Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: ColorMunki vs. APS  (Read 6961 times)

mballent

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 58
    • http://www.ballentphoto.com
ColorMunki vs. APS
« on: March 25, 2008, 03:00:52 pm »

OK I saw the video for the X-Rite ColorMunki and it certainly appears to be pretty cool.  Our own color guru Andrew Rodney called it scary good, so I am thinking that I could get away using that instead of APS for my Z3100... Any thoughts on that... It would be half the price of the APS solution and it appeared to be very easy to use.
Logged
-Michael
[url=http://www.ballentphoto.co

Doombrain

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 211
ColorMunki vs. APS
« Reply #1 on: March 26, 2008, 06:04:55 am »

Quote
OK I saw the video for the X-Rite ColorMunki and it certainly appears to be pretty cool.  Our own color guru Andrew Rodney called it scary good, so I am thinking that I could get away using that instead of APS for my Z3100... Any thoughts on that... It would be half the price of the APS solution and it appeared to be very easy to use.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=184201\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

the built in system for the Z sucks, hard. nice idea, poorly implemented.
Logged

Ernst Dinkla

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4005
ColorMunki vs. APS
« Reply #2 on: March 26, 2008, 06:31:20 am »

Quote
the built in system for the Z sucks, hard. nice idea, poorly implemented.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Based on experience ?


Ernst Dinkla


Try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
Logged

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3263
ColorMunki vs. APS
« Reply #3 on: March 26, 2008, 06:46:12 am »

Quote
OK I saw the video for the X-Rite ColorMunki and it certainly appears to be pretty cool.  Our own color guru Andrew Rodney called it scary good, so I am thinking that I could get away using that instead of APS for my Z3100... Any thoughts on that... It would be half the price of the APS solution and it appeared to be very easy to use.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=184201\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It would no doubt be easy to use and profiling a projector is a nice bonus.  

APS provides a TC9.18 target that has worked very well for me in creating good profiles for my Z3100.  It is very easy to use as well and provides the ability to do some editing of your profiles.  The editing capabilities aren't in the Andrew Rodney league but they're probably all that most people would need.

APS also lets you profile paper for other people.  That might not be possible with the ColorMunki as the second target seems predicated on what it read on the first target.
Logged
Regards,
Ron

Doombrain

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 211
ColorMunki vs. APS
« Reply #4 on: March 26, 2008, 07:41:01 am »

Quote
Based on experience ?
Ernst Dinkla
Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=184356\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

yeah, I'm not a fan on the Z and i have one right next to me now which i've not used in over three months in favor of a epson 11880.

Negative point IMO:
it takes an hour to start up
white only backing
you HAVE to use the GO channel on gloss or the bronzing is comical
very slow output
poor reds
ink mist issues on spectro
back loader
buggy driver software
APS software not very advanced
closed loop spectro
no edge to edge on matte
12 channel with no real improvement on gamut from 8 channel printers


plus points:
good media cutting system
great packaging
auto bad nozzle remapping
informative information panel on printer
Logged

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3263
ColorMunki vs. APS
« Reply #5 on: March 26, 2008, 09:17:16 am »

Quote
yeah, I'm not a fan on the Z and i have one right next to me now which i've not used in over three months in favor of a epson 11880.

Negative point IMO:
it takes an hour to start up
white only backing
you HAVE to use the GO channel on gloss or the bronzing is comical
very slow output
poor reds
ink mist issues on spectro
back loader
buggy driver software
APS software not very advanced
closed loop spectro
no edge to edge on matte
12 channel with no real improvement on gamut from 8 channel printers


plus points:
good media cutting system
great packaging
auto bad nozzle remapping
informative information panel on printer

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=184369\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

just curious.... can you elaborate on the negative of a closed loop spectro - just trying to understand
Logged
Regards,
Ron

Scott Martin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1315
    • Onsight
ColorMunki vs. APS
« Reply #6 on: March 26, 2008, 09:33:16 am »

Quote
just curious.... can you elaborate on the negative of a closed loop spectro - just trying to understand[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=184386\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That's a negative for me and a number of my clients as well. If you have a shop with a bunch of devices it's nice to profile all of them the same way to provide the highest level of consistency and quality possible. If the on board profiling is used on a Z, the quality is not only different but it's inferior to professional level external profiling.

