Re: Rich Grey ?
Re: Rich Grey ?
- Subject: Re: Rich Grey ?
- From: Tyler Boley <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 18:42:27 -0700
From: "Cris Daniels" <email@hidden>
Subject: Re: Rich Grey ?
...
The quad black days are over, there are too many downsides to these
aftermarket inks, and the market is very small compared to what it was a few
years ago.
I'm sure that pronouncement will raise a smile amongst the active
community involved in these processes, and fine print shops around the
country.
Who cares how small the market is? You can still get Albumen paper if
you must have it. People still make beautiful platinum prints, thank
goodness. A friend here locally is one of the few people in the world
making tri-color carbro prints, and utilizing color management and a
myriad of digital skills to do so. This is a niche market, most people
don't need it. In fact, the more mediocre the mainstream is, the more
extraordinary fine work is.
Almost all of these aftermarket inks ( I won't name names but
I've run almost every one) are famous for clogging, especially if you don't
run the printer every day.
Those days are past, it must have been a while since you've run almost
every one. There are some fine companies involved in constantly
improving these inksets and the current state of mono inks is pretty
impressive. I'm having problems about on the same level of occurrence as
a UC user. In other words, all is well. There's no justice in
perpetuating this impression.
Almost none of the B+W inksets work with RC
papers, so you are stuck with fine art media for everything.
I've never, ever, met a serious fine photographic printmaker the least
bit interested in RC papers. However, that hurdle will be overcome as well.
You are stuck
with the "warmth" or "coolness" of the particular inkset,
and beautiful they are, and many options available...
unless you get
into something like Studioprint where you can turn off specific cartridges.
I do use StudioPrint, in a 7 ink printer. Yes, you can do that, and with
a bit of creativity come up with a myriad of beautiful blends and
splits. All linearized, all carbon pigment, with no differential fade,
and no inks hacked to make them do something other than what they are
most suited.
Who wants to dedicate a printer to B+W printing unless that's all you do,
and you'd better do a lot to justify the expense.
The same people who used a color darkroom and materials for color, and
fine B&W materials for B&W.
Finally with the
Ultrachromes what is the point?
I'll just let that question sit there, could be the new Epson slogan.
My apologies for extending this thread one more post. But there are some
extraordinary printmakers and dedicated manufacturers involved in the
evolution of this process and others. Many are equally involved in using
color management skills, and software discussed here to move it forward.
Fine prints speak for themselves, and aren't worth arguing over. Color
management and the evolution of digital process and printing is not only
for the masses, or commercial purposes, but also has a strong hand in
the evolution of fine art, and thank goodness for it. That speaks well
for how useful it is, that discerning craftspeople at the most demanding
level are involved.
Not everyone needs these processes Chris, but why denigrate it? Not
everyone needs a Mac, and it's a small part of the market, but I'll keep
mine thanks.
Also, if what you see under a 20x loupe is the only distinguishing
difference you see, we're on two different planets about this anyway.
Tyler
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden