Digital BW, The Print

By the way, I just printed my Disney-1 image --
http://paulroark.com/Disney-1.jpg -- using the old 7500, Eboni-6, and Arches Hot Press, Bright White watercolor paper.  The 16x20 image is hanging behind me now next to a copy of the Ninilchick Fishing Boat --
http://www.paulroark.com/Ninilchick-Boat.html .  These are both at 16x20.  A 16x20 silver print (medium format Tmax 100) is also hanging near them.

I was most interested in the Disney Concert Hall image because it is so dependent on the deep blacks.  It works fine on Arches.

At viewing distance, the main differences I notice among these prints is the character of the light on them.  The halogen's whiter light really helps relative to warmer lights. 

The MF Tmax 100 Grain is a little courser and not as sharp as the 7500's big old dots.  But neither seriously detracts from the impact of the image.  It's an interesting question whether a smoother 7600 would be a net benefit if the 7600's smaller droplet also results in an increase in the Lab B by one unit.  I think for large format shooters who are used to really creamy smooth mid-tones, the 7600 would win.  (The highlights of the 7500 are smooth, it's the midtones shadows that show some graininess with my current profiles.)

At any rate, I really like working with this Arches (140 lb.) paper.  The blacks are not great, but it beats lots of lesser inkjet papers, and under glass in actual display, I doubt any viewer is going to be significantly affected by a dmax that is a hair below 1.60.  In fact, one viewer commented favorably on the Arches' fine paper texture in the black areas.

I think the 100% real thing -- carbon on cotton -- may be where I'm going to be happiest.  (Got to find small 3000 K CF floods.)

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Did you look here?

http://www.bulbman.com/index.php?main_page=product_bulb_info&cPath=12553_12561&products_id=17744

Mark
http://www.stillrivereditions.com

On Jun 13, 2009, at 7:34 PM, pr_roark wrote:

>  (Got to find small 3000 K CF floods.)
>
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com



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

These are only a CRI of 82.  There are higher CRI's for less money if you have track lights.
Tom Baker

--- On Sat, 6/13/09, Mark Savoia <mark@stillrivereditions.com> wrote:

From: Mark Savoia <mark@...m>
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Arches HP BW
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, June 13, 2009, 4:38 PM











 






    
            
            


      
      Did you look here?



http://www.bulbman. com/index. php?main_ page=product_ bulb_info& cPath=12553_ 12561&products_ id=17744



Mark

http://www.stillriv ereditions. com



On Jun 13, 2009, at 7:34 PM, pr_roark wrote:



>  (Got to find small 3000 K CF floods.)

>

> Paul

> www.PaulRoark. com



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




 

      

    
    
	
	 
	
	




	




	
	


	
	
	



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

Mark Savoia <mark@...> wrote:
>
> Did you look here?
> 
> http://www.bulbman.com/index.php?main_page=product_bulb_info&cPath=12553_12561&products_id=17744
> 
...

Thanks Mark.  That looks like a good source.  I doubt my usual Costco or Home Depot carry these.

I've noticed on the internet there are all sorts of CF floods that one does not see in the local stores.  

I tried CF floods in the gallery and the artists would not accept them.  I think the real issue was that they were more of a flood than spot, lighting the walls too much relative to the paintings.  I think the light quality was OK, but I'll either need to find more of a spot or get tracks that put the lights closer to the paintings.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Does anyone have any experience with PremierArt Alise or the Harmon FP 
MP paper?  Thoughts?

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

By the way, I have seen Paul's prints on the Arches and am wanting to head that way. I have tried some tests with my 2400 printer but haven't got things as smooth as I want yet but will continue to work at it. As Paul says, It's where I want to be "Carbon on Cotton" especially the idea of being able to wash the ink carrier's off the paper.

