Digital BW, The Print

Hello All,

I've just posted details on a simple 2-channel Eboni BO technique with
QTR for the R200/220 printers that works amazingly well.  It was
inspired by Paul's 3MK approach (but quite different in how it's
done).  I'm calling it 2KBO.

It was an act of desperation because the K channel on my R200 clogged
permanently after several weeks of inactivity (tried everything, Steve
Karafyllakis even came over with his bag of magic tricks and couldn't
unclog it).

I wanted to continue making BO prints, but didn't want to spend $ on
an R800.  What got me onto this was Steve telling me that the LC, LM
and Y channels in these printers print finer dots than K, M and C, so
perhaps a multi channel approach might be effective and make a better
BO print (and I wouldn't have to buy a new printer).

The end result is prints that are almost as smooth as Paul's 3MK
samples, far better than I expected.  Full details are in the article,
here's the link

 http://www.cjcom.net/articles/digiprn3c.htm

One question I haven't answered yet is whether a 3rd channel would be
any better, given that this this printer has just 3.5 pl dots.  I only
had two Eboni carts at the moment and was under time pressure so I
just proceeded with two.  The results are so close to 3MK results, I'm
not sure if a 3rd channel would be worth it without smaller dots.  Any
opinions?

Regards,
Clayton


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

Clayton,

This looks fantastic, and I'd love to try it assuming I can fix the leak I'm experiencing in 
my 220.  I'm somewhat of a novice and I'm wondering if you'd be willing to help me out a 
bit.

I followed your set-up instructions and found that the Y and LC positions were best on my 
220 as well.  So I swapped the chips and installed the two MK cartridges.  However, the 
Epson Utility is telling me that the ink is low in both of those positions, despite the fact 
that I just installed full MK cartridges with Y and LC chips.  Does this mean the chips aren't 
functioning or installed properly?

I should mention that before installing the new Eboni carts, all of the other MIS UTR2 
cartridges (Y, LC, C, M, LM positions) were very low.  So now the Epson Utility is reporting 
that the Black position is full (which is strange since there's an almost empty LC cart in 
there now) and all the other positions are low (which is strange since there are two full 
Eboni cartridges in the Y and LC positions).  I'm not sure what to make of this at all.

Second, I'm trying to follow your instructions for creating the curve in QTR but I can't 
figure out how to do it on a Mac.  On the Mac the QTR is integrated into the Print dialog, 
and I can't seem to find where the custom curve creation part of the program is.  I'll go 
over to the QTR forum but if anyone here can help with that I'd appreciate it.

Thanks!
Chris

Well, I just found out there is no GUI interface for creating curves
on a Mac.  I guess that means I'm out of luck with this technique?

> If you have Photoshop (and probably Picture Window), you can take
the *acv
> curve, put it into the 0 - 100 mode (as opposed to the 255 - 0 mode) and
> simply copy the coordinate point of the acv curve into the List
Points of
> QTR (assuming the Mac version has such).
> 

Thanks for your reply, Paul.

I opened up the curve in PS CS3.  There are two radio buttons under
"Show amount of:" - one is "0-255", the other is "pigment/ink".  The
curve opened with "pigment/ink" automatically selected.  I'm not sure
if this is the 0-100 mode you suggest.

I also don't know if there's any "List Points" in the Mac QTR.  Here's
a screenshot of it:

http://cdkarts.com/temp/QTR-Mac.tif

From the drop-down menu that says Mode>QuadTone RIP I can choose
QuadTone Calibration, but that only has one option (a slider for ink
limit).

?? Are there any Mac QTR users here?

Chris,

 

If you have Photoshop (and probably Picture Window), you can take the *acv
curve, put it into the 0 - 100 mode (as opposed to the 255 - 0 mode) and
simply copy the coordinate point of the acv curve into the List Points of
QTR (assuming the Mac version has such).

 

Paul

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

 

 

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
chriskjezp
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2007 8:03 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: 2KBO, 2-Channel BO Printing For R200/220

 

Well, I just found out there is no GUI interface for creating curves
on a Mac. I guess that means I'm out of luck with this technique?

 



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

...
>One question I haven't answered yet is whether a 3rd channel
> would be any better, given that this printer has just 3.5 pl dots. 

(It may be 3 pl, but at any rate, the 220 is a very good little printer.
Too bad it's no longer made.)

