Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: NickCroken on August 12, 2011, 10:10:22 pm
-
Hey Everyone,
I just ran into and issue that I have never seen before when printing. My cyans/blues are blocking up and posterizing out of nowhere. I have printed the same file (twice the size) before with no issues. My substrate has remained the same and I've tried creating a new profile for the substrate as that was suggested by a friend. That did not work. I've tried shaking the cyan cartridge and tried more test prints. I have changed the cyan cartridge recently, is it possible that a bad cartridge could cause an issue like this? The issue was also apparent when I tried printing on a gloss paper instead of the canvas.
I have a ton of printing that needs to be finished by this weekend and this is really killing me! Please help if possible!
Thank you very much,
Nick
-
Some thoughts:
Noozle check.
Driver media type selection.
Paper config>color density
proper icc workflow.
-
Hi Cybis, thank you for your reply. I suppose I should have mentioned that the nozzle check turned out perfectly. I tried that a couple of times before reprofiling the substrate. Everything else is printing well except for the cyans.
-
Hi!
Seems to be posterisation? Are you using printer profiles? If so do you have the correct profile, and have you shut down color management in the printer driver?
Sorry, no better ideas here!
Best regards
Erik
Hey Everyone,
I just ran into and issue that I have never seen before when printing. My cyans/blues are blocking up and posterizing out of nowhere. I have printed the same file (twice the size) before with no issues. My substrate has remained the same and I've tried creating a new profile for the substrate as that was suggested by a friend. That did not work. I've tried shaking the cyan cartridge and tried more test prints. I have changed the cyan cartridge recently, is it possible that a bad cartridge could cause an issue like this? The issue was also apparent when I tried printing on a gloss paper instead of the canvas.
I have a ton of printing that needs to be finished by this weekend and this is really killing me! Please help if possible!
Thank you very much,
Nick
-
We need to see all your driver settings. Also, have you tried using a canned profile (even if it's not an exact match for the media that you're using)?
-
Agree with the others, this does not appear to be a problem with the printer, but seems to be something you inadvertently changed in your workflow. I know you stated you checked it, but if it was the printer, you should see all kinds of problems with all kinds of prints.
-
I have tried using an older profile and the results were the same. Which driver settings would you like to see?
-
Here are the settings that I have been using for printing. Nothing has changed in the last few months. The only thing that I've changed was a new cyan cartridge recently. I believe I may have a faulty cartridge due to it only be the blues and cyans that are affected by this problem. I did a large print with quite a bit of blue in it two days ago and it was fine. Could it be possible that the old, good cyan ink, was still in the lines and now that that ink has been used up the faulty ink is coming through.
-
Are you 100% sure all nozzles are firing correctly? The nozzle test pattern may appear fine except the cyan on the far left of the pattern is missing completely and goes unnoticed. (far fetched, I know...)
-
This may not make a big difference, but if you are using Epson Canvas you should have the drive set to Watercolor paper Radient white,
not the generic 'canvas'
I Also believe that 'posterization' is a file or workflow issue, not a printer issue.
-
Hi Cybis,
The nozzle check appears to be ok. Also, David, I will reprofile my canvas with the correct setting once I get this issue resolved. I do not think that setting pertains to this issue as it behaves the same whether printed on canvas or paper :S.
-
Hi Cybis,
The nozzle check appears to be ok. Also, David, I will reprofile my canvas with the correct setting once I get this issue resolved. I do not think that setting pertains to this issue as it behaves the same whether printed on canvas or paper :S.
Arg, my far fetched theory didn't even apply to the 9880. Do you see the same issue when printing on epson paper with canned epson profile and the correct media type selection? same issue printing from qimage, LR, PS?
-
Nick, as I said I really didn't think the canvas setting was the root cause of your problem.
I have been rechecking my my library of printing and CS5 books and can only come up with lower bit depth in the file, and abrupt changes in curves adjustments in edits, as two possible reasons for posterization.I still think it is a file issue especially if different file prints ok.If it was the printer, I'd believe you'd be experiencing problems with other files also. Someone else asked if you tried printing outside of Qimage itself?
Since it is happening with both your original and custom profile I wonder if your file has been corrupted in some way.
I'd open the file in PS and see what your file attributes are.
A process of elimination is the only answer to get to the heart of the problem and if the printer is giving you ok prints from other files and a good nozzle check I think you can safely rule it out as the cause.
-
Hmmm - image original resolution is 1920x1170? Am I reading that right? That's a 2.2MP image. What size are you printing to? I know you've said you've printed it to twice the size previously (twice the current output size, I assume?), but it would still help to know.
Also, have you tried just printing through the Epson driver - say from Photoshop or Acrobat - and remove Qimage from the workflow?
It's a process of elimination, but a the moment I'm focussed on your output size and then it could come down to settings in Qimage for on-the-fly resizing - as I said, that's a pretty small image.
-
I just noticed in the Screen capture -Qimage job properties box you have
1-no setting chosen for a printer ICC profile
2- resolution OFF
3- interpolation OFF.
That won't work!
You have to tell Qimage what you want it to do and you have everything turned off ???
I think there lies your problem, if you are trying to print through Qimage!
The Thumbs indicate the 'Blues Test' file is a TiFF, why is it getting changed to a Jpeg?
