Topic: HP Z3100 Problems with Colour Gamut (Read 146609 times)

Mussi_Spectraflow · « **Reply #100 on:** February 15, 2007, 08:53:47 pm »

Christopher,
The gamut shows the entire gamut in the LAB color space. The axis through the center represents the L* value, with lower L values towards the bottom. As you can see that the gamut changes depending on the L* value in questions, and that generally the largest gamut on both printers is found just above an L* of 50. I do have some 2d graphs that show the gamut at specific L* values, I may post those at some point.

Julian

Christopher · « **Reply #101 on:** February 16, 2007, 05:58:14 am »

Quote

Christopher,
The gamut shows the entire gamut in the LAB color space. The axis through the center represents the L* value, with lower L values towards the bottom. As you can see that the gamut changes depending on the L* value in questions, and that generally the largest gamut on both printers is found just above an L* of 50. I do have some 2d graphs that show the gamut at specific L* values, I may post those at some point.

Julian
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101153\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

yup, right my fault :-P That happens if you only look at it in a hurry

jpgentry · « **Reply #102 on:** February 16, 2007, 03:51:38 pm »

Has anyone compared the canned profiles betweenthe 2100 and the 3100 on matte papers? I would like to hear comments on the 2100 printer as it eliminated the rgb colors and related color mixing.

-Jonathan

ricgal · « **Reply #103 on:** February 16, 2007, 05:28:40 pm »

Yes - I have a 2100 where I teach and a 3100 atr home so have been comparing with interest.
The 3100 profiles has broad shoulders as can be seen with the blue 3d and the 2d graph presumably the extra inks doing there thing
but the surprising thing is how the 21 clearly works better at the low L value in spite of using the same raw materials.
This would suggest that if the sort the mixing some of the issues in this post may be solved.
Perhaps they will never match the saturation of the Epson Reds without sacrificing a degree of lightfastness
I am having problems with reds on the 3100 in the UK just the same as everywhere else but so far no client has walked in demanding i reproduce a streak of pure cadmium red. Having run an Epson 7500 for years I have learned it is easier to manage customer expectation than pigments that are just not bright enough!

NB. in the graphs the Blue is the 3100 and the 2100 is red in the 2d and truecolour in the 3D

kers · « **Reply #104 on:** February 16, 2007, 07:21:14 pm »

Quote

Here is a 3d gamut plot movie comparing the Epson 7800 with the HP Z3100 on satin media. I think the results are quite good. I built this profile myself and have been using it to compare results between the epson and HP. As far as the performance of the printer on RC paper I find the quality to be very good. Again there are trade off's between the two printers but I do not find the the performance of the Z to be inadequate in this arena. As far as quality on matte papers goes, I am still looking into the issues and hop to be able to comment more in the near future.

Pana thanx for the substantial contibution
what I don't understand is that the dark reds of the z3100 in this comparison are not that bad , while everybody is complaining about it. Or is that a mis-interpretation?

How does the Z3100 perform on the Epson Satin and wich satin of the HP did you use?
I am interested to know if the "professional satin" type outperforms the direct dry satin type.
As it seems the Z3100 is very sensitive to the choice of paper in the way it performs.

regards Pieter Kers

jpgentry · « **Reply #105 on:** February 16, 2007, 09:34:41 pm »

This is showing that there is probably a mixing problem for matte papers but I'm not sure there is that great of a difference. Meaning that even if they perfect the mixing there doesn't appear to be a big gain. Any idea how these maps compare to the K3 inks at those given levels?

-Jonathan

Quote

Yes - I have a 2100 where I teach and a 3100 atr home so have been comparing with interest.
The 3100 profiles has broad shoulders as can be seen with the blue 3d and the 2d graph presumably the extra inks doing there thing
but the surprising thing is how the 21 clearly works better at the low L value in spite of using the same raw materials.
This would suggest that if the sort the mixing some of the issues in this post may be solved.
Perhaps they will never match the saturation of the Epson Reds without sacrificing a degree of lightfastness
I am having problems with reds on the 3100 in the UK just the same as everywhere else but so far no client has walked in demanding i reproduce a streak of pure cadmium red. Having run an Epson 7500 for years I have learned it is easier to manage customer expectation than pigments that are just not bright enough!

