Digital BW, The Print

I'm thinking of making up a poor man's monotone septone set for a 2200
out of the quadtone MIS full spectrum inks. Is anyone familiar with
how dark the light grey of a quadtone set is compared with the
lightest tone of a K7 set...should I be thinking of getting 3
additional tones by simply mixing eboni with DG; DG with MG; and MG
with LG...or would getting the lightest tone from mixing LG with base
be a better approach.

Re mixing... I was thinking of pouring two 4oz bottles into a virgin
pint bottle, tipping it end for end a few times and letting it sit. Is
there a better way?

>I'm thinking of making up a poor man's monotone septone set 
>for a 2200 out of the quadtone MIS full spectrum inks.

Note that the UT-R2 inkset is another possible source of inks.  The R2
"neutral" (cool) has a less cyan tone than the UT-FSN, particularly the dark
gray C position.  While the dark grays are the same density, the light R2
midtones are darker than the FS M position inks.  They were designed for the
Epson driver cross-overs.
 
> Is anyone familiar with how dark the light grey of a 
> quadtone set is compared with the
> lightest tone of a K7 set...

No, I've never worked with the K7 inkset. 

A draw-down test setup is the easiest way to judge relative densities.  See
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Draw-Down-Procedure.pdf 

>should I be thinking of getting 3
>additional tones by simply mixing eboni 

Eboni is not in the same ink family as the PK, LK, and other UT and MIS Pro
color inks.  It does not mix well with them.  Use one of the PK or LK inks
for grays and the color inks as needed.  The midtone UT inks are all
compatible.

>with DG; DG with MG; and MG with LG...or would getting the 
> lightest tone from mixing LG with base be a better approach.

(I'm not familiar with your abbreviations.)

>Re mixing... I was thinking of pouring two 4oz bottles into a 
> virgin pint bottle, ...

I use a digital gram scale for precise mixing. 

You don't mention what driver or rip you'll be using.

Unless you are experienced with these matters, I'd recommend you use a
pre-mixed inkset.  You may be getting into something that will turn out to
more complex than you'd anticipated.  

I've tended to move to inksets composed of standardized densities, in part
to get away from the inconsistencies that can crop up in mixed inksets.
Although even the standardized inks vary, at least I've eliminated some
sources of errors and inconsistencies.  

I might add that my original variable tone inkset was made in part because
it appeared that controlling tones via software was easier than doing so via
mixing.  All I really wanted was a "neutral" inkset, but mixing an inkset
that was "neutral" for more than one paper at one density was more difficult
than I thought it would be.  Back then I had no choice but to use at least
one toner, and after than the number and complexity of toners started to
multiply, particularly as I tried to get better control of the tones.  With
today's good printers, however, much less is needed.  In general, I'd say
the less mixing you need to do, the better.

Good luck with your project.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Hi Paul,
Thanks for your extremely helpful and detailed post. It's given me a
lot to think about. I have a 7500 with Mediastreet Generations G6
color in it. The color prints it makes are simply not in the same
class as I get from a recently acquired 4000, because the dither
pattern is (relatively) easily seen and 4000/2200 smoothness is not
there. So I'm thinking I'll turn it over to b&w, using QuadtoneRIP, in
the hope that I'll get prints with smooth tones and harder-to-see
dither. But what gives me pause is my current large quadtone printer,
a 3000 with FSN inkset. The 3000 gives very satisfactory prints with
the Piezography/R9 plugin. With Quadtone rip, prints are almost as
smooth, except in the highlights where details that are easily seen
with the plugin are gone. That's why I'm obsessing over what to
do...just go with an affordable MIS solution like UT, or would I get
substantially better results with K6 at $120/pint. I worry that I'll
spend 6 times 120, and still not get adequately smooth results. 

Are people happy with the 7500 running 4 shades of black + toner?

For a UT solution, developing my own profiles with QTR: Do you think I
could (save a bundle and) get away with keeping three of the six G6
inks now in the printer: keeping the matte black; and keeping the cyan
and light cyan as toner; changing out only the C M Y in favor of 75%
50% 25% UT?  --John

Hi John,

>... I have a 7500 ...
> I'm thinking I'll turn it over to b&w, using QuadtoneRIP,...

> But what gives me pause is my current large quadtone 
> printer, a 3000 with FSN inkset. The 3000 gives very 
> satisfactory prints with the Piezography/R9 plugin. 
> With Quadtone rip, prints are almost as smooth, except 
> in the highlights where details that are easily seen
> with the plugin are gone.