You could also be suffering from Jpeg compression of the files!
-
I just noticed in the Screen capture
There's nothing wrong with those screen captures, do you use Qimage ? if so, you'd know you need to select options via dialogue boxes before they show in the main program panel.
The first screenshot shows a reasonable set of options being chosen, the second one shows those options selected in Qimage and a reasonable set of printer driver options. TIFs files are shown selected into the print queue, so I can't see where you getting the idea that they're being converted to JPGs from.
I don't think there's anything wrong with the settings shown in the screenshots, the problem lies elsewhere.
-
Hello Nick,
I know this will probably sound rather far fetched, but I had this problem with my 7600 printers a while back. Mostly I'm using the 9900 of course, but occasionally still use one of the 7600s for a specific job. When I have been using the 9900, for convenience sake I set it as the Default Printer. If I change over to the 7600 the prints will always show posterisation. It took me a while to figure that one out at first. Tried everything I could think of accept the obvious and ultimately the easiest. I set the 7600 to be the Default Printer and that immediately solved the problem. Not sure why, nor do I care. However, I now have a notification on the 7600 to remind me to change it before printing and then back again to the 9900 when finished. If you do have printers of different vintages in operation it might be a good idea to make sure the 9880 is your Default Printer when using it. I'm sure you have probably already checked that possibility, but in case you haven't it takes only a few seconds to do so.
Good luck,
Gary
-
You of course are right on the Jpeg issue I was looking at the screen shot file and had the my view scrolled over and missed the Tif on the very left in the Queue log.
on the other settings in the Job properties box I quote the Qimage help file\....
Section I: The Basics
Example 1: Setting Qimage to Produce Maximum Quality Prints
Click the "Printer Setup" tool button. Select your photo printer and click "Properties" for the printer, making sure that your printer driver settings are set to the highest quality photo settings and select the appropriate media type/size (photo glossy, etc).
Click the "Job Properties" tab on the lower right of the main window and make sure that your "Interp." method is set to "Hybrid". Also make sure that your first "Res" value (output resolution for prints) is set to "Max" and the second Res value (output resolution for posters) is set to "High". Still on the "Job Properties" tab, leave "Prtr ICC" set to "OFF" if you do not have a custom printer ICC profile for the printer, paper, and ink you are using. If you have obtained or created an accurate ICC profile for your printer and the type of media you are using, activate that profile in "Prtr ICC". Before activating any profile, make sure you know the proper print driver settings to use with the profile because an ICC profile will only work properly with specific print driver settings. See the Color Management section for more details.
Finally, on the "Job Properties" tab, make sure that all checkboxes are not checked. This will ensure that no borders or text information are printed with your prints, and will ensure that no global or print filter is active that may affect the appearance of prints.
Nick has all 3 of those boxes set to OFF
-
Nick has all 3 of those boxes set to OFF
Good spot.
Yes, settings the print res and interpolation to something more useful would be a good diagnosic step. (not sure if the poster setting is improtant, but ti wouldn't harm things to match it with the print res).
As an aside; it's always worth saving a favourite configuration for re-use in Qimage.
-
Good spot.
As an aside; it's always worth saving a favourite configuration for re-use in Qimage.
Not to take this thread OT, but yes ...One of the best features of Qimage is being able to save Printer Configuratons,settings, Templates, Jobs,etc for instant recall.
In the beginning I quite often overlooked making the printer ICC Profile changes for different papers in the Job properties menu boxes.
David
I hope Nick has figured out his problem and was successful in getting the work done.!
-
Hi All,
I was away from internet for the last 24 hours. I have since tried matching up my settings in qimage to those that were posted (max quality etc) and nothing has changed. I have tried printing different files that work ok so long as there isn't a gradient in the blues/cyan.
I'm not sure where the 2mp came from as this file was shot personally by an aptus 65 so resolution and gradient shouldn't be a file issue. The screenshots from photoshop and lightroom show a perfect gradient.
I'll be calling Epson tomorrow, Tuesday at the latest to try and get this figured out.
I appreciate all of your suggestions and am still all ears.
-
Ah, the 2mp comment came from the note on the app saying 1920x1170, but I see now that's not the image size that you're printing.
I would still STRONGLY recommend removing Qimage from the workflow and just print from PS or Acrobat or similar and see what happens, just printing through the driver. Always test things as simply as possible and then see what the results are and work from there. Epson is unlikely to be able to help until you do that - they can't support Qimage and there's no indication of it being a printer problem at this stage.
-
I tried printing out of photoshop and had similar results, even with reworked files (incase something went wrong there). I tried two small test strips though and they worked perfectly. Now, when I went to print the big one the colours are weird again. I'm having this issue with two issues, one of my files and one of a friends.
-
Nick did you check to see if your printer is set as default as someone else wisely suggested?
-
I did and it was set to default :(
-
What confuses me is that my small test strip looked fine and then when I went to print the larger version it started happening again.
-
Are you hard wired to the printer?
-
Not sure if this will help diagnose or not but I printed a 3x8" 100% crop of one of the trouble areas and it printed perfectly. When I tried printing the larger file (which the crop came from) it reverted back to having issues.
I am hardwired to the printer.
