Luminous Landscape Forum

Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: Richard S on March 10, 2009, 03:48:18 pm

Title: Own a Z3100 Is is worth going to the Z3200?
Post by: Richard S on March 10, 2009, 03:48:18 pm

Hi Everyone,

I recently purchased a Z3100 at a very good price.  Outside of an early problem with sheet feeding, I've been very happy with its operation and the results.  The printer decided to behave itself as soon as an HP Tech showed up (possibly fear) and has printed sheet paper of all brands flawlessly ever since.

HP has a $1200 rebate on the Z3200's and I'm tempted to upgrade.  Has anyone upgraded from a 3100 to a 3200, and do you feel it was a good investment?  Most everything I print is either landscape or nature photography and mostly photo paper.

Thanks very much,
Richard

Title: Own a Z3100 Is is worth going to the Z3200?
Post by: neil snape on March 11, 2009, 02:39:46 am

Quote from: Richard S

Hi Everyone,

I recently purchased a Z3100 at a very good price.  Outside of an early problem with sheet feeding, I've been very happy with its operation and the results.  The printer decided to behave itself as soon as an HP Tech showed up (possibly fear) and has printed sheet paper of all brands flawlessly ever since.

HP has a $1200 rebate on the Z3200's and I'm tempted to upgrade.  Has anyone upgraded from a 3100 to a 3200, and do you feel it was a good investment?  Most everything I print is either landscape or nature photography and mostly photo paper.

Thanks very much,
Richard

I didn't see any real problems in image quality on photo papers on the 3100. Some extreme reds are a lot better on the 3200. Some images some of the time like fall leaves will be much better too.
What I see improved on the 3200 that is worth a lot is: substantial improvements in the HP Print Center Profiling. Also the APS package is now Monaco Profiler which is leaps ahead of the old ProfileMaker base. Paper handling is the same. Media controls though are also different, perhaps easier to gain access to custom media set ups. Reds as expected are where they should have been relative to Canon. Printer stability is much improved, there are literally few issues at all on the 3200.
So hard call: to swap or not.   If you print a lot of matte in color, then yes. IF you profile a lot and want flashy colors then yes. If you are totally satisfied with the current output, and you are not going to print for others then no.

Title: Own a Z3100 Is is worth going to the Z3200?
Post by: coellis on March 11, 2009, 04:44:32 am

Quote from: neil snape

Also the APS package is now Monaco Profiler which is leaps ahead of the old ProfileMaker base.

Neil, same applies to latest APS and Z3100 or not?

Thanks

Title: Own a Z3100 Is is worth going to the Z3200?
Post by: Richard S on March 11, 2009, 11:22:52 am

Thanks very much Neil.

I spent a day (whole day) of serious color management using the Z3100 profiling and the ColorEyes program for the monitors.  The resulting test prints were so dead on to the monitor display I'm almost afraid to tamper with the "Ecosystem" I've created.  Before now, I've always had to take certain things into consideration for the final print, and usually had to run a few tests before "The Big Print".

I appreciate your input and possibly the biggest thing that will influence my decision is whether I opt to upgrade from 24" to 44".  I was going to get the APS for the 3100 but based on what you have to say regarding the superiority of the Monaco, that's another vote toward the 3200.

Thanks again,
Richard

Title: Own a Z3100 Is is worth going to the Z3200?
Post by: dajaka on March 11, 2009, 02:23:25 pm

I just ran the APS that came with my Z3100 and checked for updates.

The newest version is 1.4 which says it is compatible with the Z3200.

Is this version the one using the new Monaco color engine?

Thanks.

Title: Own a Z3100 Is is worth going to the Z3200?
Post by: neil snape on March 11, 2009, 04:41:19 pm

I don't know, but do know the latest 1.4 on the 3200 runs Monaco. I have no way of confirming the 3100 with APS . If you can just take a look at the data in Colorthink , it should tell you. Before they were Profile Maker library 6.01 if I remember right.
What I do know the 3200 HP profiling is night and day better on the 3200 over the precedent. I still prefer APS but it is closer than one would think.

Title: Own a Z3100 Is is worth going to the Z3200?
Post by: neil snape on March 12, 2009, 09:50:37 am

Quote from: georgek

An APS one done in 2007 says Version = "ProfilingLib 6.0.0 1.4 Sep  4 2007", a different one with the latest APS 1.4 says Version = "ProfilingLib 6.0.2 1.4 Sep  2 2008" and one made with iSis and Profilemaker says Version = "ProfilingLib 5.0.8 1.75.16.2 Dec  8 2006".  The iSis with Profilemaker is quite clear but the APS ones are not. Any idea?

Yes the Library is a hybrid developed by a joint venture between HP and Gretag/X-Rite. This is why I said it is V6.0 something. The last profile I made in V1.4 on the 3200 is showing two entries both Monaco , one being unparsable, the other a text field with CxF data. Being CxF it is probably readable in ColorPort. So is the 3100 with 1.4 different or not?

Title: Own a Z3100 Is is worth going to the Z3200?
Post by: neil snape on March 12, 2009, 11:06:36 am

Quote from: georgek

Sorry Neil, my fault. The data in my post was from a Z3100ps GP with APS.

The PS model has exactly the same APS as the photo 3100. So it is probably that the 3100 uses ProfileMaker libraries, and the 3200 uses Monaco.