Interesting.  I'd assume QTR at the highest resolution it supports for the
3000 would be machine limited, but maybe not.

> That's why I'm obsessing over what to do...
> just go with an affordable MIS solution like UT, 
> or would I get substantially better results with 
> K6 at $120/pint. ...

> Are people happy with the 7500 running 4 shades of black + toner?

My 7500 with this inkset -- http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/4K+.pdf -- does
not produce totally smooth test strips, but the display prints look fine.
I'm not sure how many others use this setup.

> For a UT solution, developing my own profiles with QTR: 
> Do you think I could (save a bundle and) get away with 
> keeping three of the six G6 inks now in the printer: 
> keeping the matte black; and keeping the cyan
> and light cyan as toner;

You'd want the LC and LM as the toners.

I'd dilute the LC 1:1 like it did.  It makes a difference in the 7500.  In
fact, even further dilution might make sense if it's still to rough.

> changing out only the C M Y 
> in favor of 75% 50% 25% UT? 

I'm not sure what base the MS G6 inks use, however, I'm guessing they'd be
compatible with the UT inks.

If you did not want glossy compatibility, you could use the MIS UT standard
dark and light carbons (e.g., 3D C & LC), omitting the PK, and then make a
very light gray with the 3D-LC diluted 1 LC to 2 base.  (This is the usual
dilution ratio.)  The standard UT C and LC are a bit darker than the LK and
LLK.  This gives you a better spacing on your grays and a super-light one
for the highlights.

Good luck with the project.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Hi Paul, I read your UT-3D and 4k articles with great interest. I was
wondering why my 3000/UT-FSN prints sometimes looked a bit green!

Your 'carbon on cotton' concept is deeply appealing to me, and it
certainly looks like the way I'd like to go on my QTR-driven 7500. The
inherent warm tone it has would be my default. It would be nice at the
same time to maximize the number of carbon tones/dilutions to 5K or
6K. I would not want to go further in the sepia direction so
presumably I can omit light magenta; and conceptually I think I prefer
the possibility of greater smoothness with a 6K set over the ability
to neutralize. (If I need to make toned prints, the 4000 with QTR and
epson UC does a decent job.) I would not need photo black.

> If you did not want glossy compatibility, you could use the MIS UT
> standard dark and light carbons (e.g., 3D C & LC), omitting the PK,
> and then make a very light gray with the 3D-LC diluted 1 LC to 2
>base.  (This is the usual dilution ratio.)  The standard UT C and LC
> are a bit darker than the LK and LLK.  This gives you a better
>spacing on your grays and a super-light one for the highlights.

I'm trying to figure if there is a way to add 2 more shades to your
recommendation. Poring over the MIS website, its a bit hard to know
what to pick. The UT-3D choices are a bit confusing...beyond black,
there is carbon, light carbon, LK and LLK. If those four are all
noticeably different dilutions of carbon, I could add the 'LLLK' 1:2
dilution and have my six tones. Or are any of 3D C, LC, LK, LLK so
close to each other that one (or more) would be redundant; and another
intermediate dilution would be better; or light cyan potentially more
useful? -- John

Hi John,

>Your 'carbon on cotton' concept is deeply appealing to me, 
>and it certainly looks like the way I'd like to go on my 
>QTR-driven 7500. The inherent warm tone it has would be my default.

Most carbons by themselves are about half way to sepia -- a bit warmer than
most like.  That's the only reason we had to use the color inks.

> It would be nice at the same time to maximize the number of 
> carbon tones/dilutions to 5K or 6K. 

Since you only have 6 spots, unless you never want other than carbon warm,
you'll need toner(s).

>I would not want to go further in the sepia direction so
>presumably I can omit light magenta;

If you just use cyan, the tone goes green.  That is why the LM is in the
setup.  The UT1 toner was a single blue toner that offset the carbon tone,
but it was also a blended ink that had the problems of differential
separation in large format printers.  There is no inkjet pigment that, by
itself, is the opposite or complementary color to carbon warm, which is a
rather yellow warm.

> and conceptually I think I prefer
> the possibility of greater smoothness with a 6K set over 
> the ability to neutralize. (If I need to make toned prints, 
> the 4000 with QTR and epson UC does a decent job.) 
> I would not need photo black.

>> If you did not want glossy compatibility, you could use the MIS UT
>> standard dark and light carbons (e.g., 3D C & LC), omitting the PK,
>> and then make a very light gray with the 3D-LC diluted 1 LC to 2
>> base. (This is the usual dilution ratio.) The standard UT C and LC
>> are a bit darker than the LK and LLK. This gives you a better
>> spacing on your grays and a super-light one for the highlights.

