--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "pr_roark"
<pr_roark@...> wrote:
>
> "baecht1" dbaecht@ wrote:
>
> > I'm used to silver based and carbon prints. What I want to
> > try is BO prints and gray scale, to see if I can be happy with them.
>
> The fact that you were involved with carbon prints suggests you're a
bit of a purist or otherwise interested in more than just making an
acceptable print.
>
I never thought about it but I can live with purist. It's more than
that though, carbon printing gives me 100% control over every aspect of
the process, which is why I use the paper I make. The final result is a
reflection of me wether it is a good print or not. I even coat my own
glass negatives.
>
> > ... I am being forced into digital output ...
>
> I think once you are comfortable with Photoshop, you'll never want to
go back to not having those tools available to you.
I was very set against anything digital, until I asked myself what
would Ansel Adams think. I believe he would have accepted it without
any reservation.
>
> > either as digital negs or prints.
>
> It took me quite a while to want to give up the silver print. I used
many different digital internegative processes, but now I would not go
that direction unless the physical process of the print was a key
component of my final product. I found, shall we say, negatives to all
the negatives. If, for example, you use a 2200 to make a digital
negative, the microbanding that might come from that output and the
limits of its resolution will to transfered to your final print.
>
I will have to keep a eye out for the micro banding
> The ability to efficiently make a print, view it, throw it away, and
make another one that takes care of the problems I saw in the earlier
one is really important if the image is paramount.
I can see where the work flow will be more efficient, with a lot less
waste.
>
> I might add that the images evolve with almost each print. The thought
of contact printing a number of exact copies from a master negative
removes one of the main paths by which we make better images.
>
> > I have a real good Epson 2200, I have cs3, I ordered UT7 today
> > and empty cartridges.
>
> I'd consider that inkset as good only for exploring the possibilities.
Even though I designed it, I would not use it today. The sepia is mostly
fast fading color ink. The 2200 will probably microband with UT7 unless
you have a very good sample. But, the variable tone aspect and the
ability to easily print on glossy paper allow you to see what type of
output -- tone and paper type -- best suits your style.
What you are saying here upsets me. When I ordered the UT7 I
specifically asked if there was any color inks in this set and was told
no. The reasons I went with the UT7 was so I could try BO and grayscale
both. I don't have the knowledge to mix my own from ebony. I will be
sending the UT7 back. Do you have a better inkset for me to go with, or
a guide line for mixing my own from ebony.
>
> With respect to matte v. glossy, be sure to view them in the manner
you'll usually do so. That is, if you display under glass, compare them
under glass -- and in the lighting where they'll be displayed. You might
well find that the matte paper has a better black than the glossy paper.
It's really all about reflections and the nature of your lighting. I use
glossy paper only for my brochures.
>
> To me, not only is matte paper king for what I do, but I'm even moving
to Arches Hot Press (uncoated) watercolor paper as a main paper for some
types of prints. It even allows me to wash out the inkjet byproducts
like the glycols and glycerol, if I want to. The loose, excess carbon
also washes off, leaving a print that may be the most physically durable
that I've experienced. It can even be re-washed. It's a potentially very
exciting medium.
When I was silver printing gloss was it, but I have come to like matt to
the point I probably wouldn't go back.
>
> The UT7 curves-profiles that I made were pre-QTR-Create-ICC. Today you
can take those curves and put them into an ICC and linearize most new
papers as well as make your Epsond driver based workflow "color
managed." See
http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Embedding_Photoshop_Curves_in_ICCs.pdf
>
>
> > I have two questions.
> > I know monitor calibration is a must with color, is it
> > just as crucial with Black and White. I have looked at
> > the Spyder monitor stuff, but, I just don't know, opinions please.
>
> I use the ColorVision monitor calibration system and the spectro for
reading 21-step B&W test strips. It's definitely worth the investment,
if only for the spectro.
>
> I think getting the monitor's and printer's outputs coordinated in
terms of relative densities is very important. This can be done a number
of ways. I do not bother with soft proofing of the subtle color tones of
B&W prints. The QTR Create-ICC approach noted above is a great way to
"color manage" a B&W workflow if you're using an epson driver workflow.
I personally use adjustment curves to convert my Gray Gamma 2.2
workspace images into QTR's linear space for printing. There are lots of
options here.
This answers that question.
>
>
> > I'll be working from scanned 4x5 negs that I have silver and
> > carbon prints to compare plus I'll use images from a digital camera.
>
> If you're accustomed to 4x5, I hope you have a very good digital
camera. I'd say anything less than 20 MP will be a problem. I'm an old
medium format shooter and so far have been happy with the 21 MP Canon,
but it's the least I'd probably be happy with, and the retrofocus wide
angles are a problem. There are very few that cut it, but there are some
that you can find if you really study the MTF curves carefully. The new
Canon 24 TS-E LII is on my wish list. The 90 TS (or 85 1.8) and 35 f/2
(at F8-11 and within the 8x10 crop) are the main lenses I use. Most of
my old -- even L -- lenses are not up to the sensor or the medium format
standards I'm accustomed to.
I've never even used a 35mm. I have been looking at 4x5 scanning backs.
I don't have a digital input device yet, this is the reason I was going
to scan.
>
> With respect to printing with the 2200, I used mine to print 100%
carbon pigment ("Carbon-6," the home-brew version of Eboni-6) prints on
mostly Premier Art Smooth Bright White paper for neutral prints and lots
of other matte papers for other tones up to medium warm. I used a cheap
SuperJetUSA CIS and had no problems. I pulled the plug on that system
after 9 months to do some other experiments with the printer, but the
system worked fine and made very good prints.
>
> With CISs you do have to keep an eye on the ink levels relative to the
print head. The tops of the ink should be a bit above the head. CISs
will back flow if it's low and run right through if too high. The 7800's
back flow valves and air pressure system are, I hope, going to be a big
plus in my setting that printer up for carbon printing.
This is one reason I'm going with cartridges, for now.
>
> As an old carbon printer, the attributes of carbon pigment inkjet
printing may appeal to you.
From what I have read and can tell from what I see on the internet, I
think it is the direction for me, but, i don't know yet. Time will tell.
>
> Good luck with the transition. I'd never go back.
Thanks for your input.
>
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com
> http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]