Of course, that would change if more external packages could utilize the onboard spectro. The GMG RIP is a good example. GMG talks with the on board spectro and makes better profiles than the HP driver or APS. One can use GMG with a variety of printers and get consistent and excellent results.

It's potentially cost effective to have a bunch of printers and one spectro, instead of a bunch of more expensive printers with their own spectros that could potentially introduce variation and lead to inconsistency. Although HP's retail costs on these printers have been high, the rebates have effectively made them about the same as the competition. On the other hand, XRite is aggressively pursing OEM deals so I wouldn't be surprised if all three fine art brands have spectros in them at some point in the future.
Logged
Scott Martin
www.on-sight.com

rdonson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3263
ColorMunki vs. APS
« Reply #7 on: March 26, 2008, 12:00:37 pm »

Thanks for taking the time to respond, Scott.  Your points are very well reasoned.

I'm sure that I'm like a number of other Z3100 owners here in this forum in that I have only one large format printer and the built-in spectro with APS is good enough and makes sense for me.  When I looked at a new large format printer I did factor in buying a standalone x-rite spectro if I went Canon or Epson.
Logged
Regards,
Ron

Scott Martin

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1315
    • Onsight
ColorMunki vs. APS
« Reply #8 on: March 26, 2008, 12:25:07 pm »

Good point Ron. I hope it's working out great for you. While some Z series owners have been happy, others found that they've had to buy equipment (or services) for externally made profiles anyway.
Logged
Scott Martin
www.on-sight.com

Ernst Dinkla

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4005
ColorMunki vs. APS
« Reply #9 on: March 26, 2008, 04:11:53 pm »

Quote
yeah, I'm not a fan on the Z and i have one right next to me now which i've not used in over three months in favor of a epson 11880.

Negative point IMO:
it takes an hour to start up
white only backing
you HAVE to use the GO channel on gloss or the bronzing is comical
very slow output
poor reds
ink mist issues on spectro
back loader
buggy driver software
APS software not very advanced
closed loop spectro
no edge to edge on matte
12 channel with no real improvement on gamut from 8 channel printers


plus points:
good media cutting system
great packaging
auto bad nozzle remapping
informative information panel on printer

[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Horses for courses I guess.

I can understand that with a 64" wide printer that is faster than a Canon iPF9000 and the jobs that go with it in volume and size the Z3100 stays idle. 24" or 44" ?

With the printer on I do not see that long start up. With the gloss enhancer it delivers the best gloss of all. The fade resistance is twice that of the others.  You can use the APS for other printers too and given the total price it is a good deal compared to other solutions with automatic spectro reading + profile editing etc. The integrated calibration has been a more important feature than the integrated profiling in my opinion but I had profile creation software and a (manual) spectro already.

I share your observation on the driver software and the back loader.


Ernst Dinkla

Try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
Logged

keith_cooper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 473
    • Northlight Images
ColorMunki vs. APS
« Reply #10 on: March 29, 2008, 09:10:06 am »

The ColorMunki delivers some nice profiles, but do remember the market it is aimed at.

If you understand rendering intents and why you might choose to use one to another, then you are in the 'expert' category, not a typical ColorMunki user ;-)

I've (like -everyone- else who has posted comments) only had the latest beta software to test with my CM so I don't really want to make detailed comments on CM profile quality at this stage, other than it produced perfectly acceptable profiles (perceptual RI) for my Epson 1160 and HP K80.  Note that I don't use either of these office printers for my fine art prints ;-) (Epson 9600 and 7880)

The CM is firmly aimed at a (big) market, most of whom will have far more of a "that's good enough"  attitude to profiling than some here on this list.

I have to keep remembering this for when I'm putting materials together for a longer article than my initial review Still, not actually selling profiles or having direct business connections with any of the companies I test stuff for really helps keep a bit of perspective ;-)

I do quite a few talks on colour management for local camera clubs and I've long had a quick 'test' I sometimes apply when I'm asked a detailed question by someone wanting to get into their own profiling etc.  It's simply "Do you paint behind your radiators?" if they look at me as if the whole concept of not painting all the wall behind a radiator is unthinkable, then I make sure to point out that a key part of colour management is knowing when to stop, when the results meet your needs... As you might guess, I've never been called a perfectionist ;-) :-) and no I don't even know whether all the parts of the walls behind my radiators are painted - the visible bits are.

