help

Eugene  



Hi:
I was referring to the ImagePrint RIP feature that allows you to softproof  
and then print through PhotoShop. It is called their Print Thru Application  
(PTAPP). Using it, you print just as you would in Photoshop, and then send the  
image to ImagePrint, using the appropriate ImagePrint profile. It permits  
previewing in Photoshop exactly what print values you are going to get. You have  
to have IP 6.1 or 7.0 to access this feature, and the additional cost is 200  
USD. This is apart from the book itself, which provides how-to descriptions 
of  B/W printing through PS without a RIP.  
HTH.,
 
Richard (Brooklyn)



************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com.


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

Lately I've had random spot of magenta on my prints. (An Epson R2400). 
Does anyone have an idea as to what causes this?

Yes thank you Richard Brooklyn I was not aware of this option. I 
agree being able to soft proof the grey profiles that Image print 
offers is a considerable advantage. 
My experience has taught me that you either rely on our eyes or you 
rely on the numbers,  there are no other options. Ideally we should 
be able to rely on our eyes,  but there are so many obstacles between 
what we  see on the screen and the proof we produce  from the file 
data . 

At one point,  (perhaps this is the "dark ages" that Amadou refers 
to),  I attempted to follow and understand the chain of cryptic 
algorithms that compress the data through  the work flow to the final 
print, only to discover that the vast majority of them are so 
surreptitious that it is almost inconceivable to draw a direct 
correlation between data and density unless you unplug the color 
management system and fly the plane yourself.  

Recently I have dedicated time and energy to correlating data and 
density in order to master this relationship. So far my best results 
are achieved by returning to the stone age techniques of drawing 
direct correlations between L* values as they are displayed in the 
greyscale workspace and densities as they are measured by a 
densitometer.  For example  everyone knows that L*50 should produce 
18% reflective density but it never does. For me this is an 
interesting question , why doesn't it?  If I print a monochrome patch 
of L*50 from a greyscale space which will be converted to a custom 
profile via relative rendering I should produce 18% grey. But I 
don't, I never do. The problem is compounded when I try to maintain 
the precise resonance of shadow tones that I perceive on the screen 
between say, L*4 and L*2 ( both of which are fictitious values that 
niether the printer nor the monitor can reproduce) but which BPC and 
what ever other linearization algorithms  might transpose between the 
file data and the printer profile conversion.  

So, here's the thing, After trying to learn how to fly the Boeing 747 
using auto pilot,  I am now interested in finding out how to fly a 
spit-fire manually and I am wondering if anyone has any idea about 
reference material that could help me. 

Eugene Appert

My guess is that it is a lost cause. Problem is, there is no constant since you change the paper, even if you use the same brand. I use my eyes and tweak for what seems to me a better print. Then the next week I might change my mind and tweak a little differently. It's all very subjective and all the objective measurements, numbers and so forth don't work for me. My eye is still in the darkroom over the fixer tray, guessing what the dry-down will give. So far, my CRT is telling me the truth in Photoshop, so using IP with PTAPP is working. Having said that, I'm running 2 4000's with NK 7 in 1 and split tone piezo

in the other. I just added some warm light black to the NK 7. All this to pull a print from a particular image.


Richard (Brooklyn)



So, here's the thing, After trying to learn how to fly the Boeing 747 
sing auto pilot,  I am now interested in finding out how to fly a 
pit-fire manually and I am wondering if anyone has any idea about 
eference material that could help me. 
Eugene Appert

-----Original Message-----
From: eappert <appert@...>
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, 1 Jun 2007 3:05 am
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] book



