3 Epson printers -- 2 printing strangely. Help!

[Let Biogons be Biogons]

OK. I am about to tear my hair out. I can not figure out what is going on.

I have 3 Epson printers -- a 7600, a 4800, and an R1800. I am getting widely different output from each of them -- and I mean widely different -- there are NOT subtle or small differences.

I have been printing the same image across all 3 printers, using all the same/consistent settings in Photoshop CS2 and the Espon drivers (as relevant), using ICC profiles managed in Photoshop CS2, and no matter whose profile and paper I use, I get the following:

R1800 -- Image gets a heavy green saturation
4800 -- dark, muddy, amost solarized print
7600 -- nearly perfect.

The 4800 was power cleaned and all nozzles in a test appear to be working perfectly. I've tried to let the Epson software control the colors, either through their ICC management or just simple printer settings, and the output is still wrong in exactly the same way.

My monitor (Viewsonic) is calibrated with ColorEyes 3.2 software with a using an EyeOne Display. I am running Windows XP Pro x64. The fact that one printer is printing as it should, and as I see it on the monitor, suggests that the monitor calibration is probably OK, but that something is radically wrong with something on the other 2 printers.

Does anyone have any suggestions as to where imight look to find something wrong? Any suggestions how to troubleshoot this, or how to attempt to fix it? This is going to drive me CRAZY!! Thanks for your help and insight.

[Jack Flesher]

I've tried to let the Epson software control the colors, either through their ICC management or just simple printer settings, and the output is still wrong in exactly the same way.

If you are printing with a profile and letting PhotoShop manage color, you MUST turn all color management OFF in the Epson print drivers!  Moreover, it has to be set to OFF each time you switch printer or restart PS.  You can save a paper setting that includes having CM off and simply select this from teh "Custom" dialog in the printer set-up dialog, ubt this still must be reselected after a PS restart or printer swap.

[eronald]

I would start by reinstalling all printer drivers and checking whether something wierd has happened in the Windows color applet.

Edmund

[Let Biogons be Biogons]

If you are printing with a profile and letting PhotoShop manage color, you MUST turn all color management OFF in the Epson print drivers!  Moreover, it has to be set to OFF each time you switch printer or restart PS.  You can save a paper setting that includes having CM off and simply select this from teh "Custom" dialog in the printer set-up dialog, ubt this still must be reselected after a PS restart or printer swap.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=95310\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, I turned off all color management in the printer drivers when I let Photoshop handle the color.  I've done this several times, with different papers and profiles, and still get the bizarre output.

I get the same print appearance when I turn off color management in PS and the let the printer do it (both ICM and basic Epson methods)

[Let Biogons be Biogons]

I would start by reinstalling all printer drivers and checking whether something wierd has happened in the Windows color applet.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=95311\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

OK.  I'm uninstalling and then will re-installed the drivers and software for the 2 printers.  Maybe that will do it.  

I keep thinking that it has something to do the Win x64 OS -- I can't see a logical basis for that thought, but it's just a feling that MS might have something "different" with the OS.

[Jonathan Ratzlaff]

Is photoshop selecting the same profile for the paper each time?  Each of these printers has a different ink set and different print profile and if the profile for one is being used for the other, it won't work.  Photoshop will only use the profile you have selected and if you are using the same one for all three prints you will have the result you are getting.

[Paul Sumi]

I keep thinking that it has something to do the Win x64 OS -- I can't see a logical basis for that thought, but it's just a feling that MS might have something "different" with the OS.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

According to the Integrated Color website, CE 3.2 is not supported for Windows 64 (see part way down the page):

[a href=\"http://www.integrated-color.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=CEDD&Category_Code=Display+Calibration]http://www.integrated-color.com/Merchant2/...lay+Calibration[/url]

I'm not sure exactly what "not supported" means, so you should check with their tech support.

Paul

ps: I understand that Vista is also not supported at this time.

[Let Biogons be Biogons]

Is photoshop selecting the same profile for the paper each time?  Each of these printers has a different ink set and different print profile and if the profile for one is being used for the other, it won't work.  Photoshop will only use the profile you have selected and if you are using the same one for all three prints you will have the result you are getting.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=95318\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

No, I am using the right profile for each printer.  The profiles I mentioned are for the same paper and obtained from the same source, but there are different ones for each printer (and I used the right ones).  I've pretty much covered all the obvious issues.

[eronald]

OK.  I'm uninstalling and then will re-installed the drivers and software for the 2 printers.  Maybe that will do it. 

I keep thinking that it has something to do the Win x64 OS -- I can't see a logical basis for that thought, but it's just a feling that MS might have something "different" with the OS.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=95316\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Dump Win 64.

Win 64 is a non-starter for a prooduction machine CMS. Use something else, dual boot if you must.

The reason is that half the existing software will run eratically - there is no point in chasing bugs and checking versions for the next year or so. Win XP and Mac OS X are much, much more solid.

For a test, you could borrow some machine or laptop with Win XP, use canned Epson profiles and see whether things work better.

Edmund

[Let Biogons be Biogons]

Dump Win 64.

Win 64 is a non-starter for a prooduction machine CMS. Use something else, dual boot if you must.

The reason is that half the existing software will run eratically - there is no point in chasing bugs and checking versions for the next year or so. Win XP and Mac OS X are much, much more solid.

For a test, you could borrow some machine or laptop with Win XP, use canned Epson profiles and see whether things work better. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=95334\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I KNEW it was MS's fault!  ;-)

First, Even after uninstalling and reinstalling the drivers and software for the R1800 and the 4800 (and even updating the firmware for the 4800) there is no change in the output.  I also called Epson, and discussed all the different things I tried and they are at a loss as to what the problem might be.

