Z3200 Color Management, Maximum Gamut, Postscript

[Brad P]

I am trying to squeeze the best image quality out of my HP Z3200ps workflow.  Answers aren't becoming clear.  Any pointers are appreciated.

1.  The Z3200ps's best menu-driven gamut range appears to be Adobe RGB.  The printer itself seems capable of a higher undefined gamut.  Is there any way to achieve that higher gamut?

2. If so, is there a way to generate and use an ICC profile or otherwise make adjustments to an NEC monitor?   I use ProPhoto RGB as a color workspace in my software, but want to see what I get when editing.

3. I appear to be achieving slightly better results printing using postscript and the Z3200's internal colorimeter rather than printing straight through PDF.  Is that your experience?

Thanks!

[Jager]

Not sure what you mean by "menu-driven" and "undefined" gamut.  Whatever gamut your printer is natively capable of, relative to your paper choice, can be rendered.  Assuming proper color management throughout your workflow.

Yes, it is standard practice to generate an ICC profile for your monitor (and to refresh it periodically). 

If your NEC monitor is a Spectraview model, you're golden.  You're already seeing as much as you're going to.  If it's one of the other NEC models, you're seeing a constrained gamut.

The vast majority of monitors display no more than sRGB.  Many don't even achieve that.  The NEC Spectraview series and the Eizo CG series display most of aRGB.  There are no monitors that display all of ProPhoto RGB. 

PDF is a format designed for rendering documents.  I've never heard of anyone using it for serious photo imaging and I can't imagine anyone getting great results doing so.

Perhaps you can describe your current workflow in more detail?

[Nora_nor]

If you print from Lightoom, you have a larger colour space than Adobe RGB. (depending on your image file...)  Anyway, Adobe Lightroom works in something like nut not exactly ProPhoto RGB.

From Lightroom you choose the icc profile of the paper and printer, and there is a little bit more in the print dialogue

etc

This is one example of a colour managed workflow

[digitaldog]

If you print from Lightoom, you have a larger colour space than Adobe RGB. (depending on your image file...)  Anyway, Adobe Lightroom works in something like nut not exactly ProPhoto RGB.

True but I think the main question is, does the driver then funnel the data to Adobe RGB (1998)? I have no idea. It sounds plausible based on the OP's description. For example, under Windows, using Printer Manages Color, even with ProPhoto RGB data will be converted to sRGB. So I suppose that's possible in this case but just don't know anything about this printer's drivers.

[Brad P]

Not sure what you mean by "menu-driven" and "undefined" gamut.  Whatever gamut your printer is natively capable of, relative to your paper choice, can be rendered.  Assuming proper color management throughout your workflow.

Yes, it is standard practice to generate an ICC profile for your monitor (and to refresh it periodically). 

If your NEC monitor is a Spectraview model, you're golden.  You're already seeing as much as you're going to.  If it's one of the other NEC models, you're seeing a constrained gamut.

The vast majority of monitors display no more than sRGB.  Many don't even achieve that.  The NEC Spectraview series and the Eizo CG series display most of aRGB.  There are no monitors that display all of ProPhoto RGB. 

PDF is a format designed for rendering documents.  I've never heard of anyone using it for serious photo imaging and I can't imagine anyone getting great results doing so.

Perhaps you can describe your current workflow in more detail?

In HP's print driver and documentation, one is given the choice of using different color spaces, the largest of which appears to be Adobe RGB. But there is also a selection for "native RGB". I am assuming that could  be capable of generating a picture with a larger gamut if the file itself has a larger gamut, but also that it will not be as large as prophoto RGB.  If I could figure out what that color gamut is, I could probably assign a slightly larger gamut to my NEC Spectraview monitor.

