Nothing personal but frankly speaking, as an objective by-stander, nothing prevents me from thinking that the negative comments are being put up by Epson marketing.
Thank you in advance for the clarifications.
I'm employed in an unrelated field, and not for Epson. I have no affiliation, paid or unpaid, with any company in the photographic, printing, software, graphics, graphic arts or any remotely related field. My views are my own, and I'm not speaking for any company.
With regards to the comments about the yellow, I specifically said, at least twice, that the concern about yellow would apply if the views expressed "are correct." So I accept the comments in that regard from Christopher.
I personally believe that these problems can be fixed -- if HP wants to direct their large engineering team into making this a top priority. Where I differ with some forum participants is that I believe they will only do so if the pressure continues.
Consider this -- these problems were identified when Z3100 users did something as simple -- as basic -- as printing test images that anyone can download off the web. If HP is such a power house and reputable company, backed by so many engineers, how could they have failed to do what forum participants did? Namely, to print simple test images, and compare the results to prints made from competing printers using the same test images. What could possibly be more basic than that? I again refer you to the tests done by Christopher, that show that the Z3100 can't even print fall colors as well as Epson. At least not at that time, using the firmware at that time.
If HP didn't do that prior to releasing the printer -- if they failed to correct these gamut issues before selling a $4000 or $6000 printer to all of us -- then why would they do so now?
HP will only do so now, including simple tests like printing test images, if they have reason to believe that the criticism on this site and others will cause a decline in sales. As it should. No one should buy the Z3100 until the users all agree that these gamut issues have been largely corrected. That is not the case today.
Finally, what would really get the attention of HP is if the overly enthusiastic reviews are corrected to honestly reflect what the printer does right versus what it does wrong. Michael Reichmann did an excellent job of doing just that with regards to the Canon printer, and I am hopeful that he'll do the same in the case of the Z3100. Michael's current review, using words like "brilliant" and proclaiming it to be the best printer yet, doesn't pass that test, or any other laugh test. What we all need is a balanced review, and balanced commentary.
I'll concede that I am so irritated by the complete lack of balance in that review and others, that my own comments were equally unbalanced, but in the opposite direction. The printer certainly has a number of positive attributes that I previously failed to mention. I think the on-board spectro and profiling, it ever works properly in conjunction with the driver to deliver high quality prints, is an exciting innovation. I am really tired of making profiles by hand with the X-Rite Color Elite system. Ditto with the gloss enhancer, which appears to work as advertised.
It is **CRITICALLY IMPORTANT** that the next firmware release cover **ALL** paper types listed in the driver, so that we can use the on-board spectro for any non-HP paper, and that is not the case with the current firmware. That is aimed almost exclusively, and shamelessly, at HP paper. As my earlier post said, this directly undercuts the advertised claims for the Z3100 to be able to profile and use any papers -- not just HP papers.
Finally, last but not least, if I am too harsh, some of you are making too many excuses. For a $4000 or $6000 product, this wasn't ready for prime time. Christoper is right in that regard. The defenders of HP can't ignore that prints made from a widely used test image showed all of us just that. I own a 4000 and it worked out of the box largely as intended and as advertised.
Someone made the observation that what the Z3100 will accomplish -- if these issues are not rapidly resolved -- is to INCREASE the market share for Epson, not the reverse. That is not exactly the outcome that one would expect for a "brilliant" printer that is now the best on the market, according to Mr. Reichmann.
My apologies to all if my comments were a bit verbose. I've stated my views, and will leave the rest of the discussion to all of you. It is not my intention to dominate the discussion, and I apologize to all if I was guilty in that regard.