Digital BW, The Print

a) have you used ConeColor pigments at all? 

b) have you used ConeColor with QTR? How's it compare to QTR with K3?

c) have you used ConeColor/QTR on GLOSSY?  How's bronzing and gloss
differential? 

d) does ConeColor/QTR require as much non-black/grey pigment to achieve
neutral?

In a message dated 8/29/08 2:22:03 PM, djon43@... writes:


> a) have you used ConeColor pigments at all?
> 
> b) have you used ConeColor with QTR? How's it compare to QTR with K3?
> 
> c) have you used ConeColor/QTR on GLOSSY?  How's bronzing and gloss
> differential?
> 
> d) does ConeColor/QTR require as much non-black/grey pigment to achieve
> neutral?
> 
This is a color inkset, not a black and white one... there is no magic in it 
that will make printers that print poor B&W with the OEM color inkset, print 
better B&W with these inks. The only trick that helps that is to move to a B&W 
inkset (or a printer with more gray inks in the OEM set).

C. David Tobie
WW Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
Datacolor
CDTobie@...
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
> 


**************
It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your 
travel deal here.
      
(http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)


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

Samples of ConeColor on glossy and matte Epson paper, just received,
show zero gloss differential and zero bronzing. It appears that Cone
has made some advances (Cone isn't as optimistic about this as I am,
but his samples are more recent than his website).

I wonder if ConeColor might do better QTR B&W than 
Epson's 2200 pigments do...Epson's have gloss differential and
bronzing problems with glossy and semigloss papers .

Mr. Tobie, I suggest you look carefully into this question for your
own credibility. You may be mistaken.

If someone has recently tried ConeColor with QTR, I hope they'll share
their observations. 

I'm thinking of adding a ConeColor CIS to either 2200 or R800.  


 
> > 
> This is a color inkset, not a black and white one... there is no
magic in it 
> that will make printers that print poor B&W with the OEM color
inkset, print 
> better B&W with these inks. 

Mr. Tobie, I asked an experience-based question. 

Perhaps someone with more experience than you have with ConeColor will
answer. 


The only trick that helps that is to move to a B&W 

> inkset (or a printer with more gray inks in the OEM set).
> 
> C. David Tobie
> WW Product Technology Manager
> Digital Imaging & Home Theater
> Datacolor
> CDTobie@...
> www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
> > 
> 
> 
> **************
> It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your 
> travel deal here.
>       
> (http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

> 
> I wonder if ConeColor might do better QTR B&W than 
> Epson's 2200 pigments do...Epson's have gloss differential and
> bronzing problems with glossy and semigloss papers .
> 

The Cone inks are supposed to be clones of the Epson K3 inks that 
were used in the 2400.  If they are good quality clones (I have not 
tested them), one would expect that they would perform better than 
the Epson K2 inks used in the 2200.

I have not had a chance to test the Cone inks. I have been able to 
find genuine Epson K3 inks for the same price or less than the Cone 
Color inks. The Epson inks performance is quite well known, with 
documented longevity testing on a wide vaeiety of papers, etc.  

You can load the Epson K3 inks in an older K2 machine - 2200, 7600, 
etc.  - just as easily as you can load the Cone inks.

Best,
Michael

Thanks Michael, good logic. 

Cone claims better gamut but doesn't/didn't claim equally good
gloss...still, the gloss is perfect in these samples so maybe he's
made progress.