-
Some kind of ink starvation maybe. You mentioned this happened after changing the cyan ink cartridge. Did you try reseating it or swapping it?
-
I did try re seating it, shook it up some more. If it was ink starvation would it not still affect the small print due to it requiring the same amount of ink as the big version? I am still new to printing so please excuse any ignorance I may have shown.
-
Sorry Nick, this is beyond anything else I have experience with.
I'd really like to know where all the 'experts' on this forum are, and why they don't reply to a post such as yours???
-
People *are* replying, but it's a very, very unusual issue.
Are you able to print from a different computer to test it?
Hmmm, how big is the actual file in pixel dimensions and what size are you printing to and at what resolution?
-
The file is 10725x7800px. I don't have another windows based computer that I can print off of. I tried calling technical support at Epson and all I got was a "you're out of luck" we don't know response.
I tried more 100% crop prints and they are still printing perfectly. Everytime I try to load the big file and print it the posterization appears again. I do not believe file size is an issue as I've printed significantly larger files through Qimage and not had any issues with information not flowing to the printer properly.
I have since reinstalled Qimage and my printer drivers and am still getting identical results.
-
Nick, send an e mail to Mike at Qimage with a link to this thread, you'r likely get the answer directly from him ;-) he's fantastic!
use the Email support link on this page...
http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage-u/support.htm
-
OK - an 83MP file. What physical size are you printing to when you get the bad results? ie what print resolution (ppi) are you sending through and what resize options are you using within the program?
Yes, sending a support request to Qimage would be a great idea. From what you've said, it's not your printer that's causing the issue and you're not using the regular driver, so that leave a setting in Qimage. Epson can't help you with that.
-
At some risk of going over the obvious, you initially mentioned that the problem seemed to appear at the same time that you changed out an ink cart (cyan, if my short-term memory goes back that far).
Have you considered trying another cyan cart, hopefully from a different manufacturing run, to see if that makes the problem go away after the ink line gets replaced with new ink? If you have a good relationship with your dealer, perhaps you might even be able to swap your cart for one in a demo machine.
I like changing only one thing at a time, so that if when you get the problem to go away, you'll know what it was!
-
Come to think of it, how much time elapsed between changing your ink cart, and the manifestation of this problem? There is a fair bit of ink in the lines of a 9880, so you might not see an ink problem for some time.
-
Nick, it's not ink starvation per se, it's air leaking into the system and 'replacing' the ink in the ink path. I have had this problem previously with cart(s) that 'leaked' air into the 'fuel system'. I would do a simple clean or nozzle check and all looked OK--even print a small test print-also OK. However, when I re-reprinted my image, I saw that cantankerous cart misbehaving again. What is actually happening? For a small test print, after a clean, the 'fuel system' starts out 'mostly' refilled and the print is OK. But now when you re-print the big print, you're still OK, except for the air leaking into the fuel system while printing occurs. Once the leaked air replaces the ink in that 'fuel line' you will be in starvation mode--no or little ink will be further delivered from that cart(s). This are the 'horror' cycles I believe you are experiencing--until you find the entrance for the leaked air this problem will repeat.
Obviously, you will need to check the integrity of the 'fuel lines', the seal in the cart and even the surface region where the cart seals against the printhead assy. even if I'm dead wrong I dont know why Epson never brought this topic up.
I hope my comments will be of some aid-ring Epson's bell once again, wake them up, this not an unknown phenomenon!
irv weiner
-
You may be my saviour. This all started happening after an ink cart change. I thought it could have been a faulty cart to begin with. I am going to see if I can get Vistek to replace the cartridge tomorrow.
-
If it is the cartridge how do you suggest I clear the air from the lines once I put a new cartridge in?
-
tell Visitek to read my post--if necessary read it to them--til they get it!
Make certain they check the integrity of the cart-printer interface--especially for dirt,debris or disaster!!!
good luck irv weiner
-
Irv,
How do I purge the air in the cyan line that is causin the problem. Or does the cartridge with a fresh seal do that on it's own. I'm picturing a system similar to brake lines and bleeding but I'm probably wrong
-
Normally, except that this may not be a norm sit, several gentle cleaning cycles should do it-avoid any heavy duty cleaning runs for now. Remember, we don't know yet where the leak is--my worry is possible damage to the cyan inlet ink port to the printer. I'm running a 3880, a smaller brother to your 9880, the function is the same but the physical hardware is 'different'.
I assume your 'fuel system' is pressurized as is the 3880, therefore the ink is 'pushed' down the lines and then 'sucked' into the printhead. This is probably occurring but after some active printing, the ink is being blocked 'somewhere', and I now realize that there can be some debris in the cart exit port, the cart pressure inlet port or ink inlet port on the printhead.
I re-note that you were successful in printing several small test prints--now that sounds reasonable. In between test prints while you're sweating it out the 'possible' debris settles down--wherever it is. But when you retry the big pic, the debris is disturbed and starts building up blockage of ???-this blocked location then drastically reduces the cyan flow or stops it. When you stop printing the debris 'settles' down. Nice!!
Could the debris be in the exit port of the cart--and then migrated into the input port of the printhead resulting in 2 active debris sites? Could the debris be located further in the printhead? The key note here is your printer mechanically and electrically is functioning-good! I think the problem now is to find the 'shmutz'. If this were a car brake system, you can easily unbolt and look-but it isn't.
