Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: Panascape on May 04, 2007, 01:02:46 pm
-
Ok I can't say too much but I did promise you all a report.
Firstly, HP is very committed to this machine and to getting it working the way we would like it to.
They are aware of our concerns and problems posted here and are looking into each issue as it arises.
The time spent with the engineers was quite intense and we covered a lot of issues including colour. What I can tell you is that there are various paths forward that have been identified and will be investigated and tested as soon as they get back to Barcelona but it seems that there is a very big bright light at the end of the tunnel.
What I maybe should not say but will is that while the HP has colour issues at the moment, it has the potential to produce the most unbelievable colour and while maybe for some it can’t get there right now you will not believe what I am pretty sure you will see at the end. I am hard to impress and I am impressed.
I know it’s frustrating and I don’t have an idea on timing but it’s going to be worth waiting for.
As soon as I can say more I will but I promised HP that I would not say too much and I will keep that promise.
Robert
-
I showed the HP guys at the Contact HP Gallery in Toronto yesterdays this print (http://photi.ca/gallery/1946337/1/140500849/Large) (only without the bad web colour), and they didn't believe it came off the z3100. I think this is because they all use the z3100PS's built in RIP (which doesn't know how to speak ProPhoto), and so they've never seen it print any colours that are out of the sRGB gamut.
Sometimes I despair.
N.B. this is ALSO why HP has never heard of the windows driver custom page size issue -- they never use the windows driver; they just feed the files to the PS version's built in RIP via web browser.
-
I showed the HP guys at the Contact HP Gallery in Toronto yesterdays this print (http://photi.ca/gallery/1946337/1/140500849/Large) (only without the bad web colour), and they didn't believe it came off the z3100. I think this is because they all use the z3100PS's built in RIP (which doesn't know how to speak ProPhoto), and so they've never seen it print any colours that are out of the sRGB gamut.
Sometimes I despair.
N.B. this is ALSO why HP has never heard of the windows driver custom page size issue -- they never use the windows driver; they just feed the files to the PS version's built in RIP via web browser.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115707\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Sean, don't worry the normal 3100 team use non postscript 3100's. I have the same machine as you and all I can say is just have patience, I know it’s not easy.
-
Robert,
Thank You for your report.
BlasR
-
At the risk of asking a question I am sure you have already answered Sean what exactly are you using to drive your 3100?
thanks
-
At the risk of asking a question I am sure you have already answered Sean what exactly are you using to drive your 3100?
thanks
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115720\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Windows RGB driver but the driver is not the problem...
-
Robert,
Are you using APS? I just updated to 1.2 version, no improvement other than paper size issue.
- Doug
-
I use APS 2.0 which is not released yet. This solves some APS issues but will not solve the problems with the colour.
All I can say is the problem seems to be a combination of factors that have a knock on effect.
-
I use APS 2.0 which is not released yet. This solves some APS issues but will not solve the problems with the colour.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115728\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I didn't see an answer in the other thread. Does the beta APS 2.0 work with the largest patch set on one 17x22 sheet or not? Does the largest patch set reconfigure itself so that it can fit on one sheet since that should be possible?
Are the engineers working on the problem that the Z3100 stops printing and cuts off a print in the middle when a cartridge runs out of ink. instead of waiting for us to insert a new cartridge?
And what about the many complaints about the sound of the fan or hard drive? Is a really silent mode possible when the 3100 is not used, with no noise at all, and the unit would still periodically turn itself on and do the auto head checks to prevent ink clogging?
Thanks in advance for your responses.
-
Hi Alan
“Does the beta APS 2.0 work with the largest patch set on one 17x22 sheet or not? Does the largest patch set reconfigure itself so that it can fit on one sheet since that should be possible?”
No the TC9.18 will not work on a 17x22 sheet as you cannot resize the patches. This was raised with them as well as the possibility to print it over multiple sheets.
Patches will reconfigure themselves to fit sheet size if possible.
“Are the engineers working on the problem that the Z3100 stops printing and cuts off a print in the middle when a cartridge runs out of ink. Instead of waiting for us to insert a new cartridge?”
