Digital BW, The Print

After spending hours reading here, as well as Paul Roark and Clayton Jone's excellent site, I have decided to try my hands on digital black and white printing.  I was originally looking at the R260/R280 series and the C88, and saw that the 1.5 pl droplets would be a nice specification and decided against the C88.  The R280 has been replaced by the Artisan 50/RX 580, and no body here seems to have used it.  But I decided to give it a try, since the specs are exactly the same as the R280 and not wanting to buy used printers.

   I have made quite a few prints on the new printer with the Claria inkset on Ilford Galerie Heavyweight Matte, and the results were not quite satisfactory.  I used the grayscale feature on the Epson driver, and prints have a bluish/greenish cast to them, but the prints were fairly smooth (or smudgy?).  Then I tried using QTR with serveral BO curves (claria BO curve, ones that made by Paul Roark that neutralizes the tone), I can get much more neutral prints with it.  However, the prints are rougher comparing to Epson driver prints (ie. the dots/grain are much more visible).  With QTR, printing at 1440 super (don't know what it means) just looks bad, unmistakably from an inkjet; printing at 2880 dpi, it's still a little rough, but not a bad look.  Besides the more neutral tone, I like the QTR prints because the tone transitions appear to be smoother (even though the "grain structure" is rougher).

So here's my long list of questions:
1)Is the grayscale on Epson driver equivalent to BO?  (If not, that may explain why the Epson prints look smoother)  

2)I have not tried any glossy paper yet.  But from what I gather here, the claria inks do much better on glossy paper than matte. Do you think that switching paper would produce better contrast?  I am particularly interested in Red River SatinPro.

3)Is it normal that printing with QTR is slower than Epson? The difference is huge, taking almost twice as long for me with QTR.

4)I plan to try the UT-RC inks.  But investing in all six cartridge will be a significant cost ($120) that I do not want to commit to yet.  Is it possible for me to buy only the PK position and do BO printing? or can I dilute the PK ink like the EB-6 for smoother prints?

5)From my understanding, the Eboni ink is the same in the warm/neutral/cool ink set, and the only difference is in the toner cartridges.  Does this apply to the PK ink?

6)Would using the UT-RC set produce smoother prints comparing to BO printing?

Thanks for reading all this.  Digital printing has been hugely confusing.  I still have many questions on profile, curves, and etc.  For now, I just want to make some good prints using existing profiles.  But I am not afraid of diluting inks, especially if it means I can make a smoother print while minimizing cost.

I only feel vaguely qualified to partially answer your questions.  I'm sure someone more knowledgeable will be along shortly.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Foon Hoe" <feedthefoon@...> wrote:
> 4)I plan to try the UT-RC inks.  But investing in all six cartridge will be a significant cost ($120) that I do not want to commit to yet.  Is it possible for me to buy only the PK position and do BO printing? or can I dilute the PK ink like the EB-6 for smoother prints?

I believe your cheapest option is to get a set of empty carts from E-bay (probably around $30 for the whole set of six) and a small bottle of Eboni from MIS.  With this setup you can cheaply setup 3MK printing (see Paul's web site, this is three channels of 100% Eboni using QTR) which does produce quite smooth prints.  You can also if you want make one or two additional dilutions using his Carbon-6 process (with the 1.5pL printers you can get very smooth prints with even just one more dilution).  

Be advised I don't think you can mix third party carts with Epson carts, so whatever you do I think you'll end up needing to buy 6 carts.  Again, E-bay empties are the easiest way to get going at about $30.  MIS also sells empties, just a big more expensive is all.

> 6)Would using the UT-RC set produce smoother prints comparing to BO printing?

I believe yes, especially compared to single channel BO.  The 3MK process is much smoother than BO though.  And again, with a 1.5pL printer you can get away with just a few dilutions.  On a R280 and a 1400 I use just two dilutions.  I've bought MIS bottles of 100% Eboni and their Y dilution (around 2% I think) so I don't have to mix my own.  Gives nice smooth prints and low cost - Paul has a few write-ups about it on his site and posts on this group.

Ken

"Foon Hoe" <feedthefoon@...> wrote:
>
>... The R280 has been replaced by the Artisan 50/RX 580, ...
>  I decided to give it a try, since the specs are exactly the same as the R280 and not wanting to buy used printers.
> 
>    ... with the Claria inkset ... I used the grayscale feature on the Epson driver, and prints have a bluish/greenish cast to them, but the prints were fairly smooth (or smudgy?).  Then I tried using QTR with serveral BO curves (claria BO curve, ones that made by Paul Roark that neutralizes the tone), I can get much more neutral prints with it.  However, the prints are rougher comparing to Epson driver prints (ie. the dots/grain are much more visible).  With QTR, printing at 1440 super (don't know what it means) just looks bad, unmistakably from an inkjet; printing at 2880 dpi, it's still a little rough, but not a bad look.  Besides the more neutral tone, I like the QTR prints because the tone transitions appear to be smoother (even though the "grain structure" is rougher).