The search path becomes clear-but how to for 'us' is not. A first step is to replace the cyan cart, if still no change, its possible that cyan cart had debris and spread its cancer-put it aside. It is quite possible that the check valve in the cart's exit port is flakey-let's hope. Now if the input port to the printer has debris in it--how do we clean it? Thirdly, if there is debris in the printhead-how do we clean it?? BTW, do not shake the carts vigorously, you will cause foaming.
What we do know is that the 'clog' is usage dependent--the longer the continuous print time, the greater the chance of a clog--in your case 100% in x minutes. I'm quite certain if you tried to print 10+ 4X6 at once. you wont make it.
If you are in warranty or have a repair contract, this is a job for Epson techs, now that you can inform them of the actual most probable cause.
BTW, what do YOU mean by posterization, if you are losing cyan during printing, your image should show a very warm cast but still have normal detail. Is this so? If not, what does your 'bad' part of the image look like, are you seeing blocks of pixels?
Let us know what happens when you use a new cyan cart.
irv weiner
-
Nick, it's not ink starvation per se, it's air leaking into the system and 'replacing' the ink in the ink path. I have had this problem previously with cart(s) that 'leaked' air into the 'fuel system'. I would do a simple clean or nozzle check and all looked OK--even print a small test print-also OK. However, when I re-reprinted my image, I saw that cantankerous cart misbehaving again. What is actually happening? For a small test print, after a clean, the 'fuel system' starts out 'mostly' refilled and the print is OK. But now when you re-print the big print, you're still OK, except for the air leaking into the fuel system while printing occurs. Once the leaked air replaces the ink in that 'fuel line' you will be in starvation mode--no or little ink will be further delivered from that cart(s). This are the 'horror' cycles I believe you are experiencing--until you find the entrance for the leaked air this problem will repeat.
Obviously, you will need to check the integrity of the 'fuel lines', the seal in the cart and even the surface region where the cart seals against the printhead assy. even if I'm dead wrong I dont know why Epson never brought this topic up.
I hope my comments will be of some aid-ring Epson's bell once again, wake them up, this not an unknown phenomenon!
irv weiner
It is true that piëzo heads become very ineffective in pumping ink when air is in the lines. While there could be a relation between the new cart and the problem I am a bit curious whether you had your issue with a 9900. Air leaking into an ink channel usually happened at the damper connection at the head side or when air had been trapped in a new cart. But the 9900 carts have a sensor in the ink outlet that should be triggered with any air being in that cart and flowing out. I think exchanging the cart with a new one may help but more likely because a small hole in the cart's pressure chamber keeps the overall air/ink pressure too low but not low enough to trigger the pressure sensor. In the past air in the lines at least showed in bad nozzle check prints, fast changes in "blocked" nozzles for every new nozzle check print. Perfect nozzle checks but lousy prints were usually the result of bad ink flow: dirty dampers and issues closer to the carts like cart slot needles being blocked or low pressure.
met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst
Dinkla Gallery Canvas Wrap Actions for Photoshop
http://www.pigment-print.com/dinklacanvaswraps/index.html
-
Nick, I suggest you contact Art and discuss this problem. He is very familiar with the printer world and publishes a group of free guides concerning the survival and repair of printers. He is a very frequent contributor to the Yahoo printer forums.
"Arthur Entlich" e-printerhelp@shaw.ca eprinterhelp
irv weiner
-
Hi Irv,
I just installed the new cartridge, did a couple of cleanings and had the same result. Samples of what the prints are looking like are presented on the first page of this thread. I really had my fingers crossed that this would be the ticket but it appears not to be.
-
With all due respect to Irv, there's no way that was the problem based on the sample print you showed here. Posterisation is not the result of a missing nozzle (or nozzles) here. The colours are true, just posterised.
I think several of us have suggested various paths of actions and asked various questions. I would suggest reviewing and go through a thorough testing process of elimination rather than waiting for a "magic bullet" answer.
Get some help from Qimage, do some testing with the straight driver, respond to queries about output PPI etc, consider creating a large set of gradations (CMYK) and look to see if any of them posterise.
-
Here's something else to try assuming nozzles do indeed drop out during printing. Perform a nozzle check before and after a large print, if they are both fine then it's probably not the issue. If on the other hand you loose nozzles while printing, try this:
Nozzle drop out while printing indicates a ink supply issue. The Print Head demands ink during the printing process, and the Ink System does not deliver it properly. The Print Head slowly “starves” for Ink. A cleaning cycle delivers a much stronger demand on the Ink System and will refill the Print Head with Ink. The process of printing will once again “starve” the Print Head.
1. Determine the amount of printing that it takes for the Nozzles to drop out.
1.1 Note that interval.
2. Perform a Power Cleaning cycle.
2.1 Perform a nozzle check and ensure that all of the nozzles are working.
The purpose of the Power Cleaning cycle is to remove any air in the Dampers that might restrict ink flow.