Yes this seems to be a bug that was missed.
“And what about the many complaints about the sound of the fan or hard drive? Is a really silent mode possible when the 3100 is not used, with no noise at all, and the unit would still periodically turn itself on and do the auto head checks to prevent ink clogging?”
This was not covered by I will ask them on Monday.
-
Re the fan/HD noise, not everyone is experiencing this issue. In my case, the only sound I can hear from the printer is when it periodically wakes itself up to do head maintenance. Maybe the issue is related to heat or ventilation in users' physical environments. Or maybe it's a tech issue present on some units but not others.
-
Sean,
If I understand you correctly the HP guys were surprised by the quality of your prints. What driver do you use ?
Regards
Ernst
-
Robert -- following up on the question posted by alan, if the patches can be reconfigured to fit on different sized sheets, then the TC 9.18 patch set should fit on a 17x22 sheet. Based on measuring the size of the patch set. Have you tried it? If it doesn't work, can you ask why it doesn't, since in theory the 9.18 patch set should fit on a single 17x22 sheet once the patches are reconfigured.
-
Marty, the TC 9.18 is currently 18"wide. There needs to be a certain amout of white space around the target so even re-configured it will be fractionally too big for a 17 x 22" sheet.
-
Marty, the TC 9.18 is currently 18"wide. There needs to be a certain amout of white space around the target so even re-configured it will be fractionally too big for a 17 x 22" sheet.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115814\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
With a white margin, the patch is about 17 5/8" by 18 5/8" so I assumed it would be possible if it filled the 22" dimension, as there would be room to spare.
Even if the patch reduced down to 16" in one dimension (17" width of the paper), you still an extra 3 3/8" inches total to fill on the long dimension (22" length of the paper), and that should be ample room for reconfiguring on a sheet that is 22" long.
As a rough approximation, and including white margins, if the patch reconfigured to be 16" wide, it would be no longer than 20 1/4". If the patch is 15" wide, it would be about 21 1/4" long.
So under any logical variation of reconfiguring to fit different media, it should EASILY fit on a 17x22 sheet.
Since 17x22 sheets are a widely used standard size, it is unfortunate that the reconfiguring doesn't at least include the ability to fit on that size.
As a practical matter, the APS 1.20 is still only able to function with rolls. Because for most of us the largest sheet we use is 17x22. Unless you use24x36 sheets!
It is still a step in right direction that it works with 17" rolls.
But if it can be reconfigured to fit different size media, it should be fixed to work with 17x22 sheets, and that would be an important improvement for many users of the APS who buy paper in 17x22 sheets and not in rolls.
That would be an important improvement in version 1.20 or 1.21.
-
Mart, there is a non printable margin that the printer requires for sheets that you are not taking into account.
-
Mart, there is a non printable margin that the printer requires for sheets that you are not taking into account.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115821\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The new APS 1.20 is limited only to rolls when using the largest 9.18 target, and that is unfortunate. And not necessary.
Your response on margins doesn't correspond to how the APS actually prints with the largest TC 9.18 target (17 5/8" by 18 5/8" in size).
With the current APS, it leaves a 3/8" margin on the edge of the paper when it prints on 24" rolls.
I based my posting on the actual margin now left by the APS -- 3/8".
My calculations demonstrate that there is more than enough room for any non printable or printable margins. There is simply lots of room left on the 22" dimension for a 17x22 sheet.
And that is true even if the margin has to be greater than 3/8".
With a 1/2" margin, if the target is 16" wide on a 17" wide paper -- the 9.18 target would be about 20 1/4" long, leaving ample room for margins on the long dimension.
That means that the margins can even be slightly larger than 1/2" and the target would still fit on a 17x22 sheet. (Again, the actual margin is 3/8" with the current version of the APS)
* Again, the new APS 1.20 is limited only to rolls when using the largest target, and that is the reason that most owners of the Z3100 would buy it. Let's just be honest in how we all describe it.
* It is a major improvement that it works with 17" rolls.