My experience so far indicates that adding more channels is only useful to
the extent the microbanding is more of a problem than "noise" -- roughness
of the dither.  (Whether this is technically "noise" is questionable, but it
seems to act like it for some purposes.)  That is, on the 260, straight K
only was better than multiple channels of Eboni.  (It is probably the case
that noise is additive, though not in a linear fashion.)  

It also looks like the dots are not ideally placed with most of the
combinations I used. I'm wondering if using the jets Epson designed to be
crossed over (e.g., LC then C) might help, but, of course, in the 1800 there
are no such cross-overs, and with the K2, the issues are different.  With
the 260 the build quality or other extraneous factors seem to be holding it
back, though I expect it is still going to be smoother than a 220 -- we'll
see.

My work with the 2200 (for purposes of profiling the large format K2
printers) as well as the 1800 and 260, indicates that QTR's dither,
particularly at the very beginning, is smoother than Epson's.  Also, one
Eboni in the very light tones is better than 2 MK jets firing.  That is what
is behind the staged or staggered entry points of the MK jets.  Keep it to
the minimum number of jets until needed for microbanding control.

On the 2200, with its 4 pl dot, I use LK + Eboni.  Since the larger dots
print cooler, it has allowed me to make a profile for K2 printers that uses
only LK at first for very smooth highlights, and also a fair amount of LK in
the midtones to reduce the graininess of the Eboni there.  I can do this on
Hawk Mountain Peregrine Velvet, the most neutral printing paper I've found,
and match the 1800 100% Eboni tonal distribution on Premier Art 205/Epson
Scrapbook.  This will allow those or us who use that very good combination
(1800 + PA/Scrapbook 205) to have larger prints made on 7600 and 9600
printers with color inks installed, as long as they use Eboni (or other
equally neutral MK) in the K position.  These prints are clearly not as
smooth as the 1800 prints, but they are not bad for 16 x 20 and above.  That
is probably the route I will take with my own printing.  

See http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/K2-Eboni-LK.pdf  for my preliminary
write-up of this approach.

The 220, of course, could use the same approach I'm using with the 2200, and
probably make a better print -- as long as medium warm tone is acceptable. 

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Chris,

 

Since I do not have a Mac, I can't help all that much with QTR and that
platform.  In Windows I open the Curve Creation at the top of what appears
to be the same interface you sent. It's under "Tools."  Then for the inks I
want to use a scroll down to the "Load Curve" option, then press the "Curve"
button.  One of the tabs that then shows is the Point List.

 

Paul

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

 

 

  _____  

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
chriskjezp
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2007 9:21 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: 2KBO, 2-Channel BO Printing For R200/220

 


> If you have Photoshop (and probably Picture Window), you can take
the *acv
> curve, put it into the 0 - 100 mode (as opposed to the 255 - 0 mode) and
> simply copy the coordinate point of the acv curve into the List
Points of
> QTR (assuming the Mac version has such).
> 

Thanks for your reply, Paul.

I opened up the curve in PS CS3. There are two radio buttons under
"Show amount of:" - one is "0-255", the other is "pigment/ink". The
curve opened with "pigment/ink" automatically selected. I'm not sure
if this is the 0-100 mode you suggest.

I also don't know if there's any "List Points" in the Mac QTR. Here's
a screenshot of it:

http://cdkarts. <http://cdkarts.com/temp/QTR-Mac.tif> com/temp/QTR-Mac.tif

From the drop-down menu that says Mode>QuadTone RIP I can choose
QuadTone Calibration, but that only has one option (a slider for ink
limit).

?? Are there any Mac QTR users here?

 



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

Hello Chris,

>This looks fantastic, and I'd love to try it assuming I can fix the 
>leak I'm experiencing in my 220. 

As someone else said, it might be the MIS spongeless carts, if you are
using them.  They are notorious for leaky poppet valves.  I had some
once and had to send the whole set back and insisted on the sponge
carts as replacements.  I've used them for years without leaks.  I
don't know if they still have them, but I would avoid the spongeless
ones if possible.


>I followed your set-up instructions and found that the Y and LC 
>positions were best on my 220 as well.  So I swapped the chips and
>installed the two MK cartridges.  However, the Epson Utility is 
>telling me that the ink is low in both of those positions, despite 
>the fact that I just installed full MK cartridges with Y and LC 
>chips.  Does this mean the chips aren't functioning or installed 
>properly?

Did you reset the chips when you filled the carts?