3. Print until the interval in step 1 has been exceeded (2 times the interval is recommended).
-
With the samples shown I would not think of ink supply issues either. You did not see any of this in the image at pixel size zoom? Did you make softproof checks with the profile, something out of gamut in that area? Even then there should be a better representation of the image colors so check whether there is no double profiling done etc. A bad profile is still possible. Try perceptual and relative colormetric rendering with a profile for the 9880 from the paper manufacturer etc. I hope you are not using a 9900 profile for a 9880. Qimage's color should not differ from Photoshop color if all the settings are correct, no odd print filter interfering in Qimage?
met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst
Dinkla Gallery Canvas Wrap Actions for Photoshop
http://www.pigment-print.com/dinklacanvaswraps/index.html
-
Ok Nick It's been a week.
As Paul Harvey used to say...
" And now for the rest of the story" ?
After so much anguish, and a cry for help, I think we all deserve a follow up, if you have figured out your problem?
I'd like to think this would be a learning experience for all.
David
-
Sorry, I have been out of reception In the mountains for a couple days. The issue is still not fixed, Epson Canada is now looking into. I'm about to be getting on a sailboat where I'll be out of reception as well. I'll be back Monday!
-
Bump... another week gone by ?
Sure seems like Sailing and Vacationing took precedence over your printing "Urgency"
Hope you had a swell time ::)
Any news?
David
-
I'm sorry guys, I meant Monday the 29. The printer urgency has been on my mind the entire time and am hoping to have it fixed by next Wednesday as I have a large backlog of work. I'd have stayed home to fix the printer had the trip not been planne for 8 months.
I just arrived in Vancouver, I'll report back as soon as I hear something from Epson or try more test.
-
Hi Nick, hope you did have a good time.Not trying to bust chops just real curious. Unfortunately many of us can turn other peoples problems into a learning experience. ;-)
David
-
Here is an update. I have been talking with an Epson professional throughout the day and still am not really getting anywhere. I've printed an epson diagnostic file perfectly. I did however try printing a gradient of the two trouble areas and ended up with a couple weird white areas on the print. I have attached the sample below.
-
Do you realize that these Epson inks, combined with the way the carts are inserted into the machine, have a way of becoming separated from the base.
What I really like about the Canon and HP printers is the way the ink carts are always inserted with the opening facing down. The carts drain completely this way and don't need any odd pressure situations to move the ink flow smoothly.
Do you shake your carts occasionally? The pigments need to be suspended in a uniform blended way. You could still see a good nozzle check but have unsuspended pigments in the carts, lines, and dampers.
If you haven't taken the carts out and shaken them well, I would definitely do that. Then if it were me I'd do a couple of deep cleanings, or print out a purge color gradient in a big size on cheap paper to purge all the channels. This happens all the time when people think their dampers are clogged or their heads are bad when in reality their inks are not in adequate suspension. Epson never told me to shake my carts except when installing them. That is a mistake.
j
-
I agree with what you say about the need to keep the inks in suspension (makes sense) but that doesn't account for the considerable amount of ink already in the tubes feeding the print head.
Your solution would require frequently removing and shaking the carts. Doesn't that run the risk of prematurely wearing of the carts insertion seal and the possibility of pressurization problems from leaking, and also introducing air into the feed tubes?
-
Look man, if that is the case then this is one hell of an over engineered, frustrating, back assward piece of equipment. They never got figured out. I don't know how they could go from the perfectly engineered heads they designed for the Rolands, the Mimakis, the 10K series a decade ago that never had these issues to this crap. It just baffles the mind.
I agree with what you say about the need to keep the inks in suspension (makes sense) but that doesn't account for the considerable amount of ink already in the tubes feeding the print head.
Your solution would require frequently removing and shaking the carts. Doesn't that run the risk of prematurely wearing of the carts insertion seal and the possibility of pressurization problems from leaking, and also introducing air into the feed tubes?
-
Nick,
The areas your showing us now do not appear to be related to the original pics you posted that did appear to be posterized.
Unless I'm nuts these appear to be damaged areas of the paper (scuffs), or a bad 'emulsion' (for lack of a better term), on the paper surface that has not absorbed any ink. Is this EX Fiber paper?
-
Yes, Dean, we all know you don't like Epsons. Thanks.
There's no particular need to constantly shake the cartridges if the printer is in regular use. The agitation of the ink flowing through the tubes to the head is plenty to ensure that the pigment particles are properly suspended. Unless the cartridges are left unused for many months, or unless you actually see a problem (and what you're seeing has nothing to do with pigment separation) then there's no need to shake them.
Also, placing an ink cartridge "valve down" doesn't remove the need to pump the ink to the head. The Canons and HPs don't rely purely on gravity to feed ink (if they did, it would fail, since the entire cartridge is not above the print head).
To the OP - can you make the file available somewhere for someone else with the same printer to test for you?
-
Actually I like Epsons, and their great dither and gamut beats everything. What I don't like is all the hassle people have with missing nozzles and the unsatisfactory method they have created for pressurizing these carts when they had a pressurized cart/head design that worked great with the 10K a decade ago. And IF you don't use your printer regularly you should shake the carts. With the Canon it does a thorough job of suspending the inks without taking them out whether you are printing for months or not.
-
Nick,
You say that the Epson file works fine, you still have not told us if this is problem related to only this 1 file of your own?
