What printer gives the best B/W prints?

[tiggert]

IMHO the Cone inks are the best I've seen/used to date. Using an Epson 2880 and the Selenium with Gloss overcoat on Epson Signature Glossy I have made prints that fool other photographer (large format at that) friends compared with Ilford SG version...especially if finished the same (trimmed & dry mounted). The Matt papers are amazing as well, and save the extra Gloss coat step. It also has a plus of being able to make amazing enlarged digital negatives (by simply swapping out 2 inks) that I am having a blast with.

[GG12]

Have used Imageprint on Epson for years, now with 4900. Good quality BW. Has anyone compared it with Quadtone RIP for BW? Is there a major difference? The newest version of IP (v. 9) is much improved for user interface, finally.

[Michael Graves]

Before I dropped money into my printer, I took the time to go around to a couple of places that did digital printing as a service. As a result I had the same file printed on an Epson, a Canon and an HP...all the "professional" lines. Every print looked good, but every print looked different. My personal preference was the Epson, even though it was the most expensive of the three. I'm about to place an order for the Cone setup, based on all the positive reviews I've seen. Saving money and getting better results at the same time sounds too good to be true.

[Jim Noel]

The darkroom produces the best B&W prints if the printer is skilled.

[Michael Graves]

The darkroom produces the best B&W prints if the printer is skilled.

True. But I'm sure the OP had a very good reason for posting this question in the Digital Hardware section instead of the Darkroom section.

[Kirk Gittings]

The darkroom produces the best B&W prints if the printer is skilled.

From every negative? Absolutely not. I think I might qualify as a "skilled" darkroom printer having taught it at two universities, had 90 + shows (most with all but almost all with some silver), and had 51 years of practice (yes I started in the 6th grade). There are things I can do with some negatives in inkjet (if one is skilled ) that simply won't come close in a traditional darkroom and vice versa.

[paulr]

I agree 100% with Kirk. Working digitally offers vastly more control, which is of course more important in some situations than others. But there are other differences. With an ink set like piezography, you can have completely linear tonal separation all the way from dmax to paper-white. You're under no obligation to use this … you can create any shaped curve you like. The implications of this alone are hard to appreciate unless you've worked with it. Imagine the potential of a longer tonal scale than a palladium print, with a higher dmax.

The biggest advantages my silver prints offered were a glossy surface, and the accompanying deeper dmax. This meant that some of my images just looked better in silver for these basic reasons.

Now, though, you can print on gloss papers with these inks. I haven't tried it. Next time I have a black and white printing project, I'll have to set up a printer for this and try it out.

[Peter Langham]

Frequently it is a matter of intent. When the process matches the intent of the image maker, the finest result is produced (assuming a suitable skill level). This is regardless of process. I have produced images from inkjet that absolutely would not have been as good from the darkroom. I spent 20+ years in the darkroom and have some skills. I have received comments from others (dedicated traditional process proponents) indicating surprise at the quality of the output. These are knowledgeable people with strong biases against my process, but reacted positively to my prints. I urge Mr Noel to seek out some of the best of the digital printmakers, (not me!) whose vision and technique are aligned.

[Kirk Gittings]

Intent is absolutely a major factor. I have actually gotten to the point in the field where I can pretty much know whether it will work best one way or another. With enough practice it becomes part of the pre-visualization process just like seeing a scene and knowing it will work better in b&w vs. color.

[Michael Graves]

From every negative? Absolutely not. I think I might qualify as a "skilled" darkroom printer having taught it at two universities, had 90 + shows (most with all but almost all with some silver), and had 51 years of practice (yes I started in the 6th grade). There are things I can do with some negatives in inkjet (if one is skilled ) that simply won't come close in a traditional darkroom and vice versa.

Good point. I have a photograph of a dead tree that looks positively eerie on the darkroom print (Oriental VC Fiber). I haven't been able to get a decent computer print of it to save my life. I have another negative that I thought was hopeless before I got my 3880, that turned out a very nice print after scanning it and tweaking the contrast in PS. Each method has its intrinsic value.