>I should mention that before installing the new Eboni carts, all of 
>the other MIS UTR2 cartridges (Y, LC, C, M, LM positions) were very 
>low.  So now the Epson Utility is reporting that the Black position 
>is full (which is strange since there's an almost empty LC cart in 
>there now) and all the other positions are low (which is strange 
>since there are two full Eboni cartridges in the Y and LC positions). 
>I'm not sure what to make of this at all.

There has to be a reason...just have to figure it out.  Did you swap
any chips?


 
>Second, I'm trying to follow your instructions for creating the 
>curve in QTR but I can't figure out how to do it on a Mac.  On the 
>Mac the QTR is integrated into the Print dialog, and I can't seem to 
>find where the custom curve creation part of the program is.  I'll 
>go over to the QTR forum but if anyone here can help with that I'd
appreciate it.

Sorry, I don't have a Mac and have no experience with Mac/QTR.

Regards,
Clayton


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

Thanks for your help, Clayton. 

After a day of frustration I finally caved in to my long standing
desire to own an R2400.  I ordered it off of the Epson website for
$450 refurbished ($509 minus 10% discount coupon), and I'm told they
honor the $75 mail-in rebates for refurbished printers so it may only
end up costing me $375.  A good deal for such a great printer (yes,
I'm trying to convince myself!)

Interesting timing on this episode with the 220, since I've been
deciding between an R1800 with Paul's approach (necessitating RIPs,
MIS ink, etc.) or a 2400.  What today's frustration with the 220
leakage issues showed me is that I have neither the time nor
inclination to fiddle around so much with the hardware.  I want
something that gives me pretty good results with a minimum of
tinkering.  So the 2400 won.

I'm sure I'll be back here with questions about it too, but from
reading your article Clayton it seems much more "user friendly" than
some of the other approaches here.

Best,
Chris

Hello Paul,

>>One question I haven't answered yet is whether a 3rd channel
>>would be any better, given that this printer has just 3.5 pl dots. 
> 
>(It may be 3 pl, but at any rate, the 220 is a very good little 
>printer. Too bad it's no longer made.)

Now I'm not sure about the 3.5.  I had that in my head from somewhere
but tried to look it up and can't find any specs in the manual.  So
I'm really not certain what it is.  If anyone can find this somewhere
please let me know.


 
>My experience so far indicates that adding more channels is only 
>useful to the extent the microbanding is more of a problem...

In this case 2 channels eliminated the banding so I'll let it be.  


>That is, on the 260, straight K only was better than multiple 
>channels of Eboni.  

I'm wondering if the 2KBO approach might work on the 260.  I looked at
one of the 3MK curves and it looks like all three are nearly the same,
all stacked up on one another (all three had same ink limit).  That's
what I began with, but it looked worse than 1K BO.  When I separated
them by changing the ink limits it got better.  Ended up with a 4:1
ink limit ratio for optimum smoothness.  This can be seen in the curve
chart in the article.  


>My work with the 2200 (for purposes of profiling the large format K2
>printers) as well as the 1800 and 260, indicates that QTR's dither,
>particularly at the very beginning, is smoother than Epson's.  Also, 
>one Eboni in the very light tones is better than 2 MK jets firing. 
>That is what is behind the staged or staggered entry points of the 
>MK jets.  

Interesting, I did something similar without realizing the importance
of it.  The secondary curve begins at about 25.  My curves aren't
defined with input numbers like yours, but were created with the
Shadow, Highlight and Gamma settings (back when I tried BO on the
2400).  The resulting shapes are very much like yours.  The final
contrast control is done with the embedded acv curve


>On the 2200, with its 4 pl dot, I use LK + Eboni.  Since the larger 
>dots print cooler, it has allowed me to make a profile for K2 
>printers that uses only LK at first for very smooth highlights, and 
>also a fair amount of LK in the midtones to reduce the graininess of 
>the Eboni there.  

>The 220, of course, could use the same approach I'm using with the 
>2200, and probably make a better print -- as long as medium warm 
>tone is acceptable. 

Understood. Since I prefer not-too-warm I'm quite happy with the
all-Eboni setup.  I like the range of tones it gets with the various
papers (and the tones are really pretty, clear and not muddy looking).
 But it's certainly easy enough for anyone who's interested to try it.

