Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Black & White => Topic started by: Jeff-Grant on November 02, 2014, 01:15:12 am
-
I have never used ABW on my Epson printers, but feel that the other options for B&W are more attractive. In looking around, I haven't been able to find any comparison of Peizography, MIS etc. I can find articles from users both for and against the various options but any comparisons or pros and cons have eluded me. I have an old Epson 2400 which I plan on using but I'd like to hear what others are using and, particularly, why they are using it.
I have all the gear that I need to build profiles, linearise etc so those are not issues. However, I can't see myself spending much time experimenting with mixed inks etc. What really interests me i stye quality of the print.
-
Don't overlook ImagePrint's B&W profiles. We did a comparison between Piezography and ImagePrint, we sent the file to Piezography and let them print this image. We then printed the same file through ImagePrint on our Epson 4900. When we received the print from Piezography we saw that the blacks were better on the IP image. They both were very neutral under daylight, but we saw a slight cast under tungsten light in the Piezography print.
We've also sent some B&W prints to Aardenburg and tested the lightfastness. We were pretty sure that the Piezography print would come out on top, but to our surprise the ImagePrint faded a lot less. The test was done on a Piezography mix were the've added some dyes to get a neutral print, so if you would compare their museum inks Piezography would probably do a lot better. But still, ImagePrint images in B&W last a long time.
And you have all the other advantages of ImagePrint. You can tint your images in a very subtle manner to duplicate the choices that we had in the darkroom with different papers and developers. And you use the ordinary Epson inks, so you can mix B&W and colour prints.
-
Thanks Stefan. That's the last response that I expected. I've looked at Imageprint before, and decided against it for reasons that I no longer remember. I hear what you are saying but I'm wrestling with how it can do a better job with fewer inks.
-
Download the demo version and I'm sure that you will be convinced. We're printing for some of the most demanding photographers here in Sweden, guys that are well known for their amazing skills in the darkroom. But when they are doing larger prints for exhibition purposes, they come to us. It's hard to do prints in the sizes up to 150 cm width in the darkroom. And when they are impressed, we must do something right. And ImagePrint must be good. I'm quite sure that isn't the number of inks that decides the quality of the prints.
-
To keep life simple and get excellent results, print from Lightroom by converting the photo to B&W in the Lightroom HSL/B&W panel. Use the same paper profile you would use for any other prints. You may also consider buying NIK Silver Efex Pro 2 which can be installed to operate in conjunction with Lightroom. You would access it from the Photo>Edit In.... drop-down menu.It provides for added local control over tone and many interesting presets.
-
Mark's suggestions are excellent. The Epson ABW driver does give a deeper Dmax and can give outstanding results but since Apple OS crippled the use of profiles for this driver, one cannot use ABW profiles for soft proofing such that trial and error printing is the only route available. Such profiles can still be used with WinOS making it easier to preview results and correct toning prior to printing. I'm still on Win7 and most of my B/W printing is done with the Epson ABW driver. I also submitted a bunch of test prints using Hahnemuhle PhotoRag Ultra Smooth to Aardenburg for stability testing.
-
Which approach one takes is obviously influenced by factors such as how important lightfastness is, what print tones are preferred, cost, flexibility, etc.
I, personally, have been an advocate for using 100% carbon pigments for the best longevity. At page 2 of http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/Eboni-6.pdf I summarize some of the most relevant http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com/ fade test data. This is becoming a bit dated, but with respect to longevity, the 100% carbon pigment approaches are going to fade at less than half the rate of the OEM B&W approaches, depending on how the Epson or HP images are printed. The differential can be much greater.
The only 100% carbon pigment approaches I'm aware of are the MIS Eboni and Cone Carbon Sepia. The OEM gray inks are not 100% carbon. It takes about 50% color inks in a mix to neutralize the warm carbon that is needed for glossy printing. The Piezography inks aside from the carbon sepia are not 100% carbon.
The main challenge with using 100% carbon if one wants a Lab B to be less than 8 (on matte paper, higher on glossy) is to find a pigment and paper that print more neutrally. That is what has made the MIS Eboni approach unique. It can print with a more neutral tone (lower lab b) than other carbons.
For most printers, the extreme longevity of 100% carbon is probably overkill. When it comes to adding colors, controlling the print tone can be a challenge. Also, the colors, particularly third party pigments, tend to fade at different rates. Again, for medium term display, all of the systems will be fine. For longer term, stay with the OEM colors.
I personally find it easiest to use the HP Z3200 PK and grays (which can be diluted from the PK), which are the most neutral and, for this coolness they exhibit, the most lightfast. So, I use HP grays to cool my Eboni carbon when I want cooler matte prints.
As one can gather from the above, if you are interested in flexibility and a more turn key approach, the ABW OEM approach may be the easiest route. For me, Eboni carbon on Arches watercolor paper is the most satisfying, and the medium I think will last the longest FWIW. It doesn't hurt that it can also be by far the least expensive.
Paul
www.PaulRoark.com
-
To keep life simple and get excellent results, print from Lightroom by converting the photo to B&W in the Lightroom HSL/B&W panel. Use the same paper profile you would use for any other prints. You may also consider buying NIK Silver Efex Pro 2 which can be installed to operate in conjunction with Lightroom. You would access it from the Photo>Edit In.... drop-down menu. It provides for added local control over tone and many interesting presets.
Converting a colour image to B&W in Lightroom is my main tool. I really like the control that the HSL panel gives me. But you have to have a very good colour profile to get a good B&W profile. Most of the profiles that can be downloaded from the paper manufacturers don't give a stable grey balance from black to white, according to my tests.
And then the lightfastness of the print isn't at all as good as a real B&W profile, which uses the three black inks almost exclusively. It's only in the darker areas that the colour inks are used.
-
Mark's suggestions are excellent. The Epson ABW driver does give a deeper Dmax and can give outstanding results but since Apple OS crippled the use of profiles for this driver, one cannot use ABW profiles for soft proofing such that trial and error printing is the only route available. Such profiles can still be used with WinOS making it easier to preview results and correct toning prior to printing. I'm still on Win7 and most of my B/W printing is done with the Epson ABW driver. I also submitted a bunch of test prints using Hahnemuhle PhotoRag Ultra Smooth to Aardenburg for stability testing.
The soft proofing in ImagePrint is one of the advantages of that RIP. It's easy to judge how the print will look, I can even do minor changes in contrast and/or lightness. Another important area for us is that we don't have to worry about the small changes in the printing pipe line that has happened with almost every upgrade of the Mac OS. As we now and then have to reprint a file it's important for us that we have a stable system. And the tinting in ABW is pretty weak compared to ImagePrint's tinting. As the photographers we are working with want us to emulate the look of the papers and developers that they are using in the darkroom, this is an important feature for us.
-
Quadtone RIP has not been mentioned and cannot be underestimated as a viable B&W printing option. Not only will it use your OEM inks in a much more optimal manner for B&W printing, it will give you much more sophisticated control of your print hue, allowing separate curve blends for highlights, mid tones, and shadows. Despite a reputation to the contrary, assuming supported printer and paper curves, you will be up and going quickly. It is a sophisticated enough driver for others to dig into and create unique use and curves for custom inksets as well, including Jon Cone's utilization of it for Piezography. Complexity comes with digging into customization and unusual inksets, but again, that is not that hard for many either, and there is a vibrant yahoo user group to help.
Given it's low shareware cost (you can try it for free), it's an option that must be on the list.
Additionally the QTR Print Tool is an amazing tool I would advise for anyone printing anything, color or B&W. For many of us involved in color management, it's become the only way to reliably print profile charts.
Quadtone RIP will make use of your 3 blacks, and the additional color inks for hue control, in a optimal manner like the much more expensive options, for$50. SHould you decide to proceed into specialty B&W inksets, you will already have QTR under your belt.
Tyler
-
Converting a colour image to B&W in Lightroom is my main tool. I really like the control that the HSL panel gives me. But you have to have a very good colour profile to get a good B&W profile. Most of the profiles that can be downloaded from the paper manufacturers don't give a stable grey balance from black to white, according to my tests.
And then the lightfastness of the print isn't at all as good as a real B&W profile, which uses the three black inks almost exclusively. It's only in the darker areas that the colour inks are used.
I get around the profile problem by creating my own using the ArgyllCMS. I can include a 52 step B/W patch set in with the color patches and get a profile that works well for both color prints and B/W using the normal Epson print driver.
-
I get around the profile problem by creating my own using the ArgyllCMS. I can include a 52 step B/W patch set in with the color patches and get a profile that works well for both color prints and B/W using the normal Epson print driver.
But is it possible to create a profile that uses mostly the black inks in the highlights and mid tones and only adds colour inks to neutralize the print colour and deepens the black? That's important to minimize the metameric failure, which is a real problem with B&W prints? Can you create a profile without using the yellow inks, that isn't as light fast as the other inks? I haven't used Argyll, so I don't know.
If it's only to get a really stable gray balance there are other ways. To do that with a profile made in i1Profiler I use a target with some 2000 patches as a fine tuning step. I have no idea if that will give you a better result than the Argyll does, as I haven't tested that profiling program. But for the profiles I create for the Epson driver, it's OK.
-
Many thanks. That has given me a lot to ponder. I should have mentioned that I don't use LR, and won't in the future. I use C1 exclusively and Phocus for my old H stuff. I much prefer the look of colour from them. Additionally, I use Nik Silver Efex for my B&W conversions. I'm also wary of RIPs, having bought ColorBurst at full price only to have support dropped and then buying Overdrive which has it's own set of issues for me. Currently, I am using Mirage which is proving to be stable and easy to use.
When I looked at the Imageprint site, the first thing that I saw was the B&W feature. The impression is that I just press a button for instant B&W. I've never found that to be the case. If it's true, I wonder what I have been doing all this time with SEP.
My inclination is to try QTR, just to get the hang of it. I already have it from a while back. From memory, the last time that I looked at it, soft proofing was not an option. looking again, Print Tool appears to include it but the manual is not crystal clear on how to use it. I'm assuming that I need to select a QTR profile for soft proofing. If I get this going to my satisfaction, I can look at ink sets later.