In Photoshop's and Lightroom's print menu, on the bottom left of the print settings menu, one is given the choice of outputting to postscript.  If I output to postscript and print that file, the image printed appears to have colors slightly closer to what I see on the screen.  I haven't done a lot of testing and am unsure, but it makes me wonder if converting the file to postscript before printing (with this postscript capable printer) I might have superior results in a normal printing workflow.  That was the sales spiel I was given three years ago when I bought the printer for about a grand more than the nonpostscript version.  But Lightroom and Photoshop may have come along since then and it may not make much difference now.

Regarding PDF, my goof.  The default choice in that dialog box is PDF, and I just assumed that stood for something that was a default printing mechanism. I just clicked on the help button and see that it is actually used to output to portable document format, which of course would be the wrong thing to do and I don't do it.

[Brad P]

If you print from Lightoom, you have a larger colour space than Adobe RGB. (depending on your image file...)  Anyway, Adobe Lightroom works in something like nut not exactly ProPhoto RGB.

From Lightroom you choose the icc profile of the paper and printer, and there is a little bit more in the print dialogue

etc

This is one example of a colour managed workflow

I use ProPhoto RGB in my software in the background. I am trying to get the highest gamut my printer is capable of, and not be limited to Adobe RGB when printing but use the maximum the Z3200 is capable of.   The HP driver requires a selection of color spaces, including sRGB, ColorSync RGB, Adobe RGB, and native RGB.   I assume that native RGB may allow a larger color gamut to be printed than Adobe RGB.   It is unclear in the software or HPs documentation. I don't know if Photoshop or lightroom will output a larger color space automatically in the background or if the output is more limited. 

My NEC monitor has a slightly larger gamut than Adobe RGB. If I can print in a color space larger than Adobe RGB, then I would like to stetch out the NEC monitor as far as I can to match as much of the printable colors as I can. 

[Geraldo Garcia]

True but I think the main question is, does the driver then funnel the data to Adobe RGB (1998)? I have no idea. It sounds plausible based on the OP's description. For example, under Windows, using Printer Manages Color, even with ProPhoto RGB data will be converted to sRGB. So I suppose that's possible in this case but just don't know anything about this printer's drivers.

HP "PS" printers accept that you send the file directly to the printer accessing its internal printer server through web interface. That way you can print JPEG, TIFF or PDF files without the use of any software.
The printer internal setup refers to the color space that is expected for this files. It is not relevant when you print from a software (Photoshop, Lightroom, Qimage...) using "software manages color" and the proper profiles.

[Brad P]

Thanks for all thoughts so far.  The aim of my questions is how to achieve the maximum color space for the Z3200ps, decompose that, and stretch out the color space of an NEC top end monitor to cover the printer's color space as much as possible. There are different ways to send files to the printer for sure, and  I know I can at least get both the printer and monitor to cover Adobe RGB right now. But how can I go further and align the printer and monitor view is much as possible, if that is possible?

[Jager]

Postscript is a programming language intended for graphics-intensive things like desktop publishing.  You can think of it as a form of print driver.  It's not normally used as part of photography/inkjet workflow. 

AFAIK, the Lightroom/Photoshop print options for PDF/Postscript create a separate document rendered in those respective formats.  Are you saying that you go through the LR/PS print dialog, create a .ps document, then send that to the printer?  And that your resulting print is better than if you sent it through a conventional LR (or PS)/printer workflow?  I would find that very curious.

It sounds like your monitor is not profiled correctly.  I'd start there.

As a general rule, work in the largest gamut you have available.  Stay in ProPhoto RGB as long as you can.  Most high-end imaging devices render to that by default.  And LR uses that in the background in most of its modules, so just run with that.

I would forget about 'native RGB' or any similar obscure gamut. 

Be mindful that your monitor - and you have a very good one - is showing you almost the entirety of aRGB (actually, a very tiny bit less, but not enough to be important).  There's nothing you can do to see more.  That's a hardware limitation, not anything related to its profile. 

