Digital BW, The Print

Paul,

I've started a project designing a UT2-like inkset for the 
R1800/R1900.  The UT2 inkset you designed for the 1280 was fun to use 
and I miss its flexibility.  I've read through all the applicable 
white papers on your website and have some questions.  Thanks in 
advance for your help and all you contribute to this forum.

For now, I'm switching color and BW inks back and forth in the same 
printer.  Each inkset stays in the printer for at least a month or 
more and I may go to a dedicated printer in the future as budget 
allows.  I use MIS or IS for all inks, there are no OEM used inks in 
the printer.  I'm using QTR and have cut-and-pasted from the 3MK 
profiles you generated as the starting point.  I have also found a 
source of totally spongeless carts, so EB-6 inks are an option.

My configuration at this time (subject to change) is 3-MK, 2-PK, GO, 
R1800 blue (which is really purple), and a sepia slot.  I started 
with the R1800 red as the sepia ink as you suggested, but it wasn't 
what I was looking for.  After making color samples of all the inks I 
have, the UT2 sepia (yellow position) was the closest ink to what I 
want.  This is based on comparing the color samples to some old (late 
1800's and early 1900's) family photos.  However wanting the most fad 
resistant inks, I thought there may be a better way to make that 
ink.  I was thinking of mixing some MK, R1800 yellow and maybe some 
R1800 magenta.  Would these be good choices from a permanence 
viewpoint?  Is there a ratio you'd recommend as a starting point to 
match the UT2 sepia?  Also, would MIS UC-base be good for dilution?  
If not, what would you recommend?

I am going to look into a LK position as well.  How does one part MK 
to four parts base sound?  In the future, I will probably also try 
R1800 cyan in place of the blue (purple).

I know I'm covering a lot of ground here, so thanks for your patience 
with this student of yours!

Bob

I can't say much about most of your post, but for inks for the R1800
I'd look at Epson K3 Yellow over R1800 yellow for convenience, cost,
and improved longevity over the image specialists product (according
to the Aardenburg tests).  

I use this with my R1800 and it works well.  You could probably do the
same with magenta and also get it from large format Epson carts (like
9800 carts).

Roger



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@...m, "Bob Marsolais"
<bob@...> wrote:

>
> Paul,
> 
> I've started a project designing a UT2-like inkset for the 
> R1800/R1900.  The UT2 inkset you designed for the 1280 was fun to use 
> and I miss its flexibility.  I've read through all the applicable 
> white papers on your website and have some questions.  Thanks in 
> advance for your help and all you contribute to this forum.
> 
> For now, I'm switching color and BW inks back and forth in the same 
> printer.  Each inkset stays in the printer for at least a month or 
> more and I may go to a dedicated printer in the future as budget 
> allows.  I use MIS or IS for all inks, there are no OEM used inks in 
> the printer.  I'm using QTR and have cut-and-pasted from the 3MK 
> profiles you generated as the starting point.  I have also found a 
> source of totally spongeless carts, so EB-6 inks are an option.
> 
> My configuration at this time (subject to change) is 3-MK, 2-PK, GO, 
> R1800 blue (which is really purple), and a sepia slot.  I started 
> with the R1800 red as the sepia ink as you suggested, but it wasn't 
> what I was looking for.  After making color samples of all the inks I 
> have, the UT2 sepia (yellow position) was the closest ink to what I 
> want.  This is based on comparing the color samples to some old (late 
> 1800's and early 1900's) family photos.  However wanting the most fad 
> resistant inks, I thought there may be a better way to make that 
> ink.  I was thinking of mixing some MK, R1800 yellow and maybe some 
> R1800 magenta.  Would these be good choices from a permanence 
> viewpoint?  Is there a ratio you'd recommend as a starting point to 
> match the UT2 sepia?  Also, would MIS UC-base be good for dilution?  
> If not, what would you recommend?
> 
> I am going to look into a LK position as well.  How does one part MK 
> to four parts base sound?  In the future, I will probably also try 
> R1800 cyan in place of the blue (purple).
> 
> I know I'm covering a lot of ground here, so thanks for your patience 
> with this student of yours!
> 
> Bob
>

Hi Bob,


> I've started a project designing a UT2-like inkset for the 
> R1800/R1900.  The UT2 inkset you designed for the 1280 was
> fun to use and I miss its flexibility.  

The UT14 is what I see as the UT2 replacement.  It comes with Glop 
instead of sepia, but that is easy to change.  

> For now, I'm switching color and BW inks back and forth in the same 
> printer.  Each inkset stays in the printer for at least a month or 
> more and I may go to a dedicated printer in the future as budget 
> allows.  I use MIS or IS for all inks, there are no OEM used inks 
in 
> the printer.  I'm using QTR and have cut-and-pasted from the 3MK 
> profiles you generated as the starting point.  I have also found a 
> source of totally spongeless carts, so EB-6 inks are an option.
> 
> My configuration at this time (subject to change) is 3-MK, 
> 2-PK, 

I'd recommend MIS K4-PK.  It's a little lighter load than the older 
PK and it works a bit better in the 1800.