> By the way, I just printed my Disney-1 image --
> http://paulroark.com/Disney-1.jpg -- using the old 7500, Eboni-6, and Arches Hot Press, Bright White watercolor paper.  The 16x20 image is hanging behind me now next to a copy of the Ninilchick Fishing Boat --
> http://www.paulroark.com/Ninilchick-Boat.html .  These are both at 16x20.  A 16x20 silver print (medium format Tmax 100) is also hanging near them.
> 
> I was most interested in the Disney Concert Hall image because it is so dependent on the deep blacks.  It works fine on Arches.
> 
> At viewing distance, the main differences I notice among these prints is the character of the light on them.  The halogen's whiter light really helps relative to warmer lights. 
> 
> The MF Tmax 100 Grain is a little courser and not as sharp as the 7500's big old dots.  But neither seriously detracts from the impact of the image.  It's an interesting question whether a smoother 7600 would be a net benefit if the 7600's smaller droplet also results in an increase in the Lab B by one unit.  I think for large format shooters who are used to really creamy smooth mid-tones, the 7600 would win.  (The highlights of the 7500 are smooth, it's the midtones shadows that show some graininess with my current profiles.)
> 
> At any rate, I really like working with this Arches (140 lb.) paper.  The blacks are not great, but it beats lots of lesser inkjet papers, and under glass in actual display, I doubt any viewer is going to be significantly affected by a dmax that is a hair below 1.60.  In fact, one viewer commented favorably on the Arches' fine paper texture in the black areas.
> 
> I think the 100% real thing -- carbon on cotton -- may be where I'm going to be happiest.  (Got to find small 3000 K CF floods.)
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

Paul,
   I use SoLux MR-16 bulbs in my home gallery track lighting system.
http://solux.net/cgi-bin/tlistore/infopages/index.html

SoLux claims a CRI of 98.  The warmest bulbs they have are 3500K though.  They do go up to 4700K which bright and bluish.  I have seen them used in galleries and museums.

BertGF



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

>
> By the way, I just printed my Disney-1 image --
> http://paulroark.com/Disney-1.jpg -- using the old 7500, Eboni-6, and Arches Hot Press, Bright White watercolor paper.  The 16x20 image is hanging behind me now next to a copy of the Ninilchick Fishing Boat --
> http://www.paulroark.com/Ninilchick-Boat.html .  These are both at 16x20.  A 16x20 silver print (medium format Tmax 100) is also hanging near them.
> 
> I was most interested in the Disney Concert Hall image because it is so dependent on the deep blacks.  It works fine on Arches.
> 
> At viewing distance, the main differences I notice among these prints is the character of the light on them.  The halogen's whiter light really helps relative to warmer lights. 
> 
> The MF Tmax 100 Grain is a little courser and not as sharp as the 7500's big old dots.  But neither seriously detracts from the impact of the image.  It's an interesting question whether a smoother 7600 would be a net benefit if the 7600's smaller droplet also results in an increase in the Lab B by one unit.  I think for large format shooters who are used to really creamy smooth mid-tones, the 7600 would win.  (The highlights of the 7500 are smooth, it's the midtones shadows that show some graininess with my current profiles.)
> 
> At any rate, I really like working with this Arches (140 lb.) paper.  The blacks are not great, but it beats lots of lesser inkjet papers, and under glass in actual display, I doubt any viewer is going to be significantly affected by a dmax that is a hair below 1.60.  In fact, one viewer commented favorably on the Arches' fine paper texture in the black areas.
> 
> I think the 100% real thing -- carbon on cotton -- may be where I'm going to be happiest.  (Got to find small 3000 K CF floods.)
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
>

Tom,
Do you have a specific source for these -- true spot lights"?  J Vee

On Jun 13, 2009, at 6:35 PM, Tom Baker wrote:

>
>
> These are only a CRI of 82. Â There are higher CRI's for less money  
> if you have track lights.
> Tom Baker
>
> --- On Sat, 6/13/09, Mark Savoia <mark@stillrivereditions.com> wrote:
>
> From: Mark Savoia <mark@...>
> Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Arches HP BW
> To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, June 13, 2009, 4:38 PM
>
> Did you look here?
>
> http://www.bulbman. com/index. php?main_ page=product_ bulb_info&  
> cPath=12553_ 12561&products_ id=17744
>
> Mark
>
> http://www.stillriv ereditions. com
>
> On Jun 13, 2009, at 7:34 PM, pr_roark wrote:
>
> > (Got to find small 3000 K CF floods.)
>
> >
>
> > Paul
>
> > www.PaulRoark. com
>
> [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]

I have been using "off the shelf" watercolor papers with my Epsons for years with strong results.