* But it is a significant limitation that it doesn't work with 17x22 sheets -- since that is a widely used sheet size for those who may not buy rolls.
And that limitation is not explained by the actual margins utilized by the current version of APS 1.0.
-
Lose 2 rows on the right which fits the width which = 68 pathes = three rows at the bottom which adds about 2", taking the height to 22"
-
Lose 2 rows on the right which fits the width which = 68 pathes = three rows at the bottom which adds about 2", taking the height to 22"
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115830\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not the way I calculate it. I'm not trying to argue for the sake of argument, but I just don't understand your calculations.
Three rows are about 1 5/8"
That takes you down to 16" with ample margins (17 5/8 - 1 5/8 = 16")
Adding three rows on the other dimension means 18 5/8" + 1 5/8" = 20 2/8. Add 3/8 margin on both sides, and you are at 21. (And I am adding shorter rows to the longer dimension, so I am being conservative.)
That leaves one full inch unaccounted for on a 22" sheet!
I still don't see how it wouldn't work with one 17x22 sheet
But even if it won't the answer is to ask HP to fix APS to work with multiple sheets, similar to all other profiling packages.
It is a significant limitation that it only works with rolls with the largest target
-
The answer is to ask HP to fix APS to work with multiple sheets, similar to all other profiling packages.
Already done and taken one step further in requesting the separate sheets need not all be the same size so that we can use off cuts.
-
The answer is to ask HP to fix APS to work with multiple sheets, similar to all other profiling packages.
Already done and taken one step further in requesting the separate sheets need not all be the same size so that we can use off cuts.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115834\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Wonderful! If they do that, then the question of 17x22 sheets doesn't matter.
If they don't, then I'll revisit the question of a 17x22 sheet, since I still don't understand why it doesn't work -- see my last posting with the figures on moving three rows from one side to the other, plus margins. (Robert, I edited that post after you responded)
-
you are not taking into account that the I1 does not sit right against the back of the printer (about 1" forward) or the back of the caridge so the sapce at the tail end of the print needs to be more than for a normal print.
Trust me marty, before APS was modified, I tried making a custom target using the data in the target measurement file but was about 8mm short of space.
Sorry just looked at my test targets and you need to take 4 rows off the right (you need to leave space for the black blocks which means adding about 4.5 rows on the end.
Marty, I don't think you will be happy no matter what HP does as origionally you wanted it to fit 17"rolls which they did and now its sheets.
-
you are not taking into account that the I1 does not sit right against the back of the printer (about 1" forward) or the back of the caridge so the sapce at the tail end of the print needs to be more than for a normal print.
Trust me marty, before APS was modified, I tried making a custom target using the data in the target measurement file but was about 8mm short of space.
Sorry just looked at my test targets and you need to take 4 rows off the right (you need to leave space for the black blocks which means adding about 4.5 rows on the end.
Marty, I don't think you will be happy no matter what HP does as origionally you wanted it to fit 17"rolls which they did and now its sheets.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115849\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I am happy with the interim progress thus far.
I just didn't understand the calculations. You only commented on the non print margins. What harm in trying to understand? Isn't that what a forum is for?
As I said in my last three posts, it is a big step forward that it now works on 17" rolls.
But it is clearly only an interim fix that the APS works with 17" and 24" rolls. Rolls alone are not enough as compared with other profiling packages.
It is a bit unfair to accuse me of not being happy no matter what, since you also recommended to HP that they fix the APS to work with sheets. You didn't report that on the top of this thread. So it would appear that we both agree on that point, and neither of us is entirely satisfied with the APS 1.20. It is an interim fix, and a work in progress.
My last posting acknowledged your recommendation to HP that it be fixed to work with sheets and I said that it is "wonderful." What more can I say?
-
"But it is clearly only an interim fix that the APS works with 17" and 24" rolls. Rolls alone are not enough as compared with other profiling packages."
Marty, what you need to remember is that the I1 in the z3100 is not like other profiling packages. It is an in printer autoscan solution that is governed by the physical contraints of the device and which imposes some restrictions that other stand alone solutions do not have.