-
When I looked at the Imageprint site, the first thing that I saw was the B&W feature. The impression is that I just press a button for instant B&W. I've never found that to be the case. If it's true, I wonder what I have been doing all this time with SEP.
You can use the profile to convert a colour image to a B&W. I have never used that feature, as I loose all control over how the conversion is done. I convert an image either directly in Lightroom/CameraRaw, or I do it in Photoshop. But believe it or not, we often print from scanned B&W negatives. No conversions necessary.
So you could continue to convert your image to B&W in SEP or whatever software that gives you a result that you like and then use ImagePrint for printing.
-
Thanks Stefan. I can't ever open a file without having a play with it.
-
Thanks Stefan. I can't ever open a file without having a play with it.
I hope that you report how you like Quadtone. I think it is interesting software, I've tested it once and didn't really like it. But as with most software, you invest a lot of time and learn how to interact with it, how to get around the different limitations. I've been working with ImagePrint since 2002, and I think that I know how to get the most out of that program. It's hard for a new program to compete, it has to have really strong advantages compared to the program you are familiar with.
-
I will report back. Imageprint is a lot of cash for personal use. If that's what I need, i'll buy it buf i'll invest time in QTR first. If I can't accurately soft proof, it won't be long.
-
It is a lot of cash, so I would do the same as you. From what I've heard, I think you will be satisfied. For me, who has a production running, the cost of the software is a minor consideration. Does it save me 10 minutes time each day, it is worth every öre it costs.
-
But is it possible to create a profile that uses mostly the black inks in the highlights and mid tones and only adds colour inks to neutralize the print colour and deepens the black? That's important to minimize the metameric failure, which is a real problem with B&W prints? Can you create a profile without using the yellow inks, that isn't as light fast as the other inks? I haven't used Argyll, so I don't know.
If it's only to get a really stable gray balance there are other ways. To do that with a profile made in i1Profiler I use a target with some 2000 patches as a fine tuning step. I have no idea if that will give you a better result than the Argyll does, as I haven't tested that profiling program. But for the profiles I create for the Epson driver, it's OK.
Unless you are willing to write a new printer driver that controls the inks you are limited by Epson's driver which does use small amounts of yellow ink. Thus the ArgyllCMS profiles will reflect this. While it does post light fast problems that is also dependent on the paper you print on. Most of my printing is on Museo Silver Rag which seems to have better fade resistance than other papers as per studies on the Aardenburg website. Maybe the QTR driver addresses this; I'm not sure as I print straight from LR using either the ABW or normal Epson driver.
-
There is an article on LuLa that really explains why I prefer ImagePrint for my B&W printing. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/bw_master_print.shtml is written by George DeWolfe and in the end of that article he writes about the different B&W printing methods, how he has tested them and why he came to the conclusion that Imageprint was the best software for his needs.
This is his summary:
The quality is better than the other processes I’ve tried. This includes the HP and Epson B&W interfaces (which tend to print too green), poor profiles for all of standard printer drivers, a dirth of profiles for the Quadtone RIP, and dedicating inksets like MIS and Piezography to one printer (because they only print B&W).
-
profiles for soft proof can easily be made with the free utility that comes with QTR. In fact they can be useful for a variety of types of output, including ABW etc.. Whether you make them in RGB mode or grayscale mode, the softproof LUTs are color so they will reflect your ink/paper hue as well.
Tyler
-
Thanks Tyler. It looks like my i1 is about to get a bit of a workout.
-
I did a search and came across this while looking for RIP Software. Bowhaus.com!
-
Canon only
-
Imageprint is a lot of cash for personal use.
I have justified the cost of ImagePrint to myself, as being a cost effective means of saving at least the same amount in ink and paper that otherwise would be wasted. Is that true? I can't definitively say after 1 year of ownership, maybe ask me in 5 years time to see if my opinion has changed.
However, I can say this: (1) that the ability to easily use all sorts of odd proportioned scraps and trimmings of paper for test strips means that I both print more test strips and have fewer full-sized prints I am unhappy with, (2) The paper profiles are very good, and I especially like the fact that there are separate profiles for B&W and color printing, and (3) the ability to reduce the ink load when printing large areas with a solid colour (i.e. black ink in a night-time sky) reduces ink consumption. I believe that Imageprint does this automatically to some extent.
In my opinion, ImagePrint is both very convenient to use and a way to save money in the long run.
-
Thanks Jay. I may yet come to that decision but I have all the gear that I need to build profiles etc so I can fiddle to my heart's content at little cost. Maybe, if I'd bought Imageprint a few years back instead of Colorburst, I wouldn't be having this discussion.
-
QTR is not looking too flash on support. I posed one question and got a great response. I then pushed my luck and asked a second. 24 hours later the silence is deafening. Maybe patience is a requirement but it makes learning difficult.
-
QTR is not looking too flash on support. I posed one question and got a great response. I then pushed my luck and asked a second. 24 hours later the silence is deafening. Maybe patience is a requirement but it makes learning difficult.
You got to understand QTR does not have a large organization behind them. You need to be more patient as they do not have someone sitting at the phone waiting for it to ring.
-
You got to understand QTR does not have a large organization behind them. You need to be more patient as they do not have someone sitting at the phone waiting for it to ring.
The software companies shouldn't be too small, as they can't handle support questions. Software companies shouldn't be too big, bigger companies don’t care. Is there an optimum size? ;)
-
QTR is not looking too flash on support. I posed one question and got a great response. I then pushed my luck and asked a second. 24 hours later the silence is deafening. Maybe patience is a requirement but it makes learning difficult.
there is a Yahoo QTR Users Group which has over 4000 members. A lot of simple questions can be dealt with there. https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/QuadtoneRIP/info
-
You can try QTR for *free* but if you continue to use it, and register (pay the rather nominal and worthwhile fee) it entitles you to full support for QTR. I'll place bets questions are answered much quicker for registered users... ;)
QTR works great when paired with Jon Cone's K7 B&W Piezography. I really like the latest MPS iteration of the system.
ken
-
With the exception of the expensive RIPs, I've tried many different b&w options, from the channel mixer in Photoshop, through the conversion in Lightroom, ABW, and QTR, and have settled on using Silver Effex and doing a straight print. I took a class in Silver Effex from a friend and colleague and learned of its many features. And no I do not work for Nik Software or whomever owns it now. Silver Effex gives impressive control over the process and can produce stunning results. It can also be overdone and produce ghastly results, I know, I've done both. Were there no Silver Effex, I'd certainly use QTR, Roy Harrington wrote and supports a superb piece of software at a very affordable price, a genuine bargain for what you get. I was never able to really do the soft proofing but got to know it pretty well during the time I printed with it. In fact, I've recently experimented with Silver Effex, no toning and then printing in QTR, quite interesting and with impressive potential. I wonder if anyone else has tried this approach.
-
With the exception of the expensive RIPs, I've tried many different b&w options, from the channel mixer in Photoshop, through the conversion in Lightroom, ABW, and QTR, and have settled on using Silver Effex and doing a straight print. I took a class in Silver Effex from a friend and colleague and learned of its many features. And no I do not work for Nik Software or whomever owns it now. Silver Effex gives impressive control over the process and can produce stunning results. It can also be overdone and produce ghastly results, I know, I've done both. Were there no Silver Effex, I'd certainly use QTR, Roy Harrington wrote and supports a superb piece of software at a very affordable price, a genuine bargain for what you get. I was never able to really do the soft proofing but got to know it pretty well during the time I printed with it. In fact, I've recently experimented with Silver Effex, no toning and then printing in QTR, quite interesting and with impressive potential. I wonder if anyone else has tried this approach.
I think the two, how you convert to B&W and how you print your converted image are separate things. I also use SilverEfx to convert the image to B&W, but I get totally different results depending on what method I use to print that same converted image. I have an HP Z3100 printer that I use to print the image if I use some tinting during the conversion to B&W. The Z3100 produces very nice B&W images just printing from LR. I also have a dedicated Epson 3880 printer with Piezography inks and use QTR to print. The prints I get from the Piezography ink set using QTR cannot be matched with the Z3100. The tonal differences are just too much.
-
Mea Culpa, as usual, I didn't make myself abundantly clear. It is now close to 48 hours with no response. The questions that I posted were on the QTR forum. I actually joined it in 2008, when, to the best of my knowledge, I also paid for a QTR licence. I can run QTR having not done so since 2008 so I assume that I have a valid license, I'll happily buy one of that isn't the case.
Earlier in this topic, Tyler said that the QTR Yahoo group is vibrant. It appears closer to moribund to me on my small sample, hence my post. I would also dispute support as a function of size. Vuescan is probably the best supported piece of software that I have ever used. I don't think that Ed Hamrick ever sleeps. To the best of my knowledge, he is a one man band.
I am acting on a suggestion that appeared early in this topic which was to try QTR using standard Epson inks, and then progress to a dedicated b&W printer down the line if I found that I liked using QTR. My post on lack of response on the forum was to provide some feedback on my progress.
-
you are subject to the whims of internet forums there and anywhere. This forum tends to attract fairly quick responses of varying usefulness because of the sheer numbers of members. That group is a niche user group, not a support group, if no one happens to read your post with direct experience with your particular issues, you are likely to get no reply. Nonetheless it is certainly vibrant compared to other niche groups I'm on, and often Roy will address posts there directly. I'll reply for you there as best I can. Hamrick is an anomaly, certainly not the norm to expect from others. I usually get answers there, but I may have to wait some days.
-
Thanks Tyler. That makes good sense. It's a pity that it isn't a bit more active. It would make learning a lot quicker. I agree that Ed Hamrick is an anomaly, and I'm pleased that he is. There are plenty of other smallish outfits who provide excellent service these days. My experience has been generally good of late. I have spent thirty something years supporting my own software for mainframes. It's not an easy gig when things go wrong, and mainframe users tend to have bigger clubs to beat you with.
-
I have never used ABW on my Epson printers, but feel that the other options for B&W are more attractive.
