B&W Inkjet Printing

oscroft

Veteran
Local time
7:55 PM
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
2,382
Just wondering if anyone here has any thoughts on making B&W prints on an inkjet printer.

I did a bit of experimenting using my HP 5550 over the weekend, and got some varied results.

With the standard black cartridge (plus 3-colour cartridge), the results were just too contrasty - the ink is too opaque, which is why (of course) you get a seperate, more watery, black if you change to a "photo" cartridge.

So I tried printing using the photo cartridge instead of the black, trying both greyscale and color settings. Both gave nice contrast and better gradation than the black cartridge, but the greyscale print didn't have really black blacks. Printing my B&W image on the colour setting gave the best result (which was really not bad at all) - obviously the added use of some colour inks deepened the deep blacks just nicely.

But the problem is that this will be a very expensive way of printing - with the amount of black ink used, my photo cartridges are only going to last a third as long as with colour prints, and I really can't afford such waste.

Does anyone know any better way to get good B&W inkjet prints?

Best,
 
I thought of .... and also doing just that

MIS inks and a C84 or C86 (or C88 if all else fails) ... good combination

my combo has taken a little tweaking to find the right combo, but I have been very happy with the prints

Some people do black only printing with various results

Lyson also makes kits for B&W printing

This Yahoo Group is a little obsessive but are really informative about Fine Art Inkjet printing
 
Hmm, it looks to me like the Epson C8x printers are obsolete - at least, I can't find anyone in the UK selling them. And the others seem to need Photoshop workflow curves, whatever they are.

Anyone know of anything else that will work simply - just plug-in replacements for cheap 4-colour (or 6-colour) printers, with no fancy Photoshop work needed?

Best,
 
I used to spend a lot of time trying to get decent b&w prints from my Epson R200. Then I worked out that a 6x4 glossy costs 40p. Add the ink and time and suddenly it looks rather expensive. I now dev my own b&w negs like usual, scan them in, but instead of printing them myself I email them to www.bonusprint.co.uk who'll print them out at 10p a go for 6x4.

I find the results fine, better than the R200 anyway. Send them one day, they often turn up in the post the next. If anyone else has used Bonusprint for b&w, I'd be intersted to see what they think.
 
I'm just looking into the Olympus P-400. It uses a dye-sublimation technology. Dunno how good it is though.

I'm not suggesting that this is the cheapest or best way to get B&W prints but maybe it something worth considering.
 
I have used the MIS cfs inks in an Epson C86 with epson archival matt paper for some time.When my first C86 died I got a refurb on ebay for £25.00.I am in the UK and order online -the delivery is quick.

Regards
Steve
 
I've done a great deal of B&W printing on the inkjet machines. All that I have used have been epson machines. I first converted a 1270 to Piezography pigmants but had terrible problems with head clogs and banding. When it worked it worked extremely well. I printed on Hahnemuhle photo rag and loved the results from the sepia cartridges. The problem was reliability of the system, the cost of pigment cartridges and software and problems with the printer feeding heavy (308gm) paper. I then purchased a 2200 and converted it to septone pigments and had stunning results with no problems at all. The downside was the cost of the bulk ink system but I recovered the cost from art print sales very quickly. I found myself needing a larger printer and purchased a 7000 and converted it to a later version of piezography pigments. It too had terrible banding from time to time but when it worked it was excellent. I also owned a 2200 for color and a 7600 for color. I tried Imageprint rip (very expensive) and hated it for B&W and overall just did not like the software. When the 2400 came out I purchased one and love it in all respects. You print from photoshop which is no problem. I did find I had to jockey around and find my own profiles for best printing but it does print stunning images. I also purchased a new 7800 and sold my 2 2200's, 7000 and 7600. I'm very pleased with the results for my applications. I've found the correct combination of settings that give a very platinum/ palladium looking print. I regularly print 24x36's for my New York galleries and have had great success with the results. I will add that the results are totally dependent on the quality of file sent to the printer, settings in photoshop and the printer driver as well as the kind of paper used. I have been experimenting and just tried a new archival paper sold by lexjet. It's sunset air dried gloss fiber paper. It's about as close to a fine art print made on air dried gloss fiber base that I have seen. I would say it's 90-95% as good as can be produced in the darkroom. I'm extremely critical about my B&W prints and studied with Ansel Adams in the mid 70's. I know what a fine print is and still do a great deal of art printing in the darkroom so I have a good basis for quality. The down side of this paper is the cost. It's really expensive and the paper feels like cardboard for a new shirt. I like the look but the feel lacks something. I think in time inkjet will equal silver gelatin in quality but it still falls a little short for some applications. I recently saw that Hahnemuhle has a comperable paper that I will soon try. I've landed on H photo rag as my standard archival rag paper. The museums and galleries love the look and I've never had a quality issue.

Good luck! Any way you go you will have a learning curve so be prepared to invest tome serious time and some money.

I might also mention that you might look at QTR ( quadtone rip). Pizography uses this software now and it's free to download from the internet. If you like it and feel like you want to pay a token fee to use it you can pay $50 US. but its your choice and not required to use the application. It works very well with the 2200 (2100 in the UK) and a number of other printers. The fellow that developed it really has his act together and the results with regular inks isn't bad. Check it out and see if it works for you.
 
