Printing B&W - a question

[The_Traveler]

I saw the gallery of an area photographer and his b&w prints were just gorgeous and, when he gave a seminar locally on converting to B&W, I went. It was very enlightening. I can honestly say that I think I am almost as proficient with conversions as he is - on the screen - but his prints are just spectacular.

POINT OF THIS POINT AND QUESTION FOLLOWS

I have started a project that I envision as a large set of B&W sepia toned images and I would like to develop a printed image stockpile for display.



I've never had much success with commercial labs with B&W and it is just too expensive for me, with no thought of recouping the costs, to pay for iterations of custom printing.

Are there small to medium size printers that will produce up to 11 x14 that can get these spectacular, gallery quality results with some care.

 

[KmH]

I would think the print paper used has a lot to do with it, and I would expect chromogenic printing to give higher quality results than making your own inkjet prints.

 

[The_Traveler]

I have started a project that I envision as a large set of B&W sepia toned images and I would like to develop a printed image stockpile for display.

I've never had much success with commercial labs with B&W and it is just too expensive for me, with no thought of recouping the costs, to pay for iterations of custom printing.

Are there small to medium size printers that will produce up to 11 x14 that can get these spectacular, gallery quality results with some care?

I understand the value of better papers than the usual Walmart stuff.
I am looking for responses about printers with suggestions for brands, models numbers, etc.

 

[Helen B]

For B&W I think that silver image trounces chromegenic almost every time. It is also way more archival. Good inkjet prints can be in the same quality league as silver image - the differences being a matter of taste and personal preference, I believe.

Though I don't have one yet, I have been impressed by the Canon Pixma Pro-1's B&W prints. You could also consider an Epson 1400 or similar, with a dedicated B&W ink set. Would that be something you would consider?

Do you want glossy or matt? How important is exceptional predicted life instead of good predicted life?

I've been using various B&W ink sets for about 10 years, and they have come a long way in that time. One of the essential features of a B&W inkset is that it isn't truly monochrome - silver image prints never are. There usually needs to be some colour variation from dark to light, however slight. There are some good ink sets available now.

Oh, and the short answer to your question is that small inkjet printers can produce stunning B&W prints, with care. Better than chromegenic in most respects.

 

[RichardH]

Just from my personal experience, my darkroom prints far exceed the ink jet ones. It goes with how good you are at exposure, processing the film, printing along with dodging and burning the print, and the quality of the paper. It's getting harder to find a good B+W paper due to mfgs. going out of business. Toning is a art all by itself. I have some old Agfa fiber paper that will be gone soon and I know I want be able to find anything close to the way it prints out.
As far as inkjet, I have read where the Cone inks for B+W are very good. Kinda expensive but you get what you pay for now. I haven't seen anyones prints that are using their inks but they get good reviews.

Good luck in your findings and let us know what you find out.


Richard

 

[Helen B]

Oh, and if you want sepia, it is much easier to get exceptional predicted life from an inkjet, and it favours the use of a dedicated inkset.

Richard, in what way do your darkroom prints exceed inkjet prints? I have found that the difference now is purely personal preference and the personal ability of the printer. Inkjets can have a significantly greater density range, and equal definition.

 

[The_Traveler]

Thanks for all responses.

Helen, I looked at the Canon and what frightened me is the ink cost, particularly if you don't print daily and the system needs to replenish, thus using lots of ink.

Right now I'm in a quandary.

 

[Helen B]

It's not an easy decision. Unlike wet printing, you tend to get locked into a choice.

Maybe a sepia inkset from MIS or Cone would be a good answer for you, in an Epson 1400. I'll have more time later today to discuss this in more detail.

 

[table1349]

I have been favorably impresses with my Epson 2880. Chose it over the 3880 for the same ink reason. Smaller $14.00 cartridges instead of $52.00 cartridges. Same ink however.