NB. in the graphs the Blue is the 3100 and the 2100 is red in the 2d and truecolour in the 3D
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101278\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Mussi_Spectraflow · « **Reply #106 on:** February 16, 2007, 11:43:03 pm »

Quote

Pana thanx for the substantial contibution
what I don't understand is that the dark reds of the z3100 in this comparison are not that bad , while everybody is complaining about it. Or is that a mis-interpretation?

How does the Z3100 perform on the Epson Satin and wich satin of the HP did you use?
I am interested to know if the "professional satin" type outperforms the direct dry satin type.
As it seems the Z3100 is very sensitive to the choice of paper in the way it performs.

regards Pieter Kers
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101294\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Pieter,

I haven't tried the HP on the Epson paper, I would expect similar results however. I used the HP Instant Dry Satin Paper, although I have a roll of the professional satin on order. I'll post comparisons if I notice any important differences. So far i've been very happy with the HP's results on the RC media, the differences on matte require more investigation. Hopefully I will have more time to look into this next week.

Julian

neil snape · « **Reply #107 on:** February 17, 2007, 02:35:20 am »

Quote

Yes - I have a 2100 where I teach and a 3100 atr home so have been comparing with interest.
The 3100 profiles has broad shoulders as can be seen with the blue 3d and the 2d graph presumably the extra inks doing there thing
but the surprising thing is how the 21 clearly works better at the low L value in spite of using the same raw materials.
This would suggest that if the sort the mixing some of the issues in this post may be solved.
Perhaps they will never match the saturation of the Epson Reds without sacrificing a degree of lightfastness
I am having problems with reds on the 3100 in the UK just the same as everywhere else but so far no client has walked in demanding i reproduce a streak of pure cadmium red. Having run an Epson 7500 for years I have learned it is easier to manage customer expectation than pigments that are just not bright enough!

NB. in the graphs the Blue is the 3100 and the 2100 is red in the 2d and truecolour in the 3D
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101278\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes these are the correct graphs for the current situation.
There are changes in the ink separations ( ink mixing if you choose that term) in the next firmware which change the transitions in all areas of the separations. Not necessarily making more gamut extension but the smoothness has be vastly improved in my tests as of this week.
The latest separations and profiles I'm testing are smoother than any other printer I've seen and finally give the best you can get from this inkset.
When it's available I don't know. I was promised next week but is that next week after my 2 weeks away I don't know!
Yes you are right on the choice of media.
There is an enormous difference on the more coated matte media. The difference between Hahnemuhle 308 PhotoRag and HP Hahnemuhle Smooth Fine Art is night and day. I assume Epson Enhanced Velvet would also achieve better results on the HP.
On B&W the HP MK is as efficient as other MK inks so B&W and the Z printer works fine on all media including Hahnemuhle PR.
It's true that there is always a compromise on colour gamut vs lightfastness and stability. I was happy with the notions of maximizing lightfastness as much as 2-3 times older inksets but can see that it can be a compromise with some caveats.

neil snape · « **Reply #108 on:** February 17, 2007, 03:04:29 am »

Here is a screen capture of my older profile and the newer ID Satin.
The performance of the Pro Satin is very good in synthetic plots and really nice in actual printing.

The semi-transparent plot is the ProSatin, the solid colour red is ID Satin. There is a difference in brightness largely due to optical brightners that you don't really want in FA printing.