> GO, 
> R1800 blue (which is really purple), and a sepia slot.  I started 
> with the R1800 red as the sepia ink as you suggested, but it wasn't 
> what I was looking for.  

> After making color samples of all the inks I 
> have, the UT2 sepia (yellow position) was the closest ink to what I 
> want.  This is based on comparing the color samples to some old 
> (late 1800's and early 1900's) family photos. 

I too surveyed old photos to see how to mix the sepia.  There is a 
great variety of such tones, but I thought the UT2/7 sepia made a 
nice compromise.

> However wanting the most fad 
> resistant inks, I thought there may be a better way to make that 
> ink. 

Yes, that's one reason it's not in UT14.

> I was thinking of mixing some MK, R1800 yellow and maybe some 
> R1800 magenta.  Would these be good choices from a permanence 
> viewpoint?

It's cheaper to buy 7600 carts of Y and M.  Judging by Wilhelm, HP 
and Canon might even be better sources of pigments, but I have never 
done any mixing with the colors from either.  (Both HP and Canon 
blacks seem to be OK in C6 base for at least the short periods I've 
worked with them.)

>  Is there a ratio you'd recommend as a starting point to 
> match the UT2 sepia?

I mixed a red from Y and M at 1:1.  Epson pigments are slightly 
different than MIS, so the ratios may need some adjustment.  Then my 
original formula was to mix this red with UT7-C (MIS's darkest 
midtone carbon gray).  I used about 16% red to 84% UT7-C.

>  Also, would MIS UC-base be good for dilution?  
  
No, use MIS Glop if you want to have glossy printing with the minimum 
of bronzing. 

> 
> I am going to look into a LK position as well.  
> How does one part MK to four parts base sound?

Do you want to make a matte only inkset?  I assumed from above that 
you wanted glossy compatibility.  If so, don't use MK as a starting 
point.  Use PK, LK, or some of the MIS grays, such as UT7-C.

If you do dilute MK to make an LK, it depends on the load of the MK.  
Then it also depends on where you measure the density -- the curves 
are not linear or congruous.  The C6 LK is about 16.7% Eboni, and is 
a bit light.  18% Eboni is closer.

Good luck with the project.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Paul and Roger, thanks for your responses.

 

Paul, I guess I was thinking so much along the lines of the 1800 and 3MK
that I forgot about the UT14 inks.  I read your paper on them and I am going
to modify my approach.

 

> I'd recommend MIS K4-PK.  It's a little lighter load than the older

> PK and it works a bit better in the 1800. 


Do you know how MIS K4-PK compares to their PK for the 1800.  Do the same
comments apply?

 

I think I'm a bit confused over the definition of carbon.  I thought
"carbon" was synonomous with matte/eboni black and anything glossy or color
was some sort of pigment, but not carbon.  Since the UT-14 LK and PK inks
are carbon and glossy compatible, I guess I'm wrong.

 

If I put the six UT-14 inks in the 1800, that leaves me with two more slots.
If one is used for sepia, what would you recommend for the other?  Would the
1800's tendancy to band influence this choice?

 

Thanks again!

 

Bob

 



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

I think the MIS K4 PK is the same as the R1800 PK and different than
the older MISPRO PK or the UTR2 one I use.  I think the PKs are carbon
blended with color inks to make them more neutral and that diluted
carbon looks warm- Paul could tell you more.

The Epson OEM R2400 PK appears to be the same as R1800 OEM PK (I can't
tell any difference in my color prints and use them interchangeably).

I'm also interested in your full ink approach to the R1800 as I'm not
terribly happy with the 3MK output and am not sure if the coarseness
of the prints is inherent to this approach (versus my UTR2 prints) or
due to shortcomings in the ability of my R1800 to print perfectly in
three channels (PK and MK look good- Y is next best but marginal).

Being able to also print on glossy papers would be a nice bonus.
Do let us know how your experiments progress.

Roger


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Marsolais"
<bob@...> wrote:
>
> Paul and Roger, thanks for your responses.
> 
>  
> 
> Paul, I guess I was thinking so much along the lines of the 1800 and 3MK
> that I forgot about the UT14 inks.  I read your paper on them and I
am going
> to modify my approach.
> 
>  
> 
> > I'd recommend MIS K4-PK.  It's a little lighter load than the older
> 
> > PK and it works a bit better in the 1800. 
> 
> 
> Do you know how MIS K4-PK compares to their PK for the 1800.  Do the
same
> comments apply?
> 
>  
> 
> I think I'm a bit confused over the definition of carbon.  I thought
> "carbon" was synonymous with matte/eboni black and anything glossy
or color
> was some sort of pigment, but not carbon.  Since the UT-14 LK and PK
inks
> are carbon and glossy compatible, I guess I'm wrong.
> 
>  
> 
> If I put the six UT-14 inks in the 1800, that leaves me with two
more slots.
> If one is used for sepia, what would you recommend for the other? 
Would the

> 1800's tendancy to band influence this choice?
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks again!
> 
>  
> 
> Bob
>

Bob,

>...
> I guess I was thinking so much along the lines of the 1800 
> and 3MK that I forgot about the UT14 inks.  I read your 
> paper on them and I am going to modify my approach.


