Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: holmherzer on May 15, 2006, 02:17:13 pm
-
Has anyone found any new information or reviews on the ipf5000. I have looked everywhere I know to look and haven't seen anything with any detail. I am patiently waiting to buy a new printer and would love to find out how the Canon is measuring up.
David
-
The printers are becoming available now. There are no reviews yet that I'm aware of.
I expect to have one for testing within days. I'll post initial impressions as soon as possible.
Michael
-
Thank you, I look forward to reading what you have to say.
David
-
Has anyone found any new information or reviews on the ipf5000. I have looked everywhere I know to look and haven't seen anything with any detail. I am patiently waiting to buy a new printer and would love to find out how the Canon is measuring up.
David
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65557\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have been testing for a bit more than a week, and so far the results are outstanding. I had not had much time to do comparison prints to the Epson, but at the very least the image quality is just as good as the 4800. Add in things like user changable print heads, a (at least 2x print speed), the ability to leave the roll holder loaded and still use the cassette feeder, auto head checking, etc, etc.
I think Epson should be very worried. It is very impressive.
-
Danamr, have you tried switching media yet - between matte and non-matte? How does it handle that change? Have you had a chance yet to see how it performs in respect of bronzing, gloss differential? Are you using only Canon papers with it, or have you had a chance to test other papers?
-
Canon has apparently calibrated this printer with a custom built target of 69,000 patches. I would have imagined there would be limited gain after 3000 patches or so, but we will see.
The increase of gamut with the extra 3 colours over the Epson has not been reported to be very significant, but I await exact 3D plots. Linearity will be very important for high end users.
So will handling and performance with non-Canon media . I would like to see someone coming up with a pre head vacuuming of paper to reduce clogging from loose bits of cotton (or wood !) that both come with rolls and packed sheets and is produced within printers by the cutter. Nash Editions did this with the old Iris' years ago. There are a lot of nozzles in this new monster.
Epson , I note, is spending a lot on advertising, so things are hotting up at long last.
Bring on the lions!
Cheers,
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au
-
Just based on the tidbits I hear, I have a sense that Epson will need to spend on alot more than just advertising. The clogging issue could also be a very distinguishing parameter between these machines, but it takes months of operational experience to get a reliable handle on that variable - be it absolute or comparative.
-
I just recieved one on Friday and I had a little trouble with the print setup. That window is a lot more complicated then the Epson driver. There was some matermerism using High gloss Photo paper, but that may be my inexperience.
One thing I found was the roll holder is a $249.00 option, with the Epson 4800 it is standard equipment The machine ships with the print heads in separate packages and you install them. The ink that ships with the machine is 90mm carts (starter carts)
Overall the machine is well engineered and prints quite fast. I will be testing it further in the next few days
-
Danamr, have you tried switching media yet - between matte and non-matte? How does it handle that change? Have you had a chance yet to see how it performs in respect of bronzing, gloss differential? Are you using only Canon papers with it, or have you had a chance to test other papers?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=66152\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
So far I have been working with Ilford Smooth Pearl, and more than anything else running profile targets to see what settings get the best gamut with the printer. My first trys show some extension over the Epson, but not huge. One issue is that there are areas where settings are not really explained. There is no explaination of what the special 1-5 settings do. It's my understanding they are mainly increasing ink density, and I have printed a couple of profile target sets to see what the difference is between 1-5 but have not had a chance to build the profiles to see what they look like.
I am not seeing any bronzing on the smooth pearl, i will be testing glossy media next week.
I have not experemented with matte papers yet, and I have some Crane Silver Rag I want to try on it too. I have gotten very little Canon stock in yet, and am still waiting for a roll feeder so I am a little limited in terms of testing so far.
-
I just recieved one on Friday and I had a little trouble with the print setup. That window is a lot more complicated then the Epson driver. There was some matermerism using High gloss Photo paper, but that may be my inexperience.
One thing I found was the roll holder is a $249.00 option, with the Epson 4800 it is standard equipment The machine ships with the print heads in separate packages and you install them. The ink that ships with the machine is 90mm carts (starter carts)
Overall the machine is well engineered and prints quite fast. I will be testing it further in the next few days
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=66160\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I would say different rather than complicated in the print drivers. Are you using the plug in? I found that was a lot simpler work flow than the print driver. The prints I have seen on gloss don't show any issues, but I have not tried my self. What setting did you use? I suspect something like special 4 or 5 might get the best result.
I do agree that the printer seems well made.
-
I'm curious about how much ink was left in the starter cartridges after the ink lines were filled.
-
I'm curious about how much ink was left in the starter cartridges after the ink lines were filled.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=66174\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I am not close to running out, and have printed about 12 13x19 prints, plus a bunch of 3600 patch test targets.
Nice thing about the printer is the cartridges drain from the bottom, so there should be little waste.
-
I would say different rather than complicated in the print drivers. Are you using the plug in? I found that was a lot simpler work flow than the print driver. The prints I have seen on gloss don't show any issues, but I have not tried my self. What setting did you use? I suspect something like special 4 or 5 might get the best result.
