z3100 APS question

[SeanPuckett]

So, can an APS owner create their own targets?  As in, feed it a list of RGB values (from a spreadsheet perhaps) to have the thing construct a target of an arbitrary number of user-defined patches, and the printer will profile against it?

[dkeyes]

So, can an APS owner create their own targets?  As in, feed it a list of RGB values (from a spreadsheet perhaps) to have the thing construct a target of an arbitrary number of user-defined patches, and the printer will profile against it?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=121981\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Not that I know of. It's has a very limited custom capability. Basically, you can select target size (not sure why anyone would use the two smaller sizes). You can also select gloss/no gloss, conform to paper width and print at a size you can re-read at a later date. Allows you to select from two color temps, D50 and D65. Allow you to plug in a previously made profile and save using either color temp and gloss or no gloss.
That's about it. The patch shape and size are custom to the profiling device, thus the reason it won't read other patches.
I imagine you could find someone with software knowledge to do what your talking about but not sure how you would load that info.
- Doug

[neil snape]

Not that I know of. It's has a very limited custom capability. Basically, you can select target size (not sure why anyone would use the two smaller sizes). You can also select gloss/no gloss, conform to paper width and print at a size you can re-read at a later date. Allows you to select from two color temps, D50 and D65. Allow you to plug in a previously made profile and save using either color temp and gloss or no gloss.
That's about it. The patch shape and size are custom to the profiling device, thus the reason it won't read other patches.
I imagine you could find someone with software knowledge to do what your talking about but not sure how you would load that info.
- Doug
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=122555\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There are 3 sized charts. The smallest is a quick profiler for trying different media of which are not necessarily made for inkjet printing. It is very quick and can be done on small media formats. The next size up is a mid sized patch set that covers repro colors near copy and banner type printing needs. The last and largest are both high patch layovers from high quality printing both rgb or CMYK. There is enough redundancy to cover most printable colors without much chance of reversals, or exceptions happening in the profile creation.
The patches are proprietary yet a SDK is available to create charts as developers need. So no it's not customisable by the end user but certainly is for color app dev. For example GMG have both very high patch calibrations and profile charts.
I have requested the latest Bill Atkinson charts be accepted, yet I don't expect a response by HP or Gretag. It is what they should do though.
Let's not forget that the Z printers are just now getting out there, and the accompanied software also in their first days. We can expect  over time many very nice upgrades , some free, some paid, that will increase options and help workflow. So far it is off to a nice start. The potential and road map for the Z printers is a long one.

[SeanPuckett]

Not as bad as I expected, but not as good as I'd prefer.  

Anyway, I ask because I've created a few custom patch sets charts with Argyll, ColorPort and ProfileMaker (and some perl scripts) with a great deal of attention paid to near blacks, near whites and fine grey tones (in addition to broad spectrum RGB) that makes the stock profiles look bad for B&W and toned prints.  The output seems to glow in comparison with stock profiling, if that makes any sense.

At this point I'm trying to figure out how I can distribute this information so that people without $5K in third party software and hardware can use it, but am mostly drawing a blank.

The only thing I can think of to even approach a solution is to share the final ICC profiles for certain media types and hope that printer-to-printer variation is mostly held in check by the linearization step.  But that's hardly a real answer.

sigh.  maybe someday someone will figure out how to drive the on-board spectro.

[neil snape]

Anyway, I ask because I've created a few custom patch sets charts with Argyll, ColorPort and ProfileMaker (and some perl scripts) with a great deal of attention paid to near blacks, near whites and fine grey tones (in addition to broad spectrum RGB) that makes the stock profiles look bad for B&W and toned prints.  The output seems to glow in comparison with stock profiling, if that makes any sense.



The only thing I can think of to even approach a solution is to share the final ICC profiles for certain media types and hope that printer-to-printer variation is mostly held in check by the linearization step.  But that's hardly a real answer.

sigh.  maybe someday someone will figure out how to drive the on-board spectro.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=122601\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I wish I could figure out Argyll. I'd say go ahead and share away. The inter printer agreement on these printers in something like average max <0.5dE most units in test were more like 0.2 so I don't think the shipping versions should be far off. . And that is linear at the same time.
Why don't you write HP for the SDK? You seem to know a lot so it's something you might revel in.

[Charles Gast]

We can expect  over time many very nice upgrades , some free, some paid, that will increase options and help workflow. So far it is off to a nice start. The potential and road map for the Z printers is a long one.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=122566\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree in that something hp needs to do is make the aps-grade profiling available free of charge to all current and future users. To sell a self-profiling printer with less than the best profiling they have available then say IF you want the best color profiling we have for this system "for another 8 or 900 bucks well sell you the "advanced" profiling solution" is a foul-smelling marketing tactic.
 Everyone who has purchased a printer such as this and has *no* interest in having the best color accuracy possible raise your hands.  