"It is a bit unfair to accuse me of not being happy no matter what, since you also recommended to HP that they fix the APS to work with sheets"
I suggested that HP impliment a multiple page solution in APS as it would be a nice way of using up wasted media not because I regard the lack of this feature in APS as somethinbg that is broken. I never expected them to agree to it and was happy when they agreed to take it under consideration.
I would certainly not regard the steps they have made as an interim step and in the light of my first paragraph I would ceratinly not underestimate, in this case, the compexity of something that may seem trivial or hold it against HP if they decided not to impliment this even if I was a bit dissapointed.
The way the system currently works would need to be reworked as well as the way the machine loads its media.
-
Marty, what you need to remember is that the I1 in the z3100 is not like other profiling packages. It is an in printer autoscan solution that is governed by the physical contraints of the device and which imposes some restrictions that other stand alone solutions do not have.
I suggested that HP impliment a multiple page solution in APS as it would be a nice way of using up wasted media not because I regard the lack of this feature in APS as somethinbg that is broken. I never expected them to agree to it and was happy when they agreed to take it under consideration.
I would certainly not regard the steps they have made as an interim step and in the light of my first paragraph I would ceratinly not underestimate, in this case, the compexity of something that may seem trivial or hold it against HP if they decided not to impliment this even if I was a bit dissapointed.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115861\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I want to restate, clearly and unequivocally, what the Easy software can already do, what the APS fails to do, and what we have every right to expect for $800.
The Easy software works with sheets -- it creates profiles on sheets. It is clearly possible with the Z3100 and not a physical limitation of the machine. If it can work with the Easy software, it should be possible with the APS. A number of forum participants made that point in previous threads on the APS. This is a limitation of the software, and not of the Z3100.
For now, the fact that the new version of APS can work with 17" rolls is a big improvement and suffices. But it is only an INTERIM step.
The only reason I debated the point about whether it works with a single 17x22 sheet is because that would at least allow us to use that sheet size. Robert shot me down on that, and says it is not possible.
But if that is clearly impossible, then I'm back to the view that it is NOT sufficient that it only works with rolls with the largest target.
We paid $800 for the APS software, and it should be able to match the functionality of the Easy software with sheets. I'm not being unreasonable and I'm not asking for too much. Not for $800.
If you want to say I am never satisfied, so be it. I didn't pay $800 for software that only works with 24" or 17" rolls. I thought we were getting a full range professional profiling package -- and one that at least matches the Easy software and will at least work with large sheets like 17x22 or 13x19.
What are the views of others who paid $800? Are you satisfied that with version 1.20? Specifically, that it will still only profile 17" and 24" rolls and no sheets? Is that what you paid $800 for?
One other question. Robert, I assume that the new APS 1.20 doesn't change how it profiles. The profiling process itself hasn't changed has it -- only the width of paper that it work with?
So when the new APS 1.20 is released, there is no need and no advantage to reprofile any 24" rolls that we already did?
-
The Easy software works with sheets. It is clearly possible with the Z3100 and not a physical limitation of the machine. If it can work with the Easy software, it should be possible with the APS. A number of forum participants made that point in previous threads on the APS. This is a limitation of the software and not of the Z3100 as you appear to suggest.
Yes the easy profiling works with single sheets, not multiple sheets which is what would be required to get a HP TC 9.18 target onto a 17”x 22”sheet.
We paid $800 for the APS software, and it should be able to match the functionality of the Easy software with sheets. I'm not being unreasonable and I'm not asking for too much. Not for $800. If you want to say I am never satisfied, so be it. I think you're making too many excuses for HP.
APS will also quite happily print a HP RGB 1.5 target (mid size) onto an A3 sheet and has no problem with printing a TC 9.18 target on a sheet that the target will fit on but going to a multiple sheet system is a huge amount of work. So actually APS is quite able to match what the easy profiling can do and a whole lot more.
