Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: Panascape on February 07, 2007, 12:22:51 pm
-
Before I got my Z3100 last week, a friend who got his two weeks earlier was complaining that his printer has a very narrow red gamut. This was in the back of my mind but my initial prints from my Z3100 seemed to be fine until today.
I got a job today from a client with very deep maroon coloured reds that fade to black. I printed it on my Epson 4000 which I know is properly calibrated and it looked great. Then I printed it on the Z3100 and the result was shocking, all the red was washed out and all the images were flat. (I can’t post the images here due to the client not allowing it as it has not be run publicly yet)
I remember seeing this same problem last week when I tried using Epson Enhanced Matt in the z3100 but I just put this down to a paper incompatibility.
If I Softproof the image in CS2 (monitor calibrated with OPTIX XR pro) using absolute colormetric for the rendering intent, the image with the Epson profile has about 4% of the image that is out of gamut, but with the z3100 profiles about 80% of the image is out of gamut.
This got me suspicious so I tried with other device profiles and got similar results with the z3100 always being by far the worst.
Next I printed out non colour managed IT8 charts on the 4000 and the z3100. The first noticeable difference is that the patches that should be closest to Red, Green and Blue are very washed out and desaturated on the z3100 with the red being more orangey yellow than red.
My assumption was that if the desaturated red was causing a problem then the green and blue should also. I took a variety of images with dark blues and greens and in every case there were substantial areas that were out of gamut for the z3100.
To check to see there were no head problems I printed a diagnostic print and I am confused as to why the red ink prints a light peachy colour, the blue ink prints purple and the green ink prints a lime green while the remaining inks print correctly.
This is really worrying me as I am the second person to come across this. My supplier has alerted HP but I was wondering if anyone else has seen this?
Thanks
Robert
-
The blue will definitely look purple. Same thing on the Canon by the way. Red is orangeish and green is bright lime. These are as they should be. One of the many reasons we photographers aren't color scientists.
Are you printing out of Photoshop CS2 on a Mac? Are you running 9.0.2? See http://h41186.www4.hp.com/country/us/en/ne...?pageseq=357613 (http://h41186.www4.hp.com/country/us/en/news/8162.html?pageseq=357613)
-
I am running on an XP Sp2 Machine. I have the latest printer drivers and I have also run all possible clibrations on the printer.
I tested my monitor's profile with my Monaco and borrowed another to make double sure and the monitor is spot on.
I just spoke to my collegue and he is driving his with an EFI RIP. He has been onto EFI for a while about this he syas they are aparently are bringing out an update to the RIP to combat this problem. Unfortunately this doesn’t help me as I am using the windows driver.
-
Robert,
I'm curiuos to know if you have figured out your gamut issue yet. Have you had any contact with HP support?
I know when I saw output from these printers at the Imaging Expo in San Antonio a few weeks ago, that the ability to produce saturated pure reds was definitely present. They were printing an image of red flowers on a green plant and the colors were excellent. They were, however, printing through the Image Print RIP that the IP rep was demonstrating. I'm not sure if I saw the same print coming from the HP driver.
I am interested in your solving this issue, since I am on the HP waiting list for a 44" model.
Good luck,
Jim
-
For what I have experienced - the Z3100 is very sensitive to the type of paper-
The Hp Premium Instant-dry Photo Satin- works the best for dark deep colours so I have learned.
and also has a very nice soft gloss. It is the paper with the widest gamut (have not been able to use the professional type of this paper yet)
Aso the red is indeed the one of he weakest colours in the spectrum- surely the Canon wins here. The green and yellow are very good of the z3100. Also the blue is strong.
Maybe it also has to do with the type of profiling. The Z3100 basis profiling does seem to me what is called GCR- wich means that the near neutral colours are built up with gray as a basis and not so much with the colours. This enables easier neutral printing but maybe narrows down the gamut in the dark colours- indeed my printer uses gray more than the other colours.
I guess that to create the stability of the colours ( 200 Years??) it also narrowed down the choice of colour pigments- but they are still very intense...
-
Hi Jim
Initially there was only my printer and my colleagues’ printer that seemed to have this problem and HP seemed to feel that it was only the printers in South Africa that were suffering.
As of today, HP South Africa’s own printer is also able to produce the problem. The problem exists with all media types and is easily demonstrable by softproofing with the canned profiles and switching the gamut warning on.
A raw IT8 chart seems to indicate the problem. The Z3100 is not printing the pure red, green, or blue patches properly but rather prints a washed out version of the colour. The reds that it can’t print would all have a large black component but because the default red has not saturation the black is overwhelming the red component and the result is a lifeless grey mess. The same applies to the blue and green.
Test were run today with a z3100 driven by an Onyx RIP and they claim that the problem did not occur but it did with the HP driver…
If you want to test the problem yourself, make patches with the following values 52, 32, 33 - 37, 12, 15 - 24, 4, 4. The z3100 cannot print these anywhere near correctly, as softproofing in CS2 and then switching on the gamut warning will show.
The 4000 battles a little but still produces a very acceptable print, the z3100 just produces a mess.
Robert
-
Kers, I agree that the printer is very neutral but it is almost eliminating all dark colours and just printing a tinted grey.
-
Kers, I agree that the printer is very neutral but it is almost eliminating all dark colours and just printing a tinted grey.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=99905\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
hello Robert,
I don't know if the so called - to me still mysterious- " advanced profiling solution" gives you the freedom to chooce to built up the colours differently ( your way); with more colours in the shadows.
Maybe more patches than the 400 are needed to achieve this.
With the 11 colourpigments this must be possible.
HP wants everybody to achieve at least very neutral prints and also wants to leave open a reason to buy this ...APS ?
-
I have ordered the APS and have been told that it should be here sometime next week. I would like to think this will solve the problem but I suspect the issues lies with the way the printer is colour mixing. If you look aqt the red, green and blue inks straight out of the cartridge, they are beautiful vibrant colours, if you look at the way the printer is using them you start to wonder if you are not better off without them.
-
First of all are these RGB numbers ? Because that doesn't help us at all without the colour space you are using...
EDIT:
If they are sRGB all printers I have can print them without any problem (R2400,4000 and Z3100)
If I take it as ProPhotoRAG than it is the same with all three printers, on some papers all three are out of gamut on others only one. BUT THIS IS THE SAME WITH ALL THREE PRINTERS. Even the 4000 and 2400 which have both custom profiles with over 4000 colour patches.
-
I have ordered the APS and have been told that it should be here sometime next week. I would like to think this will solve the problem but I suspect the issues lies with the way the printer is colour mixing. If you look aqt the red, green and blue inks straight out of the cartridge, they are beautiful vibrant colours, if you look at the way the printer is using them you start to wonder if you are not better off without them.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=99913\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
As soon as you have it please post some information here. A LOT of people want to know what it is about. Especially about custom profile targets with more patches (3000+)
Thanks
-
Sorry, they are RGB.
I agree that on both the 4000 and 3100, they are out of gamut, but on my 4000, they still print as an acceptable red colour which my client will accept, on the z3100 they are past the point where the client will accept the print.
Are you printing with the Hp driver or a RIP?
I have had 4 more jobs with dark reds today from different clients, all 4 were printed on the 4000 and the z3100 on HP Super heavy weight matte paper.
In all 4 cases the clients were happy to accept the Epson prints but reject the HP prints without knowing from which printer they came from.
I will let you know as soon I the APS package arrives.
-
They are RGB. I agree that on both the 4000 they are out of gamut, but on my 4000, they still print as an acceptable red colour which my client will accept, on the z3100 they are past the point where the clinet will accept the print.
I have had 4 more jobs with dark reds today from different clients, all 4 were printed on the 4000 and the z3100 on HP Super heavy weight matte paper.
In all 4 cases the clients were happy to accepot the Epson prints but reject the HP prints without knowing from which printer they came from.
I will let you know as soon I the APS package arrives.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=99925\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Still the question which colourspace :-P sRGB will look quite diffrent from ProPhotoRGB or WideGamutRGB
-
Adobe RGB 1988.
There are two interesting things you may want to try, 1) porint out a diagnostic print from the HP and have a look at the ink colours, I was previously not aware that the printer shipped with peach, purple and lime green inks. 2) print out an uncalibrated IT8 chart on the 4000 and the Hp and look at the pure Red, Green and Blue areas.
-
Given that he's seeing the problem when soft proofing in PS, it sounds like the problem may be in the profile that the printer generated. Could someone here who is using a similar paper and NOT seeing the gamut problem share an appropriate profile with him?
-
Tom, I am using the canned profiles from HP which Barcelona claim are fine. I spent a lot of today working with HP South Africa. We have noticed a possible problem in that the ink in the Red, Green and Blue cartridges does not resemble the colour tag on the side of the cartridge.
The red ink is peach, the blue ink is purple and the green ink is neon lime.
Would anyone be prepared to print a diagnostic print from their z3100’s “image quality maintenance menu” and could they confirm if their red, green and blue inks are also a strange colour. Could you also please let me know what firmware version the printer is running?
Indecently there are now 4 of us who have discovered this problem. I have also discovered a problem where my black and white prints are far to saturated and are losing detail. HP South Africa has apparently also seen this since the update to .06 firmware.
Thanks
Robert
-
Tom, I am using the canned profiles from HP which Barcelona claim are fine. I spent a lot of today working with HP South Africa. We have noticed a possible problem in that the ink in the Red, Green and Blue cartridges does not resemble the colour tag on the side of the cartridge.
The red ink is peach, the blue ink is purple and the green ink is neon lime.
Would anyone be prepared to print a diagnostic print from their z3100’s “image quality maintenance menu” and could they confirm if their red, green and blue inks are also a strange colour. Could you also please let me know what firmware version the printer is running?
Indecently there are now 4 of us who have discovered this problem. I have also discovered a problem where my black and white prints are far to saturated and are losing detail. HP South Africa has apparently also seen this since the update to .06 firmware.
Thanks
Robert
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100039\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Now it really depends on what you mean with these colours. Any picture on them ? I mean I have a print lying here and the blue colour looks like purple but I woudn't call the green lime. The red hm ist not really what I would call a stong red. So any picture of what it should look like or how yours look ?
-
Robert,
There are a couple insights I can offer that may be helpful. First off I would check what firmware you have. Our printer shipped(we have had it for a while now) with 4.0.0.4. The initial testing with this configuration yielded mixed results. We saw reversals in the blues and found that values below and L* of 40 especially reds lacked saturation compared to the Epson K3. When we upgraded to the latest firmware 4.0.0.6 these problems were fixed.
These two printers have a different gamut. In values below L* 50 the two printers gamut's diverge and you may see the advantage go to the Epson on one image and the HP on the other. In high L* values you will see the HP usually has more gamut. So it's a bit tricky to say one printer has the larger gamut and leave it at that, it really depends on the usable gamut, which of course depends on your image.
Lastly the profile you use, and the means by which you create it, can produce radically different results. The canned profiles are okay. If your reproducing well exposed photographs on a glossy media I think you will find them generally good.
This also holds true for the profiles created using the Easy profile creator. What I have found is that many of the issues you have brought up can be resolved by using a "better" profile. I have three test prints in front of me. One made with the canned profile, one with profiler using the imported numbers read by the on-board spectro, and one from EFI colorproof XF using the Color Manager Package. First, they all look "good". What I do notice are fairly drastic differences in the rendering of the blues, shadow transitions, and low L* saturation in the reds. I also have a print from my Epson 9800 out of Image Print. On the print from the HP using the canned profile the Epson dark saturated red is better, but on the HP image using the Profiler profile the dark saturated red is better on the HP. The APS is still a work in progress, and my initial testing is cautiously optimistic.
Also, as you noticed, the red looks orange and the blue is more of a violet. I've talked to some of the HP engineers and this is by design. The colors by themselves do look a little strange, but it's designed to work in a complimentary manner with the rest of the inks to expand the gamut. So it just a matter of getting the printer to make the best use of the colors it has at it's disposal.
This is a nice piece of hardware. It's brand new and it will take time to figure out the best way to drive it. Think of the difference the Atkinson profiles made to someone using an Epson 7/9600 series printer vs. the canned Epson profiles. That said there are inherent design differences and HP made a choice to target gamut above L* 50. They were shooting for percentages, assuming that on a majority of images there would be a usable gamut increase. I think this is good logic, although as your aware there will be times when this is not an advantage.
I hope this helps somewhat. Please feel free to ping me with any questions. There is also a gamut comparison movie that should be up on our website by now, that illustrates some of the issues I've mentioned. www.spectraflow.com
Regards-
Julian Mussi
-
Robert,
There are a couple insights I can offer that may be helpful. First off I would check what firmware you have. Our printer shipped(we have had it for a while now) with 4.0.0.4. The initial testing with this configuration yielded mixed results. We saw reversals in the blues and found that values below and L* of 40 especially reds lacked saturation compared to the Epson K3. When we upgraded to the latest firmware 4.0.0.6 these problems were fixed.
These two printers have a different gamut. In values below L* 50 the two printers gamut's diverge and you may see the advantage go to the Epson on one image and the HP on the other. In high L* values you will see the HP usually has more gamut. So it's a bit tricky to say one printer has the larger gamut and leave it at that, it really depends on the usable gamut, which of course depends on your image.
Lastly the profile you use, and the means by which you create it, can produce radically different results. The canned profiles are okay. If your reproducing well exposed photographs on a glossy media I think you will find them generally good.