How does this relate to using the CM? Well, if you are of a more 'exacting' nature then I think the 'simplifications' of the CM would rapidly annoy.  In any case I really would suggest waiting to see comparisons from shipping versions of the CM software, from a variety of sources before deciding if it would fit your needs.

Keith Cooper

PS For my own profiles I can be both lazy and exacting by quickly measuring thousands of patches on an iSis - just because I stop at 'good enough' doesn't mean that they can't be damn fine profiles :-)
Logged
bye for now -- Keith
[url=http://www.nor

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
ColorMunki vs. APS
« Reply #11 on: April 11, 2008, 04:27:15 pm »

Hi!

I have a quite blunt question:

I have a Print Fix Pro and I'm not all that impressed by the profiles it generates for my Canon i9950. Should I consider the ColorMunki or would I be better spending two-three times as much on an I1 Spectro?

I'm thinking about buying an Epson Stylus Pro 3800, but my shopping list is long and cash flow is limited. I understand that Epson priners are very consistent from sample to sample, so you can use vendor profiles with some confidence.

Where should I put my priorities?!

All comments are much appreciated.

Erik

Quote
The ColorMunki delivers some nice profiles, but do remember the market it is aimed at.

If you understand rendering intents and why you might choose to use one to another, then you are in the 'expert' category, not a typical ColorMunki user ;-)

I've (like -everyone- else who has posted comments) only had the latest beta software to test with my CM so I don't really want to make detailed comments on CM profile quality at this stage, other than it produced perfectly acceptable profiles (perceptual RI) for my Epson 1160 and HP K80.  Note that I don't use either of these office printers for my fine art prints ;-) (Epson 9600 and 7880)

The CM is firmly aimed at a (big) market, most of whom will have far more of a "that's good enough"  attitude to profiling than some here on this list.

I have to keep remembering this for when I'm putting materials together for a longer article than my initial review Still, not actually selling profiles or having direct business connections with any of the companies I test stuff for really helps keep a bit of perspective ;-)

I do quite a few talks on colour management for local camera clubs and I've long had a quick 'test' I sometimes apply when I'm asked a detailed question by someone wanting to get into their own profiling etc.  It's simply "Do you paint behind your radiators?" if they look at me as if the whole concept of not painting all the wall behind a radiator is unthinkable, then I make sure to point out that a key part of colour management is knowing when to stop, when the results meet your needs... As you might guess, I've never been called a perfectionist ;-) :-) and no I don't even know whether all the parts of the walls behind my radiators are painted - the visible bits are.

How does this relate to using the CM? Well, if you are of a more 'exacting' nature then I think the 'simplifications' of the CM would rapidly annoy.  In any case I really would suggest waiting to see comparisons from shipping versions of the CM software, from a variety of sources before deciding if it would fit your needs.

Keith Cooper

PS For my own profiles I can be both lazy and exacting by quickly measuring thousands of patches on an iSis - just because I stop at 'good enough' doesn't mean that they can't be damn fine profiles :-)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=185179\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

neil snape

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1447
    • http://www.neilsnape.com
ColorMunki vs. APS
« Reply #12 on: April 12, 2008, 02:32:42 am »

Quote
Hi!

I have a quite blunt question:

I have a Print Fix Pro and I'm not all that impressed by the profiles it generates for my Canon i9950. Should I consider the ColorMunki or would I be better spending two-three times as much on an I1 Spectro?

I'm thinking about buying an Epson Stylus Pro 3800, but my shopping list is long and cash flow is limited. I understand that Epson priners are very consistent from sample to sample, so you can use vendor profiles with some confidence.

Where should I put my priorities?!

All comments are much appreciated.

Erik
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=188800\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The Munki is still having last minutes changes. The i1 is a very solid mature device and the software very sure both OEM and third party. From what we read the new device is a breakthrough and works very well already. It makes sense to choose a device that creates profiles that are close to the i1 inexpensive and easy to use.
Epson are consistent from printer to printer, and if there is a problem there is a calibration app that can align them. Hopefully they will include the munki as a target reading device in the future.

As far as the Z and  APS , the integration is top notch. The choice that it be Gretag/Logo software will create profiles very similar to ProfileMaker. The automation and redundancy of a fully automated spectro cannot be beat for the price of APS, considering you get an i1 D2 included.
It is a large format printer, and if you are profiling large format media it could not be easier to use with results equal to Profile Maker.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up