As for me making too many excuses for HP I don't think I am. I have been harder on HP than most on this forum with regards to many issues and I have even been harder than you have. I have put in over 300 hours of time testing, I have passed on concerns and comments and have championed many causes here but I will not pressure HP on something that I don't not agree with just because the person asking it thinks they are right and if my disagreeing with you is construed as me cutting HP too much slack then you are welcome to your opinion.
So when the new APS 1.20 is released, there is no need and no advantage to reprofile any 24" rolls that we already did?
The profiling in 1.20 has not changed so there will be no need to re-profile what you have done.
-
As for me making too many excuses for HP I don't think I am. I have been harder on HP than most on this forum with regards to many issues and I have even been harder than you have.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115875\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I agree with that, and apologize to you. While you were typing your response, I was simultaneously editing my posting to delete that reference to you. We were both typing and editing at the same time. (Candidly, I was annoyed by your personal comment that I will never be happy or satisfied. But I should have ignored that comment, and not responded in kind.)
You have performed an extraordinary service for all of us, and for HP. If HP has not been paying you for your time and materials, they certainly should.
Again, my apologies for the personal comment, and thanks for your hard work. I regret that you were so quick to respond, and not allow me the time to remove my comment about you!
As to the multiple sheets, I still think it needs to be included in any $800 package, so that 13x19 or 17x22 sheets can be used. I still believe that is what we paid $800 for -- the equivalent of an $800 professional profiling package. It doesn't yet meet that standard.
-
Marty Please don't get me wrong, I agree multiple sheets would be really nice but in reality, let’s look at what needs to be done.
APS would need to be modified so that it know what size sheet is loaded. Then APS would need to be modified so that it would print the multiple sheets. This is the easy part.
The real work I the modification to the printer which HP would have to do, not Gretag.
The printer would need to have an additional mode whereby it would ask for sheets to be loaded to read without going through the normal loading procedure where you have to specify the media being loaded and the operation form there on would also require modifications. While this may seem easy, it is quite a lot of work to get it to operate smoothly.
The pricing of APS is a whole different issue and I do agree it is expensive and have voice this concern to HP but I regard this and the feature set as two separate issues.
As for my comment about you never going to be happy I too apologise but I do feel it is important to realise that in reality, no product is ever going to be 100% perfect, even my Epson 4000 has it problems.
There are issues that I can live with and issues that I cannot and I would far rather the engineers spend their time working on the issues that I cannot live with and for the most I tend to get used to the smaller issues and they become less of a problem.
The chances are pretty good that in the future we will only ever need to profile each media once so the issue of roll vs. sheet for me becomes a nice to have rather than critical problem and I would rather the engineer’s focus on resolving the colour issues than get involved in modifying the firmware.
In the meantime we report back to HP regarding issues, work with them to resolve them and try to get the machine as near to perfect as we can but at some point there could be minor issues that will remain unresolved.
-
I would rather the engineer’s focus on resolving the colour issues than get involved in modifying the firmware.
In the meantime we report back to HP regarding issues, work with them to resolve them and try to get the machine as near to perfect as we can but at some point there could be minor issues that will remain unresolved.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115881\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well, I can readily agree that other issues might be a higher priority. My own wish list would be:
(1) correcting any remaining color problems;
(2) correcting the bug that causes the printer to cut off the print when the ink runs out instead of just stopping and letting us change the cartridge -- you indicated that HP will fix that, in your response to another posting.
(3) the noise of the fan/hard drive -- in response to another posting you said you'd raise that issue with HP. It would be great to have a silent sleep mode if it wouldn't interfere with the auto nozzle check.
(4) They also need to fix the firmware/APS so it can profile Pro Satin.
(5) FIXING THE WINDOWS DRIVER and the page size issue -- apparently they are close to the release of a new driver that solves that?
(6) For windows -- the HP Pro plug-in? Not sure what it offers the Mac that would be useful for Windows
(7) And ! last but not least, to include the generic photo mode in any firmware color revision, along with all of the generic paper types, since it wasn't included in the last firmware revision.
I'd readily agree that those issues should be higher priorities than the APS and sheets.