This also holds true for the profiles created using the Easy profile creator. What I have found is that many of the issues you have brought up can be resolved by using a "better" profile. I have three test prints in front of me. One made with the canned profile, one with profiler using the imported numbers read by the on-board spectro, and one from EFI colorproof XF using the Color Manager Package. First, they all look "good". What I do notice are fairly drastic differences in the rendering of the blues, shadow transitions, and low L* saturation in the reds. I also have a print from my Epson 9800 out of Image Print. On the print from the HP using the canned profile the Epson dark saturated red is better, but on the HP image using the Profiler profile the dark saturated red is better on the HP. The APS is still a work in progress, and my initial testing is cautiously optimistic.
Also, as you noticed, the red looks orange and the blue is more of a violet. I've talked to some of the HP engineers and this is by design. The colors by themselves do look a little strange, but it's designed to work in a complimentary manner with the rest of the inks to expand the gamut. So it just a matter of getting the printer to make the best use of the colors it has at it's disposal.
This is a nice piece of hardware. It's brand new and it will take time to figure out the best way to drive it. Think of the difference the Atkinson profiles made to someone using an Epson 7/9600 series printer vs. the canned Epson profiles. That said there are inherent design differences and HP made a choice to target gamut above L* 50. They were shooting for percentages, assuming that on a majority of images there would be a usable gamut increase. I think this is good logic, although as your aware there will be times when this is not an advantage.
I hope this helps somewhat. Please feel free to ping me with any questions. There is also a gamut comparison movie that should be up on our website by now, that illustrates some of the issues I've mentioned. www.spectraflow.com
Regards-
Julian Mussi
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100074\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Does that mean you own the HP APS ? Could you comment on diffrent options ? Like which targets can you use ? How many profiling patches ? Can you make custom targets ?
Thanks
-
Does that mean you own the HP APS ? Could you comment on diffrent options ? Like which targets can you use ? How many profiling patches ? Can you make custom targets ?
Thanks
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100087\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You get three RGB target options if I rememeber. the basic easy color, a mid sized and TC9.18 target. You also have the option of generating a CMYK profile(ECI), printing it through your RIP, and then measuring it in the printer and generating a profile. I bet by the time it ships it will be an even more robust solution.
-
Just want to emphasize Julian's point about the color of the RGB inks and put this issue to rest for good. THe newer printers from Canon and HP have reds and blues that are more accurately described as orange and violet, respectively. StudioPrint RIP even lists them in ink channels as Orange/Red and Violet/Blue. Attached is a linearization from the Canon 5000. You have CMYK followed by RGB. The additional inks are designed to augment the basic 4 color set. For reasons that only color scientists fully understand it makes more sense to have orange and purple for mixing with the primaries.
-
Hi Amadou
Looking at the test chart, especially patch E20, this is what I would be happy to get as base Red, however the best my machine can do at the moment for an uncalibated chart would be E13.
The same would apply for A20 and F20 with the best my z3100 getting being around A14 and F17. If I create an uncalibrated chart with CMYK ramps and RGB ramps the CMYK prints correctly while the 100% RGB patches print Orange, purple and light bright green. This already says to me there is a problem with the colour mixing.
I have attached a sample of how the two printers will print the same chart. On the left is the Z3100 on super heavy weight matte and on the right, the epson 4000 on enhanced matte.
[attachment=1821:attachment]
-
The newer printers from Canon and HP have reds and blues that are more accurately described as orange and violet, respectively. StudioPrint RIP even lists them in ink channels as Orange/Red and Violet/Blue. Attached is a linearization from the Canon 5000.
Don't want to get too far off topic here, but how is Studioprint with the IPF5000? Several posters on the IPF5000 Wiki are asking about RIPs for the 5000. Is the gamut any better than using the drivers or plugin, or is there some other advantage to Studioprint for the 5000?
Feel free to stop by the Wiki:
http://www.canonipf5000.wikispaces.com (http://www.canonipf5000.wikispaces.com)
if that would be a more appropriate place to discuss this (side) topic.
--John
-
I softproofed the canned profiles for the 3100 and my ipf8000 quite awhile ago and reported the limitations of the new printers on matte paper. I had posted this on the Epson group and the Canon Wiki. The 9600/7600/4000 reproduces darker reds and many darker tones in general when compared to almost any other inkset including the x800 and certainly better than the IPF and Z series. The Z series seems to be the most limited in bottom end gamut when printing on matte papers and attempting to reproduce dark tones. If you are printing matte this is very likely not the printer you would want to buy. I print large canvases and use the ipf8000. I took a hit on gamut when I switched from my 9600.
-Jonathan
You will notice in my post here I complain of flat reds and browns on my IPF8000 (on matte paper) as compared to the old 9600 I had:
http://canonipf5000.wikispaces.com/message/view/FAQ/195556 (http://canonipf5000.wikispaces.com/message/view/FAQ/195556)
-
Thanks Johnothan
Problem is that HP sold the printer as being able to produce vibrant prints with an increased gamut on all media and I was assured that the matte papers would be no exception. All of my work is on matte paper and canvas.
I have done extensive testing and I am convinced the problem lies with HP's colour mixing strategy rather than a problem with the device or inks as the z2100 produces vastly better results.
Robert
-
Thanks Johnothan
Problem is that HP sold the printer as being able to produce vibrant prints with an increased gamut on all media and I was assured that the matte papers would be no exception. All of my work is on matte paper and canvas.
I have done extensive testing and I am convinced the problem lies with HP's colour mixing strategy rather than a problem with the device or inks as the z2100 produces vastly better results.
Robert
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100615\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Ok let's get clear because I'm getting a little pissed. ( @ HP ) What they deliver here is a total disaster. I mean gamut is horrible. Yes I still believe that can be fixed in firmware by changing the colour mixing. Here ar two example which speak for themselfs:
Both times HM Photo Rag. AND NO It doesn't get much better on glossy media. ( Only a little bit )
[attachment=1827:attachment]
[attachment=1828:attachment]
Now I really starting to ask myself how some testers could have missed that flaw ... ? Perhaps because it only started with the newst firmware version ? Or why ? i mean these things are not small they are BIG...
-
I too questioned the possibility of the problem being related to firmware but the canned profiles which were created with the original firmware also show the gamut problem.
Apart from HP missing this problem, how did all those who tested the printer a gave it glowing reviews also miss it? I picked it up on the first print.
-
I was about to pull the trigger on a Z3100, think I better wait......... I should have listened to my wife and not sold my 9800.......................
-
Wow, this a real disappointment. I was ready to buy the z3100 44 inch today. I have a buyer for my 9600 waiting. I print mostly subtle monochromatic neutrals on matte paper and canvas.
The reviews really fooled me. How could they miss this? How is it that another smaller printer using the same inks? produce better a color gamut? I really hope it can be fixed with a new firmware.
Andrew Gonzalez
http://www.sublimatrix.com (http://www.sublimatrix.com)
-
Wow, this a real disappointment. I was ready to buy the z3100 44 inch today. I have a buyer for my 9600 waiting. I print mostly subtle monochromatic neutrals on matte paper and canvas.
The reviews really fooled me. How could they miss this? How is it that another smaller printer using the same inks? produce better a color gamut? I really hope it can be fixed with a new firmware.
Andrew Gonzalez
http://www.sublimatrix.com (http://www.sublimatrix.com)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100671\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I REALLY WOULD SUGGEST ALL TO WAIT UNTIL we have a clear statement from HP.
This is a disaster and if HP comes up with nothing better than that's the best we can do, than this printer is on ebay in a second. Sorry nice try, but the result so far is a disaster.
I will post as soon as I hear news from HP.
Another thing... Is this problem being fixed by RIPs like ImagePrint ? I mean do they change something in the colour mixing and so on or is it sitting to deep in the firmeware of the printer ?
-
Apart from HP missing this problem, how did all those who tested the printer a gave it glowing reviews also miss it? I picked it up on the first print.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100636\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I still think it is not so easy to identify. I have around 15 prints here which look fantastic. BUT they all are not printed on Matt and they all don't have any sat. red in them.
If you print BW it's fantastic, if you print not "too" special photos you probably wouldn't notice a Problem for some time.
-
I can understand possibly not seeing the problem straight away in a normal environment but when someone reviews a printer, I expect that they will really put it through its paces with regards to trying to see where its limitations lie.
This is not a difficult problem to pick up as we have both seen.
In this case of this problem, I know HP has been aware of it for a while but I am guessing they have done what most companies would do and kept quiet while they tried to fix it in the hope that they could patch it before it became too widely publicised.
As an owner of this printer and someone who is being really inconvenienced by it, I am not ready yet to contemplate getting rid of the machine as all of my past experience from the commercial print arena says that they can fix this but I do feel that an official comment is now due from HP, if for no other reason than to reassure the owners who have encountered this problem.
It would seem that a valuable lesson has come from this with regards to how the printer was tested in beta phase and by reviewers and this I feel this is an area that maybe needs to be looked at closely by potential buyers before we make decisions based on these reviews in the future.
-
I also WILL keep the thin as long as I know what HP will be doing or Epson is dowing something new at PMA... So HP should hurry at least with a statement so that we know what we are up to.
-
John,
I'm still in testing phase right now so I can't make any informed comments about SP and the Canon. I can say that from an RGB profiling stanpoint Printfix Pro2.0 is yielding very impressive results with the 5000 for both color and monochrome prints. By the end of the month I should have a beter feel for StudioPrint with both the Canon and the HP. I'll make sure to pass along the info.
And thanks for devoting so much of your time to the wiki by the way. It is geatly appreciated! If only you were an employee of Canon. We'd probably have real documentation and better online support by now
-
I'd be careful about inferring too much from raw data send to a CMYK printer through an RGB driver. In theory of course, the driver, in a color managed scenario would make any necessary adjustments to what you're seeing to hit the required hues.
I'm not disputing that you have a color issue. One thing I ran into here was inconsistent color output, literally from print to print. Specifically a magenta cast or alternately dark, slightly washed out colors. After much troubleshooting it seems my problem is computer specific. I have run the same test prints from a second computer that all come out as expected, with saturated reds, deep blues, etc. I'm going to reinstall the driver on the problem computer. Do you have access to another machine with the driver loaded?
I will say that for RGB profiling I'm getting better results right now from PrintFix Pro. I know, this defeats the whole purpose of having a built-in spectro. Still have more testing to do to make a definitive statement. Have you tried creating a profile with something other than the on-board software?
Hi Amadou
Looking at the test chart, especially patch E20, this is what I would be happy to get as base Red, however the best my machine can do at the moment for an uncalibated chart would be E13.
The same would apply for A20 and F20 with the best my z3100 getting being around A14 and F17. If I create an uncalibrated chart with CMYK ramps and RGB ramps the CMYK prints correctly while the 100% RGB patches print Orange, purple and light bright green. This already says to me there is a problem with the colour mixing.
I have attached a sample of how the two printers will print the same chart. On the left is the Z3100 on super heavy weight matte and on the right, the epson 4000 on enhanced matte.
[attachment=1821:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100500\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Robert,
Have you had any contact with HP support?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=99882\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm also very curious and like to hear what HP Support told you.
Did you call them?
-
My main question right now is if these printers with the gamut issues are only from the South Africa area?
Has anyone within the US taken delivery of a Z3100 with the same issues?
If not, the problem may be localized to a specific production plant and wouldn't affect those of us who are ready to take delivery of one of these printers.
Jim Cole
-
My main question right now is if these printers with the gamut issues are only from the South Africa area?
Has anyone within the US taken delivery of a Z3100 with the same issues?
If not, the problem may be localized to a specific production plant and wouldn't affect those of us who are ready to take delivery of one of these printers.
Jim Cole
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100708\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have the same problem here. UK printer is from Germany.
Now I do final test to rule every own mistake out.
I recalibrate everything, make a head cleaning.
After that I will produce a new custom profile based on 5000 patches. After that I know 100% whether the printer is able to produce any good results with the firmware right now.
No nothing against PrintFix pro, but I think I know what I'm doing and that my custom profiles are some of the best. ( Ok had to be said, I mean I sell them ^^)
So I will post again when everything finished.
-
Just want to emphasize Julian's point about the color of the RGB inks and put this issue to rest for good. THe newer printers from Canon and HP have reds and blues that are more accurately described as orange and violet, respectively. StudioPrint RIP even lists them in ink channels as Orange/Red and Violet/Blue. Attached is a linearization from the Canon 5000. You have CMYK followed by RGB. The additional inks are designed to augment the basic 4 color set. For reasons that only color scientists fully understand it makes more sense to have orange and purple for mixing with the primaries.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100108\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Panascape's post only had one chart reproduced so one cannot see the comparative effect. But Amadou, I'm wondering whether you have put the issue to rest for good. While it may be correct that the inks are orange and violet, what really matters is whether the numbers in the image file that define for example red come out of the printer as that red should come out, etc. From what I'm reading here it seems the complaint is more about this than about the hue of the inks themselves.
-
Panascape's post only had one chart reproduced so one cannot see the comparative effect. But Amadou, I'm wondering whether you have put the issue to rest for good. While it may be correct that the inks are orange and violet, what really matters is whether the numbers in the image file that define for example red come out of the printer as that red should come out, etc. From what I'm reading here it seems the complaint is more about this than about the hue of the inks themselves.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100715\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
YES I really don't care how the inks look like. I care how they are getting used and that's a disaster...