Not for nothing, but if you haven't explored the Epson ABW, you are working from a point of ignorance...do you have half a clue about what you are doing? There's a big difference between how to convert from color>B&W and how to print B&W images...so far, nothing you've posted indicates you have half a clue how to print B&W (since you've never bothered to use ABW on Epson printers).
You can flail away as you want, or maybe, you might want to ask the ultimate question: how one prints the ultimate B&W images?
-
Humble apologies, Jeff, I was unaware of the need to prove that I know what I am talking about. Further, I was also unaware that ABW was what I need to demonstrate proficiency in to show that I am not clueless. I hope that I may have at least some clue having watched your videos and read your book but possibly not. If I were to ask the question 'how one prints the ultimate B&W images?' would you provide an answer?
-
If I were to ask the question 'how one prints the ultimate B&W images?' would you provide an answer?
You betcha...assuming you want to use an unmodified Epson, I would suggest the QTR...it's really easy on Mac but more problematic on Win. However, if you are willing to use 3rd party inks, I would suggest the Cone B&W inks. However, it's a one way trip and even then I would suggest using the QTR to drive it.
Sorry you were offended with my previous post, but asking for alternatives without having used ABW on your own images struck me as odd. If you do learn how to use ABW then you'll have something to compare to alternative approaches.
-
QTR is not difficult and there is a workflow available on the website. To have that capability in a $50.00 shareware software is a miracle and I would say it is the biggest bang for the buck you could find in this world of monochrome printmaking, IF you are using an Epson machine, regardless of the inkset you are using.
Really he's done all the work for you unless you are using some exotic media. All you have to do is install the package, select the QTR driver in Photoshop as your printer, pull down the menu to select your curve and you are done. If you want to soft proof for color as Tyler is describing it is slightly more involved but very well designed. Personally I don't soft proof monochrome because I've always done paper tests to select my hue toning if necessary and use those settings over and over. Most of us only use two or three mono print colors anyway. QTR also has split toning capability, and that is also well designed.
If you are on the Canon platform, True Black and White is fantastic, and that's what I use on the LF Canon. It costs a lot more than QTR and only works on Mac, but it's a damn good solution in that you can use only black and gray inks for a neutral print, and easily tone your file if that is needed by simply adjusting hue sliders. Then you save that setting for future use. It also allows you to plug your I1 spectro directly into the software and linearize your specific paper using their pre made grayscale. It is well worth the money if you print with a Canon IPF printer.
Epson ABW is adequate for some people and easy to use but the other above options give you much more control of profile making and linearization, and they can shut off the problem yellow ink entirely. For those of you who don't know, Epson bw prints are quite permanent as long as you avoid the yellow.
Studio Print is the ultimate for monochrome printing and no one has ever beat that really, but quite a bit more expensive than Image Print or any of these. The workflow is has a significant learning curve and support for bw printing from Ergo Soft is a pain in the ass. It can be linearized with multiple iterations to really fine tune tonal distribution and I find it makes slightly sharper prints with Epson 2880 ppi workflows. I just quit using it because QTR will do anything I need to have done just about as well If I"m on the Epson platform with a lot less trouble.
john
-
Newbie questions:
Why would someone want to use Epson ABW or any other RIP to convert an image to BW? I would assume that you don't have as much control.
And, if My image is already converted to BW, are these Rips that useful?
Thanks
-
Thanks Jeff. A lot of digging around on the web had led me to think that QTR, with an alternate ink inkset, was a better solution than ABW. I'm really looking for the next step along the way, and it looks like the Cone inks are the solution. In the meantime, I can come to grips with QTR on my 3880. I may well go back and try ABW later but for now, I'll concentrate on learning QTR.
-
Thanks John. QTR is a screaming bargain, no argument there. I'm happy to hit the learning curve. It would be great if there were more papers and a more active forum but, I guess that is the price that you pay.
-
Why would someone want to use Epson ABW or any other RIP to convert an image to BW? I would assume that you don't have as much control.
And, if My image is already converted to BW, are these Rips that useful?
Epson ABW and QTR are to print B&W images not convert them.
-
And, if My image is already converted to BW, are these Rips that useful?
Thanks
No one who is interested in quality uses the RIP to convert an image from colour to B&W. We use the tools in Lightroom/Camera Raw, Photoshop or plug-ins to convert our images. But a RIP is useful when you want to control the amount of ink that should be used to produce a certain tone. They give much more precise control over the mix of inks that is used. And the prints that is produced by a RIP like ImagePrint, which I use, last a lot longer than a print produced by the Epson printer driver and a icc-profile. And when I say a lot longer, I mean a loooot longer. You can check out the differences on http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com.
If you don't want to invest in a solution like ImagePrint or learn QTR, you should at least use Epson's Advanced B&W option. It is a major step forward in quality compared to the normal print workflow for B&W images.
-
No one who is interested in quality uses the RIP to convert an image from colour to B&W. We use the tools in Lightroom/Camera Raw, Photoshop or plug-ins to convert our images. But a RIP is useful when you want to control the amount of ink that should be used to produce a certain tone. They give much more precise control over the mix of inks that is used. And the prints that is produced by a RIP like ImagePrint, which I use, last a lot longer than a print produced by the Epson printer driver and a icc-profile. And when I say a lot longer, I mean a loooot longer. You can check out the differences on http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com.
If you don't want to invest in a solution like ImagePrint or learn QTR, you should at least use Epson's Advanced B&W option. It is a major step forward in quality compared to the normal print workflow for B&W images.
Thank you for the explanation. I got a little confused. I just thought that if I have a BW image processed in PS and go to print that with a profiled paper, I would get a great print. But your saying that a RIP (QTR,ABW,ETC) will given me an even better product?
-
But your saying that a RIP (QTR,ABW,ETC) will given me an even better product?
Without a doubt. If you use an ordinary color profile it's very hard to get a stable grey balance. Also the separation in the shadow and highlights is better with a solution like ImagePrint, QTR and Advanced B&W. Another area that's important for us is the greatly improved lightfastness.
-
Great posts about digital black and white printing. I believe the study of Master black and white gelatin silver, platinum, paladium or even gold tone contact prints like my friend Linda Connor creates is an important way to improve your sense of what a truly fine black and white image looks like. Decide on a particular substrate and send this paper to some of the fine people on this list with one image file to get sample prints for viewing from the different inkset, printers and software discussed. Live with these prints for as long as it takes to make your final printer, paper, inkset decision.
You can't go wrong with ImagePrint but it will cost you and only work for that particulare printer you decide to use today. QTR the best bang for the buck. Great software. ABW a good starting point if not a final answer for some. LR also has special features for the black and white printer. I think it important to learn from the fine analog black and white artists work to move forward with your own digital black and white. Digital will never be the same as gelatin silver or the other darkroom processes but studying what came before digital can help decide on how to move forward. Some may disagree but that's how I see it after 40 years in photography.
-
Seeing the work of masters is an excellent idea, and probably harder down here. I didn't realise that it would be possible to have a print done as you suggest. Can you suggest a few names. I have the Cone sample set on the way already. I'm hoping that is informative.
-
Jeff,
Smart move ordering the Cone sample print set.
I don't really want to put any specific people on the spot to make prints for you. I think if you review the posters on this subject you can sort out those contributors who have the ImagePrint RIP, LR or QTR though I think you might want to sample the QTR on your own along with making an ABW print for yourself. QRT has some fine profiles to use with the OEM Epson inkset and/or the Cone inkset. Remember in the Epson ABW you can choose between Neutral, Cool, Warm etc but you can also tweek the tone to your liking as well. If you prefer a split tone print I've not found a way using ABW but LR works and I suspect ImagePrint RIP also has profiles. I haven't used the ImagePrint RIP myself but my friend Richard Misrach uses it and he is one of the outstanding photographers of my generation. There are some very generous people on this site. I'm sure someone will come forward with a print or two after you supply them with the substrate.
The proof is always in the print. Good luck.
-
Thanks again. I couldn't agree more about the generosity of the members of LuLa. There are some extremely helpful people. I only frequent this and the colour management forums. Both are excellent. I'll dig around further for a source of prints.
-
Totally agree! What an outpouring of knowledge here! I have learned so much on this journey into LFP from everyone and keep learning.
Since I do so much BW and decided on a Canon ipf, I definitely don't have much of a choice. But that's ok! True Black and White will be worth it. I did a live comparison of Epson and Canon printers and the Canon produces noticeably deeper and richer blacks. The Epson produces better colors , but not as noticeable.
-
I was wrong anout QTR support. It may not be fast but the quality is excellent. The first few prints are looking very promising.
-
.
You can't go wrong with ImagePrint but it will cost you and only work for that particulare printer you decide to use today.
Not correct. It will work with all Epson printers of the same size. If you decide to upgrade from a EPSON 4800 to a Epson 4900 it will work right away, no need to upgrade. If however you decide to go up in printer size you'll have to get a new license.
-
Alan, I see that you use ABW (Advanced B&W mode) on a Windows computer. I currently use it on my MacPro, but am running an older OS -- 10.6.8.
I have not updated my operating system for fear that I will not be able to use Advanced B&W mode. Since I work in B&W 90% of the time, I need the ABW mode. Does anyone know whether ABW will be gone if I upgrade to OS 10.10 (code name Yosemite)?
-
I would it expect it should, because I am on Mavericks (the version just before Yosemite) and the Epson driver continues to support ABW Mode in Mavericks; but I don't know factually for Yosemite. I recommend you give a (free) call to Epson Pro Graphics Tech Support - they SHOULD know for sure!
BTW, I visited your website - absolutely stunning photography.
-
Alan, I see that you use ABW (Advanced B&W mode) on a Windows computer. I currently use it on my MacPro, but am running an older OS -- 10.6.8.
I have not updated my operating system for fear that I will not be able to use Advanced B&W mode. Since I work in B&W 90% of the time, I need the ABW mode. Does anyone know whether ABW will be gone if I upgrade to OS 10.10 (code name Yosemite)?