Here goes my first attempt at posting a link to this forum....

http://homepage.mac.com/neil_snape/.Public..._vs_IDSatin.jpg

ricgal · « **Reply #109 on:** February 17, 2007, 04:06:46 am »

Quote

Yes you are right on the choice of media.
There is an enormous difference on the more coated matte media. The difference between Hahnemuhle 308 PhotoRag and HP Hahnemuhle Smooth Fine Art is night and day. I assume Epson Enhanced Velvet would also achieve better results on the HP.
On B&W the HP MK is as efficient as other MK inks so B&W and the Z printer works fine on all media including Hahnemuhle PR.
It's true that there is always a compromise on colour gamut vs lightfastness and stability. I was happy with the notions of maximizing lightfastness as much as 2-3 times older inksets but can see that it can be a compromise with some caveats.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101330\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I take it The HP smooth fine art is genuinely optimised for the vivera inkset and not rebadged HPR

Do you think the RIP companies are going to solve the dark red issue? I was hoping to shelve the exscuses i have become so adept at making to clients over the years but it seems i may be exercising them for a while longer.

Christopher · « **Reply #110 on:** February 17, 2007, 06:19:56 am »

Quote

I take it The HP smooth fine art is genuinely optimised for the vivera inkset and not rebadged HPR

Do you think the RIP companies are going to solve the dark red issue? I was hoping to shelve the exscuses i have become so adept at making to clients over the years but it seems i may be exercising them for a while longer.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101339\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I talked to two diffrent RIP Companies, and to sum up there statement. Yes they can deal better with the inks than HP itself ... I just saw a beta profile on one of their RIPs and let's say it looks ways better than any HP Profile so far. ( I'm talking only about HMPR ) Sorry , that I can't show pictures, but soon when I get a final one I will post some.

Christopher · « **Reply #111 on:** February 17, 2007, 06:23:49 am »

Quote

Pana thanx for the substantial contibution
what I don't understand is that the dark reds of the z3100 in this comparison are not that bad , while everybody is complaining about it. Or is that a mis-interpretation?

How does the Z3100 perform on the Epson Satin and wich satin of the HP did you use?
I am interested to know if the "professional satin" type outperforms the direct dry satin type.
As it seems the Z3100 is very sensitive to the choice of paper in the way it performs.

regards Pieter Kers
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101294\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Just look at page 2 or so, there you will find some from HMPR.

madmanchan · « **Reply #112 on:** February 17, 2007, 07:25:42 am »

Quote

I talked to two diffrent RIP Companies, and to sum up there statement. Yes they can deal better with the inks than HP itself ... I just saw a beta profile on one of their RIPs and let's say it looks ways better than any HP Profile so far. ( I'm talking only about HMPR ) Sorry , that I can't show pictures, but soon when I get a final one I will post some.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101358\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Not a huge surprise. When the Epson 2200 came to market, the inks were amazing but the driver had issues making the most of them: far from linear, far from gray balanced, and putting down too much ink in the shadows. ColorByte's ImagePrint really helped to straighten it out. The Epson driver is now much improved.

Hopefully HP can fix their ink mixing and color halftoning algorithms. The Z series sound like amazing machines, but they need to be driven properly ...

kers · « **Reply #113 on:** February 17, 2007, 03:14:40 pm »

Quote

Here is a screen capture of my older profile and the newer ID Satin.
The performance of the Pro Satin is very good in synthetic plots and really nice in actual printing.

The semi-transparent plot is the ProSatin, the solid colour red is ID Satin. There is a difference in brightness largely due to optical brightners that you don't really want in FA printing.
Here goes my first attempt at posting a link to this forum....
http://homepage.mac.com/neil_snape/.Public..._vs_IDSatin.jpg
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=101331\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Neil would you be so kind to send me the satin pro profile to me ( zipped).
email z3100@beeld.nu

(I will put a z3100 page with all profiles online )

did you make the profile with the z3100 and does the gloss enhancer work well?

regards

Pieter Kers

Mussi_Spectraflow · « **Reply #114 on:** February 20, 2007, 02:31:53 pm »

This thread is getting a little too long, and now i'm going to make it a little longer. I had a chance to run some matte media through our Z3100 yesterday and have a few remarks to make.

The point of this little test was to make a profile and print on the Z3100 using Epson enhanced matte and compare that to a print made using the epson 7800 and the same media using a custom profile I created earlier. I used the monaco 729 RGB target, printed throught the driver.

