One Ink to Rule Them All?

[Bullokie]

Greetings, fellow travellers!

I apologise if I'm treading well-worn paths, although I've searched the forums and I'm still a bit stumped. I'm a noob, if it wasn't yet obvious...

I'm beginning experiments with digital negatives, and to that end I've scored a used Epson R800 on ixnay-bay for $30. And with only minor blockages in the red and blue channels! Provided I can get those cleared, I'd like to get a continuous ink rig to minimise hassles, which is where I need some guidance.
I chose the R800 for its compatibility with Quadtone RIP, as I'd like to try my hand at some cyanotypes, and later on perhaps Pt/Pd. So the most important quality of the inkset I choose will be UV-blocking ability, correct? And from what I can gather, the MIS Eboni inks make nice B&W prints but aren't so good at blocking UV.
Second priority is digi-negs for straight silver-gelatin prints, and I'm led to believe the ink here has to block slightly longer wavelengths, meaning most inks should be up to the job... Please correct me if I'm wrong.
A close third priority is that the inks be pigment, and preferably with several different blacks so I can print some good B&W directly if need be. Oh, and if I can squeeze some colour prints out as well that would be nice. And I nearly forgot, the inks have to be cheap!...

My list of demands is probably ludicrous, yet I thought I'd found nirvana when I saw the MIS 3K/colour inks. If anyone can convince me I'll still have success at alt. processes with these inks, well, I'll probably buy shares in the company!

Thanks in advance

B.

 

[Bullokie]

tl;dr: do 3rd-party pigment inks block UV as well as Epson's? If so, does MIS' Eboni, et al. fit the bill?

 

[donbga]

tl;dr: do 3rd-party pigment inks block UV as well as Epson's? If so, does MIS' Eboni, et al. fit the bill?

What non-OEM, non_Epson inks that are worth fooling with for producing inkjet negatives for alternative processes certainly represents a vast area of unknown knowledge. Based on prior experiences I would recommend that you avoid inks sold by MIS (aka Inksupply.com) as they will surely clog your printer in time.

Look at the Cone color inks and refillable carts. Don't invest in a CIS for a cheap printer like the R800, it really makes no dollars and sense. You will probably drive yourself crazy fooling with the CIS and keeping it working.

Some people report success with ink and carts from the Inkjet Republic.

If you are going to use QTR then which ever inks you load can be tested by printing the QTR ink separation image with your desired alternative process. This will identify the inks which effectively block UV light and work with the process being tested. Generally speaking most iron based processed behave similarly. So test with one and have a clue for the others.

Gum and Carbon are different.

Don Bryant

 

[pschwart]

The R800 makes fine digital negatives -- printing composite b&w negatives with the native Epson driver and inks provide plenty of UV blocking for pt/pd and carbon transfers (I haven't printed silver gelatin). The quality is excellent and this approach is far simpler than building a QTR profile.

I have used a lot of MIS inks but none of them were good UV blockers. I do give MIS ink a thumbs up for b&w prints. I have used MIS in a slew of different printers without more than the usual Epson clogs, the ink is affordable, and the prints are beautiful. For me, the best approach has always been to dedicate a printer for monochrome b&w and print negatives on a different printer. I agree with Don, adding a CIS is just adding expense and headaches. Better to consider this after you have locked down your process. I have never bothered; refilling cartridges is not a big deal and it gives me more flexibility. If you really want to print b&w and digital negatives on the same printer, a 3800 can do this if you are satisfied with ABW, but that printer won't $30

tl;dr: do 3rd-party pigment inks block UV as well as Epson's? If so, does MIS' Eboni, et al. fit the bill?

 

[Firstlight]

B.

I've done silver gelatin (as well as Cyanotype) with the big brother R1800 (same Epson ink set) version and great results. I used the Pictorico Hi-Gloss White Film and printed out at RPM Photo which I believe is at 2880 dpi, with a custom profile developed for Epson Ultra Prm Luster which is the paper setting I used in the Printer setting.
Plenty of white blocking using a 7-1/2 watt bulb for the Slv Gel and also my UV set up (used the clear OHP film).
I think some of the std Epson profiles would also work fine.

Results were very smooth on Ilford MG IV.

- Terry

 

[pschwart]

Right -- when I retired my R800 I replaced it with an R1800. The negatives it makes are at least as good as what I get from the 3800. No custom profile required, just a Photoshop correction curve.

B.