Besides Arches I like the Fabriano Uno,( they recently changed the name) and Whatman's.

People really go for the deckled edges.

I have had success coating these papers with InkAid products to get that better black.
Golden Paints has a relatively new product line called Digital Ground
that may be even better than the InkAid, at least on metal.

Just thought I'd put in my 2 cents to encourage folks to experiment with these things.

J.Z.

"bertgf" <bertgf@...> wrote:
>
>
>    I use SoLux MR-16 bulbs in my home gallery track lighting system.
> http://solux.net/cgi-bin/tlistore/infopages/index.html
> ...


I think SoLux has about the best reputation for light quality.  In terms of efficiency (lumens/watt), however, I think they are about the same as standard halogen lights -- which are still hot wire technology.  (I hope someone sets me straight if I'm wrong here.)  

I'm hoping to find a more efficient light source not only for my home but also gallery.

LEDs are probably the future, but my impression is that their light quality is not close yet.  This may be changing, however.  One article I read indicated that even if their CRI is less, the lack of the CFL spikes gives them a better looking light.  I'm skeptical.  The spectrum graphs I've seen have a large spike in the blue region.

The best fluorescent lights, incuding CFL floods, seem to be a good combination of efficiency and light quality, althought there are still spikes in the spectrum.  The floods seem to spread the light so much (flood v. spot) that they appear to work best for art if they are quite close to the images.

I'll probably be buying several types of CFL floods for testing. 

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Not directly about printing, but of iterest to meany of us ...

This seller has quite a bit of photo equipment up on eBay ... 
Scanners, etc., as well as many non-photo items.

Beware.  He offer a "guarantee" on everything.  It's a total fraud!

And please spread the word on other photo groups.


Arthur Fink


     Arthur Fink Photography

     Ten New Island Avenue         . land 207.766.5722
     Peaks Island, Maine 04108     . cell 207.615.5722
     www.arthurfinkphoto.com    af@...

     Problems with my e-mail address?  My provider has
     been returning some mail as if it were spam!  You
     can address me at    arthurfinkphoto@...

Arthur, were you personally scammed?

Sarah

p.s. I am back in Chicago now. Oh, how I miss Maine!



--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Arthur Fink <af@...> wrote:

>
> Not directly about printing, but of iterest to meany of us ...
> 
> This seller has quite a bit of photo equipment up on eBay ... 
> Scanners, etc., as well as many non-photo items.
> 
> Beware.  He offer a "guarantee" on everything.  It's a total fraud!
> 
> And please spread the word on other photo groups.
> 
> 
> Arthur Fink
> 
> 
>      Arthur Fink Photography
> 
>      Ten New Island Avenue         . land 207.766.5722
>      Peaks Island, Maine 04108     . cell 207.615.5722
>      www.arthurfinkphoto.com    af@...
> 
>      Problems with my e-mail address?  My provider has
>      been returning some mail as if it were spam!  You
>      can address me at    arthurfinkphoto@...
>

At 12:41 AM 6/18/2009, Sarah Renkes wrote:

>Arthur, were you personally scammed?

Yes I was.  In my case it wasn't photo equipment, but an espresso 
machine.  Item was shipped to the wrong address, and arrived with the 
portofilter not working.  Seller claimed that "w/guarantee" meant 
just "not doa" -- e.g. that the unit would turn on and a light would 
go on.  He offered a refund if I returned it, but not for shipping 
both ways.  That cost would have been more than the amount of my 
claim, and I'd be returning a unit on which I'd spent several hours 
finally getting it to work.

Before the purchase I had correspondence with the seller in which he 
made sweeping claims for his "guarantee".

