Epson SureColor P800

[Mark D Segal]

I am working on a set of tools to quantitatively characterize "printer manages color."  Ideally, printer reviews would explore this untouched but significant area. Expect a specific thread on this topic in the future.

I'll enjoy seeing that, but I also think it's adequate to compare the properties of well-known printer test pages to get a good appreciation of what's going on between these different approaches. Sometimes a few prints of some of the Romans 16 set also helps zero-in on more subtle distinctions.

[Doug Gray]

You are much more kind than I am 
Odd yes. Mostly wrong too.

Don Quixote in the Color Management World? It's akin to the challenge Hercules had cleaning the Aegean stables, but without Herc's available solution.

[digitaldog]

Don Quixote in the Color Management World? It's akin to the challenge Hercules had cleaning the Aegean stables, but without Herc's available solution.

As I said, I'm more concerned with those reading (and accepting?) what Bob wrote that these others may believe is justified and correct. I've shown visually one of his ideas about color management (soft proofing with differing RIs) is simply ridiculous, outlined the oddity of his ideas about rendering intents, questioned his analysis of code, (the truth he believes about algorithms). Until he backs up any of the above with facts, my job is done. 

[BobDavid]

As I said, I'm more concerned with those reading (and accepting?) what Bob wrote that these others may believe is justified and correct. I've shown visually one of his ideas about color management (soft proofing with differing RIs) is simply ridiculous, outlined the oddity of his ideas about rendering intents, questioned his analysis of code, (the truth he believes about algorithms). Until he backs up any of the above with facts, my job is done. 

In my initial post, I was remiss about not specifying a particular paper. Since I now use one flavor of Epson media, the SureColor printer will manage output. ... Certainly, there are limitations. If it's necessary to source out a file to be printed on different media on another printer, then it's critical to use an appropriate ICC profile and soft proof.

Mea Culpa for jumping the gun and not being more specific in my initial post. However as the thread progressed, I disclosed workflow--sharing every aspect of the pipeline from soup to nuts (camera to final output).

I came across this a few weeks ago. It touches upon some of the issues that have been bandied about here. Advanced Graphic Communications

Another point: When the printer takes control of output, rendering intent is handled by the printer. I tested relative, absolute, and perceptual in the Adobe dialog box. The output stayed the same.

To Mark Segal's point, I agree. It is important to have a free and open exchange of ideas without letting personalities and ego muddy the waters. ... If I've offended people, that isn't and wasn't my intention.

There have been some cocky and condescending comments hurled about here. And tempers have flared.

[digitaldog]

Another point: When the printer takes control of output, rendering intent is handled by the printer.

So what I provided from Adobe Photoshop is a bug?

And tempers have flared.

It can be upsetting for some I suppose, to be asked to prove one's point and not being able to do so.

[BobDavid]

Thanks. Well done Digital Dog.

I've always wondered about your logo: A dog, similar to RCA Victor's Nipper, with his face glued to a CRT display.

Supposing the scan rate of the CRT is less than 70-80 Hertz, a dog will see flicker. Dogs have significantly fewer cones than humans. They perceive muted blues and yellows. Dogs are farsighted. The longer the snout, the more farsighted they are.

Was Nipper in the RCA Victor logo partially or completely deaf?   
 

[digitaldog]

Are you saying he's wrong ?
A simple yes or no ...

Who are you asking about what?
If you're asking me, the answer is here:
http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=120632.msg1000473#msg1000473
It isn't a yes or no answer in total. It's a yes in a few specific areas.

[Farmer]

But I wouldn't go as far as to say "100% OK". May or may not be.

I did qualify my statement: "if you know what you're doing and you like the results".

This is where judgment enters the picture. In terms of colour accuracy, high quality custom profiles in an ICC-managed workflow are hard to beat, but the last degree of that accuracy may not be visible to the average viewer. One must also be aware of possible printer drift. As you know Phil, when these machines leave the factory they are calibrated to a common standard and they can be pretty stable, but not 100% over an indefinite time period. I would surmise that as the printers drift from the initial standard (depending on what ways), the comparative results of Printer Manages Color could vary.

Sure, but unless you're trying to hit FOGRA certs or similar, most people don't regularly relinearize their profiles.  I know some do, and they'll gain greater consistency.  To Bob's original point, if you're using the vendors media, then there are tools to relinearize the printers (the hardware is even built into some of them).

We (many of us) had the "printer manages" discussion just recently here on LuLa.  It's a viable option, but for all the reasons discussed on the other thread (and at various times over the years) it's not what I would recommend for most users.

[digitaldog]

Sure, but unless you're trying to hit FOGRA certs or similar, most people don't regularly relinearize their profiles. 

There's really little reason to do so other than have a proof of concept the printer hasn't drifted visibly. At least with the many Epson's I've trended over the years. dE differences over time and units is remarkably tiny at least on the pro and sub pro line.

[Farmer]

There's really little reason to do so other than have a proof of concept the printer hasn't drifted visibly. At least with the many Epson's I've trended over the years. dE differences over time and units is remarkably tiny at least on the pro and sub pro line.

Absolutely.  The proofers I know who are doing certs are getting a print by print confirmation of the printer being within tolerances.  They're extraordinarily picky, but relinearization often isn't required for long periods.

You're far more likely to get variances due to changes in temperature, humidity, substrate consistency, and so on, in my experience.

[digitaldog]

Thanks. Well done Digital Dog.
I've always wondered about your logo:

Cease wondering about that, work harder on color management concepts; that would be my suggestion.

[BobDavid]

Cease wondering about that, work harder on color management concepts; that would be my suggestion.

I think you are closed-minded, arrogant, and childish. I'd be happy to send you one a print of a file managed by the printer and then one managed by Adobe. I'll also send you the TIFF.  PM me your address. ... I've been reading the "Printing:" forum for years. I've never seen you post your work. Why not put something up in the "critique" section. I'd like to see what your images are all about. My website is bobrosinsky.com. My prints are gorgeous--they were as a professional, and they are now.

As noted again and again, SP800 > Epson Ultra Premium Luster Photo Paper > printer management. As a few people on this thread have attested, the narrow pipeline is fine, but inflexible. For now, whatever I print is for personl use.

Again, I am not sure what to make of your logo. It's stupid.

[digitaldog]

I think you are closed-minded, arrogant, and childish.

But in terms of understanding this topic and dismissing yours, I think I did an excellent job.
I don't need a print from you showing how Printer Manage Color can produce a lovely print; I've done it.
What I don't need is someone telling others rubbish like: there's no need to soft proof or pick a rendering intent because someone is using an Adobe RGB display.
Or that they have uncovered which algorithm from two companies is superior when it's clear you do not have said code.
Or that I should try an Absolute RI after being told no RI will be used when invoking PMC.
And then there's that text about signal to noise ratio that more than just I found nearly impossible to take seriously.

You are entitled to your own opinions. You're not entitled to made up comments about color management that were very easily and visibly dismissed in this post. Telling is that you've completely ignored said facts, differences in how the RI's produce a preview and so forth.

The narrower pipeline is fine. And so is someone shooting JPEGs on an iphone but I don't recommend the same for someone with a DSLR or better go out of their way for 'fine' when much better and more capable is available. For you, PMC is OK and probably camera JPEGs in sRGB. For those of us implementing a full color managed path, it's a hack.


As for the logo, don't let it confuse you any more; examine what rendering intents and soft proofing actually do to an image preview on any kind of display, you'll find the time spent is far more worthwhile for you.

[BobDavid]

'As for the logo, don't let it confuse you any more; examine what rendering intents and soft proofing actually do to an image preview on any kind of display, you'll find the time spent is far more worthwhile for you.'

I know that stuff, have and still utilize tight color management ala Rodney Dog (duh soft proofing, custom ICC profiles, high-end Eizo monitor, viewing booth, a work area that's neutral grey, and a stockpile of esoteric paper.

You are an angry fellow.

[digitaldog]

You're a chicken.

And I'm the one being childish?
More a dog. But OK you are again entitled to that opinion. 

[BobDavid]

And I'm the one being childish?
More a dog. But OK you are again entitled to that opinion. 