-
I am very interested to know what comes of this - and if HP can do anything about it by either changing firmware or even reformulating their inks.
I have a z3100 on order and bought the little brother the b9180 to use for small sheets. I found out that it will not print reds well onto matte paper and since its using the same inks minus the extra blacks and gloss I am worried that I'll get nearly the same on the 3100.
The very worst thing is how the printer handles out of gamut colors. I'm printing a lot of floral images where the OOG red's are coming out orange and the images are there for unusable - red roses with orange spots?. With my old epson 4000, the OOG reds were still red and not really noticable on the prints.
I never thought I would miss that epson 4000! Sold it and my 7600 last year - rats!
Previously I didn't really worry about out of gamut colors since they didn't show up so much. Maybe someone with more color managment savy can explain what part of the process handles the OOG color? Is it the printer driver or the color profile that deals with this? I always thought it was the profile? I guess what I am saying is that for my work I don't necessarily care if I get the absolutely correct color, but I sure don't want a rough or weird transition between regions in gamut and those out. If this can be fixed on the HP by either reworking my profiles or by HP redoing their firmware, maybe not all is lost?
-
I too have a 3100 and an Epson 4000- It is true that deep reds are disappointing, similar in some way to the first gen epson pigments which struggled in that department- (I also have an epson 7500 too which i have wrestled with for years).
I believe all is not lost though-
1.the lightfastness is double at least of the Epsons which is important for giclee on matt paper (and might explain the curtailed gamut)
2.The deep blues and oranges are very strong
3. metamerism is controlled better than any inkset i have seen
4. gloss dif/bronzing is well controlled with GE
5. B&W is superb
6: its really stingy with ink
As ever it depends on the image you want to print- Its a shame it is not at present the one stop shop one might have hoped for
It is interesting that we are given a machine with a spectro that can in theory can use any manufacturers paper easily yet more than ever it requires OEM paper to perform at its best.
I hope HP will sort the headstrike issue and the lack of deep red- we shall see- perhaps we should all badger them!
-
I am very interested to know what comes of this - and if HP can do anything about it by either changing firmware or even reformulating their inks.
I have a z3100 on order and bought the little brother the b9180 to use for small sheets. I found out that it will not print reds well onto matte paper and since its using the same inks minus the extra blacks and gloss I am worried that I'll get nearly the same on the 3100.
The very worst thing is how the printer handles out of gamut colors. I'm printing a lot of floral images where the OOG red's are coming out orange and the images are there for unusable - red roses with orange spots?. With my old epson 4000, the OOG reds were still red and not really noticable on the prints.
I never thought I would miss that epson 4000! Sold it and my 7600 last year - rats!
Previously I didn't really worry about out of gamut colors since they didn't show up so much. Maybe someone with more color managment savy can explain what part of the process handles the OOG color? Is it the printer driver or the color profile that deals with this? I always thought it was the profile? I guess what I am saying is that for my work I don't necessarily care if I get the absolutely correct color, but I sure don't want a rough or weird transition between regions in gamut and those out. If this can be fixed on the HP by either reworking my profiles or by HP redoing their firmware, maybe not all is lost?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100720\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Eric, I'm not sure how nostalgic I would be for an Epson 4000. I had one, now using the 4800, and on both printers OOG red is a big problem. I think there are four issues - maybe you know them and do these things already: (1) the profile and paper choice, (2) the choice of rendering intent (3) the colour working space and (4) how Photoshop renders OOG colours in light of the foregoing. Re (1) - matte has lower D-Max than gloss; while this primarily matters for shadow detail it can also affect how saturated colour reproduces. Re (2) it is sometimes worthwhile softproofing both RELCOL and Perceptual to see which does less damage; re (3) sometimes using a narrower colour space helps tame the reds so at least some detail is preserved from hyper-saturation that can periodically occur from using a very wide colour space; (4) before you print, make your final colour correction adjustments with Soft Proof active. Add a Selective Color Adjustment Layer, select Red, and tweak Cyan, Yellow and Black till you see something more satisfactory looking for you than what Photoshop did on its own. Then print and see what happens. It should be predictable assuming you are well colour-managed.
-
It's interesting that the z3100 sample print from HP, the one with the red flowers and water splash, printed on HP Pro Satin, looks beautiful. The reds are not orange and are very deep and rich.
Is this a color calibration problem with the spectrophotometer?
Has anyone tested the Advance Profiling Solution for the color issue?
-
Eric, I'm not sure how nostalgic I would be for an Epson 4000. I had one, now using the 4800, and on both printers OOG red is a big problem. I think there are four issues - maybe you know them and do these things already: (1) the profile and paper choice, (2) the choice of rendering intent (3) the colour working space and (4) how Photoshop renders OOG colours in light of the foregoing. Re (1) - matte has lower D-Max than gloss; while this primarily matters for shadow detail it can also affect how saturated colour reproduces. Re (2) it is sometimes worthwhile softproofing both RELCOL and Perceptual to see which does less damage; re (3) sometimes using a narrower colour space helps tame the reds so at least some detail is preserved from hyper-saturation that can periodically occur from using a very wide colour space; (4) before you print, make your final colour correction adjustments with Soft Proof active. Add a Selective Color Adjustment Layer, select Red, and tweak Cyan, Yellow and Black till you see something more satisfactory looking for you than what Photoshop did on its own. Then print and see what happens. It should be predictable assuming you are well colour-managed.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100742\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Mark,
Thanks for the suggestions...I have played with this some but not the color space of the original file which was adobeRGB. Are you suggesting I convert this to sRGB first before printing? Actually I am now using profotoRGB for a lot of my work so that space is very wide and can cause printing problems.
And you are right about the epson: When I was using my epson 4000 there was at least one moment a day where I wanted to either take a sledge hammer to it and smash it up or toss it down the stairs and kick it out the door. I wasted so much ink, paper, and most importantly time trying to get that thing to work. Why epson made the user interface so restrictive I can't say. The sheet feeder tray was worthless and either it wouldn't feed the paper or it would fold up one of the corners on the way through. What made me the most frustrated is some times it would work, take 3 sheets and then I would leave the room and it would quit. It made nice prints - when it worked. It clogged. It came out of adjustment and made bands, it ran low on ink and wouldn't let me clean a clog even when there was enough ink left to make 30 prints. I hated that thing.
I've spent a little time comparing profiles for the ipf5000, epson 3800, epson 4000, and the hp 3100 and b9180. I'm just downloading them from paper manufacturer's sites: Crane, Hahnemuhle, Ilford, Inova I'm then comparing them to each other for each paper type using the colorsync utility on the Mac. Seems like everytime the canon and epson printers have a bigger color space in the reds and mostly everywhere else too with some exceptions. I'm surprised! The older epson inkset for the 4000 and 7600 seems to have really big range in the reds.
-
Previously I didn't really worry about out of gamut colors since they didn't show up so much. Maybe someone with more color managment savy can explain what part of the process handles the OOG color? Is it the printer driver or the color profile that deals with this? I always thought it was the profile?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100720\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It's the profile. Contact me at edmundronald at gmail dot com and we can make and test a new profile. I have some new Xrite equipment coming in that needs testing.
Edmund
-
It's the profile. Contact me at edmundronald at gmail dot com and we can make and test a new profile. I have some new Xrite equipment coming in that needs testing.
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100770\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Edmund, while it is good of you to offer help, there could be several causes, including but not limited to the profile.
Eric, the 4000 from my experience was a very robust, reliable performer except for clogs/ink recession. Likewise for the 4800, which clogs much less than the 4000 did, and both are far better built compared with the casing and paper handling of the 3800.
The reproduction of reds is often a problem because the colour spaces we are using exceed the printers' gamuts. (And I believe in Michael's reviews, if I remember correctly, he found the Epson 4800 somewhat better on red, the Canon better on blue and green, and the HP z3100 very close to the Canon IPF5000.)
Your soft-proofing will tell you whether gamut compression is occuring, and if so things will happen to the reds. What happens depends on the things I mentioned in my previous post. If you are using ARGB98, experiment by making a new copy of the image file, convert to sRGB, print it in your usual way and see what happens. This will help explore at least one possible approach to a solution.
If however you are getting orangey reds out of the printer for shades of red that on the (properly profiled and calibrated) monitor are both redder and in gamut (i.e. minimal difference with soft-proof on or off) this would suggest another kind of problem happening between the image file and the mixing of ink, because the soft-proof is done with the printer profile you are using and gamut compression would not be the culprit. Once you have gone through a process of elimination like this, including perhaps taking up Edmund's offer of a profile, if you have not solved it a call to tech support may be in order.
-
Edmund,
Thanks for your offer - I'll gladly take you up on it.
Mark,
I just tried some of your suggestions including the color space change and also the selective color. The problem is visible in soft proof but just more apparent when you see the print - could be my viewing light in my home office or something else but it just looks worse on paper. My screen is calibrated (Apple Cinema display). However, it appears that the color managment and printer is working correctly. Now, I'm just hoping that a new profile will help with the transitions from in gamut to OOG otherwise this printer is going on the auction block and I will cancel my z3100 order. I also spoke to HP support today - unfortunately the tech support person who fielded my call did not know what rendering intents were and had to put me on hold for 10 minutes to go find out what they were before suggesting I try printing with HP's automated software solution. She was unaware of anyone else having problems printing deep reds.
btw-It appears from the profiles downloadable from the paper manufacturers that the 3100 gets slightly better gamut than the b9180 -
-
HP South Africa has taken this up with the design centre in spain but as of yet no suggestions or official comments.
-
Mark
I am seeing the colour perfectly on my screen and softproofing shows exactly what I am going to get on the printer and matches the output very closely.
My epson 4000 beats the z3100 in every single area and the softproofing and prints confirm this. Christopher did a good test whereby he profiles the same paper on and Epson and a z3100 using the same external device and his post above speaks for itself.
After an extreme amount of testing my conclusion is that HP have a problem with the way the printer mixes the ink internally. This is resultin in raw colours that are not suffiecient to produce a profile with a wide enough gamut.
Robert
-
Eric, could you please post the exact operating system version and Photoshop version you are running ? Thank you.
Edmund
-
Ok as promised here are the results. Changes NONE. OK the large custom profiles got a little bit better but still so bad compared to the Epson.
The image show the maximal IN-Gamut Range of the Printer. So Colour got so much tuned until they fir nearly into gamut.. sorry but that's not good. I mean look at these...
Paper used: HM Photo Rag
[attachment=1838:attachment]
-
Ok, I wanted to show you one more thing. A Gamut Chart with L = 25; L = 50 and L = 75
I think it shows how really poor the z3100 performce at 25. I mean 50 is not good. 75 is good buzt 25 is a real disaster.
[attachment=1843:attachment]
-
Ok, I wanted to show you one more thing. A Gamut Chart with L = 25; L = 50 and L = 75
I think it shows how really poor the z3100 performce at 25. I mean 50 is not good. 75 is good buzt 25 is a real disaster.
[attachment=1843:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100870\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Christopher,
Thanks ever so much for taking the trouble to do these tests, and fix-up the results so they can be displayed for our "enjoyment". I am sure it is of as much interest to you as it is to those of us thinking of buying one of these printers.
It is very clear from your results in the previous post that not only red, but in fact ANYTHING on the warm side of the spectrum is coming out much less saturated from the Z3100 than from the Epson 2400, and the 2400 would have yet *somewhat* less gamut than the 4800.
I assume from your descriptions that you have custom-profiled both printers in the same way and are using the same paper in each. Can I also assume you are not using any RIPs to drive either printer - you are using the native drivers. Now is it possible that there are other settings on the HP driver or in the way Photoshop is communicating with the HP driver (*Print with Preview* settings) that are messing you up without you knowing about it? That is to say, have you carefully checked that ALL the necessary settings in the HP driver and in Photoshop are correctly configured for the paper and profile you are using? It sounds to me as if you have probably checked all this over and over again, but I ask anyhow *just in case* something may be amiss.
The reason I ask is that it is TRULY hard to believe that a firm as sophisticated as HP, with the HUGE amounts of money they put into developing the Z3100 would release a printer for 5000 dollars that can't out-perform in every respect a low-price, out-of-date Epson 2400. You can imagine they would have taken Epson's and Canon's Professional Printers apart to the core and studied every aspect before they even got into their basic design work, not to speak of the elaborate testing their own engineers and beta testers world-wide would have had to perform to convince HP's marketing people and corporate executives that the machine was ready to be released.
Discussion Forums like this would tend to see more complaints than satisfaction because happy customers just carry on printing usually without posting good news, while the disappointed people are upset therefore motivated to spread the bad news. This is just human nature - watch the news on television every day and you know what I mean. So on that basis I have to assume that while your issues are real in your case, there have to be other people who are completely satisfied, otherwise the volume of complaining would be much louder and we would be hearing even more about it.
The reason I'm saying this is not to make any excuses for HP, because I have no relationship with them whatsoever, but the logic building in my mind is that perhaps the problem you are showing - which is clearly there in the results - is NOT a generic problem with the printer technology, but a software issue or a malfunction of your particular machine. That would suggest a very thorough dialogue between you and your local HP service center, with your output tests, to try to get to the bottom of what is happening.