I'm preparing some sample prints (including the 21-step) to go out in
tomorrow's mail.  One of them is on Kayenta.  I'm especially curious
to know how they compare to your 1K 260 prints because the 260 is the
current model.  My R200 won't live forever...


Regards,
Clayton


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

Hello Chris,

>After a day of frustration I finally caved in to my long standing
>desire to own an R2400...

Congrats.  It's gonna be a whole new world <g>  


>Interesting timing on this episode with the 220, since I've been
>deciding between an R1800 with Paul's approach (necessitating RIPs,
>MIS ink, etc.) or a 2400.  What today's frustration with the 220
>leakage issues showed me is that I have neither the time nor
>inclination to fiddle around so much with the hardware.  I want
>something that gives me pretty good results with a minimum of
>tinkering.  So the 2400 won.

Somehow I understand <g>

I put up with a certain amount of refilling carts and such because
I've found that doing my initial image workup proofing in BO on the
200, rather than the 2400, saves a lot on ink costs.  I was doing
straight BO on the 200 but the K channel died, so I'm faced with
either doing QTR-based BO, which is _much_ slower, or paying a high
price for another scarce 200 or 220, or doing proofing on the 2400. 
I'd rather not spend the $ right now so I bit the bullet and got into
the 2KBO stuff.  I can always take another route if the slowness
proves to be too big a problem.  With the Speed setting on "Faster"
for proofing it's not so bad, so we'll see...

As for 2400 ink costs, atlex.com has excellent prices, as does
costcentral.com and uniquephoto.com.  Be sure to compare shipping
costs.  Sometimes the lowest cart price isn't always the best deal. 
Depending how how many carts you're buying, sometimes free or low
shipping overcomes a slightly higher price.


Regards,
Clayton


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

Paul,

>"Minimum Ink Droplet Size 
>3 picoliters" [for the R200]

Got it, thanks.


>...curves, ink limits...

Understood on all.  


Question re small Eboni dots = warmer tone: that's exactly what I'm
finding.  The 2KBO prints are quite a bit warmer than the 1K BO ones.
 Can you explain why this is?


>I'll probably be able to borrow a 1400 in a few weeks to see how it 
>does.

I think a lot of folks will be interested to hear your report.

Thanks for all the good input on this.


Regards,
Clayton


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

Hi Clayton,


http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/consumer/consDetail.jsp?BV_UseBVCookie=ye
s&infoType=Specs&oid=37368464&category=Products

"Minimum Ink Droplet Size 

3 picoliters" [for the R200]

>> on the 260, straight K only was better than multiple channels of Eboni. 

>I'm wondering if the 2KBO approach might work on the 260.

I've tried that, and it's not bad.  However, the single K BO is essentially
the same quality, and it would allow color.  So, I'm thinking a single K BO
with either color or R2 in the midtone spots might be the formula that would
be most useful for the largest group.

Oddly, the glossy quality of the 260 with the MIS inks in just a couple
spots is bad.  It may take all the midtones pumping the R2 inks to hide the
banding.  That appears to be what Epson does with its "grayscale" printing.
It's full of color inks.  So, if a printer had R2 in the midtones and Eboni
in the K, one could do 100% carbon on matte paper with QTR, or neutral
blended matte B&W with the Epson "grayscale" mode, or neutral (or carbon
depending on R2 version loaded) glossy with either no cart swapping
(generating the dmax with the 2 dark R2s and either QTR or PS curves/ICC) or
with a PK swapped in.  I'm waiting for the R2 carts to test this.

>I looked at one of the 3MK curves and it looks like all 
>three are nearly the same, all stacked up on one another

There are actually important differences.  First, they start at different
points.  See the Point List tabs in QTR.  Second, they have slightly
different slopes.  It turns out if you have the exact same slope and density
for all the curves you get little vertical lines.

>(all three had same ink limit).

That makes it easier to set the dmax and linearize for different papers.
See the notes in the dmax test curve.

>That's what I began with, but it looked worse than 1K BO. 
>When I separated them by changing the ink limits it got better.

Yes, you were probably running into the same slope & same density problems.


> Ended up with a 4:1 ink limit ratio for optimum smoothness. 

I found also that I was able to achieve the same dmax with less ink if all
three were at the same level.  But, whatever works for that printer model is
what you need to do.  The printer models are clearly not all the same.

>I'm preparing some sample prints (including the 21-step) 
>to go out in tomorrow's mail. One of them is on Kayenta. 
>I'm especially curious to know how they compare to your 
>1K 260 prints because the 260 is the
>current model. My R200 won't live forever...