Second and on to the x64 issue, x64 was to be my saviour giving me all the speed and memory I could use when I work with really big files in PS  (scanned 6x7 and larger film).  With an Athlon x64 processor and the x64 OS the system finally felt like it was moving.  It is noticably faster -- PS especially -- with the x64 OS than without.

But I don't see why x64 wouldn't be any good for color management.  Did MS just dump everything that was in XP Pro, and start over with stuff that doesn't work.  I would have thought that with a few extra years of experience that x64 might actually be better (wishful thinking, I suppose).  Actually, as fast and capable as the x64 OS is, there have been other issues with it -- like my scanners wouldn't work (no drivers) and I had to replace my laser printer with one that worked under x64 as well. This is all a shame becaase x64 was held out as being ideal for intensive graphics work.

Why would half the existing software run erratically?  Which half?  Why does the 7600 seem to print just fine, and the 4800 print badly -- is the software and color management of the 2 printers really that different such that one would work and the other, not?  I'm noticing this now because the 4800 is a new printer, and ther x64 OS is about 6 months old (or so).  

I should also note that I am using Epson drivers for the printers that were specifically created for Win x64.  I would have assumed that they had sorted out the issues with the x64 OS and their printers before they released these drivers (which have been out for several months).

I have an older, small laptop with Win XP that is not the best for PS but I will load the 4800 software on it and try to print from it. I'll see what happens.  I have another computer that is currently running Vista (beta), so I can't use that one either (no compatible drivers/software yet). If the laptop works, I guess I'll have to run out and buy yet another copy of Windows (I hate having to give Bill more money).

[p.tinson]

With the 4800 you might like to try the following.
In PS set no colour management.
In the driver select your media, got to custom advanced, leave on color controls but select the Adobe 1998 instead of the default sRGB and leave the gamma at 1.8.
Peter

[Let Biogons be Biogons]

An update.

First, let me respond to Peter.  Thanks for the suggestion, but I had already tried that with virually no change.

I tried printing from my laptop that runs on ordinary Windows XP.  Unfortunately, I found the same problem printing the file to the 4800, so it doesn't appear to be x64 OS related.  I spoke to Epson again after this.  We tried printing another image -- an Adobe sample image, I beleive, and I still got bad color blocking and a solarization type effect.  Epson, after all we tried, could not explain what was going on.  The only think left to try was doing a complete head alignment.  Epson is going to call me again on Monday to arrange a printer replacement  I did the complete auto alignment routine for 4800 and then tried to the print again -- a minor, if any change at all.  So, no real success.  I printed the image again on the 7600 for comparision  (both were printed with the Epson drive color control, not by photoshop) and it came out as it should.  On a lark, I then tried another picture on the 4800 and lo and behold, it looked pretty good.  Now I really don't know what is going on.  Was it just something about the original file (lots of OOF areas, perhaps?) that the 4800 just could not handle?  I then printed the new picture on the 7600 the same way as on the 4800 and it came out pretty close to the 4800 (a little lighter + cooler due to Ultrachrome vs. K3 ink, and MK ink vs PK ink on the 4800).  This is consistent with what the Epson tech guy said -- that the K3 inks print a little darker than the 7600 inks.  

So now what??  Is it possible that the 4800 just doesn't like -- or can't handle -- the original image?  The following 2 images hopefully will help you see what I am seeing..  The first, the original image that caused a problem for the 4800 (the 7600's output is virtually identical to this, as it should be).  The second is a scan of the last printed output from the 4800 of the file (some of the prints from the 4800 were actually worse than this -- even more solarized and muddy).

Something screwy is going on.  I've got until Monday to see if I can figure out what is going on.  On Monday I will have to decide if I let Epson take it away for a replacement.  I'll print alot more tests with it over the weekend.  Any suggestions, thoughts, or particular tests I could run?  

Thanks for all the help.  I really appreaciate it.

[John Hollenberg]

I have no idea what the problem might be, but think it is very unlikely that the image content is causing the difficulty.

This printer should handle that image without problems.

Edit:  One thing just occurred to me.  I was once having some very odd problems with an Epson printer, did a nozzle check and everything was fine.  Finally realized that an entire channel (black in your case?) was missing and I simply hadn't noticed it because it was on one end of the nozzle check pattern.

--John

[Stephen Best]

So now what??  Is it possible that the 4800 just doesn't like -- or can't handle -- the original image?  The following 2 images hopefully will help you see what I am seeing..  The first, the original image that caused a problem for the 4800 (the 7600's output is virtually identical to this, as it should be).  The second is a scan of the last printed output from the 4800 of the file (some of the prints from the 4800 were actually worse than this -- even more solarized and muddy).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=95399\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This looks like some sort of mask. Try flattening the file before you send it to the driver. If you get good output with another file, it's not the printer.

[Let Biogons be Biogons]

All the layers (and it was just a nik sharpening layer) were flattened before printing.  I had considered that might have been an issue when I was grasping wildly for straws to find an answer.  I even tried converting it another profile (adobe RGB to sRGB) to see if that would help.

I too think it is unlikly that the image is causing the problem -- but the universe of potential answers is getting very small.  When the 4800 printed the other image reasonably well, the light of inquiry would tend to shine on the image itself.  But if it prints well on the 7600 why not on the 4800 -- and why THAT particular image, and not the other?

I've done nozzle tests on the 4800, and have seen the several pages of output from the auto alignment procedure -- all the inks are firing normally.  The good print from the other image file would suggest all the inks were accounted for as well.

I am at a loss for an answer.  Will be trying more images and prints tomorrow afternoon.