What I did before was get a new harddrive (they are quite cheap now) and install the new OSX 10.10 on it. Keep the 10.6.8 runs forever! Even it is not the fastest but is the most promising OSX for us who use it to print.
But honestly, I've switeched from OSX to Windows. It just has a lot more option and alternate to print anything for my variable clients.
Aaron
-
Thanks Mark. I really appreciate your praise. Here are a couple brand new images that I'm dying to print .... once I replace my 7900. UGH
-
Both super - the "floating" one in particular!
-
Alan, I see that you use ABW (Advanced B&W mode) on a Windows computer. I currently use it on my MacPro, but am running an older OS -- 10.6.8.
I have not updated my operating system for fear that I will not be able to use Advanced B&W mode. Since I work in B&W 90% of the time, I need the ABW mode. Does anyone know whether ABW will be gone if I upgrade to OS 10.10 (code name Yosemite)?
You have just stated one of the more important reasons for us not to use the Epson driver. There are alternatives which don't change in minor or major ways between upgrades. I think that I don't have to state what I use instead :-) By now it should be fairly obvious
Med vänliga hälsningar
Stefan
www.profiler.nu
-
I'm not on a Mac but my understanding from the countless threads on LuLa is that MacOS supports Epson ABW printing but does not allow soft proofing (you certainly can soft proof a B/W print using a conventional profile and if you use a conventional profile there are ways to improve the B/W performance by including a B/W step wedge set of patches when you generate the profile).
-
I'm not on a Mac but my understanding from the countless threads on LuLa is that MacOS supports Epson ABW printing but does not allow soft proofing (you certainly can soft proof a B/W print using a conventional profile and if you use a conventional profile there are ways to improve the B/W performance by including a B/W step wedge set of patches when you generate the profile).
Alan, are you getting ABW soft-proofing on Windows? I thought this limitation is with the ABW approach and not the operating system, but............?
-
I'm not sure what the soft proof issue is here.. ABW in and of itself has nothing to do with soft proofing. The OS and and app do... but any soft proofing depends on the existence of a profile. Unless one makes or acquires one, there is no inherent ability to proof. For ABW using the EOM driver, or for QTR, these are easily created with the tools that come with QTR for an economical shareware price. Other methods are available as Eric Chan demonstrated. Depending on various workflows, you may have to make RGB or normal single channel versions. Using ABW, which I believe will not allow for a profile conversion in the print path, and requires a 2.2 gamma file space for best results, you'd use your profile in soft proof with preserve numbers checked. There are other specifics involved depending on workflow and driver, etc, but to my knowledge, nothing impairing a softproof workflow on the Mac.
-
Alan, are you getting ABW soft-proofing on Windows? I thought this limitation is with the ABW approach and not the operating system, but............?
Yes, I do get soft-proofing with ABW profiles. It's locked out with MacOS but still available with Win7. There was a rather long thread on this last year: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=85317.0 Phil Brown said that it still works with Win8.1 and I'm still on Win7
Alan
EDIT: I should clarify that the profiles are prepared using the QTR scripting tool with a 51 step B/W patch set printed with the ABW driver.
EDIT#2: Tyler is incorrect, one cannot soft proof with MacOS using up to date system as referenced in the link I posted above.
-
Thanks Alan - correct - I recall that thread now - useful.
-
...EDIT#2: Tyler is incorrect, one cannot soft proof with MacOS using up to date system as referenced in the link I posted above.
Hello Alan, I can be addressed directly like a human as well. These examples are with PS CC 2014.2.1 Release. OSX v 10.9.5
You may be right about the very newest OSX versions, in which case I stand corrected. The profiles used here are made with QTR-Create-ICC or QTR-Create-ICC-RGB accordingly, for a client's personal QTR and paper setup. I assure I have done the same thing for other clients using the ABW driver, with similar success.
In all cases the ABW driver could be invoked when printing. Of course in that case, one would have checked preserve numbers for soft proofing while editing, since profile conversion is not in that specific print path. I hope the captures make sense, if I am missing something I'm happy to be corrected. Examples are show for both RGB B&W and grayscale B&W, each with RGB and Single channel builds of the profiles.
The hue in the softproof is due to the specific QTR curves used for hue control in this specific setup, as QTR profiles, whether single channel or RGB builds, use RGB softproof LUTs.
Tyler
-
Tyler - I was only repeating what was said last year on the lengthy exchange. I don't have a Mac so I cannot give any first hand knowledge about this. If it works for you that is great; I'll let other Mac users weigh in on this.
Alan
-
By reading just about all of the comments here it sounds like I can make perfectly good BW prints using Epson's ABW and Epson's inks in a 3800 printer! Logic tells me that having 7 different shades of BW inks would produce a much better tonal range in a print over Epson's ABW module. In reading there comments here it doesn't sound like there is a dramatic difference. If there is not a dramatic difference why spend hundreds of dollars on Cone's inks?
Or am I missing something? I wish I could make a print myself on my 3800 and make an identical print using Cone's inks to really see if there is much of a difference!
Frustrating. ; )
-
By reading just about all of the comments here it sounds like I can make perfectly good BW prints using Epson's ABW and Epson's inks in a 3800 printer! Logic tells me that having 7 different shades of BW inks would produce a much better tonal range in a print over Epson's ABW module. In reading there comments here it doesn't sound like there is a dramatic difference. If there is not a dramatic difference why spend hundreds of dollars on Cone's inks?
Or am I missing something? I wish I could make a print myself on my 3800 and make an identical print using Cone's inks to really see if there is much of a difference!
Frustrating. ; )
I don't know what logic would tell you that seven grey inks are better than three. That isn't the only factor determining output quality; for example there is the paper you use, ink mixing, dithering and tonality management in your imaging software. Obviously there are algorithms controlling ink lay-down from the three channels that produce the maximum Black and the smooth and subtle tonalities that these printers can deliver - as well as your skill in preparing the files. I don't think there is any alternative but comparative testing to see whether the Cone approach outperforms Epson's on whatever the criteria you set. You'd need to find someone with the appropriate set-up to work with.
-
By reading just about all of the comments here it sounds like I can make perfectly good BW prints using Epson's ABW and Epson's inks in a 3800 printer! Logic tells me that having 7 different shades of BW inks would produce a much better tonal range in a print over Epson's ABW module. In reading there comments here it doesn't sound like there is a dramatic difference. If there is not a dramatic difference why spend hundreds of dollars on Cone's inks?
Or am I missing something? I wish I could make a print myself on my 3800 and make an identical print using Cone's inks to really see if there is much of a difference!
Frustrating. ; )
Logic is sometimes bad for you, experience is better. If you have a 3800 printer, go ahead and print a file with ABW. Then you can request a test print from Cone from the same file. Do a comparison when you get the print from him. If you don't see any difference, go ahead and print with ABW and be happy. If you see a difference you have to decide if the better quality is worth the extra expense and that you now will have a printer that you only can use for B&W printing. Your own experience is much more important than the logic that more inks=better result.
Best regards
Stefan
http://www.korta.nu/profiler
-
Logic is sometimes bad for you, experience is better.
Stefan
http://www.korta.nu/profiler
:-)
-
A lot of what is best comes down to what you print. In my continued digging on the subject, I read a piece by Jon Cone where he says that, piezography is not for you if you are into high contrast, and heavy blacks. Piezogaphy is about long tonal ranges. My Plan A for now is to use QTR on my3880 with Epson inks and piezography on a 2400 when I want the tones that it can produce.
Again, from my reading, I'm still waiting for my inks to arrive, it occurs to me that your PS work needs more attention with piezography as you are going to see more shadow and highlight detail that with ABW or QTR on Rpson inks.
I wouldn't bother buying the sample prints from IJM. They are too small for serious appraisal.
-
A lot of what is best comes down to what you print. In my continued digging on the subject, I read a piece by Jon Cone where he says that, piezography is not for you if you are into high contrast, and heavy blacks. Piezogaphy is about long tonal ranges. My Plan A for now is to use QTR on my3880 with Epson inks and piezography on a 2400 when I want the tones that it can produce.
Again, from my reading, I'm still waiting for my inks to arrive, it occurs to me that your PS work needs more attention with piezography as you are going to see more shadow and highlight detail that with ABW or QTR on Rpson inks.
I wouldn't bother buying the sample prints from IJM. They are too small for serious appraisal.
Jeff, when your inks arrive, it would be useful to do side by side tests of Cone versus Epson driver (not necessarily ABW) vs QTR for a good sample photo that require long tonal range and another that requires high contrast with maximum black. My prediction is that given the state of technology reached in your 3880, you may be surprised how narrow the differences may be - but that's just an intuition as I have not seen such a comparison myself. All I know is the B&W work emerging from my 4900 is good enough to dispel any interest in other options, and the difference of IQ between the 3880 and 4900 is not that much.
-
Mark, will do, and I'll report back.
-
Super - I think many members will find that very interesting.
-
It was this very thread, followed by the one I posted asking some questions about ImagePrint, that led me down the road of... Piezography.
Six weeks ago I was perfectly happy with ABW. Although I might have considered a piece of software (a la ImagePrint or QTR), I was adamant against using 3rd-party inks. I simply wasn't going to go there.
Well, there you go.
During the couple days while I waited for Cone's inks to arrive, I printed a number of recent images using ABW so that I would have a direct basis of comparison. I've got a spare set of Epson carts waiting in the printer stand, to get me back square, should that be indicated. Well, well.
I'll have more to say shortly, but the short answer, after making a 100+ prints with Cone's K7 Warm Neutral inkset, on a wide variety of both matte and glossy papers, is there is no question in my mind that Piezography holds a distinctive, consistent, qualitative advantage over ABW. That advantage is more pronounced in images that benefit from a long tonal range. And it becomes more profound as you go up in size.
You can easily achieve deep black, high-contrast images, if that's what you're after. You just have to edit for it. If you have a pixel that is mapped to tonal values of 1 or 2 or 3, you'll actually get detail from that pixel. Only zero will give you true black.
Same thing on the highlight end. Piezography's inks will differentiate the entire tonal scale. Most other printing systems, including Epson's ABW, can't do that.