Have you checked to see if the color space you originally saved the file in has somehow been converted to a smaller gamut color space, unable to render the smooth gradient tonalities effectively?
-
The epson test file was a simple colour swatch grouping. I could email someone the file in jpeg form.
This is happening with one of my files with the cyan gradient as well as one of my clients files where there are cyans in the clouds. PM and I can send the file to the address.
-
UPDATE
I have just determined that Qimage is the problem. I let the printer manage colour instead of Qimage (opposite of what I have been told to do all along) and the gradient went away. I have sent Mike @ Qimage an email with the new findings.
As soon as he responds I'll fill you in on what is happening.
-
Hmmm - I hope this is the case so that you can get some assistance, but back in mid August you mentioned that you printed directly from Photoshop and got the same results, so it more seems like a profile error/issue than Qimage or driver.
I did suggest using canned profiles from Epson to test - did you have a chance to try that?
-
I had tried that and they didn't jive. Qimage was spitting out the weird gradient. Now, with the printer managing the colour it works fine. I didn't think it was profile based because it affected all of my substrates and their respective profiles.
-
Just to report that Qimage has a trouble managing some of my colour munki profiles.
I print on Epson 4880 and latest Qimage Studio edition 2010.202.
On images with highly saturated colours a strong colour shift occurs. It happens in a place of few square mm. where the most saturated colour is. It is very rare to happen and I have not mentioned it to Mike at Qimage.
Printing the same image from PS – no colour shifts.
I thought my case is isolated one, but it seems Qimage has an issue applying some colour profiles.
Atanas
-
UPDATE
I have just determined that Qimage is the problem. I let the printer manage colour instead of Qimage (opposite of what I have been told to do all along) and the gradient went away. I have sent Mike @ Qimage an email with the new findings.
As soon as he responds I'll fill you in on what is happening.
Could you mention in what Qimage DDIsoftware forum you posted the new findings, I like to follow the thread there.
met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst
New: Spectral plots of +250 inkjet papers:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
-
I have been posting here exclusively and emailing Mike directly.
Mike replied saying that my profiles were the issues and that when he used my profile to print in photoshop he had the same issue. When I print from photoshop my images are perfect. At this stage I believe that something in Qimage has potentially corrupted and is now not reading my profiles properly.
-
I have been posting here exclusively and emailing Mike directly.
Mike replied saying that my profiles were the issues and that when he used my profile to print in photoshop he had the same issue. When I print from photoshop my images are perfect. At this stage I believe that something in Qimage has potentially corrupted and is now not reading my profiles properly.
If that is the case it would be good to discuss it at the Qimage forum so we leave no stone unturned to solve this.
met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst
Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
-
I still don't believe that my profile is the issue. I have generated a new one. Would someone be kind enough to test my profile and a small crop of the trouble issue? I could email you the profile and the image.
-
I still don't believe that my profile is the issue. I have generated a new one. Would someone be kind enough to test my profile and a small crop of the trouble issue? I could email you the profile and the image.
If you can send it to my Dropbox (https://dropbox.yousendit.com/Send-file-to-jc1-DropBox) or pm me a download link.
Thanks
jc1
-
I still don't believe that my profile is the issue. I have generated a new one. Would someone be kind enough to test my profile and a small crop of the trouble issue? I could email you the profile and the image.
Your files were received.
Check if this profile helps < download (https://www.yousendit.com/download/bHlBek9xU1A1bmhMWEE9PQ) >
I can only verify it with CS (windows) and with the help of some test patches. I have no idea on the actual color reproduction with this profile. < click to view (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-AhVJsc5QbQI/TnBx-X7wxxI/AAAAAAAAANs/axdS_9fZoJk/s1600/000+testing+a+canvas+profile.png)>
where
1 and 4: your profile, RelCol and Perceptual
2 and 5: original
3 and 6: jc1's profile, RelCol and Perceptual
Regards,
jc1
-
See your profile looks way better in the gradients but the colours seem a bit dark.
-
See your profile looks way better in the gradients but the colours seem a bit dark.
A bit dark, are you comparing it with the actual printout?
There are strange behaviors with your printer profile.
a. The absolute gamut (AtoB) seems to be alright but not the rendered gamut (BtoA).
The rendered gamut volume cannot be calculated though it can be displayed on screen.
The rendered gamut of your printer (profile) appears much smaller than its absolute gamut, see (b) for reasoning.
Reference: absolute vs rendered gamut
http://www.colorwiki.com/wiki/Color_Management_Myths_26-28 (http://www.colorwiki.com/wiki/Color_Management_Myths_26-28)
b. The printer gamut was rather small compared with that for sRGB or the printer profile generated by jc1, when viewed with Gamutvison.
c. Change in hue after conversion, as demonstrated below.
The images were converted to the printer color space with Relative Colorimetric intent.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-q5ti_Ho4CVk/TnFJWOcKQLI/AAAAAAAAANw/2MKhVVwc6BU/s1600/0+before+and+after+conversion.png)
Latest and newer profilers may solve your problem, just a suggestion.
jc1
-
Please forgive my lack of experience in this situation. Is the magenta where I am losing integrity? The profile I sent was the most recent one. What are you using to make your profiles? I am considering purchasing this kit from i1 http://xritephoto.com/ph_product_overview.aspx?ID=1464 although I'd like to know for sure that my profiles are the issue not any of the software handling them. Also, with that kit, I don't need the monitor calibrating software as I have a NEC spectraview setup. Are there any alternatives that would do as good of a job for potentially less money?