> > I'd recommend MIS K4-PK.  It's a little lighter load 
> > than the older PK and it works a bit better in the 1800. 
> 
> 
> Do you know how MIS K4-PK compares to their PK for the 1800.  
> Do the same comments apply?

I think Roger is right; the 1800 PK is K4-PK.  It's 100% carbon, not 
a blended, neutralized PK.

 
> I think I'm a bit confused over the definition of carbon.  
> I thought "carbon" was synonomous with matte/eboni black 
> and anything glossy or color was some sort of pigment, 
> but not carbon.  Since the UT-14 LK and PK inks
> are carbon and glossy compatible, I guess I'm wrong.

I think the main thing that has distinguished the MK from PK in the 
past has been the nature of the coatings.  The glossy ones have much 
more -- like an acrylic coating or glop binder.  The MKs do not use 
this type of coating, althoug they all have some sort of surfactant 
surrounding them.  So, gloss v. matte does not determine whether a 
black is "100%" carbon or not.

I put the "100%" in quotes because all of these pigments have at a 
minimum a surfactant surrounding them, perhaps in addition to binder 
or other coating.  I don't consider these to be a significant part of 
the image forming substance, but I do suspect they have a minimal 
affect on image tone.  When I've added more surfactants, the carbon 
inks I've mixed often become slightly warmer.  In my latest quick and 
dirty fade test, the most stable pigments I know of actually seemed 
to cool down a bit, which, perhpas, could be these warm 
surfactants "burning off."

MIS MK, PK, LK, and, from what I can tell, Epson MK, K2 PK and LK are 
all "100%" carbon in that I think they do not have either color 
pigments or dyes added.  Many of the OEMs (perhpas all now) 
are "shading" or "toning" their carbon pigments.  I think all of the 
latest Epson, Canon and HP PKs and greys have some form of colorant 
in them besides carbon (not sure Canon has any carbon in it).  These 
OEMs are not telling us what they are doing, however.  So, we're sort 
of left guessing. I suspect, however, that these shaded, toned or 
blended carbon inks will ultimately have their tones drift more than 
100% carbon, but there is not easy way to know.  Wilhelm does not 
publish the data about tone shifts, as far as I know.  I'd take me a 
long time to nail it down, and I'm not sure I'm going to bother.

> If I put the six UT-14 inks in the 1800, that leaves me with 
> two more slots.

> If one is used for sepia, what would you recommend for the other?
>  Would the 1800's tendancy to band influence this choice?

It might, but you might wait until you see how the system works -- 
where banding might show up.

Then again, you could try something interesting like stick in some HP 
grey to see how it performs in a mixed system.  

I assume you going to use QTR exclusively for printing.

Have fun.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Gents,

 

One of my goals is to use MIS 1800 inks as much as possible.  Otherwise,
with the exception of the blacks, they don't get used up real fast and I
want to avoid settling and the possible mildew issues as inks get older.
With the printer path I've taken, I currently have partially filled bottles
of 16 different inks laying around.  Paul, I suspect you have several times
more at your place!

 

Here is the ink combination I think I'll try next, in the order they appear
in the 1800.  By the way, I suspect the end results of this experiment
should transfer directly to the 1900.  And yes, I am printing exclusively
with QTR.  I've had a lot of fun using QTR.  Once you get the hang of it, it
gives you a tremendous amount of flexibility.  For $50, it's the best buy
going.

 

Y - Sepia Mix or Cool Mix

M - MK

C - PK

MK - MK

PK - PK

R - MK

B - PK

GO - GO

 

For the sepia base, I'll start with the MIS Y and M at 1:1 to make a red
base.   For the UT7-C component, I'll try PK and GO.  Any suggestions for
the PK/GO mix ratio?  For the Cool Mix (not as important to me), maybe C and
B at 1:1 with the same PK and GO as the sepia.  Also, in order to free up
another colorant slot if needed, I may try removing a MK and use PK for
matte in its place.  I know the PK does not have the D-max of MK on matte
paper, but we'll see what happens.  This move would be to counter any
banding that may show up when a color slot is used.  Thinking about it, I
could swap either a PK or MK depending on what media is used.

 

So many choices, so few slots!

 

Thanks, Paul and Roger, for your thoughts.  This is fun!

 

Bob

 



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

"Bob Marsolais" <bob@...> wrote:
>
...
> I currently have partially filled bottles
...

If you have UT2 inks still, you have the sepia and UT-C (it was the 
dark warm gray midtone in UT2 -- UT2-M).

 
> Here is the ink combination I think I'll try next, ...

> I am printing exclusively with QTR.  
 
> Y - Sepia Mix or Cool Mix
> 
> M - MK
> 
> C - PK
> 
> MK - MK
> 
> PK - PK
> 
> R - MK
> 
> B - PK
> 
> GO - GO
> 

So, you're going with the warm PK for a 3-PK glossy.  You'll need a 
fairly strong cool toner if you want to produce a neutral print with 
3 PKs.