That's the good news. The bad news is that the fidelity is so high that it will reveal every defect in your workflow. That calibrated monitor that seemed to soft-proof perfectly fine with ABW? Not so much anymore. If you can't see pretty much the entire Adobe 1998 gamut, you're flying blind. Making a print to see what's in that black-as-night shadow seems ass backwards. And it is.
Yes, you'll need that Eizo after all. And a GTI viewing station.
Like I said, I'll have more to say shortly...
-
Excellent, keep it coming! I can't begin to tell you how happy that makes me.
-
You can easily achieve deep black, high-contrast images, if that's what you're after. You just have to edit for it. If you have a pixel that is mapped to tonal values of 1 or 2 or 3, you'll actually get detail from that pixel. Only zero will give you true black.
Same thing on the highlight end. Piezography's inks will differentiate the entire tonal scale. Most other printing systems, including Epson's ABW, can't do that.
What other printing system have you tested? As this is one of the reasons that I like ImagePrint that you get this long grayscale, with a good separation in the extreme shadows and highlights. Bu you have to test the different papers that you use, and adjust the shadow point setting to fit that paper.
-
What is really required but probably difficult to achieve is a double blind visual test of various printing technologies. We cannot discount what our brains do during subjective testing. There is a long history of false results in the high end audio field with "experts" saying that various tweaks to stereo systems lead to superior performance when the science indicates otherwise.
-
What is really required but probably difficult to achieve is a double blind visual test of various printing technologies. We cannot discount what our brains do during subjective testing. There is a long history of false results in the high end audio field with "experts" saying that various tweaks to stereo systems lead to superior performance when the science indicates otherwise.
I agree Alan. When I need to do comparative testing and the outcomes aren't blatantly obvious, I write on the BACK of the print which is which, and ask my better half to tell me what she observes different between the prints without even letting-on what I am testing for. Very helpful! :-)
-
Alan, I see that you use ABW (Advanced B&W mode) on a Windows computer. I currently use it on my MacPro, but am running an older OS -- 10.6.8.
I have not updated my operating system for fear that I will not be able to use Advanced B&W mode. Since I work in B&W 90% of the time, I need the ABW mode. Does anyone know whether ABW will be gone if I upgrade to OS 10.10 (code name Yosemite)?
Hello Jan,
I haven't been in here for a few days and just read your post. I share your hesitation to upgrade the OS. My business is centred around my 9900 and any downtime due to OS issues etc are not at all productive. For more years than I care to admit I have maintained at least three clones(SuperDuper) of my OS and Apps partition on my main drive(Mac HD). These clones all reside on separate drives and it takes only a couple of minutes to reboot and be working again should there be an issue with the main drive partition. I also create a fourth clone of the OS and Apps when testing a new OS or update. That way I can test all of the apps I normally use on a daily basis to make sure everything is working correctly. The clone method is also very useful when testing, since all of my apps are cloned as well. The testing can be done after hours or any other convenient time. I will usually set up a schedule and check off each app as tested and ready for the new OS. I can then go ahead and install the new OS Upgrade on the main drive and be confident that everything will run as expected. In your case I would not advise upgrading to OS X 10.10.x directly from 10.6.8. As a matter of fact I believe Apple suggests running Lion at least before upgrading to Yosemete. You might want to look into that. I'm on Mavericks and of course ran the Clone tests before upgrading from Lion. As usual I will wait for a few months before entertaining the possibility of jumping on the Yosemete bandwagon, even though I have already downloaded the upgrade installer. As usual, I'll follow the input from the great folks here at Lula concerning Yosemete and the Epson Pro Printers, and then initiate my own clone test procedures. Hope perhaps some of this is helpful Jan.
Gary
-
Hi Gary,
Very prudent and sensible advice. My procedure isn't quite as deep as yours, but similar in approach and then again I have lighter requirements. I have Snow Leopard on one drive and Mavericks on another. Then I have an external 4TB G-Tech split into two partitions for clones of the two operating systems. I use Bombich Software's Carbon Copy Cloner to up-date the clones every day that anything significant is added to the system, be it software or documents. Like you, I adopt a conservative approach to system upgrading. I am not an early adopter, in fact only do it when some piece of software or other requires it. This is based on the leave well enough alone philosophy, but if you buy a camera which needs LR5 to demosaic the raw file and LR can't operate on Snow Leopard, bingo, upgrading becomes a necessary part of progress. Anyhow, I'm pleased to report that I have had ZERO problems operating all the usual stuff in Mavericks - the Adobe Suite, Lightroom, the Epson 4900, SilverFast, LSI PrinTao, etc. etc.
-
I have been using Lightroom 5 ABW mode to print and had not considered QTR until I read this thread. I downloaded and installed the software and installed profiles for Epson 3880 on a Mac OS X 10.9 system. I printed a sheet, no problem. However, I cannot find where in Lightroom one can adjust the curves. All documentation, including my Digital Print book, shows this happening in Photoshop. So how do LR users adjust the three QTR curves?
Thank you.
-
lower left in LR- "Print Settings", will bring up the print dialog, select the Quad3880 printer, make sure little arrow to the right is up (click on it), where it says layout scroll to QuadToneRIP.. there you will find all your controls. Selct and save, then back in LR go ahead and print...
You'll also find more informed users here-
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/QuadtoneRIP/info
good group to join
-
lower left in LR- "Print Settings", will bring up the print dialog, select the Quad3880 printer, make sure little arrow to the right is up (click on it), where it says layout scroll to QuadToneRIP.. there you will find all your controls. Selct and save, then back in LR go ahead and print...
You'll also find more informed users here-
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/QuadtoneRIP/info
good group to join
Thank you, thank you, thank you! I googled and searched and could not find it anywhere. Thanks a million!
-
On the original topic, here's an interesting read: http://www.bwmastery.com/blog/2015/abw-vs-qtr
-
I'm new to B&W printing so I really appreciated all of the information - thank you. I don't want to steal this thread but I'm wondering if available paper profiles would impact a decision. Someone using ABW for instance, would be able to download and use the paper manufacturers profile and therefore have ready access to way more paper profiles than an a Piezography who needs a specific profile for the inks. Or would you create custom profiles anyway.
I recently converted a 3880 to a piezography ink set (Selenium) and I'm still on the learning curve. I'm in northern Canada however. I don't have access to a lot of papers and shipping is expensive for the ones I can get. Chalk it up to inexperience but I didn't understand the impact of available paper profiles at the time and now I'm finding my paper choices are limited to the profiles supplied in QTR (which isn't necessarily what I can get). If I want a paper that doesn't have a profile in QTR I can get one custom made by Ink Jet Mall for a fee but other than that, my choices are limited to the supplied profiles.
Knowing this wouldn't have changed my decision - once I know more, I'll settle on a combination that works. I'm just curious what the more knowledgeable users are doing.
Thanks
Dave
-
Dave it takes some digging around, but depending on your Epson printer model, the curves for piezography can be "shared" amongst those with similar models. So for example, your 3880 can also utilize curves from the 3800, 7880/9880, 9800, etc.... There are different papers available in the curves folders; you just need to find them, and then try the curves on the various papers. If you feel you like a paper after that point, then you can consider a custom curve if you need it. I "discovered" this on my own with a K7 converted 9800, after determining that some of the 9800 curves were bad for some papers, yet when I "borrowed" curves for the 7880 or others, they looked fine.
I'm now using a converted K7 B&W 9890. For me I've found it best to select the papers that I like best, and stick with those. I consistently find myself reaching for Cone 2 and Cone 5, though I really like the papers from Canson as well. PM sent.
ken
-
You can create your own piezo profiles if you have a spectrometer that can give you a Lab value. You just need the L number though.
On Inkjetmall's piezo website there is a Linearization chart that you plug in your L values and see if it is linear or not over a 21 step chart. If it is off, you can open that *.quad file under QuadToneRIP>QuadTone>Quadxxxx-K7 with Notepad++ and take the 255 numerical values for any ink color and import the range into a spreadsheet and apply a plus or minus percentage value to raise or lower that particular ink to move the linearization error up or down into being a straight line.
QTR shows the 7-8 inks as colors and if the middle needs a boost, you concentrate on the inks shown in the middle and work on the 255 numbers in the *.quad file to shift it up or down applying something like a 0.90 times whatever value ink is in that range, or a 1.10 times whatever to move it the other direction on the curve.
Sort of hard to explain and it takes some time to do. Maybe easier to pay them them the $100, but you can do it in an evening and probably straighter than they can do if you keep working it. I've made about twenty 21 step panels on one sheet of 8.5x11 inch paper and altered the ink densities for each to make it about as straight as I could.
Basically you read the L value. Put them into the IJM Linearization spreadsheet. See where the highs or lows are. Examine the colors in QTR curves. Open the QUAD file used in Notepad++ (Freeware). Import it as text into a spreadsheet. Look for the ink to shift like C. Apply a pos/neg. multiplier to all the 255 values in that ink range. Save the file. Put it into the QuadTone folder. And try again in QTR and see if it is closer to the IJM Linearization straight line.
SG
-
SG have you floated this on the IJM forum?
-
Thanks Ken - that'll give me a few more options while I sort this out. Cone papers are expensive to get shipped here so I'm trying to find the best locally available alternative that works. I checked out the Inkpress Pro Baryta but both ITSupplies and Vistek were out of stock when I looked.
Dave
-
SG - As Jeff mentions, you might want to check about creating profiles for piezography inks on the IJM forum. I know that Jon Cone has indicated in past posts that paper/ink profiles need to be created by them.
If you find out differently, I'd be interested to know.
Thanks
Dave
-
Dave,
You can also ask on the IJM forum. This week I asked about Harman FB Matt, and had no luck. Today, I asked about Canson Rag Photographique and Dana provided a profile.
-
Fwiw, here is a linearization I did some time ago. In the upper right is the chart with the 21 steps in RGB that is read into the piezogrpahy linearization spreadsheet post in IJM piezo site.