As I said at the beginning, there should be a great deal of interest in the outcome of all this amongst those like myself who have been seriously considering to buy one of these printers. It is most important for prospective customers to know whether the problem you demonstrate is a generic technological deficiency, or a case-specific issue that has a straightforward solution. So do please follow-up further with HP and keep us posted.
-
Mark, I have tested using a 4000 and the Z3100 using windows drivers for both. I have tried evey combination of setting on the HP driver and my results are the same as Christophers. We have even elimineted the drivers from the equation by examining the profiles and these tell the same story.
In this case HP did indeed release a $5000 printer with what appears to be screwed up colour mixing. I have been in touch with HP South Africa but HP Spain seems to be extremly quite with regards to this problem. I am assured however that they are working on it.
-
Mark,
I agree with your assessment of the situation, that it must be a localized issue to a few machines or to a specific production plant. I have seen prints in person that looked exceptional in every way.
I had ased in an earlier post if any of these gamut defective machines have appeared in the US market, but so far no one outside of South Africa and I think the UK has posted this issue.
Jim
-
Jim the canned profiles straight from HP show exactly the same problem as we are experiencing. This says catagorically that it is all machines.
Can't say how I know this but I would expect to see new firmware and new profiles for these machines very soon.
-
What we do not know, that could be machine specific, are possible problems with the production of the inks or the hardware itself that would show up no matter which profile was used. Am I mistaken in this assumption?
Still trying to maintain optimism here as I have one of these beasts on order.
Jim
-
Jim,
I've seen several prints done by a professional photographer here in Toronto from the Z3100 and I was also very impressed with the quality, but I must say that for these images the predominant colors were blues and greens, and some yellow so I haven't personally seen the warm side of the gamut properly exhibited by a non-HP user.
I believe Christopher is writing from Germany or a neighbouring country.
I think it really will be very useful and important for Christopher, Robert (Panascape) and HP to collaborate on getting to the bottom of what is going on and let the broader community know the outcomes. Until then it is hard to pinpoint what is what.
-
Complicated issues at hand.
We need to reduce the elements to one stream here.
So the problem is on matte media.
I can't see any problems on glossy or satin on any stock I have ever run through the printer.
Now , the ink set > it is and always has been a CMYK OGV printer for me. I was a bit confused when they labeled it RGB added primaries but on a print out like a calibration chart it's quick to see it's OGV. It's a very good choice too.
The Canon red ink tank colour is a fair bit better at producing saturated mid tone or even high L reds on all photo papers. These reds should be higher in C than the Epson K3 inks too. The HP still out does K3 on reds with photo media in the same or similar regions as the Canon.
So why didn't the reviewers or beta testers ( I am) see this?
Well some did.
Why wasn't it written up on the billboards?
Good question.
Reviewers who had the early models had varying amounts of knowledge on how to make the best of what they had in way of media, firmware and software. A fact: each early unit had different firmware and media set ups. As they came online, firmware and software changes AND media were seeded during the tester's access to the printers.
Similar things were going on for beta sites.
Early on the reds were actually fairly rich, but the transitions were harsh. Lacking in detail, the separations were changed more than once.
Then question of software. The software didn't always correspond to the latest updates in media set ups, nor separations.
Tracking these changes was a long and painful experience that most of the reviewers didn't have to go through.
Those who did reported ( some did anyway) and changes were quickly made. Each time changes were made the series of changes do not necessarily get out to users/reviewers.
Each time a change was made it affected not only the area trying to be fixed but also took away from other areas. It was a push pull thing that is still moving around.
What I see is great advances in photo media but alas flat matte media printing.
How does software play into this?
Well the built in profiler for some strange reason builds the best matte media profiles. Better than the APS, better than Profile Maker. On top of that printing in relative is better for reds than perceptual. Yet this has to be done with a media set up that I'm not sure is even in your printers yet.
APS works very well for all photo media but is just not as good at matte, yet I do not have the latest build of APS.
Another point> the soft proofing on matte is not very good. There are some serious problems there , hopefully they have been fixed. The best soft proofing will still be the built in profiles vs external.
I looked long and hard at soft proofing on Hahnemuhle FA media on K3, UC, and Claria ? Canon inks.
Strange that I also see Canon having problems in saturation in shadows on matte media.
Could it be pigment loads for thermal heads are not as well suited to matte media?
Then it brings me back to the problem and where it may have been overlooked.
I recently printed a series of artworks for a photorealistic painter. Rich reds, he was having his concerns with from his shop printer (Epson 7800 I think).
His proofs were on glossy and his prints were on Hahnemuhle. Even though the Epson is excellent at reds, it's not realistic to try to proof on glossy then try to repro on matte.
So I printed on Satin and matte on the Z. I have the proofs and prints from the Epson. The glossy are unrealistic and not near as accurate as Canon or HP will do on glossy. But , who cares the client is king. Now the matte media. The Z is flat, lackluster. The Epson is looking good compared to the soft proof of the H 308 on an iP5000, and the fresh Z print with the latest of everything.
I send the prints to the artist. He then says well after all this time wanting to print matte ( he was told that galleries prefer matte !!! ) he is thrilled with the satin repro .
So even though I had printed many rolls of matte, I hardly did much colour printing. B&W with printer management on the Z and matte is absolutely beautiful, I don't think I looked at colour enough, or that is until this artist asked me to try to help.
What can be done for matte clr repro?
New separations will help. Specific modifications to the APS, and Easy profilers.
For now that's is the quickest and most accessible fix.
Things like a different red are a possibility but when , where , how , is beyond the scope of any reviewer or beta tester.
So I hope this helps at least a little.
-
I don't have much time but I want to say following. No RIP used with either printer. Inly normal Windows driver. Same Paper and good settings. I check them and there are not to many options in the driveres.
I KNOW that it is possible to print for 1 or two weeks without seeing the problem at all. ( This happened to me.) Because normally I don't check gamut and everything when the prints look great. But these prints were blue, yellow, a lot of snow and some green.
I am also shocked by the fact that the canned profiles from HP, are even worse. I mean really they are a big OH... They have far less Gamut than the R2400.
Now I know the whole thing is kind of strange. HP spending so much time and money on the Z series and than such a result ... I mean in Germany I had to pay 7000 EUR for that thing and for that kind of money I really think of something diffrent.
My Printer is from HP Germany and shipped to the UK.
I mean IS there someone with who can claim, that his z3100 gamut is OK ? I mean at least as big as the Epsons ?
EDIT: I just got two emails back from two diffrent RIP Companies. Both state that they have found that the colours are really strange with the normal mixing. But also said that they are finishing up the colour mixing and getting some really nice results so far.
So this tells me that it is just a mixing thing and not a problem with the inks.
Christopher
-
No once again, yes the printer performce better on Glossy, but I still wouldn't call that really good. Sorry, but even on Glossy the Epson outperformce him. Yes I have done the same test as for HM Photo Rag on Glossy media. Yes it is a LOT better, but still not perfect. I don't have time now to post screens and charts, but pherhaps later.
Christopher
-
It is not my experience to see anything less than some excellent printing in all areas other than colour printing of rich , dark print on matte.
There are whole regions in most areas of the L50 on upwards that largey exceed any Epson current printer.
The better profiles are with APS or an external profiler as I said before.
The glossy gamut on the Z3100 is quit a jump on past 8 colour inksets and comparable to the Canon 12 colour. While the dark shadow gamut of the K3 inks is larger than either Canon or HP it is certainly not in most all regions three quarter tone and upwards.
-
I think the problem that we are seeing is a colour mixing issue. I hope the following will clarify this statement.
My background is commercial printing and repro, specialising on workflows and harlequin RIP’s. I am one of the founders of Hamillroad Software and along with my partner, Andy Cave who was the father of the Harlequin RIP, was a chief driving force behind the design of FirstPROOF which is a powerful virtual dot proofing system for softproofing rasterized data from RIP’s.
This background lead me to look at the problem from a very different angle to most as I wasn’t interested in comparing profiles, I wanted to see pure colours.
What most of the inkjet manufacturers seem to have lost site of is that their devices are based on a CMYK colour architecture. To me this means that the devices must be able to equal or exceed the gamut of an analogue cromalin.
The preliminary testing for this is very easy, print an unprofiled CMYK RGB ramp and make sure that the density of all the colours exceeds a cromalin of the same ramp. If the density of the colours is correct the ICC profiling process should be able to produce a profile with a good gamut, desaturating and mixing colours where needed.
The profile will not be able to create saturation where it does not exist. This is the first place that the HP failed miserably.
While the pure CMYK from the Hp looks really good, the reds had nowhere near enough saturation, the blue was completely the wrong hue and the greens were the wrong hue and did not have enough saturation. For me at a glance this says a cromalin will exceed the gamut of the HP which physical testing proved to be correct. This is not an acceptable situation.
The same process was repeated with an Epson 4000 which was vastly better.
The next step was to look at the raw inks by doing a diagnostic print. Based on the colours coming from each head, the situation we see above is as a result of colour mixing in the printer. The M and Y inks are sufficiently saturated enough that we should be able to get a far better red than we are seeing.
The LC ink is not as saturated as I would like it to be but still we should be able to get a half descent blue and green. If we look at the remaining three colours it is easy to see how these colours are being mixed in with the CMYK.
Mixing these inks in the way HP seems to be doing it is just asking for trouble as these are colour enhancers and should not play a major role for most of the CMYK gamut but should be used correctly to enhance out of gamut colours.
If they are mixed in all the time, we see exactly what we are seeing now, orange reds, purple blues and grass greens. Profiling from this point is never going to produce the result we want as the pure colours are not sufficiently saturated enough for the profiling process to be able to create an optimum result.
My findings and days worth of testing including the results from about two rolls of prints and almost 1.4l of ink , have been sent to HP South Africa and forwarded to Spain but as mentioned previously, Spain has todate chosen not to contact me or give any useful feedback.
-
It is not my experience to see anything less than some excellent printing in all areas other than colour printing of rich , dark print on matte.
There are whole regions in most areas of the L50 on upwards that largey exceed any Epson current printer.
The better profiles are with APS or an external profiler as I said before.
The glossy gamut on the Z3100 is quit a jump on past 8 colour inksets and comparable to the Canon 12 colour. While the dark shadow gamut of the K3 inks is larger than either Canon or HP it is certainly not in most all regions three quarter tone and upwards.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100928\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Sorry, but I don't care anything about APS. I know that my custom profiles with over 4000 patches better are than any thing you can produce with that stuff. And still the Gamut sucks on especially on Matt.
I also think that the canned profiles are made with care. And once again sorry, but they don't show the huge improment over 8 inks...
Ok same as last time last printer profiles. Didn't HP Claim that their satin Pro is the best performing paper of all, if that's true it would be sad...
Yellow z3100 White R2400
Now does you comment mean, that you really can print the test file (red) I posted now can be printed on your z3100 without any problems ? So that they look like they should. They look ok printed but once compared to an Epson print it's rubish...
As much as I would love that it is only a couple of printes I don't believe it anymore.. Why ? If that would be true why would they two RIP Companies find problems. Now don't come with they want to sell their programm. Thats also true but they don't have to to it that way.
Christopher
[attachment=1845:attachment]
[attachment=1846:attachment]
-
It is not my experience to see anything less than some excellent printing in all areas other than colour printing of rich , dark print on matte.
There are whole regions in most areas of the L50 on upwards that largey exceed any Epson current printer.
The better profiles are with APS or an external profiler as I said before.
The glossy gamut on the Z3100 is quit a jump on past 8 colour inksets and comparable to the Canon 12 colour. While the dark shadow gamut of the K3 inks is larger than either Canon or HP it is certainly not in most all regions three quarter tone and upwards.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100928\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This post - if correct - really disturbs me and would essentially vacate any interest in moving from an Epson 4800. Part of the whole idea of making such a move would be to get richer prints in the dark tones on both matte and non matte media. If the K3 inks have have larger dark shadow gamut and if Epson prints better reds, yellows, oranges etc. I may as well solve the ink switching problem by keeping my 4800 which is an economical production unit for the matte that I use most, and buy a 3800 for non-matte. Anyhow, I may well have a chance to make some comparative test prints between the Z3100 and my 4800 some time next month. So after I see for myself what is going on, I'll decide what to buy, but this discussion thread has been quite a valuable eye opener, regrettably at other members' expense.
-
This post - if correct - really disturbs me and would essentially vacate any interest in moving from an Epson 4800. Part of the whole idea of making such a move would be to get richer prints in the dark tones on both matte and non matte media. If the K3 inks have have larger dark shadow gamut and if Epson prints better reds, yellows, oranges etc. I may as well solve the ink switching problem by keeping my 4800 which is an economical production unit for the matte that I use most, and buy a 3800 for non-matte. Anyhow, I may well have a chance to make some comparative test prints between the Z3100 and my 4800 some time next month. So after I see for myself what is going on, I'll decide what to buy, but this discussion thread has been quite a valuable eye opener, regrettably at other members' expense.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100941\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not true for yellow. Which is way better on the z3100.
-
Mark, apart from the problems with the colour, the lousy media handling (this can be fixed with some bits of plastic and foam) and the position of the LCD the z3100 is a fantastic machine. The B&W printing is way ahead of Epson.
I am confident that HP will get these problems fixed as they have too much riding on this printer.
This part is for any HP employee lurking here, please come clean about this problem with a formal reply on your website or here. Christopher, myself and some others are doing a lot of testing to help you at considerable expense to ourselves and we have stuck by your product, the least you can do is let all here know what is happening.