 
> For the sepia base, I'll start with the MIS Y and M at 1:1 
> to make a red base.   
> For the UT7-C component, I'll try PK and GO.  Any suggestions for
> the PK/GO mix ratio?

For simplicity, you could use a 50% dilution (1:1).  That would be 
just a bit denser than the UT2/7.


>  For the Cool Mix (not as important to me), maybe C and
> B at 1:1 with the same PK and GO as the sepia.

That would be very cyan.  Try 70% MIS R800 Blue, 30% cyan.


>  Also, in order to free up another colorant slot if needed, 
> I may try removing a MK and use PK for matte in its place.

That would make the image warmer.

>  I know the PK does not have the D-max of MK on matte
> paper, 

You could shift to 2 Ebonis for the 100% black end and have the PK 
turned off at that point.

...
>  
> 
> So many choices ...

True.

Have fun.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" 
<pr_roark@...> wrote:
>
> "Bob Marsolais" <bob@> wrote:
> >

Hi Bob and Paul, I am interested in this thread as I am going through a 
similar exercise at the moment. My objective is a smooth printing BW 
neutral (but tonable from cool to warm) with good archival qualities 
(but not the driving objective).

I have an R1800 for the project and am using MIS inks. Two things I 
found out really quickly is the R1800's propensity for banding 
(although this is only with MIS rather than OEM inks) and the MIS inks 
propensity to clog. These two factors have nearly driven me to abandon 
the project but I have continued to an extent.

To cut a long story short, I am finding that I am getting good results 
from a full color inkset, profiled with COlorvision's extended gray 
patches and then given a second pass of full GLOP. 

With all the color that has to be mixed or fired in a BW print to 
achieve neutrality with PK, is there any point in messing about 
further. This comment applies to neutral PK prints only. I understand 
these comments are not relevant to the 3MK setup which is matt only and 
is has ultimate archival properties as its main driver. 

regards

Alistair Owens

Alistair Owens "hp9180profile" <owens@...> wrote:


>... I am going through a similar exercise at the moment. 
> My objective is a smooth printing BW 
> neutral (but tonable from cool to warm) with good 
> archival qualities (but not the driving objective).
 
> I have an R1800 for the project and am using MIS inks. Two things I 
> found out really quickly is the R1800's propensity for banding 
> (although this is only with MIS rather than OEM inks) and the 
> MIS inks propensity to clog. These two factors have nearly 
> driven me to abandon the project but I have continued to an extent.

I'm sort of in the same boat.  I just don't think the 1800 is worth 
the effort.  The 1400 is so good with MIS ink -- no banding or 
clogging with at least mine -- that I have mothballed the 1800.  


>  I am finding that I am getting good results 
> from a full color inkset, profiled with COlorvision's extended gray 
> patches and then given a second pass of full GLOP.

This RGB, Epson driver approach probably results in a mostly-color-
inks print image, which would not be something I'd be comfortable 
with for long term stability.

I assume people have tried to do a QTR approach with just the MK, 
toned with C & M to reach neutral. This would be more stable, but I'm 
not sure if the 1800 can do so smoothly.  I frankly doubt it.

 
> With all the color that has to be mixed or fired in a BW print to 
> achieve neutrality with PK, is there any point in messing about 
> further.

Getting the color inks to a minimum is a worthy cause.  If you're 
happy with what you're seeing and not concerned with long term tonal 
stability, there may be no reason to do any more.


For those who do want a more carbon rich print, the PK warmth is 
surely a pain.  One can spray an Eboni-on-glossy paper print and 
achieve neutrality, but spraying is a pain also.

That is what makes the HP grays interesting.  They may have lots of 
color in them also, but the Wilhelm tests of HP colors are 
impressive.  The net result may be the most stable neutral glossy 
approach.  (It's also a more known pigment -- supported by tests.)  
It dilutes in the generic materials, but it too will band in the 
1800.  So, once again, I run into that 1800 issues.  I may pull the 
2200 into action for testing an HP dilution approach.  Achieving this 
for large format is my ultimate goal anyway, so messing with the 1.5 
pl 1800 is just not a very suitable platform for me.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Paul,

I have been using Eboni 6 on my Epson 1400 and the results have been looking
very good. When I print on Premier Art Smooth BW the tone is very neutral
and the blacks are a good looking black.  When I use other papers the tone
becomes much warmer than I would prefer. I have tried some of the other
recommended papers but none come close to the Premier Art for cool tones.

 

Is there some other ink that could be mixed with one or more of the 6 Eboni
inks that would produce a cooler image on a wider variety of papers? 

 

I have a set of  UT 14 inks. Are these compatible with Eboni 6 and could
they be mixed in to make the ink cooler? 

 

I like the tonal smoothness and look of the highlights using  the 6 ink
Eboni  more than the UT 14.

 

Thanks,

Gary W.  



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

I must say the 1800 has been a rather labor intensive printer for me also.
I find that once I get it printing good, as long as I print frequently
enough, it stays working.  However, I have to go back to ground zero almost
every time I change carts.  That is why I use self-resetting carts so I
don't have to take them out of the printer to refill.