The black line under the pink line is mine corrected. About as linear as I could do after maybe 15 changes in the quad file in Notepad++ that I worked between QTR Curves (The color bar chart in QTR that shows the color ink humps) and the spreadsheet with the values transferred from Notepad++ and back into a QUAD file.
Once you understand what color ink occurs on the pink line in the linearization, you can work the values up or down in the QUAD in a spreadsheet and save as another QUAD text file file.
No, I have not mentioned it in their forums as they make money doing the profiles. I just don't want to wait. Wasn't too crazy from the canned K7 profiles since my printer wasn't all that linear from them so a bit of experimentation was in order. All you are doing is moving the ink up and down in the Y-axis in the QTR colors and not left/right on the X-axis (unless you want to shift the values of "0" in the quad file). All I do is take some value of say Magenta Ink at line 1,500 that shows 10,000 and make a multiplier of some value like 0.9 to make it 9,000 or 1.1 to make it 11,000 which is less ink at that point or more. Of course you do it to all values around it too, just not the zero values at the extremes within the 255 range of the Magenta numbers.
Of course you need to read the chart valures and plug those into the linearization chart and see if it matches the pink line. I use an i1 PhotoPro 2 head with the spot attachment. Haven't had much luck in doing a auto-sweep into ColorPort though, but 21 steps manually read isn't too bad.
I also attached an image of a bad one prior to correction where you can see the black line waver. You need to guesstimate which color you attack in the curve from the QTR Color Curve and apply percentage change corrections to the values in the Quad file. Does take a while, but you can get to making it as linear as the image with the 21 step chart.
SG
Opps... Corrected image with 21 step image didn't upload. Corrected - I hope!
-
SG - just goes to show you how far down the learning curve I am. So much to learn, so little time. Nice work, hopefully I'll get there some day.
Thanks
Dave
-
Me too, Dave. I started this thread a while back. It has been quite an interesting read.
-
Jeff, first off, thanks for linking to my post. I've been getting a small exhibition together for the last few days and haven't had a chance to respond sooner. As I mentioned in one of the comments, I am working on getting a comparison posted of prints made with QTR, QTR with MIS Eboni-6- and with Piezography K6 and K7. In doing so I found that my two printers that I have cone inks loaded in are so out of whack that it wouldn't make an appropriate comparison (one is an older 3800 and one a brand new 1430).
About SomeGuy's method for altering the .quad file: Yes that is doable, but that method involves too much trial and too much error for what I would want to do. Applying a "global" % correction to one channel at a time where you think the problem is wont fix possible reversals or bumps in the curve—you would just be moving those bumps up or down the scale—If you made measurements of the 51 step target or created an 86 step target I bet you would see little bumps where the printer might be out just a little—if you print a smooth gradient or bullseye target it would make those problems with the printer/profile more apparent. If you are going to go through all that trouble, you could just make QTR curves from scratch the way people do with the MIS inks—it would take the 1/10 the time and would probably be smoother and more accurate, although it wouldn't have the exact shape of the Piezography curves.
I've been testing a prototype of something that does an automatic .quad correction in one shot and with just one measurement file (well, an average of one to three samples of one target). It is meant fix those kinds of nonlinear/bumps/reversal problems, because that is exactly what my printer was doing, and because those kinds of problems prevent the QTR linearization function from working with the standard QTR profile creation workflow. Without getting into too much detail, I was able to fix the issues and reprinted my show with new Cone Carbon K6 inks and these modified .quad curves. If anyone is in the Bethlehem, PA area this Saturday (2/7) from 6-10PM and wants to see prints made with this method, here is the link: http://www.richardboutwell.com/blog/2015/1/25/objects-of-our-discontent (http://www.richardboutwell.com/blog/2015/1/25/objects-of-our-discontent)
-
Jeff, first off, thanks for linking to my post. I've been getting a small exhibition together for the last few days and haven't had a chance to respond sooner. As I mentioned in one of the comments, I am working on getting a comparison posted of prints made with QTR, QTR with MIS Eboni-6- and with Piezography K6 and K7. In doing so I found that my two printers that I have cone inks loaded in are so out of whack that it wouldn't make an appropriate comparison (one is an older 3800 and one a brand new 1430).
About SomeGuy's method for altering the .quad file: Yes that is doable, but that method involves too much trial and too much error for what I would want to do. Applying a "global" % correction to one channel at a time where you think the problem is wont fix possible reversals or bumps in the curve—you would just be moving those bumps up or down the scale—If you made measurements of the 51 step target or created an 86 step target I bet you would see little bumps where the printer might be out just a little—if you print a smooth gradient or bullseye target it would make those problems with the printer/profile more apparent. If you are going to go through all that trouble, you could just make QTR curves from scratch the way people do with the MIS inks—it would take the 1/10 the time and would probably be smoother and more accurate, although it wouldn't have the exact shape of the Piezography curves.
I've been testing a prototype of something that does an automatic .quad correction in one shot and with just one measurement file (well, an average of one to three samples of one target). It is meant fix those kinds of nonlinear/bumps/reversal problems, because that is exactly what my printer was doing, and because those kinds of problems prevent the QTR linearization function from working with the standard QTR profile creation workflow. Without getting into too much detail, I was able to fix the issues and reprinted my show with new Cone Carbon K6 inks and these modified .quad curves. If anyone is in the Bethlehem, PA area this Saturday (2/7) from 6-10PM and wants to see prints made with this method, here is the link: http://www.richardboutwell.com/blog/2015/1/25/objects-of-our-discontent (http://www.richardboutwell.com/blog/2015/1/25/objects-of-our-discontent)
I agree with some of this, however I doubt using 8 inks 'that overlap' in QTR's curves with the QUAD files that you will visibly see it providing it is linear with as few as 21 steps.
If a target had 255 steps and the printer had 255 different shades of black, maybe one black not working would show up in the 255 steps. However, as it stands with the K7 quad profiles in QTR, they overlap ink-to-ink so the chance of something going visibly off is unlikely. More likely the printer will not print an "exact" copy print-to-print due to nozzle mis-firing, random clogs during a run, air pressure, ink separation, etc. This is really not an exact science, imho, and even same models of printers differ, sometimes day-to-day too for whatever reason. Even the hardware that reads it may drift in a few hours of use.
What I do does require a lot of trial and error and it gets tedious until you get in the grove of learning the curves. Take some time to learn how much percentage to change and to what color ink too. A percentage change shows the curves and density changes somewhere and it can be tailored to make it as linear as you like. Plus, you can flatten out the shadows for more detail, or do the opposite for the highlights. The percentage moves the black line in the above examples up or down on the Y-axis, just applying more or less ink of that channel to the print. The peak of the curve for that ink color remains at the same spot on the X-axis. Only way to change the X-axis is to alter the peak numbers on each side of the peak in the Quad file and specific ink channel. For the most part, they overlap each other adjacently (or more) as shown in QTR's color curves.
However, the problem I find is that once one gets the thing bang-on linear with a 'perfect overlap' of the pink line and black line, a subsequent run of the same step tablet might differ slightly and may not match on a subsequent run of the same tablet and settings. Close, but it's not exact and a slight black line in the above posted images may creep out. Probably why a tolerance is needed somewhere. I doubt if going to 51 or 100 steps will improve on a curve of 21 steps for B&W. A linear line is a linear line for as few inks as we use. Can't really improve on linear even reading 5000 steps with 8 inks unless you want to look at a pixelated line which probable will not matter out of a normal printer, and I doubt if you will see a visible change in a B&W print either.
SG
-
I agree with some of this, however I doubt using 8 inks 'that overlap' in QTR's curves with the QUAD files that you will visibly see it providing it is linear with as few as 21 steps.
If a target had 255 steps and the printer had 255 different shades of black, maybe one black not working would show up in the 255 steps. However, as it stands with the K7 quad profiles in QTR, they overlap ink-to-ink so the chance of something going visibly off is unlikely. More likely the printer will not print an "exact" copy print-to-print due to nozzle mis-firing, random clogs during a run, air pressure, ink separation, etc. This is really not an exact science, imho, and even same models of printers differ, sometimes day-to-day too for whatever reason. Even the hardware that reads it may drift in a few hours of use.
What I do does require a lot of trial and error and it gets tedious until you get in the grove of learning the curves. Take some time to learn how much percentage to change and to what color ink too. A percentage change shows the curves and density changes somewhere and it can be tailored to make it as linear as you like. Plus, you can flatten out the shadows for more detail, or do the opposite for the highlights. The percentage moves the black line in the above examples up or down on the Y-axis, just applying more or less ink of that channel to the print. The peak of the curve for that ink color remains at the same spot on the X-axis. Only way to change the X-axis is to alter the peak numbers on each side of the peak in the Quad file and specific ink channel. For the most part, they overlap each other adjacently (or more) as shown in QTR's color curves.
However, the problem I find is that once one gets the thing bang-on linear with a 'perfect overlap' of the pink line and black line, a subsequent run of the same step tablet might differ slightly and may not match on a subsequent run of the same tablet and settings. Close, but it's not exact and a slight black line in the above posted images may creep out. Probably why a tolerance is needed somewhere. I doubt if going to 51 or 100 steps will improve on a curve of 21 steps for B&W. A linear line is a linear line for as few inks as we use. Can't really improve on linear even reading 5000 steps with 8 inks unless you want to look at a pixelated line which probable will not matter out of a normal printer, and I doubt if you will see a visible change in a B&W print either.
SG
What you are recommending is the effectively like shooting from the hip until you hit some target. You might actually get very good at shooting from the hip too, but having good technique, knowing what you are trying to hit, and exactly how much to correct for a printer that is out of spec will get you there on the second shot every time. What you are doing might work for you, but I'd rather correct for it once for each paper and then be able to make perfect prints rather than measuring and reprinting 21 step targets and messing with text files all day.