 

[Helen B]

Aardenburg Imaging's fade test results (link) are probably worth looking through, if you haven't already. The comprehensive reports include descriptions of the ink and printer, and measurements of the density range and image tone at various stages of light exposure.

It can be difficult choosing a B&W inkset, because of the difficulty of finding print samples that completely match your requirements, the vast range of papers now available, and the risk of being stuck with a system that disappoints. Cone / Inkjetmall will sell you sample prints, albeit on a small number of papers.

The manufacturers and suppliers I would consider:

MIS (their site is backed by lots of great info from Paul Roark)

Inkjetmall (Jon Cone's inks)

Owens Valley Imaging (doesn't support the 1400, so you would be on your own with the preparation of ink curves)

I've personally used both MIS and Cone (and others, now out of business, and ones I've mixed myself) in the past. I haven't used OVI inks yet, but based on my experience their approach looks sound.

Personally, I wouldn't rule out a digital negative / silver image print system. There's a lot to like about that. There's no need for a dedicated inkset for negatives, but you could use one - I have.

The 13" printers that I have found to work well are the Epson 2200 (now getting a bit old), 2400, 2880 and 1400 - all of them can be used with a CIS, once you have settled on your inkset (experiment with refillable cartridges until you have found what you want).

The problems with early inkjet B&W prints have mostly been ironed out. They were things like lack of overall smoothness and presence of inkjet artifacts like banding; poor rendering of subtle highlights; and poor density range.


Let me know how all this sounds, and if you would like more information on a particular topic - there's a lot to cover.

PS Don't be misled by ink cartridge costs. Small cartridges are likely to be more expensive per mL than large ones. Eg 11 mL in a 2880 cart (about $1.20 per mL); 80 mL in a 3880 cart (about $0.65 per mL).

 

[RichardH]

Oh, and if you want sepia, it is much easier to get exceptional predicted life from an inkjet, and it favours the use of a dedicated inkset.

Richard, in what way do your darkroom prints exceed inkjet prints? I have found that the difference now is purely personal preference and the personal ability of the printer. Inkjets can have a significantly greater density range, and equal definition.

Hey Helen
I have recently just bought a Epson r3000 and a Epson v600 scanner. As of now ( until I use the printer and elements program more ) my prints are better from the darkroom. Maybe in a short while, I can say the inkjet is better. I have printed wet for so long that I know what I am dealing with when printing.
I am trying the Caffenol way of chemistry for now and that is a fun thing to do since most of the chemicals can be bought at the grocery store or locally. I hope I didn't try to convince wet is better than dry. Both have their own benefits. Until I get better at ink jet, I'll print B+W in the darkroom. One of these days I want to try the cone ink for B+W but I just recently changed over to refill ink from Precision Colors and am adjusting the colors to their mix. I haven't tried but a few of the ink jet papers so far and side by side, I can tell a big difference.
I prefer ink jet with color though. I can do color in the darkroom but the ink jet is surpassing the wet for me.

To answer your post, it is personal preference. Thanks for asking and hope I answered your question.

Richard

 

[kathyt]

Thanks for all responses.

Helen, I looked at the Canon and what frightened me is the ink cost, particularly if you don't print daily and the system needs to replenish, thus using lots of ink.

Right now I'm in a quandary.

I am looking at Canon printers right now too. Which one are you looking at? What was the ink price? The thought of buying ink makes me want to puke. I don't mind buying a $400 purse because I have something that last for a couple of years, but $125 for a slab of ink pisses me off~

 

[Helen B]

Richard,

Thanks for the answer. Personally, I can't tear myself away from wet printing entirely, and sometimes I find it hard to be objective when comparing inkjet quality to that of wet prints. It's nice to have both available to us, each with their own qualities, even though there's no Record Rapid any more.

Regards,
Helen

 

[The_Traveler]

I wonder about the loss of inks with 2880 during resets that are mentioned in several reviews.
Has that been a problem?