QTR-Quadtone RIP

I would check you're printing on the right side of the paper and that 
you have good nozzle checks. Do you get this problem with other papers?

The only slightly odd thing in your curve set up is that black boost is 
less than your black ink limit. Normally it would be slightly more. You 
could also introduce an overlap of say 8-12 to smooth the transitions.

Howard

Mark McCarvill wrote:

> I'm seeking suggestions on how to reduce `grain' in my QTR
> prints on Entrada natural. I'm using UT7 inks with eboni black on a
> 7600, printing at 1440 super. Here  <http://www.stepwise.ca/QTR.jpg>  is
> a test strip to illustrate the problem.
> 
> For those interested in the detailed curve data, here 
> <http://www.stepwise.ca/QTR_Curve.jpg>  it is.
> 
> In a nutshell, I'm using a very low ink limit (30%), which I know
> contributes to grain. But going higher (even 35%) results in shiny, inky
> lines in the 90 - 100% black patches. And printing at 2880 doesn't
> improve things.
> 
> Any ideas would be welcome on how to introduce more smoothness without
> adding excessive ink.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>

Thanks for the feedback, Howard.

I'm using double sided paper, and the nozzle checks are perfect. The
only other paper I have is EEM, but it has a smoother surface than
Entrada so, not surprisingly, EEM prints are less grainy.

I started with a 100% black boost and worked my way down, because
high levels just resulted in shiny black patches and scuffs. I also
started with an overlap but eliminated it because once again blacks
were too inky.

I'm a little puzzled, because Entrada is a thick paper and can
allegedly handle a LOT of ink.

Mark

--- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, Howard Shaw <glassman@...> wrote:
>
> I would check you're printing on the right side of the paper and that 
> you have good nozzle checks. Do you get this problem with other papers?
> 
> The only slightly odd thing in your curve set up is that black boost is 
> less than your black ink limit. Normally it would be slightly more. You 
> could also introduce an overlap of say 8-12 to smooth the transitions.
> 
> Howard
> 
> Mark McCarvill wrote:
> > I'm seeking suggestions on how to reduce `grain' in my QTR
> > prints on Entrada natural. I'm using UT7 inks with eboni black on a
> > 7600, printing at 1440 super. Here 
<http://www.stepwise.ca/QTR.jpg>  is
> > a test strip to illustrate the problem.
> > 
> > For those interested in the detailed curve data, here 
> > <http://www.stepwise.ca/QTR_Curve.jpg>  it is.
> > 
> > In a nutshell, I'm using a very low ink limit (30%), which I know
> > contributes to grain. But going higher (even 35%) results in
shiny, inky

> > lines in the 90 - 100% black patches. And printing at 2880 doesn't
> > improve things.
> > 
> > Any ideas would be welcome on how to introduce more smoothness without
> > adding excessive ink.
> > 
> > Thanks
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
>

> ...I'm a little puzzled, because Entrada is a thick paper and can
> allegedly handle a LOT of ink....

Mark, I'm using MIS inks with my 7600. I have a qtr profile for Entrada 
natural (with Ebony). You may want to take a look at my settings. 
Contact me off list and I can send you the details.

Dario

With 2200 and UT7 and Entrada I've never had artificial "grain" or  
problem with excess ink at default settings. I do have other 
complaints about Entrada.

(Note that ink control has to do with coating, not thickness of paper)

I'm quitting Entrada for HPR because Entrada seems prone to 
microbanding. That microbanding always vanishes overnight. Also,  
Entrada seems to have very faintly less detail resolution than 
Kayenta (nominally Entrada's "proofing" paper, now called LaSal). 
Both factoids (test for yourselves) suggest Entrada absorbs ink 
slowly, and both should minimize grain rather than exaggerate it. 

That "test strip" looks a lot like a Nikonscan of silver B&W film...
if that's what we're seeing the problem might be in the scan.

EEM has reportedly gone through some changes recently but I'm 
mystified why Epson's still using the name (rather than "Enhanced 
Matte Ultra" etc), given the history of yellowing. 

John

Hi John,

The ink limits are different for a 7600 than for a 2200, as you probably
know. And there are no default curves available for the 7600 with
Entrada and UT7 (posted here anyway). So it's trial and error
(mostly error!) as I try to build a curve that works for this
combination.

And I haven't found that banding disappears over night with Entrada.
I wish it did, because I've wrestled with it a lot. My current setup has
eliminated 95% of banding but there is still that 5% I'd like to remove.

The scan was done on a Microtek 1800f at 1800 ppi, 16-bit. It's very
smooth, so I don't think that's the issue. It's more the
insufficient amount of ink I was putting down, which was letting the
paper show through as grain.

Since my original post, I made some progress in reducing grain, mainly
by adding a cool curve with a higher ink limit. Not perfect, but better.
Here's  <http://www.stepwise.ca/QTR_test_strips.jpg> a comparison.

Mark


--- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "djon43" <djon43@...> wrote:
>
> With 2200 and UT7 and Entrada I've never had artificial "grain" or
> problem with excess ink at default settings. I do have other
> complaints about Entrada.
>
> (Note that ink control has to do with coating, not thickness of paper)
>
> I'm quitting Entrada for HPR because Entrada seems prone to
> microbanding. That microbanding always vanishes overnight. Also,
> Entrada seems to have very faintly less detail resolution than
> Kayenta (nominally Entrada's "proofing" paper, now called LaSal).
> Both factoids (test for yourselves) suggest Entrada absorbs ink
> slowly, and both should minimize grain rather than exaggerate it.
>
> That "test strip" looks a lot like a Nikonscan of silver B&W film...
> if that's what we're seeing the problem might be in the scan.
>
> EEM has reportedly gone through some changes recently but I'm
> mystified why Epson's still using the name (rather than "Enhanced
> Matte Ultra" etc), given the history of yellowing.
>
> John
>



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