The Epson driver in its grayscale mode does still use the light inks.  QTR is using just the black ink, and with a few profiles I made also a little of the LM.  But basically, you're comparing a "BO" print with one that uses dilute inks -- but color ones.


> So here's my long list of questions:
> 1)Is the grayscale on Epson driver equivalent to BO?

No.

 
> 2)I have not tried any glossy paper yet.  But from what I gather here, the claria inks do much better on glossy paper than matte. Do you think that switching paper would produce better contrast?  I am particularly interested in Red River SatinPro.

The glossy dmax will be better, but you'll have the same trouble with unwanted color with the Epson "grayscale" mode and slight roughness with the QTR black only approach.

I might add that with the 1400 I use QTR to print HP PK black only and it makes great prints.  I'm not sure why this other supposedly 1.5 pl printer is not doing as well.

 
> 3)Is it normal that printing with QTR is slower than Epson?

I think that might be typical, but it may depend on the printer and settings.


> 4)I plan to try the UT-RC inks.  But investing in all six cartridge will be a significant cost ($120) that I do not want to commit to yet.  Is it possible for me to buy only the PK position and do BO printing?

As Ken mentioned above, I think the chips will not be compatible.  You'll probably need to have chips from the same source in all positions.  With a set of third party carts you could temporarily put a clear fluid, like the C6 base at http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Ink-Mixing.pdf, in the other positions and print.  

> or can I dilute the PK ink like the EB-6 for smoother prints?

The result will be very  warm and not glossy compatible.  

However, you can dilute HP PK to make a neutral, glossy compatible ink.  The difference is that the HP PK has the glossy coating on the particle.  So, it still works fine in a base that has no coating material.  You can do a little math and see that a dilute HP PK inkset may take not only the quality but also the value prize.

 
> 5)From my understanding, the Eboni ink is the same in the warm/neutral/cool ink set,

Yes.  Eboni is Eboni in all MIS inksets.

>  Does this apply to the PK ink?

No, there are different degrees of cooling -- i.e., how much color is added to the carbon.

 
> 6)Would using the UT-RC set produce smoother prints comparing to BO printing?

Yes.

>... I am not afraid of diluting inks, especially if it means I can make a smoother print while minimizing cost.
  
The best for the least works for me also.

Note that the HP PK is a bit cooler in the shadows of some papers that I like.  So, while I just use it straight in my 1400 because I want the other spots for Eboni and its dilutions, if you wanted a more flexible glossy compatible inkset you could use an MIS LK (or EZ warm)  as a warm carbon toner.

Good luck with the system.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com

Thank you Ken and Paul for the excellent response.  You both have cleared up many of my confusions, a lot of the reading make more sense now.  I am aware of the compatibility between carts and will purchase a whole set.

The BO prints that I made with QTR weren't terrible, but viewing up close, they are unmistakably "inkjet looking".  I wouldn't be as concerned if I am making 8x10s only.  However, I also really like making small prints.  Naturally the closer viewing distance of small prints show the roughness more.  So I am looking for a smoother approach.

I think I won't try the HP PK inks for now, since the MIS inks are just  more affordable.  Now, there are two things that caught my interest.

The easier one seems to be using eb6-YK or 3MK.  I have taken a look at Paul's 1400-YK profiles already.  Do the 3MK profiles use the same MK ink in three different slots?  The profiles that uses Y and K can be 3Y3K, 3Y1K, 1Y1K, and etc.  I saw in here (http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Eboni-6.pdf) Paul uses 1Y1K.  Is there significant difference in having more slots for each density?  Is it so that the inks can be distributed slightly differently to avoid banding?

I have also just noticed the 3PK and the glop.  Is the 3PK similar to 3MK except for using the undiluted PKN inks?  Paul has mentioned about printing in two pass, the first to print and the second for the glop.  What is the significance of the glop if the UTRC glossy set doesn't have it?  

Please tell me if what I am thinking about to print both glossy and matte is feasible. Using two of the slots to print eb6-1Y1K, three to print 3PK, and fill the remaining slot with cleaning fluid (or glop).

I hope I haven't asked too many questions.  This is very exciting, but the amount of information is simply overwhelming for me.  Thank you once again for your responses.