So we can agree on that!
-
(4) They also need to fix the firmware/APS so it can profile Pro Satin.
This may be fixed in 1.20. I must admit I have not had time to test this yet but make it a priority on Monday. I do however suspect that this is a firmware rather than APS problem
(5) And ! last but not least, to include the generic photo mode in any firmware color revision, along with all of the generic paper types, since it wasn't included in the last firmware revision.
Could you clarify this?
The most important feature I would like to see in APS is the ability to build a custom target from a description file like other packages can. Also to be able to support a larger number of patches if defined in the description file. Just occured to me that there is a remote possibility that 1.20 may be able to do this in a round about way which I will test on monday.
-
(5) And ! last but not least, to include the generic photo mode in any firmware color revision, along with all of the generic paper types, since it wasn't included in the last firmware revision.
Could you clarify this?
The most important feature I would like to see in APS is the ability to build a custom target from a description file like other packages can. Also to be able to support a larger number of patches if defined in the description file. Just occured to me that there is a remote possibility that 1.20 may be able to do this in a round about way which I will test on monday.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115900\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I edited my last post, and added a few more to my wish list, based on other posts and other complaints that have been posted in the forum. Such as the page size issue in the windows driver, and a general question as to whether the HP Pro driver for Macs should be duplicated for windows or would offer any advantage (I don't know).
Responding to your question about generic pape types --
I base that on the March 2 Technical Newsletter that was issued to explain the features of the new firmware. It clearly stated that:
"These changes affect only to HP driver and only to the following paper types:
(names that appears in the driver)
Canvas (generic)
Fine Art paper (generic)"
(and it also listed the various HP papers by name -- but NOT Pro Satin!)
I took that literally, for exactly what it says. That all of the improvements in the last firmware on color mixing, etc apply ONLY to the listed papers. And those improvements do NOT apply to generic Photo Paper or Pro Satin.
Am I wrong about that? That is certainly what the newsletter said, and in plain english.
I assume "build a custom target from a description file like other packages can" refers to the ability to take data from another profiling package using a different measuring device, and build a profile? This is probably a dumb question, but what advantage does that offer?
-
Also in Firmware (or Driver) Wish List
- The option to have Quad Black printing on more than one matte media type
(with perhaps the ability to control or tweak the ink limiting)
-
Also in Firmware (or Driver) Wish List
- The option to have Quad Black printing on more than one matte media type
(with perhaps the ability to control or tweak the ink limiting)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115907\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Andrew, I raised this with them and I am waiting for them to get back to me.
-
(6) For windows -- the HP Pro plug-in? Not sure what it offers the Mac that would be useful for Windows
They say that apparently they can't produce the plugin for windows which I am not happy about.
(7) And ! last but not least, to include the generic photo mode in any firmware color revision, along with all of the generic paper types, since it wasn't included in the last firmware revision.
The latest firmware I believe only has colour changes applied to a small number of media. I unfortunately can’t test this as I have some beta stuff on my machine. Also the colour changes only apply if the machine is driven in RGB mode.
I assume "build a custom target from a description file like other packages can" refers to the ability to take data from another profiling package using a different measuring device, and build a profile? This is probably a dumb question, but what advantage does that offer?
Not a dumb question at all. You may find that you have used a target for profiling another device that could produce a slightly different profile to the target used in APS. It would be nice to be able to use a specific target when we are trying to match the output from a specific device.
-
The latest firmware I believe only has colour changes applied to a small number of media. I unfortunately can’t test this as I have some beta stuff on my machine. Also the colour changes only apply if the machine is driven in RGB mode.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115931\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That is exactly what HP told us in the HP Technical Newsletter -- that the color changes were applied only to a specific list of media. Please refer to my earlier posting, because I quote from the HP Technical Newsletter
The generic Photo Paper and HP Pro Satin are not on that list and the color changes and improvements did NOT apply to those media types.
It is therefore vital that the next firmware release corrects that, and ALL improvements and modifications apply to ALL media types listed in the HP driver.