Yes thank you Richard Brooklyn I was not aware of this option. I 
gree being able to soft proof the grey profiles that Image print 
ffers is a considerable advantage. 
y experience has taught me that you either rely on our eyes or you 
ely on the numbers,  there are no other options. Ideally we should 
e able to rely on our eyes,  but there are so many obstacles between 
hat we  see on the screen and the proof we produce  from the file 
ata . 
At one point,  (perhaps this is the "dark ages" that Amadou refers 
o),  I attempted to follow and understand the chain of cryptic 
lgorithms that compress the data through  the work flow to the final 
rint, only to discover that the vast majority of them are so 
urreptitious that it is almost inconceivable to draw a direct 
orrelation between data and density unless you unplug the color 
anagement system and fly the plane yourself.  
Recently I have dedicated time and energy to correlating data and 
ensity in order to master this relationship. So far my best results 
re achieved by returning to the stone age techniques of drawing 
irect correlations between L* values as they are displayed in the 
reyscale workspace and densities as they are measured by a 
ensitometer.  For example  everyone knows that L*50 should produce 
8% reflective density but it never does. For me this is an 
nteresting question , why doesn't it?  If I print a monochrome patch 
f L*50 from a greyscale space which will be converted to a custom 
rofile via relative rendering I should produce 18% grey. But I 
on't, I never do. The problem is compounded when I try to maintain 
he precise resonance of shadow tones that I perceive on the screen 
etween say, L*4 and L*2 ( both of which are fictitious values that 
iether the printer nor the monitor can reproduce) but which BPC and 
hat ever other linearization algorithms  might transpose between the 
ile data and the printer profile conversion.  
So, here's the thing, After trying to learn how to fly the Boeing 747 
sing auto pilot,  I am now interested in finding out how to fly a 
pit-fire manually and I am wondering if anyone has any idea about 
eference material that could help me. 
Eugene Appert






lease visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, and other resources as they 
re 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 
nsubscribe, 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 
hort.
 Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames. Hostile, 
ggressive or argumentative users may be removed from the membership without 
otice.
 Keep your posts and threads related to the group topic of digital B&W 
rinting. Users who persistently make off-topic posts may be removed from the 
embership.
 By posting on this forum you agree to abide by the group rules and guidelines, 
nd to abide by the actions and decisions of the group Owner and Moderators. See 
Group Topic, Rules and Guidelines” in the Files section:
ttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/files/
BY PARTICIPATING IN AND/OR POSTING MESSAGES TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO! 
ROUP YOU EXPRESSLY UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT THE “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF 
IGITAL BW, THE PRINT YAHOO GROUP SHALL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DIRECT, 
NDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT 
OT LIMITED TO, DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF PROFITS, GOODWILL, USE, DATA OR OTHER 
NTANGIBLE LOSSES (EVEN IF THE  “OWNER” AND “MODERATORS” OF DIGITAL BW, THE 
RINT YAHOO GROUP HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES), 
ESULTING FROM: (i) THE USE OR THE INABILITY TO USE THE DIGITAL BW, THE PRINT 
AHOO GROUP; (ii) UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO OR ALTERATION OF YOUR TRANSMISSIONS OR 
ATA; (iii) STATEMENTS OR CONDUCT OF ANY THIRD PARTY ON THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
RINT YAHOO GROUP; OR (iv) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO THE DIGITAL BW, THE 
RINT YAHOO GROUP.

ahoo! Groups Links
   Individual Email | Traditional
   http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.


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

Hello Eugene,

>My experience has taught me that you either rely on our eyes or you 
>rely on the numbers...
>...unplug the color management system and fly the plane yourself.  
>...After trying to learn how to fly the Boeing 747 using auto pilot,  
>I am now interested in finding out how to fly a spit-fire manually...

I appreciate your remarks.  You have found a nice way to sum up the
experience that many have had and I like the flying metaphors.  I've
been at this over 5 years now.  In the beginning I tried doing things
as many recommended in this forum and became frustrated to the point
of dispair and considered quitting.  Then I discovered the simple
stick-and-rudder-center-the-ball approach using the Black Only
technique and made that my home base for several years, all the while
learning and trying various new things that came along, looking for
the holy grail. 

I'm currently using a 2400 with K3/ABW and am still happy with the
stick and rudder non color managed approach.  I use a custom dot gain
curve for grayscale image profiles which provides decent WYSIWYG and
find I can work very efficiently.  Like you, all my darkroom instincts
have transferred over and I very much enjoy working this way.