-
Please forgive my lack of experience in this situation. Is the magenta where I am losing integrity? The profile I sent was the most recent one. What are you using to make your profiles? I am considering purchasing this kit from i1 http://xritephoto.com/ph_product_overview.aspx?ID=1464 although I'd like to know for sure that my profiles are the issue not any of the software handling them. Also, with that kit, I don't need the monitor calibrating software as I have a NEC spectraview setup. Are there any alternatives that would do as good of a job for potentially less money?
Depending on how much time you want to spend learning the system, ArgyllCMS (http://www.argyllcms.com/index.html) is free software and delivers exceptional results. You would need at a minimum a ColorMunki though an i1 Pro would be preferable since it's easier to read patches with.
-
I have a patch reader already but I'm starting to think that the reader/my software from spyder is garbage. I am in the process of trying to communicate with the lead developer at spyder but he appears to have ceased communication with me since I have sent him the profiles generated with his software.
-
Is the magenta where I am losing integrity?
The profile I sent was the most recent one. What are you using to make your profiles?
Refer to the earlier 2D gamut plot.
The test image (from you) was converted with RelCol (Relative Colorimetric, CS5) and its xyz co-ordinates were plotted in the xyY space.
a) Points in RED represent the original data.
b) Points in GREEN (mostly convered up by RED) represent the data after converting with jc1 profile (see below, Profile4)
c) Points in MAGENTA were data after converting with your profile (see below, Profile1). They were shifted slightly towards the red primary, compared with the original data points. IMHO, the shift towards the Red primary is small and might be insignificant. I compared it with profiles built by other profilers, generally they are very similar (Gamut boundary, neutrality and so on).
The profile that I created earlier was derived from the AtoB tag of the your profile, and that was before the measurement data was received. The measured data file was non-standard and I edited and recreated it for further use. The RGB reference was derived from the supplied target tiff image.
More Tests
Profile1: custom profile by nick
Profile2: profile generated with PM5, with measured data supplied by nick
Profile3: profile generated with another profiler, with measured data supplied by nick
Profile4. profile generated with the profiler used to creat Profile3, with measured data derived from AtoB of Profiler1.
Test patches: 4096, RGB with 17-pitch, similar to this (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-fK0LFcI4Qyc/TkigHEo682I/AAAAAAAAAK0/nWMNKh-Ld1Q/s1600/06a++4096+test+patches.png)
Comparison of the 4 profiles
ΔE2000
Avg 90% 95% Max error
Profile1 0 0 0 0 (reference)
Profile2 1.02 1.67 1.93 3.98
Profile3 0.68 1.04 1.14 2.07
Profile4 0.08 0.18 0.23 0.86
Comments
1. No flaw was detected on Profile1 with the test sample, though its (absolute) gamut with Relcol exhibits abnormal behavior.
Note: gamut observed with Perceptual intent is normal for profile1.
2. Only profile1 exhibits the boundary effect with the test image.
Profiles are available upon request.
jc
-
Might be relevant:
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2011/09/kinda-interesting.html
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2011/09/when-good-profiles-turn-bad.html
-
Might be relevant:
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2011/09/kinda-interesting.html
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2011/09/when-good-profiles-turn-bad.html
Thanks for the links.
Clarification:
My previous test is very general and may not reflect the color rendering capability of the profiles.
Need to perform color space conversion test.
Any suggestion?
Regards,
jc
-
Might be relevant:
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2011/09/kinda-interesting.html
http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2011/09/when-good-profiles-turn-bad.html
Which is also discussed at the LL CM forum:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=57588.20
Remains the question in Ctein's case why the original smaller image/file did get the right colors with Photoshop's CM on + the normal profile instead of using the printer's CM. The difference between the two files must have been in the image editing for the larger size, a step that was sketched as a routine procedure. Interesting to see that Mike Chaney came to the rescue, there was another issue last week with Jpeg export changes in the Photoshop 12-04 upgrade that he analysed and at least solved for Qimage Ultimate users. As written before it would have been nice if this thread had been transferred to the Qimage forum too.
met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst
Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
-
Gamutvision Hue Contour Test
The result is presented graphically as follow.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Vn6z_YD9hVE/TnMEABKh49I/AAAAAAAAAB8/uI0-eaDYh0Y/s1600/0+defective+profile.png)
where
Profile1: custom profile by nick
Profile2: profile generated with PM5, with measured data supplied by nick
Profile3: profile generated with another profiler, with measured data supplied by nick
Profile4. profile generated with the profiler used to create Profile3, with measured data
derived from AtoB of Profiler1.
Imperfect Profile
From the above result and my other observations (not shown), I have good reasons to suggest that Profile1 is an imperfect profile.
jc
-
Color Reproduction with Profile1
The original test image was cropped and sampled digitally, total of 60x80 test patches.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-dx28X1Cetc0/TnNNs6TxedI/AAAAAAAAACA/Iz69Gs3OD3g/s1600/01a+digital+sample+source.png)
The digital sample (source image, in sRGB color space ) was read into CS, converted to printer space with Profile4 and Profile1 respectively. The converted images were displayed in Lab space as shown below.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-14uFZTCYApE/TnNNz8QACtI/AAAAAAAAACE/PaHVa__tdLw/s1600/01b+digital+sample+converted.png)
Observations:
The top grapher plot (Green color points) shows the converted color points with Profile4, similar result with Profile3 can be obtained.