I do agree that the printer seems well made.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=66170\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have not used the plug-in yet, but I will try it, if it makes things easier. IMHO the regular printer driver has to many screens that need to be changed. I am a total novice with this driver and it will take some time to get it right, especially in the area of paper selection. You get errors on the printer if the paper size is not the same on the printer and the driver
As for ink remaining after the initial fill there was about 75% left, The meter reads what is left in the carts, not whats in the lines, so I suspect there is really about 90% left
-
I have not used the plug-in yet, but I will try it, if it makes things easier. IMHO the regular printer driver has to many screens that need to be changed. I am a total novice with this driver and it will take some time to get it right, especially in the area of paper selection. You get errors on the printer if the paper size is not the same on the printer and the driver
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=66183\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The software overrides the printer presets. The warnings give you information that something has changed from what you set in the printer so you can do something about it if you choose to. They can be turned off in the printer if you want.
-
Check out Red River Paper, redriverpaper.com. They just did a quick review of the iPF5000 that they just got. Apperently the Canon software even reports how much ink was used for a particular print.
Now when will the iPF9000 be available/shipping?
-
I've read the Red River review, as well as the one on InkjetArt. Unfortunately, both of them are thoroughly unimpressive as review efforts and do not provide a reliable basis for making an informed decision about whether to purchase this machine.
-
I've read the Red River review, as well as the one on InkjetArt. Unfortunately, both of them are thoroughly unimpressive as review efforts and do not provide a reliable basis for making an informed decision about whether to purchase this machine.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=67528\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Mark,
I agree. I have indicated in this thread and elsewhere that we need at least accurate evaluations of gamut, dynamic range, ink linearity, nozzle clogging and cleaning cycles, and outgassing rather than the "Gee Whizz" reports that have come in so far. Resistance to abrasion and water should also be addressed. This sets a challenge for Michael , but I'm certain he is up to it. If Epson is indeed resting on it's rather imperfect laurels these reports are important to all of us.
Cheers,
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au
-
Brian, yes indeed. But to get a good fix on clogging and cleaning cycles these machines need to be tested under various conditions of usage and environment over a longer period of time than may be desirable for publishing a review on the other factors you mention. Like you, I am keen to see Michael's review at least for factors relating to print quality and user-friendliness of the printer itself. He explained why it will take some time, so let us just wait and see. I would be very surprised if Epson is just sitting around waiting to see what happens to its market share, but of course I have no idea what they may be cooking-up - likewise regarding HP for that matter. Times are getting interesting in this market niche.
-
Has anyone in the UK receivied their printer?
I've had one on order for what seems like ages and every two weeks or so since the end of April I've been told it will be shipping "the end of next week"
-
Has anyone in the UK receivied their printer?
I've had one on order for what seems like ages and every two weeks or so since the end of April I've been told it will be shipping "the end of next week"
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68226\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Jamie. I was just wondering from wherabouts in the uk you ordered it.
-
Has anyone in the UK receivied their printer?
I've had one on order for what seems like ages and every two weeks or so since the end of April I've been told it will be shipping "the end of next week"
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68226\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes Jamie, me too! Canon had withdrawn them from the distributors at the 11th hour, apparently to install new software (it's rumoured that this first batch of 40 had mistakenly shipped with Japanese software!).
They were promised to land again this week and then be shipped same day, but it is now Friday and my dealer still cannot get a definite date from Canon. However I am reassured that we will still all get the special 'early adopters' price.
Here's hoping...
Martin
-
I just got word that dealers in Canada who have signed-up for them will start receiving a limited supply very soon.
-
I have not used the plug-in yet, but I will try it, if it makes things easier. IMHO the regular printer driver has to many screens that need to be changed. I am a total novice with this driver and it will take some time to get it right, especially in the area of paper selection. You get errors on the printer if the paper size is not the same on the printer and the driver
As for ink remaining after the initial fill there was about 75% left, The meter reads what is left in the carts, not whats in the lines, so I suspect there is really about 90% left
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=66183\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I posted (thought I did anyway) yesterday - but it is not in here. I also just acquired the iPF5000. I do not have a lot of extra time as I work and then I learn this machine, so I will share as I am able. It is so advanced over any of the Epsons I have had. You can get prints from Inkjetart from this and x800 Epson to allow some comparison. I did that. That satisfied me that quality comparison was going to be a non issue (how good can good be to the eye anyway?). I think we are at the point now where the issues forward are to be about archiviability and flexibility and other issues - not perceptual quality (in other words how can it get better?). The options and software and plugin - are a lot of learning for me. I did try the plug in and it does much better on the image I printed than printing direct from PS did. I have done glossy and Summerset velvet uncoated test so far. Everything so far is so good. Other issues - need time to know. I heard there are only about 80 released in USA so far. I am wondering if a user group (like on Yahoo groups) will be formed? The EpsonWideFormat group showed little interest recently when asked about including this printer as part of the allowed topics. In summary as you can see I choose this - over the 4800 or anything HP offers (or will actually for the time being). At this point I am having Zero second thoughts about that. I suspect the Canon - if no bumps show up - will be very popular. And about the price - it comes with ethernet card, the 4800 does not. I wanted that card so actually the list price considering those, is pretty close.