Here's the important thing:  Your hope/assumption that 'native RGB' would allow a larger color gamut to be printed than aRGB is almost certainly not true.  Your print driver is undoubtedly providing the most accurate colors of which it is capable, depending of course on how those colors are edited and interpreted upstream.  Modern photo inkjet printers are sometimes capable of exceeding aRGB in a few colors, but as a general rule - considering all colors, tones, and luminosities - the gamuts they can render is significantly less than aRGB.

That's where soft-proofing comes in.  A good soft proof will render an on-screen interpretation of what your print is going to look like.  It will reduce the gamut of your working/editing space into the gamut your printer can produce.  No, you won't like it.  But at least you'll see what is being squeezed where.

Here's the second important thing:  If your soft proof differs markedly from what your printer gives you, something's amiss in your color management.

[Brad P]

Postscript is a programming language intended for graphics-intensive things like desktop publishing.  You can think of it as a form of print driver.  It's not normally used as part of photography/inkjet workflow. 

AFAIK, the Lightroom/Photoshop print options for PDF/Postscript create a separate document rendered in those respective formats.  Are you saying that you go through the LR/PS print dialog, create a .ps document, then send that to the printer?  And that your resulting print is better than if you sent it through a conventional LR (or PS)/printer workflow?  I would find that very curious.

My two Postscript test images had lighter purples and blues in the sky which were closer to those I observed on the screen. Unsure why. It could just be some algorithm in the conversion for all I know, or it could be a superior or inferior workflow.

The spectrocolorimeter that HP has built into the Z3200 is a bit of a black box in terms of how it operates exactly when photoshop or printers manage colors, not only to me but others I've read who own it.  When printing postscript files, the printer is picking up color management from Photoshop at that point.  All I know is I may foolishly have succumbed to a sales pitch for the extra postscript feature. I suspect it actually might be an inferior workflow if it involves yet another conversion of image data away from a raw file or prevents a proper soft proofing workflow (though a .ps file is visible and printable in Photoshop).

It sounds like your monitor is not profiled correctly.  I'd start there.

As a general rule, work in the largest gamut you have available.  Stay in ProPhoto RGB as long as you can.  Most high-end imaging devices render to that by default.  And LR uses that in the background in most of its modules, so just run with that.

I'm not having problems with normal monitor calibration, soft proofing, and I work in prophoto RGB. I'm trying to see if I can tweak my equipment to obtain abnormally better soft proofing and printed gamut range.

I would forget about 'native RGB' or any similar obscure gamut. 

Why dismiss it?

Be mindful that your monitor - and you have a very good one - is showing you almost the entirety of aRGB (actually, a very tiny bit less, but not enough to be important).  There's nothing you can do to see more.  That's a hardware limitation, not anything related to its profile. 

Actually the monitor exceeds Adobe RGB in some areas and falls short of it in others.  It can cover something like 98% of the color space and exceeds it in about 2-3%.  So we're really not touch talking about much different, but at the same time not a non-trivial amount   

Here's the important thing:  Your hope/assumption that 'native RGB' would allow a larger color gamut to be printed than aRGB is almost certainly not true.  Your print driver is undoubtedly providing the most accurate colors of which it is capable, depending of course on how those colors are edited and interpreted upstream.  Modern photo inkjet printers are sometimes capable of exceeding aRGB in a few colors, but as a general rule - considering all colors, tones, and luminosities - the gamuts they can render is significantly less than aRGB.

A fair point about the printer not being able to obtain the full range of Adobe RGB.  But even the HP Z2300 exceeds Adobe RGB in some color ranges.  It isn't as good as the Canon and Epson models though.     So if practicable, it would be nice to be able to identify those areas where the printer exceeds Adobe RGB and find any commonalities where the monitor does too and be able to view those color ranges when editing.  It would also be nice to use one of the five color spaces the monitor allows me to set up to soft proof any areas the printer would clip or compress colors in a type of absolute rendering. 