-
Mark, apart from the problems with the colour, the lousy media handling (this can be fixed with some bits of plastic and foam) and the position of the LCD the z3100 is a fantastic machine. The B&W printing is way ahead of Epson.
I am confident that HP will get these problems fixed as they have too much riding on this printer.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100943\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I appreciate your optimism and I sincerely hope you are right. Meanwhile I shall await my opportunity to test before buying, and if needful then wait for HP to fix whatever problems they need to fix. I did have a Canon IPF5000 on order when that first appeared but cancelled the order once all the issues arose, and I'm glad a I did because they still haven't addressed much of it. Maybe HP will be more responsive - let us watch for that development as well.
-
The B&W printing is way ahead of Epson
Could you explain this please?
-
Kirk the HP prints incredibly neutral B&W prints and so far I have yet to see signs of metamarism. If you print in B&W mode the prints show absolutly no sign of banding, which was a problem with the Epsons. The gloss enhancer also really does work well.
Seems HP have listened to our please for clarity on the problem: HP Firmware release (http://h41186.www4.hp.com/country/za/en/news/8163.html?newlang=en&new_country=791&pageseq=826535)
Update: News letter fron HP says there is new firmware and drivers but the site still has the old firmware and drivers.
-
(1) We have no idea if HP is even monitoring this site. I sent the following message to the various email addresses on the HP site, including presales questions, general comments, and even comments to the CEO. What I couldn't do is send this message to tech support, because I don't have a valid serial number. Hopefully one of you who owns the Z3100 could do so. HP does respond to presales emails. I doubt that whoever reads my note will bother to forward it to tech support, let alone to the design team in Spain -- but it couldn't hurt to try.
My message:
Senior tech support, and the team that developed the Z3100 in Spain, need to monitor and respond to the web site and specific threads pasted below that are reporting on serious problems with the Z3100:
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....opic=14652&st=0 (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=14652&st=0)
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....opic=14327&st=0 (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=14327&st=0)
Luminous Landscape is the most widely read web site in the world for landscape and nature photographers, as well as many others. The pros on that site are reporting SERIOUS problems with the Z3100. For every problem that is reported, you can safely assume that hundreds of other anonymous readers of that site won't order the printer based on these reports of problems. Many others -- like me -- have a backorder for the Z3100 and are considering canceling that order because of these reported problems.
You need to monitor these threads; respond to the problems that are posted; and solve the problems. Or lose sales. Thus far, there is no response from HP on these forums.
(It also appears that you do not monitor and respond to problems that are posted in your OWN forums. What is the point of having HP forums if you don't respond to questions and problems that are posted there?)
edit -- hopefully Michael Reichmann will run his own tests in the next week, report on whether he encountered these problems, and either way forward these reports to the design team in Spain -- since he clearly is in contact with them. After all, Michael is the one who described the Z3100 as "absolutely brilliant."
(2) Does anyone know if the following response I received from HP is correct?
"Reprinting jobs. You may reprint jobs from the queue by selecting the desired job from the print queue via the front panel. The hard drive is intended to store jobs during printing, and is cleared when power to the printer is turned off. If jobs of different types, for example, PCL3GUI and HP-GL/2, are sent to the printer, all jobs will not appear in the queue. Please send jobs in only one language at a time if you wish them to remain in the queue."
Someone is wrong -- either HP presales or Reichmann in his review.
-
Marty, I will test this today and let you all know.
Robert
Update, I cannot find anywhere on the fron panel that will allow me to resend a job...
-
(1) We have no idea if HP is even monitoring this site. I sent the following message to the various email addresses on the HP site, including presales questions, general comments, and even comments to the CEO.
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....opic=14652&st=0 (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=14652&st=0)
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....opic=14327&st=0 (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=14327&st=0)
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=101007\")
Marty.
Did you read the thread about the problems with the Hahnemuehle Fine Art Pearl completely?
[a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=14327&st=0]http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....opic=14327&st=0[/url]
I guess not, cause HP did a good job solving the issues there and Mike explained what the problems were and how they solved it.
So why rehash that issue again?
-
... cause HP did a good job solving the issues there and Mike explained what the problems were and how they solved it....
Just for making it easier for the readers,
here is the direct link to Mike's conclusions(for the HFA paper problem) of one week ago:
--> http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....ndpost&p=100066 (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=14327&view=findpost&p=100066)
EDIT: the above link brings you directly there only if you use STANDARD or LINEAR+ mode(buttons on the right top).
If you use OUTLINE mode, pls use this link:
--> http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....t=&#entry100066 (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=14327&pid=100066&mode=threaded&show=&st=&#entry100066)
..sorry
-
Marty, I will test this today and let you all know.
Robert
Update, I cannot find anywhere on the fron panel that will allow me to resend a job...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101010\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This has to be done with the upgrade to either PCL or the Postscript option .
I installed both yesterday and it works as described. The interface is different, I'm not sure I should have gone this route as I had everything set up , profiled and calibrated on the other normal driver.
It is a nicer interface with options normally associated with an external software rip but simplified. I'll know more as I use it.
-
My message:
Luminous Landscape is the most widely read web site in the world for landscape and nature photographers, as well as many others. The pros on that site are reporting SERIOUS problems with the Z3100. For every problem that is reported, you can safely assume that hundreds of other anonymous readers of that site won't order the printer based on these reports of problems. Many others -- like me -- have a backorder for the Z3100 and are considering canceling that order because of these reported problems.
You need to monitor these threads; respond to the problems that are posted; and solve the problems. Or lose sales. Thus far, there is no response from HP on these forums.
edit -- hopefully Michael Reichmann will run his own tests in the next week, report on whether he encountered these problems, and either way forward these reports to the design team in Spain -- since he clearly is in contact with them. After all, Michael is the one who described the Z3100 as "absolutely brilliant."
Well if you think that any other brand is perfect then stay there.
Are the issues of gamut on matte are a serious flaw or a a disappointment , or a serious problem? Otherwise serious problems , there are not many. Any problems that are coming up that were missed by them and by beta sites are being fixed. Rather silly to think otherwise.
There are so many advantages and features that do make the Z printers brilliant. There are also obvious advantages to both Canon and Epson. Yet to turn a blind eye to just to cry wolf because some of the compromises of any one of the brands doesn't achieve top points is not going to help you find the perfect (nonexistent) printer.
-
I appreciate your optimism and I sincerely hope you are right. Meanwhile I shall await my opportunity to test before buying, and if needful then wait for HP to fix whatever problems they need to fix. I did have a Canon IPF5000 on order when that first appeared but cancelled the order once all the issues arose, and I'm glad a I did because they still haven't addressed much of it. Maybe HP will be more responsive - let us watch for that development as well.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100948\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I know they are on all of these issues. Not much of a consulation I realise. I wish updates and fixes, even other solutions would happen quicker from HP to their clients ....
For both Canon and HP at this point printing colour on matte will better on Epson. B&W is good on all three. I have a preference for the HP as it has an extended lightfastness meanwhile maintains contrast range.
-
This post - if correct - really disturbs me and would essentially vacate any interest in moving from an Epson 4800. Part of the whole idea of making such a move would be to get richer prints in the dark tones on both matte and non matte media. If the K3 inks have have larger dark shadow gamut and if Epson prints better reds, yellows, oranges etc. I may as well solve the ink switching problem by keeping my 4800 which is an economical production unit for the matte that I use most, and buy a 3800 for non-matte. Anyhow, I may well have a chance to make some comparative test prints between the Z3100 and my 4800 some time next month. So after I see for myself what is going on, I'll decide what to buy, but this discussion thread has been quite a valuable eye opener, regrettably at other members' expense.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100941\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Honest reports help everyone find their happiness.
For the moment if colour printing on matte is your thing then keeping the Epson is a valid choice and or option. On other than matte , dark saturation is the smaller part of the equation when you see the realism gained in greens , yellow and blues that are just not possible on Epson current inksets.
Printing on roll side by side colour and B&W is only possible on HP as images with r=g=b values print without composite in the greys. Quite a few more things already here and to come . Yet if some of the issues are not in your best interests for production printing , you'll be best to await the solution (s) to be offered .
-
Sorry, but I don't care anything about APS. I know that my custom profiles with over 4000 patches better are than any thing you can produce with that stuff. And still the Gamut sucks on especially on Matt.
I also think that the canned profiles are made with care. And once again sorry, but they don't show the huge improment over 8 inks...
Ok same as last time last printer profiles. Didn't HP Claim that their satin Pro is the best performing paper of all, if that's true it would be sad...
Yellow z3100 White R2400
Now does you comment mean, that you really can print the test file (red) I posted now can be printed on your z3100 without any problems ? So that they look like they should. They look ok printed but once compared to an Epson print it's rubish...
As much as I would love that it is only a couple of printes I don't believe it anymore.. Why ? If that would be true why would they two RIP Companies find problems. Now don't come with they want to sell their programm. Thats also true but they don't have to to it that way.
Christopher
[attachment=1845:attachment]
[attachment=1846:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=100934\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I assume you are talking about matte only then?
Please re-read my post. I said exactly what and where HP is on matte media. I don't need to print out your chart to know the inefficiencies of the current inks and separations on matte.
The gamut extensions on matte are less than stellar. Yet light gamut is in line with other printers, so fine art printing is still possible on many art styles. Don't forget one of the decisions of HP was to go for lightfastness and the compromise of this is gamut extension.
As far as APS goes, or the internal profiler , those are the options that HP offer. APS will make better profiles than the Easy on photo media. That is all I said. The number of patches is another topic that has been covered in many other places.
RIP makers that make their own screens absolutely should try to better the driver separations. I would think they could do better by having different separations per media. But it has been many years since I worked on helping on rip development.
-
I assume you are talking about matte only then?
Please re-read my post. I said exactly what and where HP is on matte media. I don't need to print out your chart to know the inefficiencies of the current inks and separations on matte.
The gamut extensions on matte are less than stellar. Yet light gamut is in line with other printers, so fine art printing is still possible on many art styles. Don't forget one of the decisions of HP was to go for lightfastness and the compromise of this is gamut extension.
As far as APS goes, or the internal profiler , those are the options that HP offer. APS will make better profiles than the Easy on photo media. That is all I said. The number of patches is another topic that has been covered in many other places.
RIP makers that make their own screens absolutely should try to better the driver separations. I would think they could do better by having different separations per media. But it has been many years since I worked on helping on rip development.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101026\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The screenshot above is not from matt. It's from glossy media and you see clearly that the z series is getting out performed on nearly all sides.
Snd sorry, but what do you mean by Fine Art printing in lighter areas ? I mean sorry, but most of the good pictures I know or love from diffrent artists have a also many dark colours... Do you want to say, that oh sorry you can only print in light L values ?
AND even there the Epson is right on so what do you gaine ? nearly nothing I would say. You loose just the shadow part.
-
The screenshot above is not from matt. It's from glossy media and you see clearly that the z series is getting out performed on nearly all sides.
Snd sorry, but what do you mean by Fine Art printing in lighter areas ? I mean sorry, but most of the good pictures I know or love from diffrent artists have a also many dark colours... Do you want to say, that oh sorry you can only print in light L values ?
AND even there the Epson is right on so what do you gaine ? nearly nothing I would say. You loose just the shadow part.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101029\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
As I said I don't need to look at your prints , nor do I want to want to go there. If you are getting better results on the mid to upper side on glossy something is wrong somewhere. 2D plots of gamuts and 4000 patch samples are not definitive methods to discount potential.
For the rest I've said what needs to be said without interpretation.
-
As I said I don't need to look at your prints , nor do I want to want to go there. If you are getting better results on the mid to upper side on glossy something is wrong somewhere. 2D plots of gamuts and 4000 patch samples are not definitive methods to discount potential.
For the rest I've said what needs to be said without interpretation.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101033\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Sorry Neil but that is the sort of response that I would expect from HP. There are many of us here who are competant and who do know what we are doing. I would expect that after the statements you have made you would be open to debate.
Is it your contention that it is not possible that someone else might have encoutered different results from yours and that only your opinion and results are correct?
-
"As I said I don't need to look at your prints , nor do I want to want to go there. If you are getting better results on the mid to upper side on glossy something is wrong somewhere. 2D plots of gamuts and 4000 patch samples are not definitive methods to discount potential.
For the rest I've said what needs to be said without interpretation."
No than that's good for you. If you are happy with what you get than that is great, but here are also people who expect that their 7000EUR printer is not outperformed by a 800EUR model. BUT that's the case right now. It is sad and I hope HP can fix that.
I really don't care whether you look at my stuff or not, but why are you even bothering posting here ? Just to make it sound right ? Sorry if you are happy fine, but there is a problem and I prefer to trust more my own testing, and the statement from specialist companies over yours...
We are not talking about potential. I think the z3100 has a lot. We are talking about facts, and here the z3100 fails...
-
Has anyone tried the new firmware and ICC profiles yet? Please share your results when you get some.
-
Eric, the news letter says there is new firmware but the site still has the old firmware, I am told it is possibly coming on Monday.
-
Has anyone tried the new firmware and ICC profiles yet? Please share your results when you get some.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101068\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The newsletters firmware / driver page is dated 2006/12 . This looks old.
Hope they are in fact updating
-
I have been assured that we should be able to expect something on Monday.
