Re: Epson Stylus Pro 9600
Re: Epson Stylus Pro 9600
- Subject: Re: Epson Stylus Pro 9600
- From: Terry Wyse <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:52:50 -0500
On Nov 11, 2004, at 11:04 AM, Corporate Image wrote:
We are looking at buying a large format printer and one of them that
catches my eye is the Epson Stylus Pro 9600. Does anyone out there
have any real world incite on this printer in relation to gamut,
speed, and the ability to match press runs. Any other info about this
printer or a RIP for this printer would be helpful.
There's TONS of folks using this printer for exactly what you describe
and it's a fine printer for this.
I think the FIRST question you should ask yourself is about
productivity. Color gamut, color matching ability are not an issue but
the 9600 is not a PRODUCTION proofer/printer in my opinion. If it's
production you're after, consider the 10600 (Ultrachrome).
Apples-to-apples, the 10600 is at least 2.5-3x faster than the 9600
(even two 9600s will not match the productivity of a single 10600 AND
it will cost you more). Yes, the 10600 does not use a light black ink
but that's not an issue for proofing, only for photographic and fine
art printing in my opinion.
Probably AS or MORE important than the printer is the RIP you choose to
drive it with. Next to your choice of proofing paper, a RIP can
make-or-break things. In a VERY small nutshell, you should look at the
following, in order of importance:
1) What calibration/linearization method does the RIP use? Is it based
on COLORIMETRY (GMG Colorproof) or is it based on simply density/dot
gain values (Rampage, Best 4.6, others) or something in between (Best
5.0, Colorburst, others)?
While any of these methods are good at initially bringing a printer
"under control" and making it generally well-behaved, in my opinion the
colorimetric calibration methods are superior in KEEPING a printer in
accurate calibration. A colorimetric calibration eliminates the need
for occasional re-profiling to account for possible hue shifts and the
like that a densitometric calibration would not catch. Trust me, I
know!
2) Does it use standard ICC profiles (Best, Colorburst, others), device
link profiles (Rampage, Best XF) or it's own proprietery device
linking/profiling method (GMG, ORIS)?
IN GENERAL the ones that DON'T use ICC profiles but instead use their
own device linking technology produce superior colorimetric and visual
color-matching. See the most recent results from the IPA proofing
"shootout".
3) If it's a prepress environment, make sure it has support for the
file formats you require such as TIFF-IT, CT/LW, 1-bit screened TIFFs
("dot proofs"), etc.
Contact me off-list if you'd like more details instead of the nut-shell
version. :-)
Hope this helps!
Terry
_____________________________
WyseConsul
Color Management Consulting
email@hidden
704.843.0858
http://www.colormanagementgroup.com
http://www.wyseconsul.com (coming soon)
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden