Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/08/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I'm surprised you're seeing metamerism (sp? - reflective color cast) using the dedicated MIS inks, assuming these are matte paper images. As one departs from the near-pure-carbon "warm" tones, there will be some pigment introduced to produced a more neutral gray tone. Whether that neutral looks "neutral" to you is a common issue. Often a cool and neutral digital tones look a bit purplish to my eye. But then, thank goodness I like warm toned prints :-) Recently I read an interesting post where a fellow took a bunch of silver prints on different papers and a colorimeter (term?) and found that there were several variants on a "neutral tone" in wet printing as well. Scott Robert Meier wrote: > I will concede that, although I have never personally seen and handled > a digital print that is, IMHO, every bit as good as a good silver > print. But my experience with digital prints is limited, so I > concede it. I have made B&W prints with MIS inks on a C86 that look > very, very good. But there is always something that is wrong with > them -- the reflections off the surface have a strange color cast, > even though the print itself is neutral gray, or the details in a > brick wall just aren't there the way they are in the silver print, or > the grey of the sky isn't as smooth as the sky in the silver print. > > >> You're welcome. Bob...BUT...Let me stress that I believe that in the >> hands >> of a skilled practitioner, a digital print can be every bit as "good" >> as a >> good silver print. :-) >> >> >> >> On 8/11/05 2:42 PM, "Robert Meier" <robertmeier@usjet.net> wrote: >> >>> BD, Thank you for setting that straight. Unfortunately that view of >>> digital being vastly superior to wet prints seems to be becoming the >>> new >>> orthodxy among a lot of photographers. >>> >>> >>> >>>> God I never thought I'd end up defending wet prints...but Walt, the >>>> suggestion that " Adobe Photoshop, Nikon Coolscan and a good Epson >>>> printer( >>>> in the right hands) can blow away most wet prints" is complete and >>>> utter >>>> nonsense, assuming you're referring to wet printing "in the right >>>> hands." >>>> >>>> Digital printing is digital printing, whether using the OEM inks, or >>>> systems >>>> such as the Cone quadtones, or MIS inks. And silver printing is silver >>>> printing. Both will, in the hands of a competent printer, produce >>>> gorgeous >>>> results. But neither will be 'better' than the other. >>>> >>>> Now, if you want to say that a competent digital printer can more >>>> quickly >>>> produce, and infinitely more quickly reproduce a print than even >>>> the best >>>> wet printer, you're absolutely correct. :-) >>>> B. D. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 8/11/05 1:58 PM, "Walt Johnson" <walt@waltjohnson.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Bill: >>>>> >>>>> You can certainly scan you b&w negative and print on an inkjet >>>>> with good >>>>> results. As a matter of fact, a few simple tools can insure better >>>>> results >>>>> than a Focomat V35. >>>>> >>>>> Adobe Photoshop, Nikon Coolscan and a good Epson printer( in the >>>>> right >>>>> hands) >>>>> can blow away most wet prints. Most importantly, the results are >>>>> repeatable. >>>>> >>>>> There are some very good links on the subject and one of the best is >>>>> Clayton >>>>> Jones. http://www.cjcom.net/articles/digiprn1.htm >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Walt J. >>>>> walt@waltjohnson.com >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Leica Users Group. >>>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Leica Users Group. >>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information