 

I anticipate I'll have the same problems with this experiment.  I have only
one printer, so I can't dedicate it to B&W and am currently switching it
back and forth between color inks and the UT18 experiment.

 

Bob

 



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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Bob Marsolais" 
<bob@...> wrote:
>
> I find that once I get it printing good, as long as I print frequently
> enough, it stays working.  However, I have to go back to ground zero 
almost
> every time I change carts.  That is why I use self-resetting carts so 
I
> don't have to take them out of the printer to refill.
> Bob
> 
Ditto that Bob, changing carts and if I leave the printer unused for a 
few days are usually the sources of my clogs (or airlocks or whatever 
they are).

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark" 
<pr_roark@...> wrote:
 
> 
> I just don't think the 1800 is worth 
> the effort.  The 1400 is so good with MIS ink -- no banding or 
> clogging with at least mine -- that I have mothballed the 1800.  
> 
I should probably abandon the 1800 and get a 1400. I am a bit 
obstinate though and like to bang on with these things until all hope 
is lost. It is often said the last thing to be abandoned is hope. 
Perhaps in this instance I should give premature abandonment a try.  



 
> This RGB, Epson driver approach probably results in a mostly-color-
> inks print image, which would not be something I'd be comfortable 
> with for long term stability.
> 
You are right Paul, and I am not comfortable with it either. It is 
not my end point. Rather where I have currently got to in the journey.


> I assume people have tried to do a QTR approach with just the MK, 
> toned with C & M to reach neutral. This would be more stable, but 
I'm 
> not sure if the 1800 can do so smoothly.  I frankly doubt it.
>
Actually I am finding PK to be quite smooth on my particular printer. 
I am currently trialling this approach. It is basically the same as I 
have used on the 2200 with QTR and OEM inks but without the LK. I am 
using the PK4 MIS ink. Did I read you saying somewhere that this is a 
pure carbon ink? I am thinking along the lines of dilutions of PK 
with C & M (maybe diluted) used to cool it all down.

 
 
> Getting the color inks to a minimum is a worthy cause.  If you're 
> happy with what you're seeing and not concerned with long term 
tonal 
> stability, there may be no reason to do any more.
> 
> 
> For those who do want a more carbon rich print, the PK warmth is 
> surely a pain.  One can spray an Eboni-on-glossy paper print and 
> achieve neutrality, but spraying is a pain also.

That is surely an option. I have tried a second pass to overcoat 
Eboni with GLOP but the results where disappointing - both in terms 
of dmax and GD. I have seen other second-pass type clear coatings 
that I will look at. I need to try the spray types too.


> 
> That is what makes the HP grays interesting.  They may have lots of 
> color in them also, but the Wilhelm tests of HP colors are 
> impressive.  The net result may be the most stable neutral glossy 
> approach.  (It's also a more known pigment -- supported by tests.)  
> It dilutes in the generic materials, but it too will band in the 
> 1800.  So, once again, I run into that 1800 issues.  I may pull the 
> 2200 into action for testing an HP dilution approach.  Achieving 
this 
> for large format is my ultimate goal anyway, so messing with the 
1.5 
> pl 1800 is just not a very suitable platform for me.

The HP grey with a second pass of MIS GLOP may be interesting (might 
be a good use for the R1800) I had a B9180 but the GD in BW (glossy) 
mode was pretty bad. That ink needs GLOP which of course the larger 
HP machines have. Maybe I should have kept the B9180 and kept the 
R1800 loaded with MIS GlOP for 2nd pass overcoating!

As always, thanks for your very helpful comments and guidance in 
these matters.

Alistair Owens

Gary Wagner" wrote:

> I have been using Eboni 6 on my Epson 1400 and the results 
> have been looking very good. When I print on Premier Art 
> Smooth BW the tone is very neutral and the blacks are a 
> good looking black.  

> When I use other papers the tone becomes much warmer than 
> I would prefer. I have tried some of the other
> recommended papers but none come close to the Premier Art 
> for cool tones.

Yes, that paper with Eboni-6 is the best exception to the general 
rule that carbon prints warm.  The old Brightcube Eclipse Satine 
(still available from 
http://store.ultrafineonline.com/brinkjetpa.html ) is close.  I've 
mentioned a few others at 
http://store.ultrafineonline.com/brinkjetpa.html 

> Is there some other ink that could be mixed with one or 
> more of the 6 Eboni inks that would produce a cooler image 
> on a wider variety of papers? 

Neutral 100% carbon is tough to achieve.  Eboni-6 base does not seem 
to be compatible with the new glossy bases.  Whether you can have 
some carts of each in the printer at the same time is something I 
have not tried.

(I'll probably make an HP based neutral inkset for the older 
printers, but I doubt it'll run well in the 1.5 pl printers.)


> I have a set of  UT 14 inks. Are these compatible with Eboni 6 
> and could they be mixed in to make the ink cooler? 

UT14 is the more flexible inkset for the 1400 that gives you a wide 
range of tones, in addition to glossy or matte paper printing without 
changing any inks.  