Most sellers I've dealt with on eBay have real integrity.  (Perhaps 
that's because I'm careful when I buy.)  When I find somebody who 
lacks integrity, I feel that they should be "outed" before they 
seduce more unsuspecting buyers.

Arthur

     Arthur Fink Photography

     Ten New Island Avenue         . land 207.766.5722
     Peaks Island, Maine 04108     . cell 207.615.5722
     www.arthurfinkphoto.com    af@...

     Problems with my e-mail address?  My provider has
     been returning some mail as if it were spam!  You
     can address me at    arthurfinkphoto@...

Arthur -
FYI -- You may not be aware of this, but since eBay changed their  
rules so that all payments
have to come through Paypal, the buyer has protection. You have at  
least 30 days (it may
be longer) to protest, and they will get your money back for you,  
even if they have to
remove it from the sellers bank account. It's a very good rule for  
buyers who are being
lied to, but a bit of a problem for ethical sellers who encounter  
dishonest buyers.
Best,
Clay Price



Arthur Fink wrote:
<<<Yes I was. In my case it wasn't photo equipment, but an espresso
machine. Item was shipped to the wrong address, and arrived with the
portofilter not working. Seller claimed that "w/guarantee" meant
just "not doa" -- e.g. that the unit would turn on and a light would
go on. He offered a refund if I returned it, but not for shipping
both ways. That cost would have been more than the amount of my
claim, and I'd be returning a unit on which I'd spent several hours
finally getting it to work.

Before the purchase I had correspondence with the seller in which he
made sweeping claims for his "guarantee"....>>>



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

Arthur -
FYI -- You may not be aware of this, but since eBay changed their  
rules so that all payments
have to come through Paypal, the buyer has protection. You have at  
least 30 days (it may
be longer) to protest, and they will get your money back for you,  
even if they have to
remove it from the sellers bank account. It's a very good rule for  
buyers who are being
lied to, but a bit of a problem for ethical sellers who encounter  
dishonest buyers.
Best,
Clay Price



Arthur Fink wrote:
<<<Yes I was. In my case it wasn't photo equipment, but an espresso
machine. Item was shipped to the wrong address, and arrived with the
portofilter not working. Seller claimed that "w/guarantee" meant
just "not doa" -- e.g. that the unit would turn on and a light would
go on. He offered a refund if I returned it, but not for shipping
both ways. That cost would have been more than the amount of my
claim, and I'd be returning a unit on which I'd spent several hours
finally getting it to work.

Before the purchase I had correspondence with the seller in which he
made sweeping claims for his "guarantee"....>>>



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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Arthur Fink <af@...> wrote:
>
> Not directly about printing, but of iterest to meany of us ...
> 
> This seller has quite a bit of photo equipment up on eBay ... 

Arthur,

Here's a handy prevention tool that I use before making any purchase on eBay. 

http://toolhaus.org/

André

cannot get it to work

--- On Fri, 6/19/09, andre1moreau <andre1moreau@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: andre1moreau <andre1moreau@...>
Subject: [Digital BW] Re: Beware eBay seller kipp9165
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, June 19, 2009, 8:42 AM











    
            
            


      
      --- In DigitalBlackandWhit eThePrint@ yahoogroups. com, Arthur Fink <af@...> wrote:

>

> Not directly about printing, but of iterest to meany of us ...

> 

> This seller has quite a bit of photo equipment up on eBay ... 



Arthur,



Here's a handy prevention tool that I use before making any purchase on eBay. 



http://toolhaus. org/



André




 

      

    
    
	
	 
	
	








	


	
	


      

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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, RobLee <roblee007@...> wrote:
>
> cannot get it to work
> 
In the "Negative/Neutral Feedback" section enter the above eBay user ID and click on either "Received by" or "Left by" and you'll see interesting comments.

Works for me using Firefox 3 and WinXp.

Andre

In theory.  But it's a tightly controlled computer script.  The 
seller offered to refund my purchase price, less cost of shipping to 
me and back to him.  All I could enter in response was a tracking number.

