-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of pglombick
Sent: 29 October 2007 12:48
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] 2200 death and non-OEM
Could someone post a link to the image.
Thank you,
Paul Glombick
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "David
Whistance" <david.whistance@...> wrote:
>
> John
>
> Yes, you're right, that image was printed with OEM inks, albeit
with the
> Epson driver rather than QTR. I think that if I had used QTR it
would have
> brought out the detail even more.
>
> I agree wholeheartedly that it looks better when printed more
neutrally,
> indeed when I was tidying up recently and came across my copy of
the print
> by chance I was rather shocked that I had sent it out like that!
It just
> shows the problems of printing and proofing even B&W images in the
evenings
> under uncorrected lights - I really must make myself a decent
viewing area.
>
> My decision to go for this particular printer/ink combination was
sadly a
> pragmatic rather than artistic one. As you may have gathered from
the
> comments with my exchange images I have been running several
smaller Epson
> printers with non OEM inksets, all driven by QTR, to try to decide
which I
> preferred. Unfortunately the inksets all have different
> strengths/weaknesses. As a result I have tended to chop and change
between
> printers (and therefore inksets) depending upon the needs of each
image,
> choosing the Cone K7 inks (in an R800) for images where smooth
graduations
> and a long tonal scale are needed and the MIS UT-R2/UT-3D (in an
R220) for
> images needing maximum dmax (from Eboni) and a split tone. I find
both to
> be a considerable improvement for printing B&W over the OEM K2
inks. With
> the K3 inks I think they are still both better but the difference
is less
> and only the Cone K7 inks seem to give substantial benefits,
especially with
> images that need their particular properties.
>
> In an ideal world I would have printed this particular image with
the MIS
> inkset (and a much more subtle split tone!), however my R220 has
been
> playing up recently - the paper feed is not taking up properly - and
> repeated attempts to cure it failed. Similarly the R800 has been
plagued
> with paper feed problems since it was new. At the last minute I
therefore
> resorted to my much more reliable SP 4000 - which has the added
benefit of
> printing much faster than any of its smaller siblings. Its only
downside
> for this purpose is that, being the mainstay of my wife's
portrait/wedding
> business, it is loaded with the OEM K2 inks! If I had my way I'd
run
> several 4000's with various Cone K7 set's, perhaps with an Eboni
cartridge
> filling the spare slot for max dmax, however my wife would probably
object
> to both the cost and the space taken up!
>
> You are right that this image doesn't rely on its tonality for its
impact
> and wouldn't be one that I would choose to show the Cone inks to
their best.
> It does however look good with the Split Tone K7's. I'll try to
put an
> image in a later exchange that shows off the strengths of the Cone
inks more
> effectively. I doubt though whether I'm a good enough
photographer/printer
> to get the very best out of them!
>
> As far as clogging is concerned I suspect it is very much down to
local
> humidity levels rather than inksets. I have never suffered any
serious
> clogs with any of my inksets but I think that is more a reflection
of the
> climate here on the Isle of Wight than any particular properties of
the inks
> themselves.
>
> David
>
> PS Sorry if I have rambled on for too long!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
djon43
> Sent: 27 October 2007 23:34
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] 2200 death and non-OEM
>
>
> David, I've just studied your most recent exchange contribution,
> "Hatch Shack Window" which you shot with a Super Angulon 58
> (reportedly Jehovah's favorite lens) on 4X5, printed Epson 4000
with
> OEM and Epson driver.
>
> It is, as I commented elsewhere, an exquisite image...shocking in
> fact. Amazing.
>
> I'll guess that your selection of that driver and ink was
intended to
> produce the strong color (a brown duotone).
>
> You noted that something about this print was decided on the
basis of
> speed, but you didn't say what that was. What was it?
>
> I immediately thought that I'd prefer it (personal taste) more
neutral
> rather than duotone...easily rendered with QT... I believe it
would
> have been equally powerful.
>
> This print actually encourages my point (in praise of OEM and
QTR).
>
> Perhaps with Cone it'd be even better, but I suspect few would see
> that readily...it's obvious that you're a close observer...what
do you
> think?
>
> Am I looking at a print that isn't the best example of your point
(in
> favor of Cone)? I hope to see something you think better, one of
these
> days!
>
> This print doesn't rely on tonality, it's constructed IMO almost
> entirely of fine detail...the wood grain and details make it,
nearly
> by themselves. Areas of smooth tonal gradation seem irrelevant.
>
> I hope you'll respond to what I hope have been constructive and
> accurate observations. And I especially hope to see more of your
work!
>
> John Kelly
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "David
Whistance"
> <david.whistance@> wrote:
> >
> > John
> >
> > Although it is indeed very good I don't think that QTR with OEM
inks
> comes
> > anywhere near the Cone K7 inks in terms of tonal graduation or
> smoothness
> > both of which are more important to me than outright Dmax.
> >
> > David Whistance
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf
Of
> john kelly
> > Sent: 27 October 2007 14:45
> > To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Digital BW] 2200 death and non-OEM
> >
> >
> > One lesson we might draw from the years of weeping
> > here about clogged 2200 is to avoid 3rd party ink in
> > 2200.
> >
> > Easily 90% of the tears involve 3rd party inks.
> >
> > (someone happy with non-OEM usually jumps in to blame
> > users rather than ink, but I generously attribute
> > their reports of success to luck).
> >
> > Another observation is that reports of clogging seem
> > to be increasing. Perhaps more people are using 3rd
> > party inks, or perhaps 2200's are dying of old age.
> >
> > Having seen lots of examples of MIS/Piezo/OEM, QTR
> > with OEM looks as good as alternatives anyway. MIS and
> > Piezotone may produce faintly measurably better blacks
> > on some papers, but OEM still reportedly does better
> > on others, and the papers are changing.
> >
> > Some measurement reports seem dubious, some measuring
> > folks seem constantly to be changing papers ( their
> > love may be tinkering more than photography, and this
> > is a printing Group, not a photo group after all).
> >
> > My own reluctant decision is to give my mortally
> > clogged non-OEM 2200 a viking funeral and to continue
> > to love my OEM 2200 until something better than 2400
> > comes along (it sounds like 1800 is an Edsel).
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]