Not everyone has the temperament and/or inclination for the high tech
approach, and for someone doing their own work for their own purposes
it's a great way to fly.  My workflow is outlined in detail in article
#9 at the link below.  Thanks for the nice post.


Regards,
Clayton


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

BINGO!

Thank you very much Clayton for the reference!  

Regards
Eugene

Right on, Clayton!

Stick and rudder.

I have a high-understanding of technology as a former IT Admin person
for several major publishing companies, but when it comes to
print-making I like the seat of the pants approach best.

Afterall, why as a traditional photographer in the 70s and 80s do I have
all these 35mm negs and contact sheets but no prints. Because that was
about as much time as I could stand in the darkroom. I wanted to be
outside, shooting, not bending over trays of chemicals in the dark for
unknown hours. Neither do I today want to be messing with a bunch more
things like various pieces of software, hardware, etc. Like you, I
prefer to go from A to B, rather than pass through the alphabet to get
to the end.

Stick and rudder is a very appealing descriptive approach. I too,
watched this forum and followed the comments and techniques of its
users, and mostly two people the most, which is you, Clayton Jones, and
Paul Roark. You phrase clicked with me. All this time I've been bogged
down processing the information on how to get good prints from this
forum. Now I realize, you perspective is really my perspective too.

I've got modern technolgy at hand (1280, R220), and I'm still not making
prints. I'm in the middle of writing several books so I really don't
cherish lost hours at the computer trouching up negs and making prints,
which lack consistancy.

That's one thing about stick  rudder I must add, and that is:  it must
work, be consistant, in order to be valid.

By example, I was doing BO prints of one neg the other week for a
charity event. I got one print finally to my liking. Then my G4/1280
started choking on the print, only printing the top 15% of the image.
Didn't matter if the print size was 11x17 or 5x7, it choked in the same
exact spot on the image. I did some voodoo, and I also reinstalled new
print drivers. That wasn't smart, the new R220 print driver messed up my
1280 print driver and ALL settings. I reinstalled the 1280 driver. I
finally saw my old presets and I finally got it to print the whole
image. But now, get this, the tone, contrast and even hue changed on
this BO print!? It was unusuable and nothing like the first print out of
the machine. I cleaned heads, etc. but didn't seem to help. A real
mystery. It meant starting over. Well, I dropped the novel idea of a
quick print for some friends and went back to writing my book.

One day I'll get back to it, and one day, when there's money, I'll get a
2400 and just see how much easier my life might become.

Simplicity is best. Technology is what got us here today, but who's the
master? Is it technology--or us?

thanks,
Craig

--
Craig B. Snyder
Writer and Photographer, www.thecraigsnyder.com
<http://www.thecraigsnyder.com/>
A Secret History of the Ollie  www.theolliebook.com
<http://theolliebook.com/>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" 
wrote:>> Hello Eugene,> I'm currently using a 2400 with K3/ABW and am
still happy with the> stick and rudder non color managed approach.


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

In a message dated 6/5/07 11:02:15 AM, forum@... writes:


> Stick and rudder is a very appealing descriptive approach.
> 

I always say "sheet and tiller arm" as there are a lot more sailers in this 
world than pilots... <G>

C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision Business Unit
Datacolor Inc.
CDTobie@...
www.colorvision.com


**************************************
 See what's free at 
http://www.aol.com.


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

Craig, it's worth remembering that this is a printmaking Group: some
participants are much more interested in the technology than the images. 

It's worth remembering that "stick and rudder" landed us on the moon,
each of us has more computer power on our desktops than those guys had. 

As well, back in wet darkroom days, the color craftsmen serving  top
commercial photographer and art director clients relied upon their
eyes, only using technology to monitor chemistry/emulsions and when
forced to knock off cheap prints without tests. Video color analyzers
were never necessary except for cheap wedding/portrait packages, and
nobody with fully developed personal skills relied upon color analyzers. 