[Ernst Dinkla]

The spectrocolorimeter that HP has built into the Z3200 is a bit of a black box in terms of how it operates exactly when photoshop or printers manage colors, not only to me but others I've read who own it.  When printing postscript files, the printer is picking up color management from Photoshop at that point.  All I know is I may foolishly have succumbed to a sales pitch for the extra postscript feature. I suspect it actually might be an inferior workflow if it involves yet another conversion of image data away from a raw file or prevents a proper soft proofing workflow (though a .ps file is visible and printable in Photoshop).

Brad, the spectrometer (not a colorimeter) in the HP Z3200-PS has no influence on your color management when making prints. It can calibrate a printer/media combination and it can create profiles for a printer/media combination. After those tasks is does nothing when you start making prints. Of course the printer is then calibrated and you are supposed to use an OEM or (Z3200) created custom profile for the paper choice. The color management choice in the driver set at application controlled then and Lightroom etc will manage your color. From any decent image editing program; Qimage Ultimate, Photoshop, Lightroom, the PS3 and PCL3 drivers can be used on an Z3200-PS printer. The drivers will work with Tiffs, JPEGs or direct printing from RAW files then. Do not use Printer Driver color management, it restricts the image file assigned color spaces to AdobeRGB and sRGB in the PCL3 driver and some more choices in the PS3 driver but the total has more limitations than by using application color management. So with Lightroom color management on + an image file with assigned Prophoto color space the last can be rendered directly to your printer/media gamut as described in the ICC printer profile.

PDFs and other Postscript described files and also Tiffs etc can go through the "RIP" driver feature in the HP Printer Utility software but there is no need to do that for normal photo image files. It can however be used for CMYK described image and DTP files that may not go through an image editor like Qimage Ultimate or Lightroom.

The Z3200-PS offers more than Postscript interpretation, Pantone spot color and CMYK color handling in printing. You got the Advanced Profile creation Software included + the monitor puck. Not that the last is that good but I like APS more than the default Color Center profile creation software, especially when creating profiles for other printers. The print length of the Z3200-PS is way bigger than the non-PS model had as the HPGL driver feature is also included in the installed software. On the Z3200-PS HP Print Utility there are more features included like an interactive log file and accounting data files.

The PCL3 driver is often described as raster driver or similar. It is the driver I mainly use as I do not often work with either CMYK or Postscript based files.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

[Brad P]

Vielen Danke, Ernst.

You helped me remember the complete sales pitch when I bought the printer. And for all that extra functionality, I understand why I bought it three years ago.

I wonder, however, whether HP's puck is calibrated to be as accurate on the full color range of the NEC monitor as is the NEC rebranded/tweaked X-Rite puck I picked up when purchasing the monitor at a later time.  I have read that NEC fine-tuned their puck to better pick up the larger color range of their monitor.  If that is true, I think I would rather not use APS because the software requires using HP's puck and my only output printer is the Z3200ps.   

To be clear on what I currently do,  I color correct my NEC monitor using their puck and software.   I select a 2.2 gamma, and a D55 white point (yes I know most of the arguments for D65 and D50), 200:1 contrast ratio to reflect what comes out in print on the monitor, and a 120 luminance value with black point set to minimum and background light adjusted (my computer is in a room with windows and a large change in lighting conditions, and I haven't yet wanted to get a hood).  I edit RAW in Lightroom, then Photoshop in 16 bit TIFF ProPhoto RGB files (exporting to a host of plug-ins depending on what I am working on).  I usually print from Lightroom, soft proofing with the specific paper profile found in the HP folder (which I have assumed is or will be modified when printed with the results obtained from the Z3200ps's spectrometer - could be wrong here), and print with software managed color (not printer managed) using that same paper profile.  To create paper profiles, I download manufacturers specs, upload them with HP's software, and run the spectrometer. 

Any further thoughts/corrections are most welcome!  I had hoped someone with your experience would chime in, as well as on questions 1 and 2, which I am beginning to believe may not have a workable solution as a practical matter. For question 3, it appears from the above and some further reading that postscript doesn't add anything for pure photographic editing - maybe for graphic artists working in other programs.

