[Leica] bw with Epson 2200...follow-up

["lea" <lea@whinydogpress.com>]

This is a follow-up to the post I sent a couple weeks ago and a thank
you to everyone who offered help. Especially those of you who suggested
the yahoo digital black and white print group; they are an amazingly
knowledgable group, huh?

To refresh: I was complaining about why the Epson 2200, touted as THE
PRINTER for black and white photographers, sucked at printing black and
white and why Epson didn't make ink that really printed black and
white...not green, not magenta, not sepia. Woe was me.

After some serious reading, researching and printing, I'm coming to
terms with the fact that an Epson 2200 just doesn't do black and white
so well with the Epson inks...at least not right now. Maybe one day they
will make real black and gray inks but for now sepia seems to be the
best we're going to get if using Epson ink.

I'm not convinced that moving to a new ink set wouldn't cure my problem
but there are so many inks out there with so many different people
saying so many different things that it sort of becomes a blur after a
bit. I'd love to get my hands on each ink set and have a go of trying it
all out myself but that's exceptionally expensive if not impossible
because then you find certain inks work best with certain papers, etc.
To buy all the paper and all the ink it would take to find the best
combination I'd be broke!

I did do some tests with the matte black ink on Epson's matt black paper
printing at 2880dpi and that was pretty darn impressive. Up to running
that print I'd never printed on matte paper at all. It has a very lovely
look and feel to it and for some of my work I'll be doing that
combination for sure. There is a notable difference using 2880 dpi
vs.1440 on the matte paper but not so much on the Ilford Pearl paper.

Ilford Pearl...that brings me to my next subject. This is my paper of
choice because it most mimicks what I use in the darkroom...the pearl rc
paper...in both texture and weight. Some of the papers being used for
digital printing are lovely to look at but they feel whimpy to the
touch. I like a somewhat stout paper and the Ilford line is the one I've
settled on both digitally and chemically. Maybe I'm being stubborn here
and others would be lovely...I've just not found them.

I've also read and spoken to photographers who have horror stories to
share about the ink actually flaking off some of the matte papers if
they aren't immediately hermetically sealed under glass. I
over-exagerate but I think you get the idea...just because the ink goes
on the matte paper, it doesn't appear that it always STAYS on the matte
paper. There's a stress when you're printing a load of 8x10s or 11x14s
for a client.

So I'm getting more comfortable with the fact that the Epson is a good
printer, can be configured to print black and white well but not with
Epson ink and not with semi-gloss papers. It's kind of like buying a new
Leica...it will shoot out of the box but to get it to do all the cool
things you may want you have to buy additional accessories (90mm lens,
viewfinder magnifier, wrist strap, 35mm lens, softie release, Noctilux,
etc...)

Oh, I've given up completely on trying for good black and white print
using the full-color ink printing and now use black ink only to print.
I've gone back and reprinted several of my images using the BO setting
and they look nice...sepia, but nice.

So, now what I wish is that Epson and many of the sites 'selling'
(wishing, hoping, praying that this was THE black and white printer)
were more honest in their assesment of its ability to give black and
white out of the box. It just plain doesn't. I don't mind a nice sepia
print...but I believe, as buyers embracing this technology, we should
know before purchasing that in order to get a real, neutral, black and
white print from the 2200 it's going to take an additional money
investment.

Lea Murphy
Whiny Dog Press www.whinydogpress.com



- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html