Yes, I'm curious also.  I recall well the Epson rep's comments to me that
Epson made the 220 too good.  It was cannibalizing the sales of their more
expensive units.  As such, I'm anxious also to see if the 1400 is the same
as the 260 or better.  Keep in mind that my mild disappointment with the 260
is mostly due to my assuming the 1400 would be able to take over from the
1800 in the future.  I still expect the 260 to make an outstanding entry
level B&W printer (if reliable carts & chips can be purchased).  If the 1400
is not up to the 1800 quality I'll just have to decide whether to buy
another 1800 and put it on the shelf for the future.  I'll probably be able
to borrow a 1400 in a few weeks to see how it does.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Hi Clayton,

> Question re small Eboni dots = warmer tone: that's exactly 
> what I'm finding. The 2KBO prints are quite a bit warmer 
> than the 1K BO ones.  Can you explain why this is?

Here's what I think is going on.  First, we know that the more dilute the
carbon, the warmer it is (all else being equal).  We also know that the 100%
black with any size dots is the coolest point.  We also know that as the
size of a dot increases, the area increases as a square relative to the
circumference. 

I think the warmth comes from the areas of the dot that exhibit more
transparency.  In the middle of the dot the carbon is opaque.  The opacity,
however, is probably in the shape of a bell curve.  As one gets to the edges
the carbon becomes thinner and has increased transparency, like a dilute
carbon.  So, smaller dots with more circumference relative to the opaque
core will have more relative transparency and thus more warmth.

Anyway, that is the model that seems to be most consistent with what I'm
seeing and reading.  

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Clayton and Paul,

Thanks for sharing on the 2KBO with the R200/R220.

I'm just wondering would kind of results one could get using the K
channel in the 2KBO setup as described by Clayton. Could it help cool
down the tone of the print while at the same time retaining some of
the print quality advantages over the BO method?

Would the same settings be used with the primary and secondary curves
in QTR or would they need to be changed because of the K channel's
larger dot size? 

Cheers,
Andre

Hi Clayton,

> I put up with a certain amount of refilling carts and such because
> I've found that doing my initial image workup proofing in BO on the
> 200, rather than the 2400, saves a lot on ink costs.  I was doing
> straight BO on the 200 but the K channel died, so I'm faced with
> either doing QTR-based BO, which is _much_ slower, or paying a high
> price for another scarce 200 or 220, or doing proofing on the 2400. 
> I'd rather not spend the $ right now so I bit the bullet and got into
> the 2KBO stuff.  I can always take another route if the slowness
> proves to be too big a problem.  With the Speed setting on "Faster"
> for proofing it's not so bad, so we'll see...

Thanks for the tip.  I was thinking of selling my 220, but perhaps I'll keep it and do what 
you suggest.  I had a bad leak but I think I've fixed it.  Have to buy some more MIS ink 
though.  Question:it seems to me that even using BO requires that the other cartridges 
have ink in them, right?  Because the Y, LM, M, LC, C positions are all out in my 220 and I 
can't print even with BO.

I'd like to try your 2KBO approach for proofing, but I guess that means I'll have to order a 
whole new set of UTR2 inks even though I only plan on using the Eboni?  Is that right?
 
> As for 2400 ink costs, atlex.com has excellent prices, as does
> costcentral.com and uniquephoto.com.  Be sure to compare shipping
> costs.  Sometimes the lowest cart price isn't always the best deal. 
> Depending how how many carts you're buying, sometimes free or low
> shipping overcomes a slightly higher price.

Thanks for the info on this, Clayton.

Best,
Chris

>... kind of results one could get using the K channel in the 
>2KBO setup as described by Clayton. 

The main issue most will probably have with the approach is that it is
grainier than the 200/220 with an inkset like the RR or K6.  I have not seen
a sample of the 3 picoliter 200 yet.  However, the 4 pl K2 printers like the
2200 are quite rough.  See page 9 of
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/K2-Eboni-LK.pdf  Note when viewing that
page that that test patches are only about 2 mm high.  You can use these to
judge roughness by standing an appropriate distance from your monitor (if
you can get back far enough).

Whether it'll be smooth enough for you is subjective.

>Could it help cool down the tone of the print while at the same 
>time retaining some of the print quality advantages over the BO method?