I've done a great deal of B&W printing on the inkjet machines. All that I have used have been epson machines. I first converted a 1270 to Piezography pigmants but had terrible problems with head clogs and banding. When it worked it worked extremely well. I printed on Hahnemuhle photo rag and loved the results from the sepia cartridges. The problem was reliability of the system, the cost of pigment cartridges and software and problems with the printer feeding heavy (308gm) paper. I then purchased a 2200 and converted it to septone pigments and had stunning results with no problems at all. The downside was the cost of the bulk ink system but I recovered the cost from art print sales very quickly. I found myself needing a larger printer and purchased a 7000 and converted it to a later version of piezography pigments. It too had terrible banding from time to time but when it worked it was excellent. I also owned a 2200 for color and a 7600 for color. I tried Imageprint rip (very expensive) and hated it for B&W and overall just did not like the software. When the 2400 came out I purchased one and love it in all respects. You print from photoshop which is no problem. I did find I had to jockey around and find my own profiles for best printing but it does print stunning images. I also purchased a new 7800 and sold my 2 2200's, 7000 and 7600. I'm very pleased with the results for my applications. I've found the correct combination of settings that give a very platinum/ palladium looking print. I regularly print 24x36's for my New York galleries and have had great success with the results. I will add that the results are totally dependent on the quality of file sent to the printer, settings in photoshop and the printer driver as well as the kind of paper used. I have been experimenting and just tried a new archival paper sold by lexjet. It's sunset air dried gloss fiber paper. It's about as close to a fine art print made on air dried gloss fiber base that I have seen. I would say it's 90-95% as good as can be produced in the darkroom. I'm extremely critical about my B&W prints and studied with Ansel Adams in the mid 70's. I know what a fine print is and still do a great deal of art printing in the darkroom so I have a good basis for quality. The down side of this paper is the cost. It's really expensive and the paper feels like cardboard for a new shirt. I like the look but the feel lacks something. I think in time inkjet will equal silver gelatin in quality but it still falls a little short for some applications. I recently saw that Hahnemuhle has a comperable paper that I will soon try. I've landed on H photo rag as my standard archival rag paper. The museums and galleries love the look and I've never had a quality issue.

Good luck! Any way you go you will have a learning curve so be prepared to invest some serious time and some money.

I might also mention that you might look at QTR ( quadtone rip). Pizography uses this software now and it's free to download from the internet. If you like it and feel like you want to pay a token fee to use it you can pay $50 US. but its your choice and not required to use the application. It works very well with the 2200 (2100 in the UK) and a number of other printers. The fellow that developed it really has his act together and the results with regular inks isn't bad. Check it out and see if it works for you.
 
Steve Litt said:
I have used the MIS cfs inks in an Epson C86 with epson archival matt paper for some time.When my first C86 died I got a refurb on ebay for £25.00.I am in the UK and order online -the delivery is quick.

Regards
Steve

I've heard that the C86 is the "diamond in the rough" for B&W inkjet prints (with the MIS cartridges).. How can you go wrong with such a cheap printer right ? :)

Dave
 
One happy Epson 2400 user here. Note: I have personal test/real-world fade data for the pigment inks. My test of HP 9690 on HP paper did not fare so well. Any experience out there? Allan?

ben
 
Wow. I haven't even posted on this thread and someone mentions me? That's cool :). Or maybe there's another allan...

Ben - what do you mean by "real world" tests? I've done "tests" too, but not against other paper/ink combinations. I have my prints on different papers, using my inks, with and without sprays (if they are glossy), in various settings. The most I've done is Costco Kirkland glossy, under the following conditions:

-unsprayed, indirect light
-unsprayed, stored
-sprayed, indirect light
-sprayed, stored

And I think I had an unsprayed framed, too. Not a sprayed one, though.

Other than the continued existence of bronzing, I see no difference.

I have made prints on 2200's and 9600's using UC inks and QTR but not scientifitically enough to call them "tests."

what I can say is that I do like the tonal range I can get with the UT2 inkset. If you don't need 13x19, you can save SO much money going the C86 EZBW route. Even if you want that size, the 1280/UT2 set is still less than a 2400. And at the very least they come darn close in tonal range (in all honesty I think I get more range).

allan
 
w3rk5 said:
I'm just looking into the Olympus P-400. It uses a dye-sublimation technology. Dunno how good it is though.

I'm not suggesting that this is the cheapest or best way to get B&W prints but maybe it something worth considering.


I have one of these printers and I have to say that I am very impressed with it. Colour prints are sharp and contrasty whereas black & white prints are surpisingly good - with ample contrast and good tonality.

It is much better than my Epson1240S inkjet

Three drawbacks

1) the paper sometime jams and you loose a print (Unless you open the machine and wind back the film)

2) Linited choice of paper - well there is no choice...

3) Dust - dust in the machine is a pain as it stops the film being transfered to the paper resulting in coloured dust marks.

These drawbacks are not a major prob though. And although the paper & film is expensive, it isn't actualy all that much more expensive than inkjet (If you use proprietry inks)
 
My Epson Photo 750 and Epson C82 were so clogged up that I gave up on Epson. I wasted more ink in cleaning than in actual printing and lots of my prints have some streaks on them.

Epsons are good if you print at least one page a week or run the printer through a cleaning cycle.
Lately they had an Epson rep at a local electronics store presenting the R800 and he told me to have a neighbour, friend, whatever to run a cleaning cycle once a week when I'm on vacation :-(

My results with Lysonic QuadBlack were very nice and I would be still using those if they were available for a printer which doesn't clog up as fast as the Epsons.
 
As an alternative story, I haven't had issues with clogging. With one exception. I had a clog from hell and did everything - cleaned the parking pad, soaked with clearing fluid, etc. Finally, I did the forced clearing with the solvent liquid and then put in fresh, spongeless carts...and it's worked. I think that's the key.

worth it still, for me.

allan
 
I actually use the C88 ... it has the same cradle as the C86 and C84

I have had no issues with the MIS inks

The C88 should still be in wide release even in the UK
 
Back
Top Bottom