As for how many steps and how many break up the gray scale: there are 256 (255+0) steps with a possible 65536 tones at each step. You might be able to see those tones, but they can be perceived in smooth gradients. Printers don't spit out ink linearly (nor does the dot-gain on paper respond linearly) for all the reasons you mentioned and more, so if you are measuring and adjusting based on only 21 of those 256 steps then there is a whole lot of wiggle room there that you might not be able to observe or correct for. If you can slice the grayscale up in smaller pieces like with 51, 86, or 128 (or even 256) step charts and then average out any variation in the printer or measurement device then you have more control on how you correct for variations in the printers' native response.
Without knowing how IJM makes their custom profiles, I imagine they use 256 steps is so they can do an exact lookup of each of the 6 or 7 16-bit ink% values at each of the 256 grayscale steps. It takes out any need for interpolation and possible variation from a single 5% gray step to the next. I made my QTR profiler prototype using 51 steps and interpolating the in between values—I tried it with only 21 steps and it didn't work. I will try 86 steps next, but for now I have something that works and I can tweak it further from here.
Take a look at the screen shot and see how much wobble there can be when using 51 steps. If I measured with 21 it would be nice and smooth—maybe not linear, but smoother.
Richard
-
Fwiw, I never could get the i1 PhotoPro head to auto-scan to generate a decent set of numbers for linearization with Windows and the QTR linearization ordeal so I had to resort to trial and error. There was some prior talk in maybe the Color Management forum here on discrepancies between manual spot reading and slide-scanning a chart. Mine was off enough I gave up on ColorPort for slide-scans so I went to the arduous spot reading of 21 steps and manually entering the data into the spreadsheets. Doing 50 steps manually would be too much and very doubtful if it would make it any more linear than I get now. Would be nice if I could feed the info quickly and trusted the numbers from the i1 head, but for now I don't. Nothing canned or supplied was as straight as I can do now, although it might take me a sheet of two of paper (The 21 step above is about 3/4" tall and 8" wide and I just move it down the page in QTR for a different quad profile so about a dozen tests per sheet.). ColorPort is sort of a finicky software that x-rite should improve on, and supply some scanable targets as much out there doesn't read right or written for older Profiler or ColorPort software.
I suspect some of Cone's calibration is also for the look and color of the K7 inks. Maybe expand the X-axis of the cyan for a selenium with the dark black inks (for whatever they choose for the selenium ink carrier), and maybe a warmer yellow highlight in the lighter inks. Don't really care as I don't shift the X-axis all that much, just the Y-axis so the print color I'm left with I live with.
For now I can pretty much improve on any supplied profile's linearization for my printers, and have. Just it does take a lot of time to do it in spot-reading mode with Notepad++ and a spreadsheet.
SG
-
Here's a post from Roy Harrington that makes more sense to me now than it did when I read it:
For those on Mac's instead of trying to re-linearize K7 .quad files which is hard to do,
go the ICC route. Just create a custom grayscale ICC built on top of the existing .quad file.
Then print using this ICC. It has the same affect as relinearizing the curve plus you get the
color-management system matching the embedded profile in your image. This is
the best/ideal way to get screen-to-print matching assuming you are profiling your monitor.
Note that you really have to use Print-Tool on the Mac to get this all to work correctly.
The MeasureTool issue is still a pain -- I run Parallels on the Mac with WinXP running so
I run MT on that.
PCs can do this too but you've got to do your ICC conversions in Photoshop before
sending to QTRgui for printing. (most people seem to go the No CM route on PCs I think).
-
and on the subject of scanning, I use an i1io2 to scan even 21 patch sets. Hand scanning and me aren't happy together. Richard has done some conversions, and I have copied them to create my i1Profiler compatible patch sets. Colorport is just too painful, and I'm not going to try Measure Tool under Parallels under Windows.
-
Fwiw, I never could get the i1 PhotoPro head to auto-scan to generate a decent set of numbers for linearization with Windows and the QTR linearization ordeal so I had to resort to trial and error. There was some prior talk in maybe the Color Management forum here on discrepancies between manual spot reading and slide-scanning a chart. Mine was off enough I gave up on ColorPort for slide-scans so I went to the arduous spot reading of 21 steps and manually entering the data into the spreadsheets. Doing 50 steps manually would be too much and very doubtful if it would make it any more linear than I get now. Would be nice if I could feed the info quickly and trusted the numbers from the i1 head, but for now I don't.
No need to read things manually! This is a trivial task if you use ArgyllCMS. You can easily generate a 21 or 51 step (or larger if you think that is worthwhile) target sheet, print it out and read it using this command: Chartread -v -l -n PrinterName where PrinterName is the *.ti3 file you are going to generate. Open this *.ti3 file in Excel and you will get the necessary L*a*b* values you need for the QTR script.
-
A Digital Black & White forum has been created by Chris Sanderson within LuLa's Raw & Post Processing, Printing group.
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
-
And there is an active Linkedin forum for B&W photography at https://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=3041092&trk=nmp_rec_act_group_photo.
-
Here's a post from Roy Harrington that makes more sense to me now than it did when I read it:
For those on Mac's instead of trying to re-linearize K7 .quad files which is hard to do,
go the ICC route. Just create a custom grayscale ICC built on top of the existing .quad file.
Then print using this ICC. It has the same affect as relinearizing the curve plus you get the
color-management system matching the embedded profile in your image. This is
the best/ideal way to get screen-to-print matching assuming you are profiling your monitor.
Note that you really have to use Print-Tool on the Mac to get this all to work correctly.
The MeasureTool issue is still a pain -- I run Parallels on the Mac with WinXP running so
I run MT on that.
PCs can do this too but you've got to do your ICC conversions in Photoshop before
sending to QTRgui for printing. (most people seem to go the No CM route on PCs I think).
On PCs B&W + Color Management becomes restricted too it seems. The Apple move to idiot proof CM on Macs made things more difficult for CM experts and B&W experts. Adobe got weak knees so it went along and worse it took Adobe CM on Windows on the same path.
The different ways I used in Qimage Ultimate to give Greyscale images a color tone did became more difficult too;
http://ddisoftware.com/tech/qimage-ultimate/assigned-16-bit-greyscale-images-selective-color-curves/?PHPSESSID=1i5ce7jcd63vsv1v9smjkjldk1
After that discussion I used PNG greyscale files (also compresses 16 bit files better than Tiff) where the assigned Gamma 2.2 is not recognised by QU but is by PS when editing. I think that loophole is now also blocked by MIke, have to test that again.
What I fear a bit in the RGB file + profile color managed route for B&W printing is the reduction in Dmax. I have seen that happen too often. For the HP Z models that I work with, HP recommends the B&W mode + printer driver CM on, application CM off. I always thought that the B&W mode preserves the Dmax (compared to the Z's calibration target Dmax reading) but some recent tests suggest it could as well be the printer driver CM preserves the Dmax too. So I'm brooding on an RGB path that could be satisfying.
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
-
That is what I've done all along for 8 years with the Z, take my 16 bit grayscale files to RGB, convert to srgb, assign a toning adjustment layer if needed. The dmax is something like 1.8 on Canson Rag Photographique, no different than printing grayscale which I find too bluish for most work. Then you can soft proof that and see it onscreen if you want. The amount of color used is so minimal that it is a non factor for metameristic failure and we know how stable these Vivera color inks are.
I can match the same print color on the Canon 8300 with TBW and use no color inks at all. The dmax isn't quite what the Z is but in all other respects it's as good.
john
-
John,
On the Z3100 that RGB workflow gave linear B&W output with for example Photorag + the HP HM Smooth Fine Art Paper media preset but not for more paper/media choices and in general not at all on the Z3200. I still have to add some form of (perceptual) linearity with a profile and that means extra application CM on top which could pull Dmax down again. For color toning greyscale the application CM renderings are not ideal either. There is actually no need for compressing/clipping the color hue/saturation as the printer gamut covers B&W toning anyway so Absolute Colormetric should be perfect but that does not know BPC which is needed to adapt to the dynamic range of the paper/ink used. A long time ago I suggested in the Colorsync forum that a B&W rendering choice should be added to the existing rendering choices. That and improved near neutral precision in the profiles should do the job. Curves can do that too but are a xxx* to make for every paper choice.
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
-
Jeff, when your inks arrive, it would be useful to do side by side tests of Cone versus Epson driver (not necessarily ABW) vs QTR for a good sample photo that require long tonal range and another that requires high contrast with maximum black. My prediction is that given the state of technology reached in your 3880, you may be surprised how narrow the differences may be - but that's just an intuition as I have not seen such a comparison myself. All I know is the B&W work emerging from my 4900 is good enough to dispel any interest in other options, and the difference of IQ between the 3880 and 4900 is not that much.
Mark, I am off and running with my Cone inks now. Jeff Hughes has covered a lot of comparative ground in a couple of other posts so I don't see the need to add to that.. One test I did do while waiting was QTR vs Mirage on a detailed image. The QTR image was better in fine detail than Mirage. In fact, QTR on K3 is very good from my samples. I think now that comparisons are very difficult as an image needs to be prepared differently to get the most out of each approach. That must be a consideration in the 'I looked at it and couldn't see any difference' comments. Having taken the PZ approach, I'm very happy with what I am getting, and learning more each day.
-
Mark,
I like your suggestion about using Nik for printing B&W.
Is it possible to buy Silver by itself ?
And if so where ?
Have been looking for it online with no luck.
Thanks,
Richard
-
Try, https://www.google.com/nikcollection/
Google bought out Nik. One low price. Hard to beat.
ken
-
I just found out one thing about SEP. By default, it adds grain. I have now made custom presets with Film Type and Colour Filter turned off. Piezography shows grain that other B&W methods may not.
-
Digital will never be the same as gelatin silver or the other darkroom processes but studying what came before digital can help decide on how to move forward. Some may disagree but that's how I see it after 40 years in photography.
It's also very possible and feasible to create digital negatives with QTR and make contact prints on traditional gelatin silver papers with white light or alternative process prints using a UV printer if that's your desire.
Don Bryant
-
I just found out one thing about SEP. By default, it adds grain. I have now made custom presets with Film Type and Colour Filter turned off. Piezography shows grain that other B&W methods may not.
