QTR-Quadtone RIP

The MP-PK ink really is performing a lot better, not to mention it looks more like a carbon 
print.

Paul, I'm using your C-3MK IGS 1-PK curve and I think you were saying that it lays down 
the GO at the same time but for some reason mine is not. I'm wondering if I've got 
something wrong which probably is the case.

Thanks again,

Joe

--- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@...> wrote:
>
> 
> >Yeah banding is certainly an issue on my end.
> 
> These 1800s are prone to it.  It's odd, the R260 can do a better K-only BO
> print, but does not get as good with a multi-channel approach.  Overall, the
> 1800 was able to make a better print.  I wonder if in the 1900 they've
> figured out how to have the best of both worlds.
> 
> >Is it MISPRO PK? Just to make certain.
> 
> Yes, MIS "MP" inksets mean their "MIS Pro" inkset.  These day's it's the
> same as the "7600" inkset, but different than the K4 or R800.
> 
> Paul
> www.PaulRoark.com 
> 
> __________
> 
> 
> --- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" <paul.roark@> wrote:
> >
> > The MIS PKs vary in ink load (carbon to base ratio) and how they print. 
> > The K4-PK is a lighter load (less carbon) than the MP-PK. 
> > The modern, faster printers usually do better with the K4-PK. 
> > However, in my 1800 3MK+PK+GL experiments the MP-PK by itself 
> > (probably because it is being coated subsequent to printing) 
> > is doing so well I'll remove all the other PKs.
>  
> > I'm now running the MK into the 100% spot, at very low slopes, 
> > from 75%. It virtually eliminates the gloss differential, 
> > and the MKs+PK take care of banding 
> > - for my particular 1800, at least. 
> 
> > Whether this works for others may be machine dependent -
> > limited by whether you get banding. 
> 
> > At any rate, you might want to try an MP-PK.
>