Brad

[Ernst Dinkla]

I wonder, however, whether HP's puck is calibrated to be as accurate on the full color range of the NEC monitor as is the NEC rebranded/tweaked X-Rite puck I picked up when purchasing the monitor at a later time.  I have read that NEC fine-tuned their puck to better pick up the larger color range of their monitor.  If that is true, I think I would rather not use APS because the software requires using HP's puck and my only output printer is the Z3200ps.   

Brad

I am using the X-Rite latest i1Display Pro (let us say III version) with dispcalGui as the software. Better than the HP (rebranded X-Rite i1Display II) puck that is anyway still plugged in to keep APS working and I ignore the warnings to use that puck for monitor calibration, no problem at all. Which settings to use for your monitor is more an endless discussion, Andrew Rodney (digitaldog) has a nice page on his website to get the knowledge on monitor calibration.  http://www.digitaldog.net/tips/

No the spectrometer doesn't do anything while you do normal printing. First you load the paper on the Z3200 and set the paper choice on the printer panel, then you select that paper choice as well in the PCL3 driver. The paper gets the right media preset presented in the driver by those choices. Then you make sure that the driver does not do CM and the CM task is given to the software you print from, so "Application does CM" on in the driver and you select the right printer profile + rendering in Lightroom. That printer profile can be one from HP for its own media, from a paper supplier for their media or a custom printer profile you created in advance with the Z3200 spectrometer. In case of supplied profiles they usually come in the .OMS compressed file format that you can install with HP Print Utility Color Center. It has two parts aboard, the media preset + the ICC printer profile. In that case if you want to use that profile you only have to calibrate the printer/paper with the Z3200 spectrometer as a final step to fine tune the combination, laying a standardised base for the media preset + printer profile, this has to be done from time to time to keep that base correct. But that task also happens in advance of actual printing of image files. The spectrometer is not involved in CM when you do your normal printing jobs. The calibration data stored, the printer profile description in your application and the rendering choice will control your color in normal printing of files, the spectrometer itself has done its job long before that moment.

On 1 + 2, the printer+media preset+paper has its own gamut, more or less hardware dependent, that gamut is described in the printer profile. The color spaces mentioned in the driver when driver color management is selected indicate which color space should be assigned to the image files you load to the driver if you want driver color management to work correctly. So for the PCL3 driver one should load either sRGB or AdobeRGB assigned images then. This has nothing to do with the gamut the printer is capable off, the more when not driver CM is used but application CM instead. I have never heard customers' complaints about the Z3200's gamut from either photographers or designers.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

[Brad P]

Tausend Dank Ernest.   You have steered me in a more useful practical direction.  Unfortunately I seem to have lost my HP puck in a recent move, so I may need to order another one to get this to work.  I haven't really considered dispcalGui before, but looking into it today it does look superior.  I will try it out. 

One remaining question though.  I have been profiling my papers by using the HP Utility program's "Import Paper Preset" and "Paper Preset Management" menu items (the latter for refer refreshing spectrometer scans).   I print from Lightroom by selecting at the bottom of the Print menus the paper profile located in the Library/ColorSync directory (I am on a Mac) and do not choose printer managed colors.  The Print Settings dialogue box, when clicked on the bottom left of Lightroom's print menus) reflects that the software is managing colors in the Color Options menu.   I have been assuming this workflow takes advantage of the spectrometer profiles and is just another way to achieve that printing in LR.  I don't need raster capabilities since I print on a smaller scale.  If all that is working correctly, then I may not need to find/repurchase my lost HP puck.  Does that make sense or am I mistaken about something?

[Ernst Dinkla]

Tausend Dank Ernest.   You have steered me in a more useful practical direction.  Unfortunately I seem to have lost my HP puck in a recent move, so I may need to order another one to get this to work.  I haven't really considered dispcalGui before, but looking into it today it does look superior.  I will try it out. 

