I'm not sure you can blame the printer for waking you up. It is designed to self-maintain; putting a piece of production equipment in your bedroom is obviously not ideal. It is no louder than any other printer I've owned.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133649\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-J –
I don’t think I indicated the printer was in my bedroom (my wife would get jealous). It is in a room, down a hall, 3 rooms from my bedroom. Perhaps we’re light sleepers. For what it’s worth, the fan in the printer does not run all the time, but it to turns on randomly and is relatively quiet.
I'm curious as to why you were "very disappointed" with the profile making, … and in my own testing so far, the APS does create very slightly different/better profiles; comparing an APS profile to a non-APS profile print (not softproof) yields a difference that is so small as to not really be sure you're seeing anything (ymmv). Perhaps you have some workflow or monitor calibration issues? Do what I did and print an image with your non-APS built profile and the included HP profile which they build using the APS (assuming you are using HP papers). Then you can see what $800 buys you.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133649\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
My disappointment is that, given the output I had comparing profiles I made, with the HP papers I had on hand, and their default profiles, I was getting poor results. And those results appeared similar to what some others in this forum were experiencing. For $800 one gets a monitor calibration package (which I have and use) and the ability to create a number of profiles, only one of which I believe I’d need, which is the TC9.18 RGB.
If, as you say, there are only slight differences between the APS and non-APS profiles, then eventually I will be happy.
To the other poster, perhaps the reason you see so many Z3100 users on here is because the printer is THAT good. It's not a conspiracy. Besides debating about the lac of the APS, the printer has very few disadvantages. And you should do a little research on the "lack of reds." I found an HP white paper addressing the "issue." From what I've read it was apparently an issue to do with early firmware versions, not a lack of gamut.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133649\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
As for the lack of reds, I can say that using the latest firmware has given me some very brilliant reds, with very good detail, in a photo of a lantern flower blown up to 24 x 16.
I will add, for what it's worth, that I am very satisfied with my Z3100. I am producing sellable and gallery quality prints with ease. I've wasted a few prints so far, but those have been due to my learning to use the printer (GE on/off) and simple aesthetic changes.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=133649\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I’m sure I’ll be able to do get to that state too and hopefully soon.
Thanks,
Mike