-
It is therefore vital that the next firmware release corrects that, and ALL improvements and modifications apply to ALL media types listed in the HP driver.
The firmware and the media colour support are not necessarily liunked as you can load media support independantly of firmware. The main reason behind HP's trip was the colour issue and I do not expect to see an immediate change here until certain avenues that were identified have been explored.
Having said this, the results of this exploration should be more than worth waiting for.
-
It is therefore vital that the next firmware release corrects that, and ALL improvements and modifications apply to ALL media types listed in the HP driver.
The firmware and the media colour support are not necessarily liunked as you can load media support independantly of firmware. The main reason behind HP's trip was the colour issue and I do not expect to see an immediate change here until certain avenues that were identified have been explored.
Having said this, the results of this exploration should be more than worth waiting for.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115955\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm a bit confused by your response, because even if media color support can be handled independently of firmware, I assume the opposite is the case as well, and firmware can influence color. The last firmware release clearly was aimed at and affected color, and just as clearly was limited to only a select list of media types, and didn't include the generic Photo Paper or Pro Satin, to name two. A literal reading of the Technical Newsletter can only lead us to conclude that the recent improvements in reds, skin tones, and dark areas did not apply to Photo Paper or Pro Satin. Thus my comment that the next firmware release needs to correct this, and apply ALL changes and improvements to ALL media types listed in the driver. That may not occur immediately, as you explained in your last posting, but it nonetheless needs to be addressed at some point. Be it in firmware, or some other driver or media driver/software revision.
Here is a direct quote from the HP Technical Newsletter, March 2, explaining firmware 4.1.0.2:
Red -- Improve vividness of reds (and colors that uses red) for certain papers
Skin Tones Improvement in Skin Tones transitions
Dark areas Improvement in shadows detail and high density zones
These changes affect only to HP driver and only to the following paper types:
(names that appears in the driver)
* HP Premium Instant-dry Photo Gloss
* HP Premium Instant-dry Photo Satin
* HP Professional High-Gloss Contract Proofing Paper
* HP Professional Semi-Gloss Contract Proofing Paper
* HP Professional Matte Canvas
* HP Artist Matte Canvas
* HP Hahnemühle Smooth Fine Art Paper
* HP Matte Litho-realistic Paper
* HP Hahnemühle Textured Fine Art Paper
* Canvas (generic)
* Fine Art paper (generic)
-
Marty, what I am saying is that a new firmware release may not correct colour yet so we may see oter areas correct before colour.
-
Marty, what I am saying is that a new firmware release may not correct colour yet so we may see oter areas correct before colour.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115983\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
OK. I just hope it is on a list somewhere for future revisions to firmware, drivers, software or some variation thereof -- at some point in the future.
Not including the generic Photo Paper in color corrections is a rather big deal, after all, since that is used to create profiles for any non-HP photo papers.
Didn't mean to be argumentative about it. We are on the same page -- I think!
-
Hi Alan
“And what about the many complaints about the sound of the fan or hard drive? Is a really silent mode possible when the 3100 is not used, with no noise at all, and the unit would still periodically turn itself on and do the auto head checks to prevent ink clogging?”
This was not covered by I will ask them on Monday.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115786\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Did you get a chance to ask HP about the sound of the fan or hard drive, and whether it is possible to have a silent mode with no noise, but the 3100 will still do the periodic auto head check? At the present time either the hard drive or fan runs all the time, and this has been noted by others on the forum as well.
Also, you said you'd check to see if Pro Satin now works with the new 1.20 beta APS. Does it?
I also agree with some of the other suggested fixes, such as the annoying problem of too many page sizes causing crashes in the windows driver.
P.S. Thanks for the report that HP will fix the bug that causes a print to be get cut off in the middle when ink runs out, instead of just stopping and waiting for us to change the cartridge and then it will resume printing, as with the Epsons. Fixing that bug will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks very much for your great help on all of these issues !!!!!!
-
I just hope they remove the annoyance of seeing satin papers trimmed 3 inches after a roll is inserted. Why is it fine for matt or canvas?
Neal