I use presets as a starting point to get me close to what the image will intimately become. From there, you can tweak all the parameters to your desires, including grain. Some of my images benefit from some grain, depending on the look I'm after.
-
No need to read things manually! This is a trivial task if you use ArgyllCMS. You can easily generate a 21 or 51 step (or larger if you think that is worthwhile) target sheet, print it out and read it using this command: Chartread -v -l -n PrinterName where PrinterName is the *.ti3 file you are going to generate. Open this *.ti3 file in Excel and you will get the necessary L*a*b* values you need for the QTR script.
Using QTR linearising/profile creation tool with ArgyllCMS measurements too as the last install of Measure Tool on Windows 7 gave locked measurement files where the same install on XP mode in W7 works, like it does with Vista. It becomes easier (and more reliable in time) to use open source these days and it is nice that I can use identical profile creation methods on the Ubuntu system too.
There is something I would like to see added to the QTR linearisation/profile creation or in a "new" ArgyllCMS function. QTR only addresses the tone range but could have the addition of calibrating the Lab a b to the target neutrality (either absolute, taking paper white as the base or making the a b paths straight between white point and black (all color perceptually correct which could imply special color spaces)). It has no color engine at work so this is probably too much to ask. ArgyllCMS would be a better base for that. ArgyllCMS may even have the functions available to create an "RGB-device" B&W profile that addresses a perceptual tone range and calibrates the a b values within the paper/ink capabilities. The Printcal function could act like that but should have the perceptual tone linearisation of QTR.
Using the HP Z3200 calibration first and printing from Qimage Ultimate through HP Z 3200 driver CM (expecting sRGB assigned) I already have a reasonable linearity and a b deviations (a within 2 and b within 3 over the range, this is a low OBA trial paper). That improves with a QTR "RGB" B&W profile in Qimage's CM. Better L curve, Dmax not compromised (2.55 D with PremiumIDsatin + Gloss Enhancer) compared to calibration target black and linearisation target black. The sort of B&W profiles I made with ArgyllCMS + a near neutral target so far are not satisfying. Perceptual does not improve the tone range, Dmax suffers and no improvement on a and b deviations. Relative Colormatric does improve some what the a b deviations but (of course) clips the tone range and Dmax suffers.
The Printcal functions should be able to make absolute color metric corrections on the a b paths near neutral, a QTR style L function adds the right perceptual linearity for the paper/ink combination + on tone range shift caused by the choices on the a b path corrections as mentioned above. The possibility to add calibration results to the ICC profile in ArgyllCMS intrigues me but I still fear the loss of Dmax or tone range clipping that happens so far with any application CM and ICC profiles I used. For the same reason I have no trust in enhanced color profiles with iterative near neutral processing steps.
It would still be a dual profiling (or in my case more a -color calibration/driver profiling/near neutral color calibration+L profiling system- on a color mode B&W workflow. In theory it should work on small gamut ink sets too or even quad sets with two color toner inks. Of course no solution for a monochrome B&W ink set.
Paul Roark's work has been very inspiring but at the same time I have seen so much of his painstaking color tweaking on B&W ink sets that I wonder if methods from color management could not make that aspect easier, regular custom calibration faster and the workflow more flexible. I know adding color hues to B&W pigment ink sets does not improve longevity but here I start from what is today the best OEM pigment ink set and the addition of the color hues is very limited. Any sepia or split tone print will have to cope with colorants anyway, the variety of carbon black hues do not extend that far.
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
-
.....
Paul Roark's work has been very inspiring but at the same time I have seen so much of his painstaking color tweaking on B&W ink sets that I wonder if methods from color management could not make that aspect easier, regular custom calibration faster and the workflow more flexible. I know adding color hues to B&W pigment ink sets does not improve longevity but here I start from what is today the best OEM pigment ink set and the addition of the color hues is very limited. Any sepia or split tone print will have to cope with colorants anyway, the variety of carbon black hues do not extend that far.
Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots
This is what I find most annoying by being locked into a "fixed" B&W tonal inkset. The coloration, say a sepia K7, becomes a selenium cool tone on some other paper with no way to correct for it - It's what you get whether you like it or not. That paper when printed becomes a big "Yuck!" looking print over what I saw on my screen for the original intent with no profile to put it back to the screen.
If I leave the file as a RGB against making it a Gamma 2.2 B&W for K7 inks, I can adjust it in a in a mulit-ink (along with a few blacks) color printer and move the curve to pick up the shadows and apply the tint I wanted. It becomes very confining having a fixed coloration B&W inkset, imho. Change paper and "Yuck!" or maybe send off $100 to get a profile to 'try' and get back the sepia tint on some new paper (That calibration program should be available for the high cost of the inks too, rather than playing the waiting game for a response via snail mail when some customer shows up with some new print surface rather than saying "I'll get back to you in 2-3 weeks after I get a custom $100 profile made for it. Weather or snow conditions might slow the process down too." Really!??)
Personally, I think far too much is made of trying to get a plu-perfect linearization as with what goes on in the Yahoo! QTR groups, i.e. "I need a perfect 256 step linearization against a 21 step" which is perfectly adequate for a final print. It's good for selling lots of ink and paper though (If I were selling ink I'd probably push it too! ;) ), and getting the anal perfectionist types worked up a bit over the entire linearization fever process too.
SG
-
I've just put a piece on my site with some of the things that I have found on the road to Piezography: http://www.jeff-grant.com/the-path-to-piezography
Having just ordered a set of 220ml inks, I'm committed. The current lousy exchange rate doesn't help at all.
-
Congratulations, Jeff!
Once you get past the nail-biting of conversion, printing with K7 B&W Piezography is fantastic.
:) ken
-
Thanks Ken. I'm looking forward to that bit.
-
i've been happily printing with K7 Neutral for a while now and enjoying the results so I am a happy and converted Piezography user. There was a fair bit of discussion around the options in this thread so I thought that this was worth mentioning. InkjetMall has posted a 'Proof of Piezography' file for validation of Piezography setups. I would really like to hear how this looks with Imageprint or ABW. On HPR on my 3880 I can see it all. http://www.inkjetmall.com/tech/content.php?172-Proof-of-Piezography-Test-Image
-
i've been happily printing with K7 Neutral for a while now and enjoying the results so I am a happy and converted Piezography user. There was a fair bit of discussion around the options in this thread so I thought that this was worth mentioning. InkjetMall has posted a 'Proof of Piezography' file for validation of Piezography setups. I would really like to hear how this looks with Imageprint or ABW. On HPR on my 3880 I can see it all. http://www.inkjetmall.com/tech/content.php?172-Proof-of-Piezography-Test-Image
That's an interesting chart for piezography and to play with.
For fun, I ran a sheet of glossy RC through a Epson with pigment ink and nothing special in setup other that using Qimage, and the other through same model with the K7 ink and QTR.
My results were not much difference in the whites or the large white tone circle on the left, but the blacks is where it got interesting.
The K7 showed more concentric black circles, but the pigment printer's print was mostly black with a faint grey/black for the center.
As I use Qimage for the pigment printer, I altered the black in the "Curves" part of Qimage's Editor window to apply less black ink coming off Dmax. The curve LOC(ation) 0 is Dmax black. LOC 1 is first hint of less black, etc. LOC 1 is 16 by default for the straight line, so I bumped it up to 35 and LOC 2 up to 55 (Default was 32 there.) which pulls the shadows up without affect LOC 0 (Dmax black). Pretty much a match for the K7 print now too by doing that little tweak.
Looking at the two now I can see the transisition of the pigment printer from the 95% to 100% and it's very clean with an even gloss (Second tone scale from top.). So I'm okay there, for now with the "modified bump" in black end the curve for the pigment printer. Probably could make a filter and use it from now on in Qimage too for all B&Ws.
However, the K7 has some issue in that the 95% is dark, but the 100% square takes on a dull matte finish and not quite as black in appearance as the 95% one next to it that appears glossier (This is on a glossy RC paper as I was doing it cheap and hoping the Photo Black K7 gloss would work!). This has been a nightmare for me as to why the Dmax in the K7 has that dull matte back ink appearance (Yes, ink carts are in the right spot. Been there over multiple fillings.). More over, if I try and apply layers of gloss optimizer to those areas of max black, they don't seem that affected by it. The Dmax black sort of shines through with its dullness for whatever reason. Looking at it at an angle shows the differences no matter if I apply 3 layers of GO.
SG
-
Thank Heavens, someone answered at last! I was a bit disappointed that no-one seemed interested enough to waste a piece of paper and a little time to see how their method performed. On the subject of gloss and K7, I recently tried and failed to get it working on EEF on a 3880. I kept on getting mottling in the 100% patch. Anything from 95% up was seriously mottled and the mottling continued quite a way back down the scale. In the end, I decided that EEF just wouldn't work on my 3880. I'm now back on IGFS and HPR Baryta which print flawlessly.
-
Interesting article: http://www.bwvision.com/better-digital-black-white-photography-printing/
-
Wanted to drop a note here that I just put a 3880 set up with Cone piezo in the "for sale" section. Not a sales pitch, just letting those interested in B&W printing know.
That aside, I will say I love and loved using the Cone piezo inks. Especially in the 3880, which was a way easier printer to work with than the 9880 I'd set up before in all ways. But with these inks and the the prints, well, once you get a feel for them and how to set the files up to push the inkset to it's limits, are unlike anything else.
There weren't any real downsides for me other than the set up time and fiddling with problematic printers in the conversion of inksets. I'd also say for people interested in it, to not over think the hues. I'd just get some ink to get started, and start blending as you go while taking notes. The inks blend really beautifully, and the hue changes are more subtle than you'd think (I actually found changing the paper effected the hue more than my different ink blends)
Anyway, I still think it's the best black and white digital option, even over digital fiber.
-
Having been using Piezography for a while now, I've put a post on my site about my experiences so far. Hopefully, it may help someone just getting started: http://www.jeff-grant.com/progress-along-the-path-to
-
My 3880 will be up for sale soon. I have two, one with K7 and the other with colour. I'm hoping that someone interested in K7will come along and save me the pain of Ebay.