One remaining question though.  I have been profiling my papers by using the HP Utility program's "Import Paper Preset" and "Paper Preset Management" menu items (the latter for refer refreshing spectrometer scans).   I print from Lightroom by selecting at the bottom of the Print menus the paper profile located in the Library/ColorSync directory (I am on a Mac) and do not choose printer managed colors.  The Print Settings dialogue box, when clicked on the bottom left of Lightroom's print menus) reflects that the software is managing colors in the Color Options menu.   I have been assuming this workflow takes advantage of the spectrometer profiles and is just another way to achieve that printing in LR.  I don't need raster capabilities since I print on a smaller scale.  If all that is working correctly, then I may not need to find/repurchase my lost HP puck.  Does that make sense or am I mistaken about something?

Though I have Lightroom available here I never used it for printing. I am a Windows man and use Qimage Ultimate to print from. Others have to guide you in Mac and Lightroom. Most likely on the Mac Lightroom has a shortcut from its settings to the HP driver so when you set Lightroom CM ON then the CM function of the driver is switched off right away. For me there are two steps.

If you do not make printer profiles you do not need APS either. The spectrometer can still do a job in calibrating the printer. Installing OEM or paper manufacturers profiles with HP's Utility can not be called "profiling" in my opinion, that term is reserved to the creation of a printer profile by means of a spectrometer and profile creation software. That part is done for you by the HP and paper manufacturers' color experts. You just set the color management steps in action. I do the same for some paper qualities but use mainly custom printer profiles made with the Z3200 spectrometer and APS. The media presets part of the .OMS files downloaded from various sources are used though.

With your NEC and OEM compatible software + to the monitor colorants adapted puck I think dispcalGui is not needed. I expect the NEC software to deal directly with the monitor calibration and subsequent profiling steps. DispcalGui has the tools for that too but has a steeper learning curve and in the end the gain may not be much.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

[Geraldo Garcia]

If you do not make printer profiles you do not need APS either. The spectrometer can still do a job in calibrating the printer. Installing OEM or paper manufacturers profiles with HP's Utility can not be called "profiling" in my opinion, that term is reserved to the creation of a printer profile by means of a spectrometer and profile creation software. That part is done for you by the HP and paper manufacturers' color experts. You just set the color management steps in action. I do the same for some paper qualities but use mainly custom printer profiles made with the Z3200 spectrometer and APS. The media presets part of the .OMS files downloaded from various sources are used though.

Ernst,

You can actually create a very good profile without the APS (although with fewer patches and options) through the HP printer utility.
After changing computers and having trouble with HP for them to allow me to reinstall and activate APS on the new computer, I gave the HP Utility profiling a try and found it to make excellent profiles. A friend told me that APS made a huge difference on his Z3100 but he found it was not better than the HP Utility profiles on the Z3200.

[Ernst Dinkla]

Ernst,

You can actually create a very good profile without the APS (although with fewer patches and options) through the HP printer utility.
After changing computers and having trouble with HP for them to allow me to reinstall and activate APS on the new computer, I gave the HP Utility profiling a try and found it to make excellent profiles. A friend told me that APS made a huge difference on his Z3100 but he found it was not better than the HP Utility profiles on the Z3200.

Geraldo,

I share that observation. The HP Color Center profile creation improved a lot between the Z3100 and Z3200 versions and is in my tests equal to the Z3200 APS profile quality now. The APS however had less issues with network connections than CC has and (as written already) it is easier to make profiles for non HP printers with it.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

[Mark Lindquist]

Geraldo and Ernst,
I concur - the HP Color Center profiles made in the Z3200ps are better than the Z3100, but I've never used the puck.  Have been very satisfied with the profiles generated by the color center via HP Z3200ps.  I've also heard the same thing Geraldo, from a few friends.

It would be nice to be able to make profiles for other printers though...