The potential and road map for the Z printers is a long one.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=122566\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

A long one? As in long time? Time will not stand still for hp.  Epson will release a self profiling printer with enhanced pigment longevity too. They won't exactly wait for their competition to get their half-baked product finished.  I seriously doubt that Epson will pull such bogus profiler marketing as hp has and I seriously doubt Epson will release their printer with 2nd rate ink recipes while telling their users "don't worry we'll keep releasing firmware until we get it right someday".
Will Epsons new printer be without bugs? Of course not. Will it have  color inadequecies and insulting added cost "advanced" profiling "solutions" I very very seriously doubt it.  Wasting ink with Epsons printhead maintenance requirements is looking better every day as HP stumbles along with the printer -3100- I bought from them.

[Shutterbug2006]

  Wasting ink with Epsons printhead maintenance requirements is looking better every day as HP stumbles along with the printer -3100- I bought from them.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=122610\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This is important.... would you say you now regret buying the Z3100? I haven't received mine yet, it looks to be a few days yet before they are shipping this Advanced Profiling Solution model in Canada.... the none APS models are available but I thought I may as well avail myself of the best of the best. If indeed it is the best.

[SeanPuckett]

I'm happy with mine.  Hell, shutterbug, you'll get a $2000 rebate if you trade in an old printer.  I paid full ticket for mine with no regret because I bought it in March, even before HP Canada acknowledged the damn thing existed.  (I'd like a rebate, but it's clear I'm not owed one.)

I just got in two rolls of Red River UltraPro Satin "2.0" and I'll be developing those new profiles for it over the next few days.  They should work fairly well on HP Pro Satin due to the similarity of the coatings.

As for "time will tell" -- I'll kick "time" in the ass and make things happen myself rather than hope for someone else to come along and fix it for me; they'll never do it right anyway -- I'll figure out the problems and solve them if I can, and share the fruit.  That's how reputations are made, no?

It's just been too damn hot in my studio to do any reliable printing -- 32C does not a happy z (or photographer) make.  Plus there's the cold that's going around....

[neil snape]

I agree in that something hp needs to do is make the aps-grade profiling available free of charge to all current and future users. To sell a self-profiling printer with less than the best profiling they have available then say IF you want the best color profiling we have for this system "for another 8 or 900 bucks well sell you the "advanced" profiling solution" is a foul-smelling marketing tactic.
 Everyone who has purchased a printer such as this and has *no* interest in having the best color accuracy possible raise your hands.   
A long one? As in long time? Time will not stand still for hp.  Epson will release a self profiling printer with enhanced pigment longevity too. They won't exactly wait for their competition to get their half-baked product finished.  I seriously doubt that Epson will pull such bogus profiler marketing as hp has and I seriously doubt Epson will release their printer with 2nd rate ink recipes while telling their users "don't worry we'll keep releasing firmware until we get it right someday".
Will Epsons new printer be without bugs? Of course not. Will it have  color inadequecies and insulting added cost "advanced" profiling "solutions" I very very seriously doubt it.  Wasting ink with Epsons printhead maintenance requirements is looking better every day as HP stumbles along with the printer -3100- I bought from them.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=122610\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There are a lot more users out there that find the built in profiling is already enough for them. You're right though for photographers the base APS being a requirement might have been a consideration, and something like ImagePrint. An interesting possibility, yet I can't see why that should be free.
Time has not stood still for anyone. The release of any pigment printers is a challenge. Epson went through a lot of broken promises with theirs. New users profit from all that experience, rightfully so. From a release point of view the Z printers still produce prints ready for the highest demands in print permanence and sales requirements, albeit the changes after release should have been made beforehand. I 'm not sure about making the Z printers sounding incapable overall that are rather some specific weaknesses. All printers have some, none are perfect.
I'm sure Epson will make added primary printers even though they claim that they don't need to. I don't think they will have a spectro or self profiling, but that's only my idea. There may be some improvement in ink fade resistance but not by as much as HP decided at a cost perhaps too great for some. The roadmap that offers options for existing platforms is something Epson have never offered, nor wanted. HP does and is going to be behind the printers.
I'm aware of the frustrations and or miscommunication on issues on the Z. All of us using the Z are trying to find the balance overall for all printing requirements, some of which as you say and know are masking the finer points that the Z are good at. Any changes in ink separations are and were made for specific improvements yet the overall color maps have changed very little over and since the release.