Foon

"Foon Hoe" <feedthefoon@...> wrote:
>
>...
> 
> The easier one seems to be using eb6-YK or 3MK.  I have taken a look at Paul's 1400-YK profiles already.  

> Do the 3MK profiles use the same MK ink in three different slots? 

Yes, so it will not meet your smoothness standards.

> The profiles that uses Y and K can be 3Y3K, 3Y1K, 1Y1K, and etc.  I saw in here (http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Eboni-6.pdf) Paul uses 1Y1K. 

I'd call most of the Y-K work as experimental.  The Eb6-Y does not settle very fast and is a bit more neutral. Thus I was trying to see if just using it and the K could make good prints.  While it did a decent job, I moved back toward the full Eboni-6, but with some HP PK in there for glossy printing and more neutral matte prints when I want them.

Keep in mind that Eboni-6 is matte only.

> Is there significant difference in having more slots for each density? 

In the 3-MK the point was to have only 100% Eboni to keep the tone as neutral as possible for a 100% carbon ink, while also having enough nozzles working to hide the banding that the 1800 is prone to.  In my 1400, I don't have banding with the K channel.  As such, my 1400 single black only is actually smoother than the 1800 3-MK.  I sure can't guarantee all 1400s are this smooth, however.  In fact, my 1400 Y channel does band.

> Is it so that the inks can be distributed slightly differently to avoid banding?

The more inks firing, the less likely you'll see banding.  Having the inks close to each other in density also might help.  However, you have an off-setting goal of hiding the transitions from a light to dark ink in the cross-overs.  Then again, it's easier to maintain a printer with fewer inks.  So, you have a lot of factors pointing in different directions that will make one system better for one person and setup, and not as good for another.  It's hard to generalize.

Of a more practical matter, I'd suggest you go with a system that has a good workflow -- or better, multiple workflows -- and existing profiles.  For those just getting into this type of printing, I recommend an ink setup that prints reasonably good with the Epson driver and no profiles at all.  Having immediate positive feedback really helps.


> I have also just noticed the 3PK and the glop.  Is the 3PK similar to 3MK except for using the undiluted PKN inks?

MK is matte black for matte paper only.  PK is photo black for glossy paper.  On matte paper it cannot give a good dmax -- deep black.  PK is just a bit more dense on the paper than the darkest matte gray ink.  So, in an ink setup, it'll go into the C or M spot and work well with the Epson driver.  Note the Eboni-1400 setup I use -- see http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Eb1400.pdf .  With that setup the HP PK is used in a black only mode to get a great dmax on glossy paper.  With the Epson driver and no profile at all (aside from the built in Epson profiles) it acts as a cool dark gray, simply cooling the deep shadows about on Lab B unit -- just barely visible.  Note that an MIS neutral PKN could be used there, but I found the MIS PKs banded.  That is, the HP PK prints more smoothly, has a higher dmax, can be diluted and stay glossy, does not separate, does not differentially fade, and is more lightfast.


>  Paul has mentioned about printing in two pass, the first to print and the second for the glop. 

I don't do that any more.  The exit rollers in the printer I was using for those experiments got badly fouled with glop.  In fact, I don't use glop at all any more.  The HP PK does bronze a bit, but the black only method of printing holds that down significantly compared to when dilute glossy inks are used.  I don't find it that much of an issue.  Then again, I don't use glossy for fine art.  I spent enough time chasing the "holy grail" of the air dried silver print that was my standard for years.  I finally came to the point where I liked the inkjet matte prints better.  My dry mounting press is now for flattening Arches watercolor paper.

> What is the significance of the glop if the UTRC glossy set doesn't have it?  

Glop reduces gloss differential and bronzing.  A post-printing spray does a better job, but using  a solvent spray is easiest if you live in a climate where you can spray in an open garage or the like all year.  You don't want to breath the solvents.

 
> Please tell me if what I am thinking about to print both glossy and matte is feasible. Using two of the slots to print eb6-1Y1K, three to print 3PK, and fill the remaining slot with cleaning fluid (or glop).

The Eb6-YK will do OK for matte.  The 3PK will probably not be smooth enough for you.

You might want to consider just using the UT14 and wait until you have a better feel for B&W inksets before trying to put together your own unique approach.  There is a substantial learning curve here.  Getting a system that works right off the bad is important.  You can always change later, even rinsing out the UT14 carts for the next inks you want in those carts.

 
> ... the amount of information is simply overwhelming ...

That's a major reason why the commercial, more turn-key systems are used.  I never really used the UT14 myself but made it so MIS and users would have a simple variable-tone, matte and glossy inkset for the 1400.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com