I hadn't thought to use K3 in a CIS because of the many bad reports on
CIS reliability/damage and bad quality control on 3rd party carts ...
those date back years...have there been CIS improvements ?  Cone makes
a convincing case for his color, but apparently hasn't explored QTR
with it.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Michael T.
Murphy" <uriel_bear@...> wrote:

>
> > 
> > I wonder if ConeColor might do better QTR B&W than 
> > Epson's 2200 pigments do...Epson's have gloss differential and
> > bronzing problems with glossy and semigloss papers .
> > 
> 
> The Cone inks are supposed to be clones of the Epson K3 inks that 
> were used in the 2400.  If they are good quality clones (I have not 
> tested them), one would expect that they would perform better than 
> the Epson K2 inks used in the 2200.
> 
> I have not had a chance to test the Cone inks. I have been able to 
> find genuine Epson K3 inks for the same price or less than the Cone 
> Color inks. The Epson inks performance is quite well known, with 
> documented longevity testing on a wide vaeiety of papers, etc.  
> 
> You can load the Epson K3 inks in an older K2 machine - 2200, 7600, 
> etc.  - just as easily as you can load the Cone inks.
> 
> Best,
> Michael
>

I expect that Jon has a great ink set.  It is just that it is a bit 
new and untested.

I have to say I give him a lot of credit for being honest and 
forthright about the quality of his inks, and in not stinting in 
praise of Epson inks.  Unlike many of the amateurs that like to slam 
Epson, etc. and make unfounded claims for the most generic of clone 
ink sets. ;>)

I am using a cheap CIS for my Epson 2200. One of the $50 units off of 
Ebay.  They are probably OK if you get them set up right the first 
time. 

Unfortunateky I tinkered with mine a bit, and had every connection 
and tube come undone.  I finally got it working OK, but I would not 
rely on it too much.  I was just playing with the 2200 though, I have 
2 7600's and a 9600 for more serious work.

Probably worth investing in one of the better CIS' if you are going 
to use it heavily.

The K3 inks can yield a good gloss on the newer baryta papers.  Neil 
Snape has posted a bit on the most recent addition, the Hahnemuhle 
Photo Rag Baryta (you have to read that name carefully, it is similar 
to other Hahnemuhle names.)  It is supposed to have excellent dmax, 
no bronzing, no gloss differential, no OBA's.  Not yet available in 
the US though.

Otherwise you can achieve excellent reults with the Hahnemuhle Fine 
Art Baryta, Epson Exhibition Fiber, Harman Glossy FB Ai, or Ilford 
Gold Silk.  They will require spraying and are quite delicate when 
wet, but really great papers.  We are quite lucky to have them.

I also like the Innova F type Glossy Warmtone for B&W.  It does need 
spraying to eliminate gloss differential. 

I have mixed a version of the Epson K3 PK, LK, and LLK inks into a 5K 
ink set plus GLOP that looks decent.  I use a light GLOP on first 
pass, then a second pass of full GLOP.  A method devised by Paul 
Roark, Tyler, et. al.  

I stil have to mix a toner for the 7th channel to get the look I want 
for those inks. That was more of a side project. I still need to 
figure out a production ink set, probably Cone.

Anyway, either Jon's Cone Color inks or the Epson K3 should be able 
to make a good glossy B&W print with a little extra work.  I think 
the HP Z3100 with the GLOP channel is a little easier, but given that 
we are running older (and much cheaper) technology the results are 
wonderful.  I hope that is on topic?

Best,
Michael

Thanks Michael..I've been pondering tossing the 2200 but it's (almost)
always delivered more than hoped for when I really tried. 

My beefs have been the gloss differential and bronzing... until
recently.... I've realized (partially thanks to Cone) that I've got
more detail in my 83mp files than 2200 will print to mere 12X18 .

Anyhow, my B&W # 12X18 are grain sharp (scans) but 14.5mp digital
holds more so I'm thinking 2400...no need for bigger, but I do want
panorama, which 3800 won't handle. 

