Epson color gamut of 1280 vs 2400

[mlipmanphoto]

I print interior photos of Architectrure. Can anyone point me to a web site that can show me the exact 3d color gamut of the 1280 vs the 2400 or the hp printers or the canon printers.?

I have tested the 2400, the 1800 and the 1280 printers.
The 1800 is not suitable for printing interiors from what meagert info I could get my hands on.
the 2400 is just ok but its fall a tiny bit short.
 I shoot archtecture for a living, I really need a printer that can exactly reproduce wood colors.  
IN COLOR.  I do  not care about printing B&W
I only print on glossy paper, I do not care if the print does not last more than 5 years. I am not a n artist I just want the colors to be accurate. I have calibrated my monitor and I use custom profiles from ink jet art.

I have been using an epson 1280 printer.
The 1280 I am using now is my 4th, I get a new one every 6 monthe or so because it clogs. It clogs all the time on epson oem inks. It clogs after about 2 months. So I use it once a week as suggested by every forum out there. It prints accurate colors but i am just going out of my mind with the clogging.  I had 2 Epson r200 printers that never clogged.

[Ted Harris]

IMO, accurate reproduction of wood tones is less of a color gamut issue than it is an issue of monitor calibration and paper profiling (likely coupled with a bit of tweaking when you are ready to rint given yoru exacting requirements.  

As for the particular printers it is something of an apples to oranges coparison since you are looking at both pigment and dye ink printers.  Having said that, assuming that thr 13x19 maximum size works for you I'd suggest taking a look at the HP B9180.  I have been teting one for the past month for an eventual article in View Camera magazine and so far its performance is topnotch.  No glitches, no nozzle clogs and generally right-on color tines.  I wa working with a very difficult image yesterday and after esome fairly minor tweaking I got better results than I have ever gotten with either an Epson R800 or an Epson 4800.

[colourperfect]

The question is what type of gloss paper are you using ?
DO you have any image examples ?

Have you used Rel Col rendering ? Using Perceptual rendering leads to colour shifts that I find problematic in the browns, dark reds and dark yellows.

Ian

http://www.colourperfect.co.uk

[madmanchan]

I print interior photos of Architectrure. Can anyone point me to a web site that can show me the exact 3d color gamut of the 1280 vs the 2400 or the hp printers or the canon printers.?

Unfortunately, no such site or comparison exists because the gamut depends not only on the printer but on the specific paper(s) that you are using. Unless you have a specific paper in mind, the comparison can't be made.

The 1800 is not suitable for printing interiors from what meagert info I could get my hands on.

Why not? What are the technical reasons for why the 1800 cannot print interiors?

I only print on glossy paper, I do not care if the print does not last more than 5 years. I am not a n artist I just want the colors to be accurate.

Then you will want to give a hard look at the R1800 or new 1400, which work best with glossy papers. The R1800 will do better glossies than the 2400.

[mlipmanphoto]

The question is what type of gloss paper are you using ?
DO you have any image examples ?

Have you used Rel Col rendering ? Using Perceptual rendering leads to colour shifts that I find problematic in the browns, dark reds and dark yellows.

Ian

http://www.colourperfect.co.uk
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102992\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

By the wording "Perceptual rendering" are you saying just visually looking at the print or are you refering to the setting in the print space  for Perceptual vs absolute colormetric vs Saturation.

So what would be better  Absolute colormetric ?

[mlipmanphoto]

IMO, accurate reproduction of wood tones is less of a color gamut issue than it is an issue of monitor calibration and paper profiling (likely coupled with a bit of tweaking when you are ready to rint given yoru exacting requirements. 

As for the particular printers it is something of an apples to oranges coparison since you are looking at both pigment and dye ink printers.  Having said that, assuming that thr 13x19 maximum size works for you I'd suggest taking a look at the HP B9180.  I have been teting one for the past month for an eventual article in View Camera magazine and so far its performance is topnotch.  No glitches, no nozzle clogs and generally right-on color tines.  I wa working with a very difficult image yesterday and after esome fairly minor tweaking I got better results than I have ever gotten with either an Epson R800 or an Epson 4800.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102981\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I must know if you can lead me on the correct path. I want ot reproduce reds and yellows in wood.
In the color mangement setting of the print space  there is a seslection of
Absolute colormetric, Realative colormetric, satuaration  or Perceptual.  What would do the best repriduction of wood on a 1280 printer with epson premium glossy paper with a custom profile.

Any thoughts? WE did a test at one point and I could not tell any differnce.

[bjanes]

I must know if you can lead me on the correct path. I want ot reproduce reds and yellows in wood.
In the color mangement setting of the print space  there is a seslection of
Absolute colormetric, Realative colormetric, satuaration  or Perceptual.  What would do the best repriduction of wood on a 1280 printer with epson premium glossy paper with a custom profile.

Any thoughts? WE did a test at one point and I could not tell any differnce.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=103061\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Relative colorimetric with black point compensation off will give a more accurate representation of what is in the file, since it does not compress the colors, but clips out of gamut colors and does not alter the three quarter tones. If there are no out of gamut colors in the image, you will see little difference. I would not expect most wood tones to be out of gamut, but you could try soft proofing in Photoshop.

If you shoot under controlled conditions and need accurate color rendition, you might try profiling your camera and printer with one of the high end packages or have a consultant do this for you.

An accurate monitor profile is helpful in matching the appearance of the screen to the prints, but if the camera and printer are accurately profiled, you could use a monochrome monitor and get good results.

Bill

[eronald]

The 1800 has a nice gamut. The 1400 probably even better. However the EPSON drivers mess up the shadows on the 1280, less on the 2400, dunno about the 1800/1400.

Imageprint might be a good investmentn and easy fix for your specific problem. Download the demo and see whether it improves matters. Won't cost you anything except a test print.

If all you need is a small improvement in shadow detail a custom profile may well solve your problem too. Any of the usual suspects, including me, can make one for you.

Edmund

[Let Biogons be Biogons]

I have tested the 2400, the 1800 and the 1280 printers.
The 1800 is not suitable for printing interiors from what meagert info I could get my hands on.
the 2400 is just ok but its fall a tiny bit short.
 I shoot archtecture for a living, I really need a printer that can exactly reproduce wood colors. 
IN COLOR.  I do  not care about printing B&W
I only print on glossy paper, I do not care if the print does not last more than 5 years. I am not a n artist I just want the colors to be accurate. I have calibrated my monitor and I use custom profiles from ink jet art.
<snip>
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102940\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Why is the R1800 not suitable?   Where, in your view, does it come up short?  It is a huge advance in every way over the 1280.  For color prints on glossy paper, it is hard to beat (and better than the R2400).

[Chris_T]

Relative colorimetric with black point compensation off will give a more accurate representation of what is in the file, since it does not compress the colors, but clips out of gamut colors and does not alter the three quarter tones. If there are no out of gamut colors in the image, you will see little difference. I would not expect most wood tones to be out of gamut, but you could try soft proofing in Photoshop.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=103067\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This description of relative colorimetric seems to be generally accepted, but I often find it not to be the case when soft proofing in PS. For example, colors that are in gamut, and without any gamut warning being flagged would still change when soft proofing (e.g. using an Epson printer profile) and in prints.

I also read somewhere that the definitions of rendering intents (and gamut warning as well?) are more like *guidelines* rather than cast in stone. These guidelines may or may not be *implemented* accordingly in a profile.  I have yet to find one profile maker who claims that he/she complies strictly with the rendering intents' definitions. IOW, you are at the mercy of how a profile is generated.