From: Nick Makris (nick@mcn.org)
Date: 09/21/01-03:02:32 PM Z
As some of you may recall, after many months of trying to make my investment
in an Epson 1520 ($500) pay off, I finally succumbed to the need for a
printer that worked properly with the PiezographyBW software. The 1160
was/has been highly touted in this regard and with thanks to some on this
list, I obtained 2 of these beasts.
After having significant problems with the PiezographyBW inks and not having
much sympathy or at least very untimely responses, from Cone and company, I
decided to try out the kit for making the 1160 into a continuous ink flow
printer with the MIS products. In particular, I used their FS (Full
Spectrum) Quadtone inks (do not confuse this product with their earlier
Quadtone inks or their FS COLOR inks). The FS-Quad inks are direct
replacements for the Cone product that ships with the PiezographyBW system.
There is a significant cost savings associated with this change - more on
that some other time.
Results obtained this morning indicate they print the PiezographyBW proof
image, as supplied with the system, perfectly. I am able to obtain 1%
changes in density throughout the 1-100% range.
I will point out that PAPER makes a GREAT DEAL OF DIFFERENCE. For paper
negs up to 8.5X11, I have found the Weyerhaeuser Jet Xtra paper to be
wonderful. It has a very tight weave, takes wax (paraffin) perfectly, shows
no residue of the paper weave after waxing, has no gloss on either side and
unlike many similar papers, prints the black inks with a deep rich black
tone. I hope to find this paper in larger sizes??????????
I also have successfully printed this same test image on Epson Backlight
Film which has a clear film on one side and a clay like surface on the
other. This film is available in size A3 (11-3/4"X16-1/2").
In the past, I have used both of these substrates to produce Pt/Pd prints.
The negs to produce those prints were always subject to the problems that I
have previously discussed on this forum. No such problems exist with the
tests discussed herein.
The really good thing about my setup is that I don't have to apply any
curves or adjustment layers to obtain the result I speak of. What I see on
my screen is what prints on my printer. I am lead to believe that the
resolution of the image should be something greater than 360 - minimum of
720. However, the proof image I tested was 360 - go figure.
Up until this time, my productions negs came off a Lightjet 5000 - I expect
to be making my negs in house here after.
Many thanks,
Nick
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 10/01/01-01:41:32 PM Z CST