>... The UT-3D choices are a bit confusing...beyond black,
>there is carbon, light carbon, LK and LLK. If those four are all
>noticeably different dilutions of carbon,

They are, although the spacing is not real even.  UT-3D-C is 75% LK and 25%
PK.  The UT-3D-LC carbon is about .5 LK (and .3 UT-C).  The LLK is about .3
LK.  So, you might want a bit more space between those 2.  For what it's
worth, UT1 quad M or hex Y is 17% LK and is the lightest MIS pre-mixed pure
carbon ink, but it would not be as light as the LLLK, below.

> I could add the 'LLLK' 1:2 dilution and have my six tones.

Yes.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Hi Paul, thanks for all the additional info on possibility of straight
carbon being too warm. For the 7500/QTR I'm going to start out by
following the suggestion from your previous post of modifying 4k+cm to
have a very light grey instead of photo black (UT-3D dark and light
carbon plus LLLK in place of cyan/magenta/yellow; & keeping the black,
light cyan, and light magenta now in the printer). This way, if I want
to have only the carbon tone available and/or am unhappy with
smoothness I'll have the future option of substituting more carbon
dilutions for the lt cyan & magenta; meanwhile I'll have some tone
control available. 

Unless there is a reason not to, I'll flush the cmy channels
individually (by modifying the QTR calibration image) with Mediastreet
flush carts I have on hand; and rinse out the 3 MIS funnel fill carts
with distilled water.

For my 2200 I'll just take advantage of the MIS July sale and get a
CFS prefilled with UT7.

Hi Paul, the recipe you suggested (K + 3 carbon dilutions, lt c and
lite m) worked wonderfully well, making rich, smooth, dither-free
prints. However, my idea of saving money by flushing out only the
Mediastreet color CMY and leaving the MK, c and m proved to be a
mistake. Flinging, dripping c and/or m on the edges of large prints,
even when cm were not used. Drops of c and/or m forming on the lower
edge of the printhead. After a week or two (and many square feet and
some torn-out hair) waiting to see if it was going to settle down, I
tried some prints with only the Mediastreet color cm channels being
used...no drips. Explanation has to be that some kind of allergic
reaction was causing the Mediastreet color to ooze out in the presence
of MIS carbon being printed. So I purged the Mediastreet ink, and now
have Eboni in K, and MIS flush fluid in cm, and it is printing fine.

Moving on. I really like the carbon tone, and could certainly live
with it as the only tone from this printer. (I also have a 4000-UC and
2200-UT7; and for many decades was perfectly happy with being limited
to 8x10 RC paper in my kitchen darkroom). 

My options seem to be: leave as is; or replace the 2 channels now with
flush fluid with two more dilutions of carbon; or with one more carbon
dilution and a cool toner.

What would you suggest for 2 more carbon dilutions, or one more carbon
plus cool toner? With an ink limit of 100, I now have densities: 
MK 1.60
UT3D-C (dark carbon) 1.31
UT3D-M 0.90
LLLK (LLK:base 1:2) 0.38

(The LLLK is neutral, a little cooler than the dark and light carbons.)

Hi John,

>... the recipe you suggested (K + 3 carbon dilutions, 
>lt c and lite m) worked wonderfully well, making rich, 
> smooth, dither-free prints. 

>... MIS flush fluid in cm ...

> I really like the carbon tone, and could certainly live
> with it as the only tone from this printer. 
>(I also have a 4000-UC and 2200-UT7; and for many decades 
> was perfectly happy with being limited
> to 8x10 RC paper in my kitchen darkroom). 

> My options seem to be: leave as is; or replace the 2 channels 
> now with flush fluid with two more dilutions of carbon;

If you have all the smoothness you need, I wonder if 2 more dilutions would
improve the situation enough to offset the additional work in profiling and
ink mixing & loading.

> or with one more carbon dilution and a cool toner.

If you use the machine regularly and only print matte, the UT1 toner would
be an option.  For just minor toning R800 blue and Red are interesting
options also.  However, for significant cooling and for the more control,
the LC (LLC better) and LM are needed.  That, of course, introduces the more
complexity in profiling, but it's not bad.

It's really rather subjective.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

> the LC (LLC better) and LM are needed.  
Hi Paul, in the few weeks you were offline (shooting/vacation I hope)
I reread your articles and decided to be less of a pest and just
follow your current thinking...LM and LLC ingredients are en route
from MIS. The breakthrough moment was when I figured out how to use
both toner colors in QTR/mac profiles.