It will probably not be cooler than a straight 200/220 K-only BO.  However,
that should be close to dead neutral on a paper like Premier Art 325.  See
the cart in my initial 2200 write up at page 2 of
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/K2-Eboni-LK.pdf 

>Would the same settings be used with the primary and secondary 
>curves in QTR or would they need to be changed because of the 
>K channel's larger dot size? 

The highlights are better with only one channel firing.  So, start the
second (K position) channel outside the highlights.  You might print with
only the first one and see where it starts to band and start the second
channel very slowly just before that point.  In short, use the second one
only as needed to control banding.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Chris:  the other carts must have some liquid in them. But the liquid
need not be ink if you're just printing BO. I've been using an old 890
in the BO mode for about 18 months with just Windex in the color
carts. I just refill with Windex and reset the chip when it gets used
up from automatic cleanings. It may work just as well with water
instead of Windex. 

There may or may not be some long term detriment to using Windex. But
I'm sure you would do fine with cleaning fluid, GLOP or something
similar. 

Bob Michaels

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "chriskjezp"
<chriskresser@...> wrote:
Question:it seems to me that even using BO requires that the other
cartridges have ink in them, right?

Hello Andre,

>I'm just wondering would kind of results one could get using the K
>channel in the 2KBO setup as described by Clayton. Could it help cool
>down the tone of the print while at the same time retaining some of
>the print quality advantages over the BO method?
> 
>Would the same settings be used with the primary and secondary curves
>in QTR or would they need to be changed because of the K channel's
>larger dot size? 

Good questions.  There's only one way to find out...<g>.



Regards,
Clayton


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

Hello Chris,

Bob is right on about the other inks.  If you don't want to bother
with refilling, even with windex, there is always the super el cheapo
color dye carts that MIS sells.  They are only used in the cleaning
squirts so they last a long long time, especially if you're only using
it for proofing.


>I'd like to try your 2KBO approach for proofing, 

It's definitely worth it for the cost savings.  Once you get 2KBO set
up and running the maintenance chores will be just refilling the two
Eboni carts.



>>As for 2400 ink costs...

>Thanks for the info on this, Clayton.

Another thought...some vendors offer free shipping if you buy a
certain amount.  Sometimes when I'm buying paper as well, which has
high shipping costs, I'll go with a vendor with higher cart prices but
free shipping...so you just have to do the math each time.   Sometimes
they have sales.   I buy from several different places depending on
the mix of the moment.


Regards,
Clayton


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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Clayton Jones"
<cj@...> wrote:
>
> 
> Good questions.  There's only one way to find out...<g>.
> 
Hello Clayton,

I've tried 2KBO printing on my Epson R220, following the steps you've
described. I have a pint of Ebony black and appropriate carts & chips,
 so it was an easy setup.

After a nozzle check I did a print head alignment examining the
printout with a magnifying glass then proceeded with the QTR Ink
Pattern Page printed at 2880. Examination with a mag. glass showed the
yellow channel to be coarser, the black channel looking just as smooth
as the others. I chose the LC and LM channels, made the primary and
secondary curves using the CJ-2KBO-R200-Ordered.ACV file.

I also made another primary and secondary curve in QTR using the K and
LM channel. Another nozzle check and I was ready to print the same
image on Premium Matte 210gms C2S using both QTR configurations plus a
BO print as control.

First thing I noticed was that the light areas of the 2KBO prints had
more density than the BO print. The  LC/LM channels print had more of
the grain effect, the K/LM print less grain (?) with the BO print
being the smoother. All prints had the same tonality.

But then I noticed paper white (no ink) in the two 2KBO prints at
exactly the same spot: an outdoor light cover with strong horizontal
lines and also around a lozange shape street sign. So I printed again
on EEM (warmer tone) and the same artifacts appeared at exactly the
same spots. Another BO print did not show these artifacts. Printed a
nozzle check again just to make sure. 

So, there you are. I'm not sure what to make of this. Hope you can
light my lantern.

Cheers,
Andre

Hello Andre,

>I've tried 2KBO printing on my Epson R220, following the steps you've
>described...

Good job of testing.



>...a BO print as control...
>First thing I noticed was that the light areas of the 2KBO prints had
>more density than the BO print. 

The main thing here is that my acv curve was created to match my 2kBO
print with my BO control print.  Our control prints may be quite
different (due to diferences among printers and whatever processes
were used to create them), and our 2kBO prints may have different
characteristics, for similar reasons.  So you probably need to make
your own custom curve.

