Re: Profilable Xerox color photocopier
Re: Profilable Xerox color photocopier
- Subject: Re: Profilable Xerox color photocopier
- From: Karsten Krüger <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 17:35:30 +0100
I am sorry you had such a bad experience with a DC240, Klaus.
Am 27.01.2008 um 12:23 schrieb Klaus Karcher:
We had a Docucolor 12 (no longer available) with Spash and were
comfortable with it. Then we bought a DC240 with the Creo RIP and
were gutted. The colormanagement and PS/PDF interpretation of the
Creo RIP was simply unusable for our tasks. We had long discussions
with Xerox and the Creo developers and decided to swap the Creo RIP
for Splash in the end.
Initially the Creo had no color limitation attached to a calibration
on DC240. So every calibration ended up to be different from the one
before. To get a Creo stable would mean to generate a new profile
after each calibration. I don't know if they changed that in their
last software version, but the last time I tried (about a year ago),
they did not fix this.
Also the Splash version for the DC240 was very buggy in the
beginning, but it became more usable in the meantime.
Yes, they had some trouble with their 1.0 release. Right now they are
at 2.0.2, which is very stable and offers PDF/X compatibility. Altona
test suite processes nicely and I had a delta E max of 2.4 on the
Fogra media wedge. Not too shabby, I guess.
We also had to return our first DC240 for a new one after countless
unsuccessful attempts to fix it.
Some systems from the first batch of DC240/250 (delivered until Oct.
2006 in Germany) had some quality issues which could not be solved by
field staff but had to be replaced. Current systems don't show this
behaviour.
The new DC240 is still a good deal worse than the DC12. It is much
more instable, more prone to break down and there are /always/
strong color variations across the sheet.
Not my experience. The DC240 / 250 in general is as stable as or even
more stable than the DC12. There is just one difference: the DC12 had
one print drum - problems on the drum were visible in any color, but
at the same place on the sheet. DC240 uses 4 drums, so it might appear
that there is more variation. Changing a drum on a DC240 in normal
ilumination might produce banding due to light exposure of all drums.
Changing drums in a dimmed light condition solves most of the color
variation on a sheet.
I am not satisfied with the DC240 toner because of its bad color
constancy. When you sway a print near the window to examine it in
daylight and artificial light alternating, you sometimes believe to
see two entirely different pages.
Laser prints (and most ink jet prints, too) face methameric behaviour
different to what you know from an offset press. This was true with
the old DC12, too. Most toner based prints will have too much magenta
when looking at them under neon light. It is, like allways, a matter
of wisdom to judge a print under D50 light.
As a laser printer the DC240 family does quite well, and for a lot of
printig tasks it is a good choice. But if you are looking for
consitency I have to agree with Scott Martin:
The DC12 is, of course, an ancient machine. As for variations across
the sheet I like to print solid C, M, Y, K and combined CMYK 11x17
pages to check for consistency and these machines has always
outperformed the others I've tested. Naturally the consistency
across the page doesn't approach inkjet. It is all relative. But if
one must have laser Xerox has a far better track record for such
things. Sorry to hear of your problems with the DC240 but they do
sound isolated and counter to the norm.
I think you'll find the color *consistency* to be clearly better
relative to the other options and the color *constancy* to be the
same as the others (they are all bad from what I've seen). If color
constancy is what you are after one should avoid laser altogether
thus the reason lots of agencies have both laser and inkjet for
quick and final color proofing.
Karsten
_______________________________________________
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