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Craig Snyder"
<forum@...> wrote:

>
> Right on, Clayton!
> 
> Stick and rudder.
> 
> I have a high-understanding of technology as a former IT Admin person
> for several major publishing companies, but when it comes to
> print-making I like the seat of the pants approach best.
> 
> Afterall, why as a traditional photographer in the 70s and 80s do I have
> all these 35mm negs and contact sheets but no prints. Because that was
> about as much time as I could stand in the darkroom. I wanted to be
> outside, shooting, not bending over trays of chemicals in the dark for
> unknown hours. Neither do I today want to be messing with a bunch more
> things like various pieces of software, hardware, etc. Like you, I
> prefer to go from A to B, rather than pass through the alphabet to get
> to the end.
> 
> Stick and rudder is a very appealing descriptive approach. I too,
> watched this forum and followed the comments and techniques of its
> users, and mostly two people the most, which is you, Clayton Jones, and
> Paul Roark. You phrase clicked with me. All this time I've been bogged
> down processing the information on how to get good prints from this
> forum. Now I realize, you perspective is really my perspective too.
> 
> I've got modern technolgy at hand (1280, R220), and I'm still not making
> prints. I'm in the middle of writing several books so I really don't
> cherish lost hours at the computer trouching up negs and making prints,
> which lack consistancy.
> 
> That's one thing about stick  rudder I must add, and that is:  it must
> work, be consistant, in order to be valid.
> 
> By example, I was doing BO prints of one neg the other week for a
> charity event. I got one print finally to my liking. Then my G4/1280
> started choking on the print, only printing the top 15% of the image.
> Didn't matter if the print size was 11x17 or 5x7, it choked in the same
> exact spot on the image. I did some voodoo, and I also reinstalled new
> print drivers. That wasn't smart, the new R220 print driver messed up my
> 1280 print driver and ALL settings. I reinstalled the 1280 driver. I
> finally saw my old presets and I finally got it to print the whole
> image. But now, get this, the tone, contrast and even hue changed on
> this BO print!? It was unusuable and nothing like the first print out of
> the machine. I cleaned heads, etc. but didn't seem to help. A real
> mystery. It meant starting over. Well, I dropped the novel idea of a
> quick print for some friends and went back to writing my book.
> 
> One day I'll get back to it, and one day, when there's money, I'll get a
> 2400 and just see how much easier my life might become.
> 
> Simplicity is best. Technology is what got us here today, but who's the
> master? Is it technology--or us?
> 
> thanks,
> Craig
> 
> --
> Craig B. Snyder
> Writer and Photographer, www.thecraigsnyder.com
> <http://www.thecraigsnyder.com/>
> A Secret History of the Ollie  www.theolliebook.com
> <http://theolliebook.com/>
> 
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones" 
> wrote:>> Hello Eugene,> I'm currently using a 2400 with K3/ABW and am
> still happy with the> stick and rudder non color managed approach.
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Hi Clayton. I'm very technically oriented myself, but I learned a very
long time ago that an agile mind can usually substitute for many
thousands of dollars worth of gear. Save a lot of time as well in many
cases.

Regards
Duane



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

> have transferred over and I very much enjoy working this way.
> 
> Not everyone has the temperament and/or inclination for the high tech
> approach, and for someone doing their own work for their own purposes
> it's a great way to fly. 
> Regards,
> Clayton
> 
> 
> Info on black and white digital printing at    
> http://www.cjcom.net/digiprnarts.htm
>

> I've got modern technolgy at hand (1280, R220),

1280 modern? I've been through 7 generations of Epsons from EX, 1270, 
1280/90, 2000, 2100/2200, R1800, and R2400, so the 1280/90 is five 
generations out-of-date!

> when there's money, I'll get a
> 2400 and just see how much easier my life might become.

It really is much, much better than any of the earlier Epsons.

Bob Frost.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Craig Snyder" <forum@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>