I've done silver gelatin (as well as Cyanotype) with the big brother R1800 (same Epson ink set) version and great results. I used the Pictorico Hi-Gloss White Film and printed out at RPM Photo which I believe is at 2880 dpi, with a custom profile developed for Epson Ultra Prm Luster which is the paper setting I used in the Printer setting.
Plenty of white blocking using a 7-1/2 watt bulb for the Slv Gel and also my UV set up (used the clear OHP film).
I think some of the std Epson profiles would also work fine.

Results were very smooth on Ilford MG IV.

- Terry

 

[Bullokie]

Thanks very much for the feedback folks, especially regarding the CISS- I was under the illusion it might simplify things.

I'm heartened to learn that the R800 is indeed up to the job, although it seems at least one of my demands cannot be met- looks like it's economy vs. reliable UV filtering- and damned if I'm paying for a set of genuine Epson carts every other week...

Interestingly, Inkjet Mall (Cone inks) don't appear to provide a colour set for the R800, it's the monochrome Piezos only. Seems like a roundabout route, (not to mention pricey), only to arrive back in monochrome-land; perhaps I'll leave the alt. processes alone for now and just get the silver-gelatin technique down pat. I am correct in assuming most/all inks (combined with Pictorico white film) are good for these digi-negs, right?

 

[donbga]

Thanks very much for the feedback folks, especially regarding the CISS- I was under the illusion it might simplify things.

I'm heartened to learn that the R800 is indeed up to the job, although it seems at least one of my demands cannot be met- looks like it's economy vs. reliable UV filtering- and damned if I'm paying for a set of genuine Epson carts every other week...

Interestingly, Inkjet Mall (Cone inks) don't appear to provide a colour set for the R800, it's the monochrome Piezos only. Seems like a roundabout route, (not to mention pricey), only to arrive back in monochrome-land; perhaps I'll leave the alt. processes alone for now and just get the silver-gelatin technique down pat. I am correct in assuming most/all inks (combined with Pictorico white film) are good for these digi-negs, right?

The Pictorico white film may certainly be used but there maybe other similar products out there that are just as suitable at less expense. Look for back it films. Kodak used to make some products like that and as I recall were a little less expensive than Pictorico.

Pictorico products such as OHP and white gloss film have virtually zero dot gain and can produce very sharp results especially with the R800/1800 as Phil points out.

I also have had good success with glossy inkjet paper such as the Costco Kirkland brand (rebranded Ilford). It's not quite as sharp since light passes through the back of the paper, but is capable of making lovely silver gelatin prints at a much reduced cost.

Don

 

[jeffreyg]

I'm not into the nitty-gritty science and chemistry of the inks and etc. just making the best prints (pt/pd) that I can. I get very pleasing results with my Epson 2200 and Ultrachrome inks on Pictorico OHP transparency film. I originally used Kodak but did not care for the surface. I use Dan Burkholder's plug-in that I tweek as needed. For really great enlarged negatives x-ray duplicating film (in a wet darkroom) is superb.

HOME PAGE

 

[donbga]

I'm not into the nitty-gritty science and chemistry of the inks and etc. just making the best prints (pt/pd) that I can. I get very pleasing results with my Epson 2200 and Ultrachrome inks on Pictorico OHP transparency film. I originally used Kodak but did not care for the surface. I use Dan Burkholder's plug-in that I tweek as needed. For really great enlarged negatives x-ray duplicating film (in a wet darkroom) is superb.

HOME PAGE

I had great results with my 2200 until it started banding.

Ardito Business Machines of West Babylon, NY has some great deals on refurbed Epson printers and maybe able to refurb malfunctioning printers.

Epson | HP Laser | Brother Printers Service And Repair - West Babylon, NY - Ardito Business Machines

Enlarging negatives in the wet darkroom sacrifices the controls that are available for digitally enlarged negatives.

 

[jeffreyg]

Although there are more controls making digital negatives if the original negative is good enlarging in the darkroom is easy. Dodging and burning are reversed as well as placing the negative emulsion side up instead of facing the easel. The chemistry is simple and not costly. The x-ray duplicating film has little or no grain and excellent tonal range. A couple of years ago I printed a limited edition pt/pd/au series for the photographer Mario Algaze Mario Algaze using the enlarged wet negative system above with beautiful results.

HOME PAGE

 

[Paul Sorensen]

I don't know first hand about UV blocking, but I do have a CISS from RIHAC in Australia and the quality for my general printing and photo printing is fantastic. You can see their system for the R800 here: RIHAC Digital Solutions.

They mention UV absorber for fade resistance, not sure that this means anything for alt process needs, but they might be able to tell you more. Again, the quality is fantastic and I could not be happier with my system.