If you wanted to try a combination, you could try a couple things.  
First, the UT14 LC is a cool ink that could be substitued into the 
Eboni-6 inkset.  If you know how to use QTR, I'd use it as a toner 
and probably replace one of the middle (say M) position Eboni-6 inks.

If you're only going to use the Epson driver, the Y position is the 
one that is easiest to control via curves, but I'd want to keep the 2 
lightest Eboni-6 inks, so you'll have some cart-chip switching and 
curves to make.
 
> I like the tonal smoothness and look of the highlights using  
> the 6 ink Eboni  more than the UT 14.

A second approach you could try is to just replace the UT14 Y (glop) 
with a very light ink, maybe even the Eboni-6 Y.  You'll still need 
to make some curves or a QTR profile that puts a lot of that in the 
highlights.  That's not too hard to do if you're accustomed to using 
curves for that purpose.  You could still use Create ICC-RGB to 
linearize the system and "color manage" the output.

If the Eboni-6 and UT14 inks are not compatible on the pad, you'll 
notice nuisance minor clogs as clumps stick to the head.  These are 
usually not that serious, but if that starts to occur, I'd stop the 
experiment.

Let us know how it works out.  


Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

"hp9180profile" <owens@...> wrote:
>
...
> I am finding PK to be quite smooth on my particular printer. 
> ... I am using the PK4 MIS ink. 
> Did I read you saying somewhere that this is a 
> pure carbon ink?

Yes, that is what I'm told and consistent with my fade tests.

> I am thinking along the lines of dilutions of PK 
> with C & M (maybe diluted) used to cool it all down.

That's basically what UT14 is.  The cool inks are based on MIS PK as 
well as C and R800 Blue (which may be a bit more stable than the MIS 
M).



> ... I have tried a second pass to overcoat 
> Eboni with GLOP but the results where disappointing ...

If you include a PK for the deep shadows and 100% black position, 
then the results can be much better.  
See http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/3MK-Glossy.pdf

I, frankly, don't like any of the "glops" or water-based coatings 
very much.  They do not harden the way a solvent-based clear coat 
does.  So, for the final, I'd rather use Print Shield.

...
> The HP grey with a second pass of MIS GLOP may be interesting 
>... I had a B9180 but the GD in BW (glossy) 
> mode was pretty bad. That ink needs GLOP which ...

I noticed that also.  

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

"Gary Wagner" <gcwagner@...> wrote:


> ... Eboni 6 on my Epson 1400 ...
> Premier Art Smooth BW the tone is very neutral ...
> When I use other papers the tone
> becomes much warmer than I would prefer. ...

I should add that the warmth with other papers is one reason I'm 
using the 3Y3K setup on my 1400.  My favorite paper is the un-
brightened Premier Art Smooth 325.  With it and the 3MK approach on 
the 1400, it's what I call perfectly neutral.  The 3Y gives ultra-
smooth highlights and a bit of warmth.  So, I balance the smoothness 
and warmth as needed for the particular image with QTR sliders, using 
2 profiles -- one 3MK and one 3Y-K.

See the tones of the two profiles here:
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/1400-3Y-3MK-PA325.jpg

The QTR sliders simply allow me to dial in the tone-smoothness needed.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Paul,

Thanks for the information. I am working with Eboni 6 on my 1400 but am
looking to forward to what ink to use on my next printer which I believe
will be an Epson 7600. I also have a 3800 Epson which I really like and am
using Cone K7 Selenium on and love the tone and smoothness but find the Dmax
of the black to be less that Eboni 6 and just not as black as I would like.
I feel the 1.7+ dmax of  Eboni 6 is just bearly acceptable and the 1.5+ dmax
of K7 Selenium having great color, tonal range but the blacks just seem to
be weaker than I would like. It would be really great if there was a 6 ink
set that was cool in tone and had a dmax of 2.0 or above on matte paper. It
seems I may be asking for too much today. Thanks for the advice and I will
keep working on this issue. Do you have any other suggestion on finding the
perfect ink?

Thanks,

Gary Wagner

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of pr_roark
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 10:40 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Eboni 6 1400 tone

 

"Gary Wagner" <gcwagner@...> wrote:

> ... Eboni 6 on my Epson 1400 ...
> Premier Art Smooth BW the tone is very neutral ...
> When I use other papers the tone
> becomes much warmer than I would prefer. ...

I should add that the warmth with other papers is one reason I'm 
using the 3Y3K setup on my 1400. My favorite paper is the un-
brightened Premier Art Smooth 325. With it and the 3MK approach on 
the 1400, it's what I call perfectly neutral. The 3Y gives ultra-
smooth highlights and a bit of warmth. So, I balance the smoothness 
and warmth as needed for the particular image with QTR sliders, using 
2 profiles -- one 3MK and one 3Y-K.

See the tones of the two profiles here:
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/1400-3Y-3MK-PA325.jpg

The QTR sliders simply allow me to dial in the tone-smoothness needed.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

 



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

Paul,

Is there more detail and profiles available for 3Y3k? Do I use E6 yellow is
what cartridges and  E6 black in what cartridges on my 1400? 