Thank you for granting me the privilege of being entitled to an opinion.

[BobDavid]

I did, and again, since you apparently didn't read what I wrote earlier: IT FAILED.
So again, the various and differing soft proof previews I see are a lie? And what you're seeing without soft proofing isn't?

I've spent some time on your website. I watched your tutorial on soft proofing. Okay, nothing new. ... I love dogs, apparently you do too. So I watched your Whippets at White Sands. I love the Ry Cooder soundtrack. Are you paying a licensing fee to use it? I surmise you are clueless when it comes to photographing dogs in a studio setting. And I see that you have a Ken Burns fetish: pan to the right, zoom in.

If you want to showcase the beauty and the character traits of dogs, why not let a still image tell the story? BobDavid's Silent Picture Show of Pet Dogs

[Carey Ridd]

Bob, Rodney is correct about what he is saying. I have read the forms here for many years but I really never comment. I understand Rodney can come across a bit harsh but he is very knowledgeable about colour management. I also can understand that your workflow works for you. Maybe in the future with different printers and different software may not work as expected. Discussion about this is good. It helps us grow and understand the technology that we have available to us. I appreciate this thread but please keep it civil. Both Rodney and you have interesting points of view to consider.

I understand the confrontation here, read some of Rodneys work and try out his techniques. If you come to a different conclusion then his or others bring it up to see if maybe there is a step missing in your testing or something he, or they might have missed.

[BobDavid]

Bob, Rodney is correct about what he is saying. I have read the forms here for many years but I really never comment. I understand Rodney can come across a bit harsh but he is very knowledgeable about colour management. I also can understand that your workflow works for you. Maybe in the future with different printers and different software may not work as expected. Discussion about this is good. It helps us grow and understand the technology that we have available to us. I appreciate this thread but please keep it civil. Both Rodney and you have interesting points of view to consider.

I understand the confrontation here, read some of Rodneys work and try out his techniques. If you come to a different conclusion then his or others bring it up to see if maybe there is a step missing in your testing or something he, or they might have missed.

Okay, agreed. No more rancor.

[Schewe]

Thank you for granting me the privilege of being entitled to an opinion.

Hum...to quote Daniel Patrick Moynihan, “You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts.”

I've read the entire thread and the facts are on Andrew's side. So far what you've provided are opinions–which is fine–as long as your opinions are not construed to be facts. So far, I've yet to see any proofs of your opinions...care to offer any?

So, Epson's print pipeline is better than Adobe's for the P800? Hum, not my experience...I will admit they are different but in my opinion (and my experience) you are wrong. Do you have any proof to offer that Epson's is better? Got any color charts you've measured and compared?

You claim for the P800 printer only (and not other printers) you personally don't see the benefit of soft proofing, and you use the Printer Manages Color option because, in your opinion it's better. Do you have any proof? Got any color charts you've measured and compared?

You say "I use an Eizo CS2420 ColorEdge monitor / NVIDIA K6000 combo", uh huh...and "the monitor is setup for aRGB" uh huh...set up for A RGB how? A RGB gamut? What about gamma? What about white point? What contrast ratio is the display set to? You say it matches your Solux bulbs, which bulbs? How have you measured that they match? What is your viewing environment?

What exactly does "The S/N ratio is higher than it is when PS manages the output." mean?

And personally, I wouldn't be exporting my raw images from C1 in A RGB...I'm pretty sure (opinion here since I don't have that camera) a Sony Alpha a7R II camera is capable of capturing a LOT more color gamut outside of A RGB so you are leaving color fidelity potential on the table by not using PP RGB–at least all my cameras can ONLY be contained by PP RGB.

So, I'm happy you are happy with your printer...I'm happy you are happy with your color management workflow.

However, I'm not happy with your opinions being presented as facts and the lessons you are espousing to other people reading this thread...that working in A RGB using Printer Managed Color and not bothering to soft proof is proper practice if your aim is the ultimate printed output of your images.

As for my creds? I have a few...maybe you've read my book: The Digital Print

(personally, I thought Andrew was doing an excellent job of maintaining a civil tone)