So much for Paypal's "Resolution" center.

I'm usually a strong advocate for myself ... think nothing of 
escalating a complaint up the hierarchy.  On this one I found myself 
stuck.  And for the amount I might retrieve, at a certain point I had 
to stop pushing.

Arthur

At 12:16 AM 6/19/2009, Clayton Price wrote:


>Arthur -
>FYI -- You may not be aware of this, but since eBay changed their
>rules so that all payments
>have to come through Paypal, the buyer has protection. You have at
>least 30 days (it may
>be longer) to protest, and they will get your money back for you,
>even if they have to
>remove it from the sellers bank account. It's a very good rule for
>buyers who are being
>lied to, but a bit of a problem for ethical sellers who encounter
>dishonest buyers.
>Best,
>Clay Price
>
>Arthur Fink wrote:
><<<Yes I was. In my case it wasn't photo equipment, but an espresso
>machine. Item was shipped to the wrong address, and arrived with the
>portofilter not working. Seller claimed that "w/guarantee" meant
>just "not doa" -- e.g. that the unit would turn on and a light would
>go on. He offered a refund if I returned it, but not for shipping
>both ways. That cost would have been more than the amount of my
>claim, and I'd be returning a unit on which I'd spent several hours
>finally getting it to work.
>
>Before the purchase I had correspondence with the seller in which he
>made sweeping claims for his "guarantee"....>>>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>


        Arthur Fink Photography

     Studio / Gallery in Portland, Maine, and also on Peaks Island
     www.arthurfinkphoto.com  af@...  207.615.5722

     Problems with my e-mail address?  If my provider returns your
     mail as spam, re-send it to: arthurfinkphoto@....


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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Clayton Price <clay@...> wrote:
>
> Arthur -
> FYI -- You may not be aware of this, but since eBay changed their  
> rules so that all payments
> have to come through Paypal, the buyer has protection. You have at  
> least 30 days (it may
> be longer) to protest, and they will get your money back for you,  
> even if they have to
> remove it from the sellers bank account. 


Now when did eBay make this change?  My Experience has been very bad recently with PayPay.  Expensive commission when you sell, confusing menus when you purchase, and NO protection from buying miss-representative items.  Customer service is the pitts.  Try talking to a human at PayPal!  

I quit buying and selling on eBay, and I will never use PayPal again.  I have a 100% rating, over 180 score with eBay, but my experiences with purchasing of large priced items has been very bad thru PayPal.  They settle their complaints by arburtration and they are the arbutor.  So!  What kind of justice are you going to get if they are the Plaintiff, Jury and Judge?  You will get their deal; what makes money for them.

Ben

ben wrote:
 >Now when did eBay make this change? My Experience has been very bad  
recently with PayPay. Expensive commission when you sell, confusing  
menus when you purchase, and >NO protection from buying miss- 
representative items. Customer service is the pitts. Try talking to a  
human at PayPal!

I happened to see a charge on my credit card which I didn't  
recognize. There was a phone number, so I called it, and it was  
PayPal. The charge was valid, but I ended up
having a long conversation with the representative, and he told me  
about the changes. I did know that eBay owns PayPal - for quite a  
while. I agree with you about them,
and also have a long, perfect history with eBay -- and only accepted  
postal money orders as payment. But they won't allow that any more,  
and I'm not going to deal with them anymore either.
Does anyone have suggestions for another vendor for selling our  
printers and cameras on line?

Clay

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

Please end this thread. It does not seem to have anything to do with B&W Printing.

There was an article in the local paper here about a man who had a bad experience on e-Bay and in the seller review section posted some moderately negative comments. The seller then sued the buyer in a local court for slander. The court was several thousand miles from the buyer's home and the buyer had to hire an attorney by phone in the distant city to defend him.

The buyer won but was out the legal fees. Even if he had lost he might not of had to pay but he would have an outstanding lien which can make it difficult to obtain credit.

This is just a cautionary tale. Make of it what you will but PLEASE do not take it up as another off topic thread.

Thanks,
Martin Wesley