-
"As I said I don't need to look at your prints , nor do I want to want to go there. If you are getting better results on the mid to upper side on glossy something is wrong somewhere. 2D plots of gamuts and 4000 patch samples are not definitive methods to discount potential.
For the rest I've said what needs to be said without interpretation."
No than that's good for you. If you are happy with what you get than that is great, but here are also people who expect that their 7000EUR printer is not outperformed by a 800EUR model. BUT that's the case right now. It is sad and I hope HP can fix that.
I really don't care whether you look at my stuff or not, but why are you even bothering posting here ? Just to make it sound right ? Sorry if you are happy fine, but there is a problem and I prefer to trust more my own testing, and the statement from specialist companies over yours...
We are not talking about potential. I think the z3100 has a lot. We are talking about facts, and here the z3100 fails...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101038\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Exactly why I'll leave you to it. You obviously have a lot of your own testing to do. You've already tagged all the problems with your sticker of failure so why do you bother ?
-
this problem with reds and browns on matte is probably not going to go away unless they change the inkset.
I print canvas on the ipf8000 and it is better than the hp but still not quite the 4000.
I keep seeing ppl making comments about sample prints being ok but most sample prints are on satin or gloss.
jonathan
-
Hi Jonathan
I have been testing this problem for a while and have been extracting ink from the cartdriges and test mixing the inks. The Magenta and yellow mix on their own are capable of producing a better red than we are seeing. I am still hopefully optomistic that this is as some of us suspect, just a colour mixing issue.
Robert
-
The constructive aspects of this discussion are coming down to the following propositions:
(1) It would seem there is a growing consensus here that the Epson professional line is outperforming the Z line on matte papers. That is unfortunate for the Z line because many photographers prepare their art photography portfolios on matte-type papers. This is something I personally will want to test as soon as I have the opportunity to do so.
(2) Some apparently savvy users are having problems with the reproduction of red whatever the media on the Z line compared with Epson 2400 upward. The cause of this remains to be fully determined, and that will require a joint effort between the affected parties and Hewlett-Packard.
Beyond these two propositions, at this point I don't see the need for some of the sour rhetoric being traded accross the web here. Nor do I expect HP, or any other large corporation for that matter, to respond to technical issues by writing into a web blog. They never do. What we can hope for is that they are working on the issues and the affected people will report back progress in due course. Is it time to call it a day for now?
-
Here is a 3d gamut plot movie comparing the Epson 7800 with the HP Z3100 on satin media. I think the results are quite good. I built this profile myself and have been using it to compare results between the epson and HP. As far as the performance of the printer on RC paper I find the quality to be very good. Again there are trade off's between the two printers but I do not find the the performance of the Z to be inadequate in this arena. As far as quality on matte papers goes, I am still looking into the issues and hop to be able to comment more in the near future.
http://www.spectraflow.com/pages/videos/gamutvideo.html (http://www.spectraflow.com/pages/videos/gamutvideo.html)
- Regards
Julian Mussi
-
Nice video. I'm assuming the wireframe is the Epson, the solid is the HP. Right?
-
you guys don't forget about the z2100. maybe fine art printers should look here if it is indeed a color mixing issue while leaving the 3100 to the photo guys.
how do those profiles look on the 2100? I would think this would tell you if the problem is inkset or mixing. my hunch is still that its inkset and that they optimised the inks for satins and glossies.
I think ppl have sold the canon line short besause of issues with the little ipf5000 that do not exist on the larger formats. the thing is super fast as well. canvas prints are very acceptable even in reds. don't overlook it...
jonathan
-
To clarify on the video. Yes the wireframe is the epson and the true-color solid is the HP.
-
To clarify on the video. Yes the wireframe is the epson and the true-color solid is the HP.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101099\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
does it stay the same if you go below L values of 50 ?
-
does it stay the same if you go below L values of 50 ?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101133\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm sorry I don't follow. Does what stay the same below an L value of 50?
-
I'm sorry I don't follow. Does what stay the same below an L value of 50?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101138\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The Gamut you showed us on which L value was it ? I mean I know that it performce good at 75 or let's say everything higher than 50, but how do they look on a L value from 25. ( I mean Level of light and darkness L from LAB)
-
The Gamut you showed us on which L value was it ? I mean I know that it performce good at 75 or let's say everything higher than 50, but how do they look on a L value from 25. ( I mean Level of light and darkness L from LAB)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101139\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
May be you have missed the comments written under the graphs (see under the video...
....Below L* 50 and continuing down till around an L* of 25 the gamut shapes diverge, with the Epson showing a stronger cyan and the HP a stronger blue. This makes sense considering the HP’s lack of a true cyan. Below an L* of 25 the Epson’s gamut is slightly larger. Over all, below an L* of 50 the Epson’s gamut seems more rounded where as the HP gamut falls in a more linear manner.....
-
Christopher,
The gamut shows the entire gamut in the LAB color space. The axis through the center represents the L* value, with lower L values towards the bottom. As you can see that the gamut changes depending on the L* value in questions, and that generally the largest gamut on both printers is found just above an L* of 50. I do have some 2d graphs that show the gamut at specific L* values, I may post those at some point.
Julian
-
Christopher,
The gamut shows the entire gamut in the LAB color space. The axis through the center represents the L* value, with lower L values towards the bottom. As you can see that the gamut changes depending on the L* value in questions, and that generally the largest gamut on both printers is found just above an L* of 50. I do have some 2d graphs that show the gamut at specific L* values, I may post those at some point.
Julian
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101153\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
yup, right my fault :-P That happens if you only look at it in a hurry
-
Has anyone compared the canned profiles betweenthe 2100 and the 3100 on matte papers? I would like to hear comments on the 2100 printer as it eliminated the rgb colors and related color mixing.
-Jonathan
-
Yes - I have a 2100 where I teach and a 3100 atr home so have been comparing with interest.
The 3100 profiles has broad shoulders as can be seen with the blue 3d and the 2d graph presumably the extra inks doing there thing
but the surprising thing is how the 21 clearly works better at the low L value in spite of using the same raw materials.
This would suggest that if the sort the mixing some of the issues in this post may be solved.
Perhaps they will never match the saturation of the Epson Reds without sacrificing a degree of lightfastness
I am having problems with reds on the 3100 in the UK just the same as everywhere else but so far no client has walked in demanding i reproduce a streak of pure cadmium red. Having run an Epson 7500 for years I have learned it is easier to manage customer expectation than pigments that are just not bright enough!
NB. in the graphs the Blue is the 3100 and the 2100 is red in the 2d and truecolour in the 3D
-
Here is a 3d gamut plot movie comparing the Epson 7800 with the HP Z3100 on satin media. I think the results are quite good. I built this profile myself and have been using it to compare results between the epson and HP. As far as the performance of the printer on RC paper I find the quality to be very good. Again there are trade off's between the two printers but I do not find the the performance of the Z to be inadequate in this arena. As far as quality on matte papers goes, I am still looking into the issues and hop to be able to comment more in the near future.
Pana thanx for the substantial contibution
what I don't understand is that the dark reds of the z3100 in this comparison are not that bad , while everybody is complaining about it. Or is that a mis-interpretation?
How does the Z3100 perform on the Epson Satin and wich satin of the HP did you use?
I am interested to know if the "professional satin" type outperforms the direct dry satin type.
As it seems the Z3100 is very sensitive to the choice of paper in the way it performs.
regards Pieter Kers
-
This is showing that there is probably a mixing problem for matte papers but I'm not sure there is that great of a difference. Meaning that even if they perfect the mixing there doesn't appear to be a big gain. Any idea how these maps compare to the K3 inks at those given levels?
-Jonathan
Yes - I have a 2100 where I teach and a 3100 atr home so have been comparing with interest.
The 3100 profiles has broad shoulders as can be seen with the blue 3d and the 2d graph presumably the extra inks doing there thing
but the surprising thing is how the 21 clearly works better at the low L value in spite of using the same raw materials.
This would suggest that if the sort the mixing some of the issues in this post may be solved.
Perhaps they will never match the saturation of the Epson Reds without sacrificing a degree of lightfastness
I am having problems with reds on the 3100 in the UK just the same as everywhere else but so far no client has walked in demanding i reproduce a streak of pure cadmium red. Having run an Epson 7500 for years I have learned it is easier to manage customer expectation than pigments that are just not bright enough!
NB. in the graphs the Blue is the 3100 and the 2100 is red in the 2d and truecolour in the 3D
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101278\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Pana thanx for the substantial contibution
what I don't understand is that the dark reds of the z3100 in this comparison are not that bad , while everybody is complaining about it. Or is that a mis-interpretation?
How does the Z3100 perform on the Epson Satin and wich satin of the HP did you use?
I am interested to know if the "professional satin" type outperforms the direct dry satin type.
As it seems the Z3100 is very sensitive to the choice of paper in the way it performs.
regards Pieter Kers
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101294\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Pieter,
I haven't tried the HP on the Epson paper, I would expect similar results however. I used the HP Instant Dry Satin Paper, although I have a roll of the professional satin on order. I'll post comparisons if I notice any important differences. So far i've been very happy with the HP's results on the RC media, the differences on matte require more investigation. Hopefully I will have more time to look into this next week.
Julian
-
Yes - I have a 2100 where I teach and a 3100 atr home so have been comparing with interest.
The 3100 profiles has broad shoulders as can be seen with the blue 3d and the 2d graph presumably the extra inks doing there thing
but the surprising thing is how the 21 clearly works better at the low L value in spite of using the same raw materials.
This would suggest that if the sort the mixing some of the issues in this post may be solved.
Perhaps they will never match the saturation of the Epson Reds without sacrificing a degree of lightfastness
I am having problems with reds on the 3100 in the UK just the same as everywhere else but so far no client has walked in demanding i reproduce a streak of pure cadmium red. Having run an Epson 7500 for years I have learned it is easier to manage customer expectation than pigments that are just not bright enough!
NB. in the graphs the Blue is the 3100 and the 2100 is red in the 2d and truecolour in the 3D
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101278\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes these are the correct graphs for the current situation.
There are changes in the ink separations ( ink mixing if you choose that term) in the next firmware which change the transitions in all areas of the separations. Not necessarily making more gamut extension but the smoothness has be vastly improved in my tests as of this week.
The latest separations and profiles I'm testing are smoother than any other printer I've seen and finally give the best you can get from this inkset.
When it's available I don't know. I was promised next week but is that next week after my 2 weeks away I don't know!
Yes you are right on the choice of media.
There is an enormous difference on the more coated matte media. The difference between Hahnemuhle 308 PhotoRag and HP Hahnemuhle Smooth Fine Art is night and day. I assume Epson Enhanced Velvet would also achieve better results on the HP.
On B&W the HP MK is as efficient as other MK inks so B&W and the Z printer works fine on all media including Hahnemuhle PR.
It's true that there is always a compromise on colour gamut vs lightfastness and stability. I was happy with the notions of maximizing lightfastness as much as 2-3 times older inksets but can see that it can be a compromise with some caveats.
-
Here is a screen capture of my older profile and the newer ID Satin.
The performance of the Pro Satin is very good in synthetic plots and really nice in actual printing.
The semi-transparent plot is the ProSatin, the solid colour red is ID Satin. There is a difference in brightness largely due to optical brightners that you don't really want in FA printing.
Here goes my first attempt at posting a link to this forum....
http://homepage.mac.com/neil_snape/.Public..._vs_IDSatin.jpg (http://homepage.mac.com/neil_snape/.Public/ProSatin_vs_IDSatin.jpg)
-
Yes you are right on the choice of media.
There is an enormous difference on the more coated matte media. The difference between Hahnemuhle 308 PhotoRag and HP Hahnemuhle Smooth Fine Art is night and day. I assume Epson Enhanced Velvet would also achieve better results on the HP.
On B&W the HP MK is as efficient as other MK inks so B&W and the Z printer works fine on all media including Hahnemuhle PR.
It's true that there is always a compromise on colour gamut vs lightfastness and stability. I was happy with the notions of maximizing lightfastness as much as 2-3 times older inksets but can see that it can be a compromise with some caveats.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101330\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I take it The HP smooth fine art is genuinely optimised for the vivera inkset and not rebadged HPR
Do you think the RIP companies are going to solve the dark red issue? I was hoping to shelve the exscuses i have become so adept at making to clients over the years but it seems i may be exercising them for a while longer.
-
I take it The HP smooth fine art is genuinely optimised for the vivera inkset and not rebadged HPR
Do you think the RIP companies are going to solve the dark red issue? I was hoping to shelve the exscuses i have become so adept at making to clients over the years but it seems i may be exercising them for a while longer.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101339\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I talked to two diffrent RIP Companies, and to sum up there statement. Yes they can deal better with the inks than HP itself ... I just saw a beta profile on one of their RIPs and let's say it looks ways better than any HP Profile so far. ( I'm talking only about HMPR ) Sorry , that I can't show pictures, but soon when I get a final one I will post some.
-
Pana thanx for the substantial contibution
what I don't understand is that the dark reds of the z3100 in this comparison are not that bad , while everybody is complaining about it. Or is that a mis-interpretation?
How does the Z3100 perform on the Epson Satin and wich satin of the HP did you use?
I am interested to know if the "professional satin" type outperforms the direct dry satin type.
As it seems the Z3100 is very sensitive to the choice of paper in the way it performs.
regards Pieter Kers
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101294\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Just look at page 2 or so, there you will find some from HMPR.