 

Does this ink combination produce a cooler tone on a variety of matte
papers? 

 

Do you have any profiles that I could try for some papers? 

 

Thanks for your help.

Gary Wagner

From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of pr_roark
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 10:40 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Eboni 6 1400 tone

 

"Gary Wagner" <gcwagner@...> wrote:

> ... Eboni 6 on my Epson 1400 ...
> Premier Art Smooth BW the tone is very neutral ...
> When I use other papers the tone
> becomes much warmer than I would prefer. ...

I should add that the warmth with other papers is one reason I'm 
using the 3Y3K setup on my 1400. My favorite paper is the un-
brightened Premier Art Smooth 325. With it and the 3MK approach on 
the 1400, it's what I call perfectly neutral. The 3Y gives ultra-
smooth highlights and a bit of warmth. So, I balance the smoothness 
and warmth as needed for the particular image with QTR sliders, using 
2 profiles -- one 3MK and one 3Y-K.

See the tones of the two profiles here:
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/1400-3Y-3MK-PA325.jpg

The QTR sliders simply allow me to dial in the tone-smoothness needed.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

 



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

There some profiles for the Eboni-6 Y-K options at 
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/1400-YK.zip

If you have the full Eb6 inkset in the printer, just use one of the 
YK profiles -- they only use one of each.  For example, the PA205-Y-K-
13x19.qidf profile, I think, was done when I had the full inkset 
installed.  It won't be optimized for another system, but you'll be 
able to see the tones and detail.

There are also 1400 black only profile in the QTR 1400-MIS folder 
that you can use in a 50-50 or other mix of profiles to see the tones 
and smoothness.

Keep in mind that one of my goals with the setup was to retain the 
100% carbon status. 

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Wagner" 
<gcwagner@...> wrote:
>
> Paul,
> 
> Is there more detail and profiles available for 3Y3k? Do I use E6 
yellow is
> what cartridges and  E6 black in what cartridges on my 1400? 
> 
>  
> 
> Does this ink combination produce a cooler tone on a variety of 
matte
> papers? 
> 
>  
> 
> Do you have any profiles that I could try for some papers? 
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks for your help.
> 
> Gary Wagner
> 
>  
> 
> From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
pr_roark
> Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 10:40 AM
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Eboni 6 1400 tone
> 
>  
> 
> "Gary Wagner" <gcwagner@> wrote:
> 
> > ... Eboni 6 on my Epson 1400 ...
> > Premier Art Smooth BW the tone is very neutral ...
> > When I use other papers the tone
> > becomes much warmer than I would prefer. ...
> 
> I should add that the warmth with other papers is one reason I'm 
> using the 3Y3K setup on my 1400. My favorite paper is the un-
> brightened Premier Art Smooth 325. With it and the 3MK approach on 
> the 1400, it's what I call perfectly neutral. The 3Y gives ultra-
> smooth highlights and a bit of warmth. So, I balance the smoothness 
> and warmth as needed for the particular image with QTR sliders, 
using 
> 2 profiles -- one 3MK and one 3Y-K.
> 
> See the tones of the two profiles here:
> http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/1400-3Y-3MK-PA325.jpg
> 
> The QTR sliders simply allow me to dial in the tone-smoothness 
needed.

> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Paul and all,

Sorry for the delay in continuing this tread. 

After spending some time reviewing how this thread has developed, 
I've come to the conclusion that the 1800 offers another possibility: 
combine UT14 and 3MK in the same printer.  Since my 1800 seems to 
have only barely noticeable banding on the MK channel, I could put 
eboni in the 7th and 8th channels and have the full UT14 inkset as 
well as the 3MK option installed at the same time.  The warm and cool 
inks would each have 2 channels.  Based on what I'm seeing, that may 
be enough to avoid banding in cool and warm prints.  The only thing 
this combination would not do is sepia.  Also I would only need to 
buy two new inks, the C and M UT14 inks since the C ink is used for 
LC amd M is used for LM.  The 1800 already uses glop and I am using 
eboni as the matte black.

Paul, in a previous post to this thread, you said sepia ink could be 
made using the UT-C and a red made from 1:1 Y:M.  (You also mentioned 
the MIS Y and M are slightly different than Epson's, so some 
adjustment may be needed).  Can UT-C be made from the MIS's R1800 
inks?  While I still have some UT-C, it is old and there is not a 
much left.

Thanks again for your help.

Hi Bob,

 
> I've come to the conclusion that the 1800 offers another 
> possibility: 
> combine UT14 and 3MK in the same printer.  

>... I could put eboni in the 7th and 8th channels and have 
> the full UT14 inkset as well as the 3MK option installed 
> at the same time.  The warm and cool 
> inks would each have 2 channels... 

>  I would only need to buy two new inks, the C and M UT14 
> inks since the C ink is used for LC amd M is used for LM.

You mean you'd dilute the C and M for the lighter inks?

> The 1800 already uses glop and I am using 
> eboni as the matte black.

> Paul, in a previous post to this thread, you said sepia 
> ink could be made using the UT-C 

Diluted to 30% UT-C (UT-LC), 84%

> and a red made from 1:1 Y:M.

