Damn, I need help.

[PSQuared7]

OK, now that I'm totally confused, I need to start reeling things in and I need your help. All of this dialog about the z3100 is mind numbing, but I still want one. Your feed back will be greatly appreciated. Here is what I need, I'm a digital only commercial shooter and all of my prints are either hung or show up in wedding albums or corporate reports. I want to print everything in house to keep cost down and quality high. The only color I care about matching is what I see on my 30 inch Apple display. I print color and black and white. Do I need RIP software. Can surivive on the X-Rite Eye One Photo System( The big daddy system). Thanks for your help.

Paul Price

[Greg_E]

Send some images out to have them printed and see if you like the "basic" Z3100 prints. You should buy a monitor calibration device if you don't already have one.

[dkeyes]

I'm a "fine art" photographer, sell my prints in a few galleries, exhibit in museums, etc. I have been using the z3100 for month and a half. Almost all my work is in color. With the current firmware and without a rip, I have been printing images that match and often exceed what I was doing on the Epson 9800 (both without a rip). Just installed the APS which gives me more color targets to profile my paper with. Very slight shadow improvements so far and slight improvement in some colors. Still not sure if it was worth the extra $700, need more testing on different images.

All that said, my best prints were with a Ergosoft rip on the Epson 9800. I haven't been able to improve on those images with the z3100 (no rip). A rip helps smooth out dark shadows by making things appear to have same density across the image (very little gloss differential), among other things. I still think the z3100 would get better with a rip, but I think none are available yet. (mac or pc) Colorbyte is coming out with one any day now for the mac (I'm on a mac).

Bottom line, get some prints done and check them out. The biggest plus, I imagine, with the rip will be ability to set up multiple images on a page with different or same sizes. Maximizing your sheet, etc. Everything else will probably add that extra "2%" improvement that only very discerning photographers will notice on very picky images. For Black and white, there may be improvements as well but my limited testing using the printer to determine colors (instead of Photoshop which is normal), has produced great quadtone images on rag paper (again, no rip).

I may buy a rip in the future if I can justify the $2000-$3000.

By the way, all the discussion about image quality and the z3100 has been around that last "2%" improvement to get to the ideal printer. Most were concerned with matching artwork that is being reproduced, not printing photographs. Alot of improvements have been made by HP in a short time around paper issues, red issues, etc. with firmware (and soon driver) upgrades. I'm confident they will keep moving/improving.

Good luck,
Doug

[adiallo]

PSQuared,
From the needs you describe, the good news is that you can choose among any current printer/RIP combo and accomplish your objectives. The bad news is you can choose among any current printer/RIP combo and accomplish your objectives.
Perhaps the biggest benefit of a RIP for those not interested in pursuing that last 2-5% of image accuracy is page layout. If you've got fifty 11x14 wedding shots to produce, loading single sheets into a 24 inch or larger printer will drive you nuts. So will having to send each image one at a time when printing on a roll. Any RIP with page layout capability will let you gang up x number of image files on your loaded sheet or roll with crop marks. You can trim after the print comes out. Other RIPs come with built-in templates for automatically resizing and arranging one image in different sizes. On the Mac ImagePrint has nice page layout features. On the PC you have more choices, ie StudioPrint, Wasatch SoftRip and Onyx products. None of these otions are cheap, however. ColorBurst has no page layout on the Mac platform but does have them in a Windows version.

My wish is for someone to make a $150 page layout print interface for the Mac. It would print through the native driver. Many printer owners don't need a RIP for improved image quality but do need one for layout. If I was a venture capitalist I'd throw some money into a startup designing that software  My next "waste a half a day project" is to see if  InDesign is a good alternative for page layout/native driver printing.

[rdonson]

...
My wish is for someone to make a $150 page layout print interface for the Mac. It would print through the native driver. Many printer owners don't need a RIP for improved image quality but do need one for layout. If I was a venture capitalist I'd throw some money into a startup designing that software  My next "waste a half a day project" is to see if  InDesign is a good alternative for page layout/native driver printing.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110959\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well, if you're willing to run Windoze under Parallels on the Mac then Qimage might be just the ticket.

[pminicucci]

Doesn't Lightroom do that?

My wish is for someone to make a $150 page layout print interface for the Mac. It would print through the native driver. Many printer owners don't need a RIP for improved image quality but do need one for layout. If I was a venture capitalist I'd throw some money into a startup designing that software  My next "waste a half a day project" is to see if  InDesign is a good alternative for page layout/native driver printing.

[marcsitkin]

All that said, my best prints were with a Ergosoft rip on the Epson 9800. I haven't

Good luck,
Doug
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=110947\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[/quote]


Erosoft Posterprint v12.04 supports the Z3100 now.

They have some canned print environments set up for the printer.

I've just spent some time trying to create my own for a glossy polyethelyne product using the APS and ergosoft, nothing good to report yet, but am working out the kinks.

Hookup to the Z3100 through the rip was smooth, however.

You might also look at Qimage if you don't need postcript.