-
I talked to two diffrent RIP Companies, and to sum up there statement. Yes they can deal better with the inks than HP itself ... I just saw a beta profile on one of their RIPs and let's say it looks ways better than any HP Profile so far. ( I'm talking only about HMPR ) Sorry , that I can't show pictures, but soon when I get a final one I will post some.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101358\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not a huge surprise. When the Epson 2200 came to market, the inks were amazing but the driver had issues making the most of them: far from linear, far from gray balanced, and putting down too much ink in the shadows. ColorByte's ImagePrint really helped to straighten it out. The Epson driver is now much improved.
Hopefully HP can fix their ink mixing and color halftoning algorithms. The Z series sound like amazing machines, but they need to be driven properly ...
-
Here is a screen capture of my older profile and the newer ID Satin.
The performance of the Pro Satin is very good in synthetic plots and really nice in actual printing.
The semi-transparent plot is the ProSatin, the solid colour red is ID Satin. There is a difference in brightness largely due to optical brightners that you don't really want in FA printing.
Here goes my first attempt at posting a link to this forum....
http://homepage.mac.com/neil_snape/.Public..._vs_IDSatin.jpg (http://homepage.mac.com/neil_snape/.Public/ProSatin_vs_IDSatin.jpg)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101331\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Neil would you be so kind to send me the satin pro profile to me ( zipped).
email z3100@beeld.nu
(I will put a z3100 page with all profiles online )
did you make the profile with the z3100 and does the gloss enhancer work well?
regards
Pieter Kers
-
This thread is getting a little too long, and now i'm going to make it a little longer. I had a chance to run some matte media through our Z3100 yesterday and have a few remarks to make.
The point of this little test was to make a profile and print on the Z3100 using Epson enhanced matte and compare that to a print made using the epson 7800 and the same media using a custom profile I created earlier. I used the monaco 729 RGB target, printed throught the driver.
The first thing I realized is that the media mode that you select is crucial. My initial test was done using the HP photo matte option. This target's chroma looked weak compared to a target from the epson. I reprinted it using the "Litho" and "Super HW coated" media types and found these to be much better. I built a profile and made a print.
Compared to the epson profile I had the overall gamut was bigger on the HP. Also I was surprised to see the HP perform very well in the below L* 50 region. It actually surpassed the epson in some areas. I did notice a weakness in one axis of red chroma around L* 50 in the 3d gamut map. But it was fairly localized.
However on my test image the prints looked very very good. The higher luminosity reds were more saturated on the HP, and very slightly less saturated in lower L* values. Not really a big surprise.When we first received the printer I had made a quick print using the canned "HP matte" setting for a client and we had noticed a loss of chroma in the low L* values that was unacceptable. However I see very good results from both printers in this last test. I'm sure that on some images this difference will favor the HP and at times the Epson to a more severe degree. At this point I agree there is room for improvement, however I would also be satisifed with the results at this level. Matching Epson performance is a very good mark of quality exceeding it in EVERY respect would be a major accomplishment. With the better black point and better print longevity I know some people would be happy with this balance. Others, understandably are looking for verifiable quality improvements, and so I would expect some dissapointment.
However...I spoke with HP and they are aware of potential for improvement, have addressed this issue in the form of a new firmware, I think this was mentioned by another poster, and will publish it next week. If the changes from 4.0.0.4 to 4.0.0.6 are any indication, then I expect good things. Lets see what we see when this new firmware is out.
Julian Mussi
www.spectraflow.com
-
Julian are you printing with a RIP or the HP driver?
I am hearing that some RIP users are getting better results then those printing with the driver.
I have a beta of the new firmware and do not see much improvement with the HP driver and profiles.
Robert
-
Robert,
Both, but I've based my comments of the performance using the drivers. HP is supposed to be sending me the updated firmware but I haven't received it yet. I haven't even bothered looking at the canned profiles yet. I did some comparisons initally and prefered the output from the custom profiles I built, I haven't revisited them.
There are two ways of looking at this as far as I can tell. My perspective at this point, I'm interested in the potential of the deice...what I can achieve in a best case scenario. If that means it takes a RIP, custom profiles and sacrificing a goat then so be it. I want to know what this can be pushed to do. Most users dont have the tool box of toys or resources I have at my disposal. Many people expect that the drivers and the canned profiles, or the easy color solution, should deliver optimal results. I don't think this is an unfair perspective, but unfortunatly it is not always the case. There are many users who are looking into this side of things.
What I've found initally is very promising, I can see that the printer is capable of very good output using the drivers. The RIP's are interesting in regards to this printer. Typically RIP's offer improvement in the are of color accuracy and workflow, and sometimes comprimise maximum gamut to achieve these goals. Image print and a few others are the exception, and I'm curious to see what they will do with this printer. As soon as I get the firmware update I'll finalize my tests and will be putting up a rather indepth review on our site.
Julian Mussi
www.spectraflow.com
-
Good news at last. The beta firmware only addresses certain papers at this stage Hahnemühle smooth fine art is showing a vast improvement. There is still a way to go but the results are encouraging.
-
Good news at last. The beta firmware only addresses certain papers at this stage Hahnemühle smooth fine art is showing a vast improvement. There is still a way to go but the results are encouraging.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102111\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Glad to here the good news- Where is it possible to get hold of the firmware? I presume it will mean redoing profiles.
Will the benefit to HsmoothFA extend to HPR308?
-
Some of the profiles have been provided by HP and I am assuming that the final relase will include new canned profiles.
-
The first thing I realized is that the media mode that you select is crucial. My initial test was done using the HP photo matte option. This target's chroma looked weak compared to a target from the epson. I reprinted it using the "Litho" and "Super HW coated" media types and found these to be much better. I built a profile and made a print.
At last a breakthrough- very nice, I thought that in the initial calibration the z3100 finds out how much ink the paper can take- But not so indeed, it is done earlier in the choice of paper.
Leaves the question wich paperchoice fits best.
I have reprofiled Epson Archival Matte paper in this way. I used to calibraste it as a "photo matte paper" and know I called it a "super heavyweight coated paper" the result is that now the z3100 uses much more ink on the paper.
This results in a very different gamut- see picture. The transparent is the "epson archival matte" called a HWC paper; in the solid part it is called a " Photo Matte paper "
[attachment=1901:attachment]
-
Looks better. Do you have total volume figures as a number? Still looks pretty small at the bottom though.
At last a breakthrough- very nice, I thought that in the initial calibration the z3100 finds out how much ink the paper can take- But not so indeed, it is done earlier in the choice of paper.
Leaves the question wich paperchoice fits best.
I have reprofiled Epson Archival Matte paper in this way. I used to calibraste it as a "photo matte paper" and know I called it a "super heavyweight coated paper" the result is that now the z3100 uses much more ink on the paper.
This results in a very different gamut- see picture. The transparent is the "epson archival matte" called a HWC paper; in the solid part it is called a " Photo Matte paper "
[attachment=1901:attachment]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102119\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Any news from anyone on the new firmware and whether it solves these problems?
Are we closer to a professional $4100 printer (for the 24" inch version) or still an amateur work in progress?
Has anyone received any updates on when the 24" Z3100 will ship?
Not that I am in any hurry -- if HP is smart they have halted all shipments until they fix these issues in firmware and/or software.
Otherwise HP will go down the road of Canon, with entire web sites devoted to fixing all the problems.
-
http://www.camerahobby.com/Digital_ColorMa...tComparison.htm (http://www.camerahobby.com/Digital_ColorManagementComparison.htm)
I just read a review of 3 profiling packages. One was the gretag. In the review this was stated:
"The two expensive suites produced profiles that were nearly identical in quality and while the Eye One Photo was a tiny bit better in shadow detail, it faltered in producing a red that’s really red, as opposed to deep, dark orange."
So in comparison to the Pulse and Print Fix Pro package the Gretag redition of red is a deep orange. Just curious if anyone has ruled the profiling package out of the mix?
-Jonathan
-
http://www.camerahobby.com/Digital_ColorMa...tComparison.htm (http://www.camerahobby.com/Digital_ColorManagementComparison.htm)
I just read a review of 3 profiling packages. One was the gretag. In the review this was stated:
"The two expensive suites produced profiles that were nearly identical in quality and while the Eye One Photo was a tiny bit better in shadow detail, it faltered in producing a red that’s really red, as opposed to deep, dark orange."
So in comparison to the Pulse and Print Fix Pro package the Gretag redition of red is a deep orange. Just curious if anyone has ruled the profiling package out of the mix?
-Jonathan
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102283\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I believe, but am not certain, that some of those who have the printer did try to profile it with outside packages and got the same results as on the Z3100 itself. That's why the issue of profiles was ruled out, and the focus is on ink mixing and firmware.
But you'd have to read through the previous six pages to verify my statements. I am responding from memory based on reading this thread in the last week!
-
I have used I1match and colorvision, Christopher has used Profilemaker. The problem is not with the profile and can be seen clearly on the unprofiled charts.
The fact is that currently the HPz3100 in many cases, for what ever reason (we have many suspicions ranging from colour mixing to problem with the ink set) cannot produce enough saturation in the primaries to facilitate the creation a successful full gamut profile.
Do not take my word on this but print uncelebrated, unprofiled targets from an Epson and the hp and compare the red primaries. The difference in saturation is extremely visible and that is a saturated as your reds are ever going to be using that chart to create a profile.
I find myself in the difficult position where I must echo Marty’s sentiments that people should wait and see where this goes before ordering or taking delivery of z3100's
-
Before I got my Z3100 last week, a friend who got his two weeks earlier was complaining that his printer has a very narrow red gamut. This was in the back of my mind but my initial prints from my Z3100 seemed to be fine until today.
I got a job today from a client with very deep maroon coloured reds that fade to black. I printed it on my Epson 4000 which I know is properly calibrated and it looked great. Then I printed it on the Z3100 and the result was shocking, all the red was washed out and all the images were flat. (I can’t post the images here due to the client not allowing it as it has not be run publicly yet)
I remember seeing this same problem last week when I tried using Epson Enhanced Matt in the z3100 but I just put this down to a paper incompatibility.
If I Softproof the image in CS2 (monitor calibrated with OPTIX XR pro) using absolute colormetric for the rendering intent, the image with the Epson profile has about 4% of the image that is out of gamut, but with the z3100 profiles about 80% of the image is out of gamut.
This got me suspicious so I tried with other device profiles and got similar results with the z3100 always being by far the worst.
Next I printed out non colour managed IT8 charts on the 4000 and the z3100. The first noticeable difference is that the patches that should be closest to Red, Green and Blue are very washed out and desaturated on the z3100 with the red being more orangey yellow than red.
My assumption was that if the desaturated red was causing a problem then the green and blue should also. I took a variety of images with dark blues and greens and in every case there were substantial areas that were out of gamut for the z3100.
To check to see there were no head problems I printed a diagnostic print and I am confused as to why the red ink prints a light peachy colour, the blue ink prints purple and the green ink prints a lime green while the remaining inks print correctly.
This is really worrying me as I am the second person to come across this. My supplier has alerted HP but I was wondering if anyone else has seen this?
Thanks
Robert
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=99663\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Robert, how are you doing with your problem in the red color? do you resolved the problem?. ,, I have been follow all the problems the people have ,,but I can't find out if you resolved your problems.
I just got my z3100 44" but I'm looking for some space in my little office to install it, the printer is a monster.
Thank You
BlasR
-
Hi, the red problem is still and I have spoke to HP about it and will hopefully work with them to resolve it. I do think however unfortunately think it will take some time to get this issue sorted out.
-
Robert, please keep Us update
Thank You
BlasR
-
Robert,
When you are printing the non colormanaged charts what media settings are you using. I used the Litho Paper setting on enhanced matte and compared it to a chart I had printed from the 7800, and they look very very close. In fact in some areas the reds on the HP look like they have more chroma. The blues on the epson are what surprised me, they look a little stronger than the HP.
On another topic, I DO think the profiling software has a lot to do with the quality of the finished print. There are noticable differences between Profiler and ProfileMaker. I've noticed differences in how transitions are handled, how blue is rendered, and a host of other minor differences. What I think matters much less is the device the color is measured with. The on boad spectro is very good, however the easy color profile creator is not as robust as the Pro color packages. That said the measurements from the HP can be imported into any program. I'm hoping for the possibility of using color port to create custom targets and then import the measurement into one of the profile creation packages we use.
Julian Mussi
www.spectraflow.com
-
Hi Julian, you can see what Bill Atkinson did with his color targets here:
http://homepage.mac.com/billatkinson/FileSharing2.html (http://homepage.mac.com/billatkinson/FileSharing2.html)
See his targets FAQ.
The only problem with ColorPort is that you're limited to using a specific set of patches, as I recall. With MeasureTool (free) you can be more flexible, then export the results as LAB for import into profile making software (like PMPro or M Profiler)
-
Julian I agree that paper setting makes a difference as the different media settings put down ink differently. Unfortunately so far the unprofiled targets tell the same story, Epson’s saturation of the primaries is visibly better across all the media I have tested.
The limits I see on the target red patches, corresponds with the limits I see on the prints and when softproofing as the profile cannot produce more saturation than a media setting is giving it to work with. I agree that some packages may produce smoother profiles but at this stage i am only looking at 3 colours, primary red, green and blue.