16%


> (You also mentioned the MIS Y and M are slightly different 
> than Epson's, so some adjustment may be needed).  

> Can UT-C be made from the MIS's R1800 inks? 

I didn't work from the k4-PK that I think is used in the 1800.   I 
think the dilute carbon would be about 20% of the K4-PK.

Let us know how it works.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

> You mean you'd dilute the C and M for the lighter inks?

No.  My understanding from your UT14 writeup is that UT14-C and UT14-
LC are the same ink, and the same for UT14-M and UT14-LM.  Neither 
the UT14-C or M would be diluted before use as UT14-LC or UT14-LM.  
Did I understand your writeup correctly?

> 
> > Paul, in a previous post to this thread, you said sepia 
> > ink could be made using the UT-C 
>
> Diluted to 30% UT-C (UT-LC), 84%
> 
> > and a red made from 1:1 Y:M.
> 
> 16%
> 
> 
> > (You also mentioned the MIS Y and M are slightly different 
> > than Epson's, so some adjustment may be needed).  
> 
> > Can UT-C be made from the MIS's R1800 inks? 
> 
> I didn't work from the k4-PK that I think is used in the 1800.   I 
> think the dilute carbon would be about 20% of the K4-PK.

Sounds good.  I'll give that a try.  I realize K4-PK is definitely on 
the warm side, but since I'm going for a sepia look, this might 
actually help by requiring less Y and M.
 
> Let us know how it works.

Shall do.

Bob

Bob,


> ... My understanding from your UT14 writeup is that UT14-C 
> and UT14-LC are the same ink, and the same for UT14-M and 
> UT14-LM.  

No, the light versions use the normal 30% dark ink to 70% base (Glop).

UT14 C and M are actually PKs -- one cool one warm (K4-PK).

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Paul,
 
> No, the light versions use the normal 30% dark ink to 70% base (Glop).
> UT14 C and M are actually PKs -- one cool one warm (K4-PK).

I'm glad you asked!  I'll dilute the UT-C and UT-M before I use them 
for UT-LC and UT-LM.

Bob

Bob,

> ...  I have also found a source of totally spongeless carts, ...

Do these carts also not leak?  The cleaning cycles needed to get the 
ones I'm using going is wasting too much ink and printer life.

What is the URL of the supplier?

Thanks,

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

> Paul wrote...
> 
> Do these carts also not leak?  The cleaning cycles needed to get the 
> ones I'm using going is wasting too much ink and printer life.
> 
> What is the URL of the supplier?
> 
Paul,

So far, I have not had any leaky valves out of about 20 carts. 
However, I am not sure they seat correctly every time.  A couple of
times it seems they leaked after installation, but the problem has
aways been solved by reseating the cart.  Overall, my experience is
they are at least as good as MIS's carts.  Sometimes 1 out of every 4
or 5 MIS carts had leaky valves.

Another advantage - $26/set of 8 carts with autoresetting chips.

The URL is www.inkjetcarts.us.

Bob

This weekend I was experimenting with various mixes to produce a more
colorfast UT2-Y (sepia).  I found the following mixture to give me the
color sepia I like:

  20% (3:2 of MISPRO-M:MISPRO-Y)
  80% (4:1 of R800-Glop:R800-PK)

The mix is very close in color to UT2-Y only SLIGHTLY less magenta
tint and SLIGHTLY more brown tint which I like.

However, after shaking the mixture for about 30 seconds and watching
the bubbles breakdown before loading a cart, I noticed that the
individual colors seemed to be more obvious on the sides of the bottle
that with UT2-Y after shaking.  (The bottles for the two inks are
different plastics).  It made me wonder if there may be any material
incompatibilities in this mixture.  I don't recall seeing any
mentioned on the forum, but I'd thought I'd ask before loading it in
my printer.  Does anyone know of any incompatibilities in the above
mixture?  Paul, is it correct to assume you've mixed these families
before and not had any unusual problems?

Bob

Bob,

> ...  I found the 
> following mixture to give me the color sepia I like:
> 
>   20% (3:2 of MISPRO-M:MISPRO-Y)
>   80% (4:1 of R800-Glop:R800-PK)

... 
> However, after shaking the mixture for about 30 seconds and watching
> the bubbles breakdown before loading a cart, I noticed that the
> individual colors seemed to be more obvious on the sides of the 
> bottle than with UT2-Y after shaking.  
> (The bottles for the two inks are different plastics). 

That could account for some of it.

> It made me wonder if there may be any material
> incompatibilities in this mixture. 

I think they are compatible.  The UT2/7 sepia is not that different.  
I believe MIS usually ran the formulas by the chemist at their 
supplier.  However, any mix of more than one type of pigment is more 
likely going to show some signs of separation, but that is more of a 
long run problem.  
...
> Paul, is it correct to assume you've mixed these families
> before and not had any unusual problems?

It's no secret that I didn't like the performance of the sepia in 
terms of longevity.  Also, I think there was more clogging in that 
position with those inksets.  However, I don't know if that was 
because of the mix or that people were not using it.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com