9880 dMax with installed curves

much thanks!

I’ll apply the code to it and send you an email of the new sales order! Except that the order did not go through. I can still see it in your shopping cart!

thanks Jon, thought was ordered but was able to apply discount code now that’s it’s ordered. will make new negs when material is received.

Mark

Walker,

Received the correct pictorico (super) outputted new targets and posted straight to you today. You should have by Fri. Pretty good dMax

cheers,

mark

Yes, as labeled x800-x880-PiezoDN-M-Bv1.quad . created 8/29. That’s the one that yielded the hi dMax. However the carbon inkset has the highest dMax. You mentioned, previously, that your in studio testing shows the carbon inkset as being the lowest .

I tried replying to your email but I got a redirect not delivered.

Mark

You should use your carbon printer for dNegs. Something is OFF in your PK ink on your 98 sel printer. (or possible in shade2). My printer here is measuring totally different dMax on sel.

 

Walker

Ok, wondering though, that should work fine enough for Paladium printing, being very warm tone. but will that warm tone decrease contrast for multigrade silver printing. it’s confusing about selenium compared to the selenium. Both printers produce perfect nozzle checks and prints, from the same hi res. files are virtually, if not perfectly matching , therefore why is the selenium exhibiting some failure with shade 2? I’m totally certain both printers have the same shade 1 ink. They both are filled from the same bottle. It’s possible I could of messed up selenium shade 2 , but if that was true how does k7 prints , especially on type 5 match one another??? sorry for the confusion , just perplexed.

Mark

Dear Mark. You are using Piezography Photo Black (WN1) Opaque Black right? Same ink? I’m measuring 2.79 (optical not uv) on both the 9880 and 3880 printers.

How long has your WN1 ink sat in the printer without printing?

W

 

yes WN1 both printers we’re filled from the same bottle. Print from 9880 printer often not so much the 1430. When I print with K7 and K6 the same image on a type 2 paper the prints from both match very close. Can’t really tell difference between K7 and K6. Type 5 on the 9880 typically achieve a 2.20 dMax. Will try Keith’s suggestion, above, to see if reboot changes anything when I get into studio. Will report back

Mark

Yes I’m referring to PDN digital negs. Just mentioning the type 5 with regular k7 curve set the 9880 is achieving adequote dMax. Walker suggested that the Shade 1 ink in the 9880 might not be full strength due to infrequent usage settling. Not the case. So I tried what you mentioned earlier a full reboot of computer and Print Tool. No joy with that. About same result. But what I further tried was just a straight 100 black patch to Pictorico with no PDN curve and got a bullet proof dMax very close to the 1430 value around a 3.0. I think this tells me that the shade 1 in the 9880 is capable , on Pictorico , of matching the output of the 1430. The 1430 is using either the PD OX IJM curve or that of the master. Bullet proof dMax. Is that not the reason the the 1430 yielded a virtual perfect digital negative. As far as PD output matching my calibrated screen? The much lower dMax values from the 9880 seem likely will never get the same kind of result? Or should I just work with the 9880 curves as they are and

work on getting it limited and linearalized?

 

Mark

 

Walker, yes let’s Skype at your earliest convenience. Would really like to know which way forward before trying to linearlizing knowing I will be able to have the right amount of dMax for both silver and PD negs. I sent to above Skype id a contact request so you can respond when you can.

Cheers,

Mark

that’s right its an optical X-Rite 810 transmission. BTW I also tried outputting to a different 9880 but with a carbon inset. But is sharing the same shade 1 black from the same bottle and output virtually exactly the same. See attached screen grabs from QTR-Curview of the 1430 PD vs 9880PD quad curves. The 1430 has the K channel fully outputting throat the curve where the 9880 ends abruptly. Does that mean anything?

Picture-3.png

Picture-1.png

Mark. Just got the negatives. You are not using Pictorico OHP Ultra Premium.

This is causing both density issues and bleed issues on the film. Piezography only works with UltraPremium.

Sorry for the news,

Walker

Walker,

my bad, will order some Pictorico. Don’t remember what material I have on hand. It did work beautifully on the 1430 using the PD quad curve. didn’t even have any of that bleed issue you mentioned. will send new negs. after I get a roll of the right stuff.

Mark

Mark,

A double triple reminder that you can only order the ULTRA Premium OHP. Premium OHP does not work!

Use coupon code PIEZOFILMMETAL for 10% off Pictorico at InkjetMall.
It also gives 10% off any Palladium and Platinum.

best,

Jon

Jon,

Just ordered from your site before I saw you 10% code. Didn’t see the 10% code.

:slight_smile:

Walker,

Are you able to work with the target’s I sent you?

Mark

x800-x880-PiezoDN-M-Bv1.quad on selenium was only producing dMax of 2.25 (you are sure this was using the new bullet-proof curve!?)

The other one was way off the charts at dMax of 3.6 optical. UV couldn’t even register but it was over 7

-Walker

Walker, both targets were using the exact same curve. I merely redirected print tool to send to the other printer. why is carbon yielding much higher dMax? Should I use the carbon printer for dNegs?

Mark