The institution that converts the paper check to image foots the bill (estimated at 4 cents-6 cents PLUS??)for printing an IRD downstream if one is necessary to complete the collection of the item. The reasoning is that the converting bank is the one that receives the most benefit by converting the paper check to image.
If you are the reconverting institution (from image to IRD) you are responsible for the contents of the IRD (Such as: the legend "This is a legal copy of your check...", you identify the bank that originally truncated the item, you preserved all previous reconverting bank identifications, you ensure that the IRD bears all previously applied endorsements, etc.) Warranties and indemnity start when a reconverting bank creates a substitute check and then flow with the substitute check.
However, the bank that converted the paper check to image is responsible for check quality. (ie: If someone uses gel pen to write or endorse the check and the imaged copy is not clear, or if there is a missing image, or if the check is torn/dog-eared and is missing an important "chunk",.......) Which means that the warranties and indemnity claims could be come back against the converting bank (paper to image) if an image quality is poor and it is determined that quality played a role in the loss.