RIP program or Xrite?

[Rita Swinford]

 
My system aged faster than I thought and IMAGEPRINT7 and XRite's i1Display somehow negatively interacted (both companies deny this should have happened). IMAGEPRINT failed and failed on reinstall and it just got worse.  The system's analyst that helps me says I need to do a complete WINDOWS reinstall and really need to to upgrade to a truly 64-bit compliant program (which XRite's is as well as IMAGEPRINT9).  IMAGEPRINT/Colorbyte says their ICC profiles and spectrophotometers are better than what the i1Pro will generate.  IMAGEPRINT9 is ~750$ while the i1Pro (with educational discount) is ~1000$. 

Any opinions on this investment for me?  I do not use more than 4 or 5 papers.  I have a 7800 Epson, wishing I could upgrade but the cost of both of these doesn't permit at this time. Are they equivalent?

Thank you.

[digitaldog]

IMAGEPRINT/Colorbyte says their ICC profiles and spectrophotometers are better than what the i1Pro will generate. 

Maybe (maybe once they fix their profile engine so blues don’t shift magenta). I’m sure they use a more expensive Spectrophotometer, how that affects the final process is up to debate.

The question is, do you want to build all your own profiles for any paper or rely on them? If this is just a profile issue (you don’t care about all the other functionality IP provides), then build your own profiles.

[bill t.]

There are countless sources of errors in every scientific measurement including those taken for color management.  I think the Achilles Heel of all "canned" profiles is that they were not made on your specific printer, with the particular batch of ink then loaded, with the particular batch of media being used.  Art media in particular has pretty significant batch variability, especially if it's canvas.

Each of those (and other things like printhead aging) must introduce a certain amount of variability.  I have think that will tend to favor measurements taken locally with a merely adequate measuring system, versus those taken elsewhere with a superb measuring system, but not from the exact same printer, ink, and media batches that are needing calibration.

And that may be more applicable to old printers with tired printheads compared to newer examples.  If your profiles are shifting blue to magenta, a hot-dog spectrophotometer is beside the point because the data being evaluated doesn't apply to your specific setup, although it can also mean you're just outside the gamut on the blue.

In one scenario, you can print targets on your system, then have somebody with top-notch equipment and skills create spot-on profiles from them that will compensate as fully as possible for all the particular color quirks in your system.  Cheaper than a RIP by far, if all you want from the RIP is profiles.  There are several zealot-quality profile makers and color management consultants on this forum, and I've heard Andy is one of them.

[JaneS]

digitaldog, the issue you report is very unusual behavior. IP typically reproduces blues more accurately than any other print driver. If your blues are pulling magenta, make sure you’re using the correct profile and print settings for the paper and perform a nozzle check. It sounds like your cyan channel may be plugged. If you’ve already done that, and you’re using IP9, send us a test file so we can take a look at it.

[digitaldog]

digitaldog, the issue you report is very unusual behavior. IP typically reproduces blues more accurately than any other print driver. If your blues are pulling magenta, make sure you’re using the correct profile and print settings for the paper and perform a nozzle check. It sounds like your cyan channel may be plugged. If you’ve already done that, and you’re using IP9, send us a test file so we can take a look at it.

It is an older issue, perhaps John updated the profile engine but at least going back to IP6 or so, and based on work I did on site with an IP customer (don’t recall the version but he was driving a 11880), no question that the profiles exhibited a magenta shift that a custom profile didn’t. But then I’ve been told for years the IP profiles don’t do this and yet I see otherwise <g>.