The bottom grapher plot (Magenta color points) shows the converted color points with Profile1 and with Perceptual Intent, similar result could be obtained if conversion was carried out with RelCol.
With Profile1, the conversion from sRGB to printer color space is "over saturated", as the converted color points were expanded to the printer gamut boundary. By right, the in-gamut color with RelCol by definition, should stay put or should have little effect due to the conversion.
The "over-saturated" color coupled with the imperfect hue gradient near the gamut boundary, give rise to the color reproduction issue.
jc
-
Based on this it appears that it is indeed the profile making software that I'm using. I have printed the image before with perfect colour/gradient although that is now appearing to be a fluke. Most of my images don't have blues like that in them so I can see why it would take so long for this issue to show up. I'm anxiously awaiting a response from David Miller at Datacolor.
-
David's response just came in, it is below in blue. Have any of you had any issues using photo black for printing on epson premium matte canvas before? The friend I bought the printer off of never had issues with it and from what I've read online, it shouldn't be an issue.
Again: sorry about the delay. There are possibly two different things going on here.
First, there's the target print itself on canvas, which has an unusually light black. You're getting L in the 26 range, which means there just isn't as much density in the shadows as there would normally be. For comparison (I have an Epson 7900 and I haven't done any work on canvas, myself, but I have other measurement files from customers that have used canvas in the past) As with fine art matte papers, canvas typically has measured L values for black in the upper teens, not the mid-to-upper 20's. (Two different canvas measurement files that I have for Epson printers; and one of this is an Epson 4000 with the much older Epson inkset; has L = 17 for the black patch) The result is a much more limited gamut; the difference in gamut volume going from an L in the high teens to L around 26 is typically a 30% decrease in overall gamut volume, which is not a great thing.
To improve this: there's nothing you can do about the canvas itself, and you're using Epson inks, so you can't do better than that. The only question is: are you -sure- that you're using a media settings that's going to give you matte black ink? (The measurement file is noted with "Radiant Paper White" as the media setting, which would give you the correct black ink). IF you were using a media setting for a glossy/luster paper by mistake, it would explain the weak black and shadows. (Typically this is what happens when people try to avoid switching between photo and matte black in older Epsons, like the 4800/80 and probably also the 9800/80, and they end up printing with photo black ink on matte papers - which will always lead to poor results/weak blacks, no matter what Epson would have them believe) If you -are- using matte black ink, then there may be other media settings that will give you darker blacks, more density, and the gamut would improve.
So with all that said, I did some testing with your sample of the image in Photoshop, to see if I'd see the same banding in the softproof that you're getting in the physical print. If I leave black ink simulation turned off: no, I'm not seeing it. If I turn it on, then interestingly enough, I'm seeing stratification in those areas that's similar to what you're getting in the prints, although still not quite as bad. So that still tends to point to the limited gamut you're getting in your target print as potentially being the cause for this.
The second possibility (by itself, or in combination with the above) is the number of patches. You're using the 225 patch target, and if the response of the printer on canvas isn't sufficiently modeled by that, (if it behaves unpredictably enough "between" the samples provided by those patches) then the profile won't give you accurate results for the colors that fall "between the cracks" and the softproof also won't be as indicative of what would be going on when you actually print through the profile. In general, I'd probably have recommended using more patches when profiling canvas, in any case. So I think the other thing you should do is print and measure the 729 patch target (use the single page target, and print it large enough so that you'll get decent sized patches to measure) and start using that instead of the 225.
So for the next round of tests, my recommendation: (and then we'll see what happens):
- Make sure you're using matte black (if for whatever you're using photo black, switch to matte black)
- You "should", I hope, be able to make a target print where the black measurement has a lower L value, hopefully, much lower. I'd be looking to see 20 or less.
- Print and measure the 729 patch target; attach a new measurement file to the ticket; and also do a test print.
One other thing (I'm sure you've got Photoshop set correctly for printing, but just in case):
- What's your Photoshop RGB Working Space set to?
- In the Photoshop Print dialog, you're using Document (not Proof) when printing, correct?
-
I recently used up my PCM and am currrently using Ex Canvas Matte...
Nick,
I do have the PCM spec sheet and this is what it says...
"Matte Black Or Photo Black may be used on this canvas.Matte Black will yield a higher D-Max but will easily scuff. Use Matte Black only if you are going to using a protective spray on the canvas. Use Photo Black if you are going to put the print behind glass without the use of a protective spay"
Ambiguous instructions I'd say ;-)
I never had a problem with Photo Black.
David
All said and done I think Mike at Qimage was right though, and deserves a follow up on your post in the Qimage forum ;-)
David
-
Fear not David, I'll be creating a summary post as soon as this is completely fixed and publishing it online and in the forums. I feel that if I have had this issue than there are other folks out there experiencing the same thing with equal frustration.