Re: Review of Large-Format Inkjet Contract Proofers
Re: Review of Large-Format Inkjet Contract Proofers
- Subject: Re: Review of Large-Format Inkjet Contract Proofers
- From: Terry Wyse <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 23:38:04 -0400
on 5/6/03 8:58 PM, DS wrote:
>
> Personally, I wouldn't go near it. If it's close to a
>
>
> year old and has had considerable proofs run through
>
> it, you're probably looking at replacing the heads in
>
> a few months.
>
>
Could you explain this a bit more? When we run out of
>
ink on our HP 3800CP, we have to replace the heads as
>
well the ink packs. From your post I assume that is
>
not the case with the Epson units. About how much does
>
it cost to replace each print head on the Epson? (I
>
assume there is one head for each ink instead of one
>
large head for all the inks.)
That's the case with the HPs but not the Epsons. You don't replace the heads
until they wear out. That's either a good thing or bad depending on your
point of view. HPs have their own set of issues with their thermal head
technology.
>
> I dare say you'll be hard pressed to get a good match
>
> using the Photo Dye inks without considerable work.
>
>
By what do you mean "considerable work?" Frequent
>
linearization and/or profiling, or lots of profile
>
editing?
Lots of profile editing if you want the best possible match. The problem is
mainly with the Yellow hue of the Photo Dye ink; it's very "orange" compared
to an offset press yellow. The result is a yellow with quite a bit of cyan
added by the profile transform in an attempt to get a colorimetric match.
This results in pure offset yellows looking very dirty. If there's a way to
combat this without extensive profile editing, I haven't found it yet.
>
Also, I may be wrong about the inkset on this unit--it
>
may be pigment. If it is in fact pigment inks, would
>
you anticipate it being just as hard or easier than
>
the dye inks to get a good match on the Epson 10000?
I thought you said it had Photo dye inks? If it's pigment (Archival Ink for
the 10000), it won't be any easier as the archival ink has a much smaller
color gamut compared to photo dye making it difficult to attain SWOP color
gamut. The reason Ultrachrome (UC) ink profiles well is the fact that it's
pigment, so the color's stable, and it has nearly the same color gamut as
the dye inks. The clincher is that the UC pure yellow is much closer to
offset yellow so pure yellows and greens are much cleaner.
>
> but I've never seen an HP yet that could compare to
>
> the quality of the Epson's (fast yes, quality?).
>
>
By quality what do you mean? Are you referring to
>
color quality (i.e. getting a good match to the press
>
sheet), or are you talking about the screening,
>
coarseness, banding, etc. of the the output?
Pretty much all of the above. Just last week I replaced an HP5500 with a
10600UC at a customer and they couldn't believe the printing quality and
color matching difference.
>
> Still, the UC inks are superior to Photo Dye using
>
> any other criteria besides metamerism.
>
>
Are there other criteria other than stability or gamut
>
by which you judge inks?
I think having pure ink tank hues that are closer to what it is you're
trying to simulate is a BIG help. Most inkjet inks (compared to offset inks)
have a yellow that's too red, a magenta that's too blue and a cyan that's
too green. Plus, as you get towards maximum saturation and over-inking, the
hues will start shifting or "hooking" in strange ways. Combine all this and
you're asking an awful lot out of a ICC profile to fix. Which is why it's
critical to have a good inkjet RIP that allows careful ink limiting and
linearization tools along with the ability to plug-in profiles. The idea is
to push it towards what it is that you're trying to match/simulate and then
let the profile(s) do the rest instead of having the profiles do it ALL!
>
> From one quickie measurement/dry-down test I did a
>
> while back plus some of what I've read, I'd say the
>
> HP dye inks are more stable than Epson's dye inks.
>
>
About how long do let the Epson or HP output cure
>
before measuring?
With Ultrachrome, you can start measuring almost immediately (30'-1 hr.).
With dye inks, I try to get to a point in the installation/calibration where
the last thing I do on the first day is print my profiling charts and then
let them set overnight and measure first thing the following day. Doesn't
allows work that way but I feel you should wait AT LEAST a couple of hours
before taking the first pass at measuring. Even then, I might measure it
again later and average this data before building the final profile.
>
Thanks for all your input, Terry. Unfortunately, I've
>
been involved with this decision only at the very end,
>
hence the time cruch on my fact-finding mission. Since
>
I will ultimately be the one who will setup, maintain,
>
and use this equipment and workflow, I want to make
>
sure we don't invest in something that cause me
>
unnecessary headaches.
Hope it's not too late! Getting just the right solution, whatever that
happens to be for you, can save you a lot of grief later on. And you'll
probably save yourself some headaches by hiring somebody that's worked with
your particular printer/RIP combo. He/she's liable to get you where you need
to be with less pain than trying it on your own unless you already have
considerable experience with these beasts. :-)
Regards,
Terry
--
__________________________________
WyseConsul
Color Management Consulting
v 704.843.0858
e email@hidden
__________________________________
_______________________________________________
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.