Digital BW, The Print

I have now run a fade test of the Indelible black ink in my florescent-light
fader for 4 days (96 hours).  The initial results indicate fading and
warming significantly more than the comparison test strip of MIS VM black
ink.

Although I will continue the test, at this point I would say that the
Indelible's blackness -- between MIS VM and Gen 4 Enhanced black -- and its
cooler color come at the expense of fade resistance and stability.  (Note
especially the change in the densitometer's cyan reading of the Indelible
70% patch.  Is the coolness of the Indelible black ink achieved by adding
cyan dye?)

For this test I printed "black ink only" 21-step test strips on Epson
Archival Matte.  The test and control strips were printed the same day on
the same batch of EAM.  The results were rotated in my fader to be sure
there was no difference in light exposure (which I've never detected
anyway). The test strips were scanned (three times) along with the control
strips on my Epson Expression Pro 1600, all at the same time.  Although the
colors of the scanner are not exactly the same as the X-Rite densitometer,
the scanner allows more accurate comparisons due to the densitometer's
limited readout.  I also measured the same patches with the densitometer.
Both results are below.

To measure the scanned test/control strips, I use Photoshop, selecting a
large part of the test strip patch for the value in question and then using
the Histogram tool.  Because the scanner exposure is set to encompass the
range of densities of the test strips, the numbers are relative only.

Indelible 100%: (Luminosity, R/G/B)
	Control = 3.97, 5.56/3.36/3.20
	96 Hr.  = 4.79, 7.18/4.00/2.92

	Change in luminosity (fading) = 0.82
	Warming (change in R-B) = 1.9

Indelible 70%:
	Control = 126.6, 125.6/127.6/123.9
	96 Hr.  = 130.9, 133.6/130.8/124

	Change in luminosity = 4.3
	Warming = 7.9

MIS VM 100%:
	Control = 9.91, 11.97/9.74/5.21
	96 Hr.  = 10.03, 12.18/9.84/5.44

	Change in luminosity = 0.12
	Warming = -0.02

MIS VM 70%:
	Control = 139.7, 139.3/140.8/134.3
	96 Hr.  = 141.4, 141.9/142.3/134.9

	Change in luminosity = 1.7
	Warming = 2

X-Rite readings (3 readings, variances are noted with a minus or plus where
one of the three was less or more; numbers are for C,M,Y and Visual):

	Indelible 100% control = 1.75+, 1.75, 1.74+, 1.75
				96Hr = 1.73, 1.74, 1.74+, 1.74

	Indelible  70% control = 0.68, 0.65+, 0.66, 0.67
				96Hr = 0.63, 0.63+, 0.65, 0.63

	MIS VM K  100% control = 1.66, 1.68, 1.71-, 1.67
				96Hr = 1.66, 1.67, 1.70, 1.66+

	MIS VM K   70% control = 0.58, 0.58, 0.59, 0.58
				96Hr = 0.57, 0.57, 0.58, 0.57


Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

(PS, I'm off to Carmel and the Bay Area conference and will be out of
contact for a few days.)

Paul,

Wow, that seems like an awful lot of fading and color shift compared 
to the MIS inks. Actually that is quite disappointing as with all we 
have heard I would have thought that these inks are the holy grail.

Mike


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> I have now run a fade test of the Indelible black ink in my 
florescent-light

> fader for 4 days (96 hours).  The initial results indicate fading 
>and warming significantly more than the comparison test strip of MIS 
>VM black ink.

Mike,

keep in mind that 
(a)Paul's results are relative (as he notes), meaning they make sense only 
when compared to each other ,
(b) the overall scale of these recorded changes may be very small in practice 
when results are viewed by the naked eye (remember that the benchmark is 
"before noticeable fading occurs"),
(c) extrapolating data is pure voodoo and everyone - Wilhelm included - is 
trying to do this with good intention, but: We don't know, for example, if we 
were to track changes over time if these inks would "settle" at some point , or if 
their change is rapid at first and slows down to nothing over time... etc.
(d) changes within the tolerance of a densitometer which is likely to be +-0.01 
are hardly meaningful (i.e. you'd need more than 0.02 change to be 
significant) - but because of its logarithmic scale, a densitometer gives you a 
better sense of the visible magnitude of a change.
(e) densitometers (unlike spectrophotometers) are set to read 3 specific 
spectral bands tuned to the photographic dyes used in specific processes 
(E-6, C41 etc). They are not good at reading color in other systems unless the 
spectral peaks of the inks being tested match the photo dyes in one of these 
processes. I would still accept the "visual" reads for black as a good indicator 
of dmax in a print, even though that's fudging a bit too.

In this context, a scanner seems more versatile (as Paul notes, too) but not as 
accurate as a spectro because the data cannot be related to an ICC plot 
without all sorts of color management which introduces a bunch of other 
variables. Nevertheless, Paul's methodology cancels out a lot of scanner 
variables and does show a "relative degree of change" that is real and 
recordable. What to do with it, how to interpret it for our purposes, is the issue 
here. What does 4 days - or 3, or 6 months - predict? 

All this to respond to your notion of "awful lot" !


Antonis

<I'll be back in 100 years with the real results....>


--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@y..., "mkravit" <michael.kravit@w...> 
wrote:

> Paul,
> 
> Wow, that seems like an awful lot of fading and color shift compared 
> to the MIS inks.

Hi all,
I'm a relative newcomer, having just received my first batch of mis vm inks 
that I'm running on a 1280.  I had a couple or three initial questions that 
I didnt find ready answers for.

1)Are there any recommended gloss or semi gloss papers?
2)What are some guidlines for acceptable dpi.  Scanning from 35mm negatives 
at 1600 dpi, what's a reasonable enlargement size to hope for?
3)I noticed on the mis site, it recommends only using brand new cartridges 
if you swap back and forth between epson and mis inksets(or mis and mis 
inksets) or the printer could lose prime.  Has anybody actually had 
problems with this?

Any information would be greatly appreciated...

thanks

-david


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