The first thing I realized is that the media mode that you select is crucial. My initial test was done using the HP photo matte option. This target's chroma looked weak compared to a target from the epson. I reprinted it using the "Litho" and "Super HW coated" media types and found these to be much better. I built a profile and made a print.

Compared to the epson profile I had the overall gamut was bigger on the HP. Also I was surprised to see the HP perform very well in the below L* 50 region. It actually surpassed the epson in some areas. I did notice a weakness in one axis of red chroma around L* 50 in the 3d gamut map. But it was fairly localized.

However on my test image the prints looked very very good. The higher luminosity reds were more saturated on the HP, and very slightly less saturated in lower L* values. Not really a big surprise.When we first received the printer I had made a quick print using the canned "HP matte" setting for a client and we had noticed a loss of chroma in the low L* values that was unacceptable. However I see very good results from both printers in this last test. I'm sure that on some images this difference will favor the HP and at times the Epson to a more severe degree. At this point I agree there is room for improvement, however I would also be satisifed with the results at this level. Matching Epson performance is a very good mark of quality exceeding it in EVERY respect would be a major accomplishment. With the better black point and better print longevity I know some people would be happy with this balance. Others, understandably are looking for verifiable quality improvements, and so I would expect some dissapointment.

However...I spoke with HP and they are aware of potential for improvement, have addressed this issue in the form of a new firmware, I think this was mentioned by another poster, and will publish it next week. If the changes from 4.0.0.4 to 4.0.0.6 are any indication, then I expect good things. Lets see what we see when this new firmware is out.

Julian Mussi
www.spectraflow.com

Panascape · « **Reply #115 on:** February 20, 2007, 04:16:27 pm »

Julian are you printing with a RIP or the HP driver?

I am hearing that some RIP users are getting better results then those printing with the driver.

I have a beta of the new firmware and do not see much improvement with the HP driver and profiles.

Robert

Mussi_Spectraflow · « **Reply #116 on:** February 20, 2007, 11:30:58 pm »

Robert,
Both, but I've based my comments of the performance using the drivers. HP is supposed to be sending me the updated firmware but I haven't received it yet. I haven't even bothered looking at the canned profiles yet. I did some comparisons initally and prefered the output from the custom profiles I built, I haven't revisited them.
There are two ways of looking at this as far as I can tell. My perspective at this point, I'm interested in the potential of the deice...what I can achieve in a best case scenario. If that means it takes a RIP, custom profiles and sacrificing a goat then so be it. I want to know what this can be pushed to do. Most users dont have the tool box of toys or resources I have at my disposal. Many people expect that the drivers and the canned profiles, or the easy color solution, should deliver optimal results. I don't think this is an unfair perspective, but unfortunatly it is not always the case. There are many users who are looking into this side of things.
What I've found initally is very promising, I can see that the printer is capable of very good output using the drivers. The RIP's are interesting in regards to this printer. Typically RIP's offer improvement in the are of color accuracy and workflow, and sometimes comprimise maximum gamut to achieve these goals. Image print and a few others are the exception, and I'm curious to see what they will do with this printer. As soon as I get the firmware update I'll finalize my tests and will be putting up a rather indepth review on our site.

Julian Mussi
www.spectraflow.com

Panascape · « **Reply #117 on:** February 21, 2007, 03:01:05 am »

Good news at last. The beta firmware only addresses certain papers at this stage Hahnemühle smooth fine art is showing a vast improvement. There is still a way to go but the results are encouraging.

ricgal · « **Reply #118 on:** February 21, 2007, 03:51:32 am »

Quote

Good news at last. The beta firmware only addresses certain papers at this stage Hahnemühle smooth fine art is showing a vast improvement. There is still a way to go but the results are encouraging.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102111\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Glad to here the good news- Where is it possible to get hold of the firmware? I presume it will mean redoing profiles.
Will the benefit to HsmoothFA extend to HPR308?

Panascape · « **Reply #119 on:** February 21, 2007, 04:24:32 am »

Some of the profiles have been provided by HP and I am assuming that the final relase will include new canned profiles.

Author Topic: HP Z3100 Problems with Colour Gamut (Read 146609 times)