The nice thing about using an acv curve for the fine tuning is that
it's so intuitive and somewhat WYSIWYG and we can see what effect the
change is having (as opposed to entering numbers in a points list
where we think is the right place and running a print to see what
happened - I've done both, and much prefer this method).  Open the
image in PS and temporarily attach a curve layer and load the acv
curve (don't save to disk or it will influence what QTR prints!).
  
Compare the 2kBO and BO prints and decide exactly where contrast needs
adjusting.  Click on that exact place in the PS image and a dot
appears on the curve - that's where the curve needs changing.  Make
the change, then save the acv curve (overwrite the old one).  Then
make a new 2kBO print, and repeat as necessary until the prints are
matched (then erase the temporary curve layer before closing the file).

An important thing, I found that once this curve was made it worked
for all my BO prints at least all I've tried so far, about 6.  None
have required a change.  So it seems to be a good match on a system
level.  Would be good if you van verify this.  

I'm not too surprised that my curve doesn't match perfectly for
someone else.  It's why my last sentence in the article was to the
effect that this is a starting place.


>The  LC/LM channels print had more of the grain effect, the K/LM 
>print less grain (?) with the BO print being the smoother. 

I don't know what to say here.  I can't test it because my K channel
is dead (the only reason I got into this was because of that).  But
there's no question that my 2kBO prints are far smoother than the
original BO ones.  If that's not true for you...well that's fine. 
Just go with whatever gives the best results (you do have Speed
setting at "Better", yes?).  You've taken the trouble to do the tests,
that's what counts.


>All prints had the same tonality.

Do you mean color tone?  That's odd, because my 2kBO prints are
noticeably warmer than the BO ones.  Is there a tone difference
between K/LM and LC/LM?


>But then I noticed paper white (no ink) in the two 2KBO prints at
>exactly the same spot: an outdoor light cover with strong horizontal
>lines and also around a lozange shape street sign. So I printed again
>on EEM (warmer tone) and the same artifacts appeared at exactly the
>same spots. Another BO print did not show these artifacts. Printed a
>nozzle check again just to make sure. 

I haven't seen any introduced artifacts.  The 2kBO prints have much
better resolution of fine detail (at least mine do).  Perhaps that
artifact is in the image and BO just doesn't resolve it...just
grasping at straws here, I have no explanation for it.

I hope others will try this and report results.

Regards,
Clayton


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

Hello Clayton,

I've just checked the QTR screen (v. 2.5.1.0) and for the R220, speed
shows at Uni-directional and Bi-directional. So I'll print next time
with  Uni-directional.

I've checked the original image on the screen at 100% and it doesn't
have the artifact that was present in the print. Also, it was the
color tone I was talking about.

I'll be re-checking the entire procedure and carefully reading your
reply and see if I can make the 2KBO work.

Thanks for taking the time,
Andre

Hello Andre,

>I've just checked the QTR screen (v. 2.5.1.0) and for the R220, speed
>shows at Uni-directional and Bi-directional. So I'll print next time
>with  Uni-directional.

I'm using 2.5.1.9 and the choices are now "Faster" and "Better".  It
makes a huge difference on mine, and would account for what you
described.  So definitely be sure of that.  Also I'm using the
"ordered" dither (too many things to think about!).

Regards,
Clayton


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

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

> 
> I'm using 2.5.1.9 and the choices are now "Faster" and "Better".  


Hello Clayton,

After an email reply from Roy Harrington (see below)I used 
QTRCleanout so that I could do a clean install of QTR.

First installed QTR_Setup_2.5.1 which install QTR as version 2.5.1.0
then  installed the PC frontend and now the version number is 2.5.1.9

I re-did the Primary and Secondary Curves in QTR using your .ACV file.

When I go to print with QTR, in the Curve Setup section, I see my
newly created curve in Curve 1, resolution is at 2880 and Speed is
still either Uni-directional or Bi-directional.

Media: Matte paper. 

Cheers,
Andre

--------------------------------------------------------------
The QTR_Setup_2.5.1 download is the full product.  2.5.1.9 is an
update of just the PC frontend QTRgui.   To get the latest of
everything, first do the 2.5.1 full product and then install the
QTRgui update 2.5.1.9 from:    
http://www.sbillard.org/Shareware/QTRgui.htm

Roy