Maybe needless to say, I want to use QTR or similar because I want one
printer for color and B&W.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Michael T.
Murphy" <uriel_bear@...> wrote:

>
> I expect that Jon has a great ink set.  It is just that it is a bit 
> new and untested.
> 
> I have to say I give him a lot of credit for being honest and 
> forthright about the quality of his inks, and in not stinting in 
> praise of Epson inks.  Unlike many of the amateurs that like to slam 
> Epson, etc. and make unfounded claims for the most generic of clone 
> ink sets. ;>)
> 
> I am using a cheap CIS for my Epson 2200. One of the $50 units off of 
> Ebay.  They are probably OK if you get them set up right the first 
> time. 
> 
> Unfortunateky I tinkered with mine a bit, and had every connection 
> and tube come undone.  I finally got it working OK, but I would not 
> rely on it too much.  I was just playing with the 2200 though, I have 
> 2 7600's and a 9600 for more serious work.
> 
> Probably worth investing in one of the better CIS' if you are going 
> to use it heavily.
> 
> The K3 inks can yield a good gloss on the newer baryta papers.  Neil 
> Snape has posted a bit on the most recent addition, the Hahnemuhle 
> Photo Rag Baryta (you have to read that name carefully, it is similar 
> to other Hahnemuhle names.)  It is supposed to have excellent dmax, 
> no bronzing, no gloss differential, no OBA's.  Not yet available in 
> the US though.
> 
> Otherwise you can achieve excellent reults with the Hahnemuhle Fine 
> Art Baryta, Epson Exhibition Fiber, Harman Glossy FB Ai, or Ilford 
> Gold Silk.  They will require spraying and are quite delicate when 
> wet, but really great papers.  We are quite lucky to have them.
> 
> I also like the Innova F type Glossy Warmtone for B&W.  It does need 
> spraying to eliminate gloss differential. 
> 
> I have mixed a version of the Epson K3 PK, LK, and LLK inks into a 5K 
> ink set plus GLOP that looks decent.  I use a light GLOP on first 
> pass, then a second pass of full GLOP.  A method devised by Paul 
> Roark, Tyler, et. al.  
> 
> I stil have to mix a toner for the 7th channel to get the look I want 
> for those inks. That was more of a side project. I still need to 
> figure out a production ink set, probably Cone.
> 
> Anyway, either Jon's Cone Color inks or the Epson K3 should be able 
> to make a good glossy B&W print with a little extra work.  I think 
> the HP Z3100 with the GLOP channel is a little easier, but given that 
> we are running older (and much cheaper) technology the results are 
> wonderful.  I hope that is on topic?
> 
> Best,
> Michael
>

> 
> Maybe needless to say, I want to use QTR or similar
> because I want one printer for color and B&W.
> 

Don't forget the Epson ABW if you do go to the 2400 or newer (2880.)

Folks get great results using ABW. the only real complaint is from 
purists, who worry that the color pigments have less longevity than 
the black.  ABW mixes in color onthe fly, a bit more than some other 
solutions sometimes.

That is not something that I really worry about.  I am happy with the 
longevity of the color pigments. I am also using papers with OBA's 
too though, so don't go by my own preferences.  I don't frame much, 
almost nothing.  ;>)

More later - morning quick read.

Best,
Michael

Michael, what's your favorite source/quantity for K3, and would I need
syringes (whose) or other tools? 

 I tend to trust Cone more than other vendors...are you familiar with
his CIS system?...

I have a mountain of Piezo, MIS, QTR/K2, and K3/ABW prints here, at
least 50-75 made by maybe 20 very good technicians with various
machines: their personal visual renditions are obviously more
important than their chosen technology.  


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Michael T.
Murphy" <uriel_bear@...> wrote:

>
> > 
> > Maybe needless to say, I want to use QTR or similar
> > because I want one printer for color and B&W.
> > 
> 
> Don't forget the Epson ABW if you do go to the 2400 or newer (2880.)
> 
> Folks get great results using ABW. the only real complaint is from 
> purists, who worry that the color pigments have less longevity than 
> the black.  ABW mixes in color onthe fly, a bit more than some other 
> solutions sometimes.
> 
> That is not something that I really worry about.  I am happy with the 
> longevity of the color pigments. I am also using papers with OBA's 
> too though, so don't go by my own preferences.  I don't frame much, 
> almost nothing.  ;>)
> 
> More later - morning quick read.
> 
> Best,
> Michael
>