ImagePrint 5
ImagePrint 5
- Subject: ImagePrint 5
- From: "Cris Daniels" <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 17:16:37 -0300
Graeme,
>
I've certainly seen prints from an Epson 10000, printed a few days apart,
that have visually noticeable differences. Such differences go away using
calibration.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by this. Linearization or an ICC
profile isn't going to make an inkset more stable, the Epson 10000dye is just
as prone to fading regardless of the software driving the printer.
>
For us, the 10600 was dead easy, and the Ultrachrome ink
works very well. Haven't had to change a thing, apart from creating some
new color profiles.
The density of the Ultrachrome light cyan and light magenta is substantially
different than the archival or dye set. Colorbyte did a lot more to the
Ultrachrome driver than just making new profiles. The 7600 was not easy either
from what I understand, with the weird 4,9, and 21 picoliter droplet sizes (
and the light black), if you want prints that are not grainy it takes some
work. ImagePrint prints noticably smoother than the Epson driver. The only
other RIP I've seen on the 9600 is Onyx Production House 5.6 and the print
quality is not as good as ImagePrint.
>
A calibration system that is too difficult to use
is nearly as useless as no calibration system as all, because
users simply won't use it
My point exactly, with everyone crying that RIPs are already overpriced at
$3000, how do you now tell the guy that he needs a spectro and a professional
profiling package as well. The average photographer is going to tell you to
jump off a bridge, hence the masses of people driving these printers thru
Photoshop and the poor driver. The whole package is pushing over $10,000 (over
the cost of the printer) and that is before schooling the customer on
everything involved including how to make CMYK profiles that won't print like
crap.
Roberto,
>
When trying to make linearizations that would
allow to use a single profile on all of them, you have to find what's the
lowest performer of a group and cut back all the others to match it.
I have yet to see this actually work, I've got profiles bundled with Wasatch
for a Mutoh Falcon, linearize the printer and the profiles should work right?
Nope at best the are considered only good as far as color accuracy. I didn't
buy a RIP to use mediocre canned profiles. You will also see that if you make
profiles for say 4 of these Epson 5000's, each one will print a little
different (it will be very slight). Not long ago I profiled 2 Epson 5500's
with the same profiling rig, one hit reds that were more vivid to the naked
eye, whether its a slight difference in the heads from printer to printer, I
can assure you that the same printer model from each vendor can have these
slight output differences. The one 5500 just couldn't match the reds of the
other. So much for using the linearize and share the same profile approach.
I'm also not interested in throttling back all of my printers to match one
turd in the group, certain installs could require this but you are certainly
handicapping the printers.
Cris Daniels
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.