QTR-Quadtone RIP

David,
I have been building profiles for several of the Fiber Gloss papers in QTR for my 2200.
My initial profiles and prints lacked any "real" blacks. I discovered that changing the paper 
from matte to one of the glossy papers helped significantly.

That put me into a testing mode. I printed a 100% black wedge with each glossy type 
paper and 1440 as well as 2880 resolution. I discovered that 2880 and luster or glossy 
paper settings provided the best Dmax for the papers (Epson Exhibition Fiber, Harman 
Gloss FB). Calumet's Brilliant Museum SilverGloss White had the best Dmax reading with 
Ilford Heavy Paper and 1440.

The 100% wedges were printed with No Color Management using a base line profile 
without a Linearization curve line.

I also, tried various ink adjustments from -30 to plus 30. This seemed to have only minor 
impact. Maybe one or two hundreds difference i.e. 2.13 to 2.15.

This all was done with the Espon UC inks. Not at all sure what impact there would be with 
other inks.

Doing this exercise took the Dmax for Espon Exhibition fiber from 1.4 with matte default 
and 1440 to 2.2 using Premium Luster Photo Paper and 2880.

The one downside, is that some of the thicker papers  --Espon Exhibition Fiber-- did 
have some problems with the head hitting the paper near the end of the sheet.  Not sure 
how that can be addressed.

Good Luck.

David

--- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "david627890" <david.whistance@...> wrote:
>
> Hello, I'm looking for advice on what the paper choice setting does in 
> QTR.  I understand its function in the Epson driver, setting the head 
> gap, ink load, etc. Does it do something similar in QTR?  I've never 
> really used the packaged profiles in QTR (except for the Cone K7 inks) 
> and must admit that I have tended to leave this setting on "Matte 
> paper" when making my own profiles. However I've recently been trying 
> some of the new "Fibre Gloss" papers with the packaged profiles and 
> have got indifferent results so wondered whether this setting would 
> improve things?
> 
> David Whistance
>