I have been using HM smooth fine art as my paper setting as suggested by HP. Christopher and I have suggested to HP that we conduct a controlled testing program using 4 papers with settings and conditions specified by HP and with the z3100 going up against an Epson 4000 and R2400. I will let you know what Hp comes back with.
To eliminate the profiling as a problem, I profiled the Epson4000 and the z3100 today, firstly using a colorvision printfix and then using the APS system with the HP’s built in spectro.
Yes you can use the APS and the z3100 to profile prints from other devices…
The profiles and the measurement files have been sent to HP for evaluation but in both cases the Epson produced far better reds than the HP. The greens and blues are also a problem but I am only focusing on the reds for now as they are the biggest problem.
I will be happy to mail you the profile sets and measurement files.
-
Hi Julian, you can see what Bill Atkinson did with his color targets here:
http://homepage.mac.com/billatkinson/FileSharing2.html (http://homepage.mac.com/billatkinson/FileSharing2.html)
See his targets FAQ.
The only problem with ColorPort is that you're limited to using a specific set of patches, as I recall. With MeasureTool (free) you can be more flexible, then export the results as LAB for import into profile making software (like PMPro or M Profiler)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102402\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You can make custom patches with color port you just import the data from a text file, it creates the patch. Then you can print and measure.....what I think would be neat is if color port supported the HPZ's onboard spectro then you could use the printer lke a very large dtp70.
-
Julian, i just compared HP's Litho realistic profile to the Epson profile I made today with the z3100's spectro and while the hp profile is better than some of the other paper settings it still has a long way to go to compete with the Epson even though the Epson was printing on what HP admts is not the best paper to test on.
This is the first time I have been able to test one of my Epson's profiles against HP's canned profiles without the profiling system being a consideration.
-
Julian, i just compared HP's Litho realistic profile to the Epson profile I made today with the z3100's spectro and while the hp profile is better than some of the other paper settings it still has a long way to go to compete with the Epson even though the Epson was printing on what HP admts is not the best paper to test on.
This is the first time I have been able to test one of my Epson's profiles against HP's canned profiles without the profiling system being a consideration.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102418\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Robert,
Could you send me the Epson and HP profiles you are using, and what paper you are printing on. That way I can see what your seeing and I can compare my profile to yours.
Julian@spectraflow.com
Thanks
-
One more week has passed since HP told some of you they would provide new firmware.
Where are we? Any progress?
Any comments or reports from HP to any of you?
I know that some of you already sold your Epsons and are waiting for shipments of the 44" or 24" Z3100. Any news on the HP schedule for that?
-
One more week has passed since HP told some of you they would provide new firmware.
Where are we? Any progress?
Any comments or reports from HP to any of you?
I know that some of you already sold your Epsons and are waiting for shipments of the 44" or 24" Z3100. Any news on the HP schedule for that?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102739\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Marty,
Still no firmware, on my end anyhow. Drop me a line and I can tell you how long it would take for us to get you one.
Thanks,
Julian Mussi
www.spectraflow.com
julian@spectraflow.com
-
Kind of quiet on the HP Gamut z3100 gamut thread.....are you all printing happily with the new beta firmware? (btw - I have access to the beta firmware but don't have a printer - send me a pm if you have a printer and didn't get the beta access code).
What baffles me is that some people seem happy and others are not - like there are two different sets of ink out there for this or something weird going on in software.
Wow would I love this printer to work out....Marty is right, I've sold my other printers and need to buy something soon. A whole lot of that HP looks good to me but I don't want a nice machine that can't make red. I guess I'll wait through PMA and hope that HP figures out either a new ink mixing deal or some other soluting for this printer.
-
Julian, i just compared HP's Litho realistic profile to the Epson profile I made today with the z3100's spectro...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102418\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hello!
How did you print the HP-Testchart on the Epson? I would be very happy if i could use the HP Z2100 to profile my Epson-Printers.
Greetings
Martin
-
There is a folder called "test charts" in the APS folder in the programs folder on a pc. The targets are in the printers sub folder.
You print the TIFF and then use the HP Advanced profiling solution software to profiled using the z series printer.
-
There is a folder called "test charts" in the APS folder in the programs folder on a pc. The targets are in the printers sub folder.
You print the TIFF and then use the HP Advanced profiling solution software to profiled using the z series printer.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=103298\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
No chance without APS?
-
Possibly, but it could be tricky and you would need the charts for the HP to read.
-
Is it essential to remake profiles with new firmware as i presume it is putting ink down differently
I spoke to the HP people @ Focus on imaging- the UK Trade Expo- Sweet Oblivion to any probs- Fuji and Illford are putting out RIPs which may be interesting, the Illford seemed quite well priced. I have a Fuji pro media swatch so if it works well with the RIP it may be good as they have a 300gsm smooth 'baryte' paper that looks suspiciously similar to FAP as does the rest of the FA range to that well known German paper firm's range.
Interesting to see how the Fuji stuff takes the ink- i only have swatch so will not find out yet!
I picked up loads of new papers to try, Harman Matte FB MP 310,, kentmere Elite Fibre Glossy unglazed, Lumijet Range-
The never ending quest for the nonexistent 'perfect' paper- that is life with a new printer!
The Trad paper makers are well and truly on the band wagon
-
Possibly, but it could be tricky and you would need the charts for the HP to read.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=103308\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
So.... without APS you can't find the charts (TIFFs) used for creating the patches?
-
The Tiffs are the easy part and I suppose you can use the HP colour centre to do the profiling but only the small target that the printer itself uses. The trick is going to be controlling the settings and getting the printer to read pre printed patches.
-
I am an Epson user lurking on the thread, and am interested in solutions for the HP Z series, as I might buy one at some point. You should look into Studioprint for the Z3100, so you can drive it natively. I know that Ergosoft has been driving CMYK, RGB, and CMYKRGB devices for quite some time, and I know they are going to be at the Canon booth at PMA. I think they will be driving the IPF8000. I will be there later this week and will ask some questions.
-
Hi All,
Julian Mussi of SpectraFlow noticed from my posts that I lived close to their business and was kind enough to suggest that I stop by and take a look at what he was able to get the HP z3100 to print. I took him up on his offer and wanted to report back to the group here my findings.
They have an Epson 7800 right next to the new HP z3100 so we could compare the output from both printers directly on the same paper using both stock and custom profiles made by Julian, as well as the HP's self generated profiles.
After looking at numerous test prints I can safely say that the z3100 is definitely capable of printing a nice red - Julian has figured out how to coax this out from the machine. Yellow also does not seem to be a problem. So the gamut problems I originally saw were not an ink formulation issue since the current inks can hit all the colors and I don't think HP will need to reformulate inks. Rework mixing algorithm maybe, but reformulate no. I think when HP gets the last tweaks in the machine and firmware it will be really great. Also it appears that the newer firmware has allowed for better rendering and transitions in the OOG areas.
How did the HP compare to the epson? Well it was amazing to see the same file printed through different profiles to both machines. Pick up any print from either machine and you'd be happy, but when you compare them to each other, you start to notice the subtle differences between the two printers. Only in comparing the two do you realize how many colors are slightly off in both prints. The HP seems to have the advantage now when the whole print is weighed, and there is hope that either HP will improve their firmware yet again or a third party RIP will release even more of the untapped potential of the machine. Thanks to Julian, I no longer have doubts about gamut on this machine. Factor in the longer life of the HP prints plus the more economical use of ink and the HP seems like the better choice IMHO.
I'd like to thank Julian for sharing his time and knowledge. He's a stand up guy and I would not hesitate to recommend him or spectraflow. Disclaimer: I have no affiliation with Spectraflow.
-
As far as "coaxing" better color I assume the coaxing involves using the built-in profiler with the latest firmware?
As far as a third party RIP goes I see ImagePrint RIP for machines for 24inch format is $2400.00! That is close to what I spent on this machine after the rebate and el-freebo paper offer! I'll have to stick with HP on this one. RIP for the RIP's at that price..
-
Charles,
I think that the $2400 is for the 44" machine. I think ImagePrint for the 24" is around $1500.
JIm
As far as a third party RIP goes I see ImagePrint RIP for machines for 24inch format is $2400.00! That is close to what I spent on this machine after the rebate and el-freebo paper offer! I'll have to stick with HP on this one. RIP for the RIP's at that price..
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112185\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
We're running the Z3100 with a Wasatch RIP now. Ergosoft Posterprint can also drive this machine. Both RIPs need a CMYKRGB (Seven color) profile to work properly. The APS does not currently make this type of profile. The APS creates a CMYK profile (4 color). If you are shopping for a RIP, be sure to ask the RIP vendor what the RIP will need to work.
My dealer is trying to get an answer from HP as to the future of the APS software. It can generate a good profile for another CMYK printer, but we'll probably return it if it doesn't do a true seven color profile.
-
We're running the Z3100 with a Wasatch RIP now. Ergosoft Posterprint can also drive this machine. Both RIPs need a CMYKRGB (Seven color) profile to work properly. The APS does not currently make this type of profile. The APS creates a CMYK profile (4 color). If you are shopping for a RIP, be sure to ask the RIP vendor what the RIP will need to work.
My dealer is trying to get an answer from HP as to the future of the APS software. It can generate a good profile for another CMYK printer, but we'll probably return it if it doesn't do a true seven color profile.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=112209\")
Marc,
Not only should one ask what the RIP needs to work (N-channel profiles = N-channel profile creator) but a friend with a Canon iPF9000 called and he told me that the Scanvec RIP he uses had an iPF9000 driver but it ignores the RGB inks including the linearisation of the RGB inks. Nothing new as the first Epson 9600 driver on that RIP (and he had to wait very long for that one) didn't use the grey ink of the 9600 :-)
I see that the HP Z drivers in the Wasatch SoftRip fall in the optional category (extra price) and the Canon iPF ones are not in that category. They are so special ? Does that mean a special B&W print mode as well ? Something I asked them a long time ago when I converted an Epson 9000 to quad inks. Can you tell more about the special features like how the gloss enhancer is used. The use of LG, MG, PK, MK on matte paper. Any user influence on the partioning of the grey inks ? How did you set the RGB ink substitution: on hue angle or saturation + hue angle ?
Ernst Dinkla
try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
-
Marc,
Not only should one ask what the RIP needs to work (N-channel profiles = N-channel profile creator) but a friend with a Canon iPF9000 called and he told me that the Scanvec RIP he uses had an iPF9000 driver but it ignores the RGB inks including the linearisation of the RGB inks. Nothing new as the first Epson 9600 driver on that RIP (and he had to wait very long for that one) didn't use the grey ink of the 9600 :-)
I see that the HP Z drivers in the Wasatch SoftRip fall in the optional category (extra price) and the Canon iPF ones are not in that category. They are so special ? Does that mean a special B&W print mode as well ? Something I asked them a long time ago when I converted an Epson 9000 to quad inks. Can you tell more about the special features like how the gloss enhancer is used. The use of LG, MG, PK, MK on matte paper. Any user influence on the partioning of the grey inks ? How did you set the RGB ink substitution: on hue angle or saturation + hue angle ?
Ernst Dinkla
try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/ (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=112216\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The Wasatch Z3100 is a standard driver in the softrip package version 6.1. I'm still under service contract so I got the upgrade for free. You could check with Miranda at Wasatch, she handled the process for me, no problems on the upgrade.
Setup is relatively straightforward. After adding the IP address, you choose the printer model on an open channel. Options include 24 or 44" models. The printer property box gives you access to the initial settings, such as paper types that are similar to those available in the Z3100 itself, pass count and uni-or bi directional, borderless, as well as the gloss enhancer setting.
From that point, using the printer via the RIP is the same as any other printer in Wasatch. They provide 7 color linearization targets, Channel ink limiting sliders, Total Ink limiting, and color work flow hookups.
The first profile we made has GE turned off, because the material, although gloss, is always laminated, so I can't comment on the GE on it with any detail. Let me know if there is a specific test you need, I'll get it done for you next week.
I asked Wasatch about the PhotoK/Matte K switch and they said it was tied to the paper type selected. Not sure what they are doing regarding the LG,MG, inks on Matte. I hope to calibrate and profile some matte stock next week to do some B&W work.
The RGB ink substitution is controlled by the profilng software (Monaco). No special controls needed or available in Wasatch for this.
I did notice that the color separations rules button is dimmed, so that particular set of mysterious controls is not available to me (which is really ok, I'm not loosing sleep over it!)
Most of the time getting the first material linearized and profiled was determining the ink limits. Once these were established, the profiling patches printed clear and dry, and everything went smoothly. I haven't done a direct comparison between the RIP prints and the HP direct prints. My need for the RIP was to handle tiling for multiple panel tradeshow displays. Not sure if this is all needed for anyone doing fine art work. I do plan on checking out some APS profiles and comparing them to the no-APS profiles for work being printed out of PhotoShop.
Hope some of this helps.
-
I see that the $2400 was for the 44" printer, not the 24" I have. For a pro shop the templates and similar functions are very useful, but I dont need that. The reason I had IP for the 4800 was for black and white, and also to eliminate the pk - mk cart swap ink wasting. I did not notice an improvement in color on the 4800.
If IP has a built in utility to allow me to use 1700 chip targets on 11x17 sheets and includes a very noticable increase in gamut coverage I could see taking a serious look at it. I am still in the earliest testing stages with this printer anyway. Maybe HP takes care of what I want without APS or a RIP. This is what is happening in my dreams at least