Chow,
Gary
-
My review of the iPF5000 and a comparison with the Epson 4800 will be published here next Wednesday (June 21).
I found clear and visible image quality advantages as well as operational ones.
Stay tuned.
Michael
-
My review of the iPF5000 and a comparison with the Epson 4800 will be published here next Wednesday (June 21).
I found clear and visible image quality advantages as well as operational ones.
Stay tuned.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68400\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thank GOD, well thank Michael I've been waiting to order the Canon (I use both matte and gloss papers) but have put it off since the other "reviews" have stated that it's NOT continuous tone and the samples certainly show the pixels.
G
-
I love the idea of user-replacable heads.
-
Even though I have one, I am looking forward the review.
I do not understand how anyone arrived at thinking or saying it is not continious tone after seeing even - not the highest and best settings-- prints results. I just was able to get one Summerset Velvet RW uncoated print (out of paper now) and the mat black ink and the other colors - all are nice and vibrant.
SVRW paper black measured 1.39 dmax. Epson hvy wt matte paper gave 1.54 dmax. I do not have ready references so I am not sure how these stack up - or even if I could extract better blacks than these. More time and experimenting will have to pass to answer that. More reason to look forward to Michaels review!
Gary
Thank GOD, well thank Michael I've been waiting to order the Canon (I use both matte and gloss papers) but have put it off since the other "reviews" have stated that it's NOT continuous tone and the samples certainly show the pixels.
G
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68401\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Koday Ultima hi-gloss - photo black (of course) 2.4 dmax.
Gary
Even though I have one, I am looking forward the review.
I do not understand how anyone arrived at thinking or saying it is not continious tone after seeing even - not the highest and best settings-- prints results. I just was able to get one Summerset Velvet RW uncoated print (out of paper now) and the mat black ink and the other colors - all are nice and vibrant.
SVRW paper black measured 1.39 dmax. Epson hvy wt matte paper gave 1.54 dmax. I do not have ready references so I am not sure how these stack up - or even if I could extract better blacks than these. More time and experimenting will have to pass to answer that. More reason to look forward to Michaels review!
Gary
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68415\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Even though I have one, I am looking forward the review.
I do not understand how anyone arrived at thinking or saying it is not continious tone after seeing even - not the highest and best settings-- prints results. I just was able to get one Summerset Velvet RW uncoated print (out of paper now) and the mat black ink and the other colors - all are nice and vibrant.
SVRW paper black measured 1.39 dmax. Epson hvy wt matte paper gave 1.54 dmax. I do not have ready references so I am not sure how these stack up - or even if I could extract better blacks than these. More time and experimenting will have to pass to answer that. More reason to look forward to Michaels review!
Gary
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=68415\")
"Photographic quality is lacking a little if you are up close. We did not see what could be called continuous tone in our prints. However, virtually impossible to tell that Prograf prints are not from a traditonal photo lab when viewed at normal distance."
[a href=\"http://www.redrivercatalog.com/infocenter/articles/canonprografipf5000.html]http://www.redrivercatalog.com/infocenter/...rafipf5000.html[/url]
"The output from the iPF5000 looks pretty good. My initial review said that the prints were grainy, I'm going to rescind that. Comparing prints from the Epson 7800, 4000 and R2400; the iPF5000 looks almost the same in my opinion. Sure the prints are a bit grainy but all of the prints are if you zoom in far enough."
http://www.inkjetart.com/canon/wide/iPF5000.html#review (http://www.inkjetart.com/canon/wide/iPF5000.html#review)
Granted I believe they only used Red River paper (I don't care for) but when you click on their samples the Canon shows much more grain IMO.
I've been waiting for Michael's review since I know it will be the best review available. I can't believe one of the BIG 3 can't come up with the "Holy Grail" of color printers (13x19 in 10 seconds, able to print matte or gloss without ink change, true continuous tone, 2000 year archival prints, perfect color accuracy, waterproof prints, self calibration, etc.) I'm NOT asking for much
I've been using Epson for many years now, it'll be weird buying a Canon, but then again it was weird buying my 1st Canon DSLR after shooting with Nikon for 25+ years.
G
-
The non-continuous tone thing probably came from the review at InkJetArt (http://www.inkjetart.com/canon/wide/iPF5000.html) where they took a 0.25" x 0.375" section of an 8 x 10 print and blew it up to 4.167" x 5.931" @72dpi.
I've got a test print from them and looking at it with a 4X loupe, I am hard-pressed to see anything that looks like grain let alone what they show on their review. I would have to say that it is very continuous tone.
-
The non-continuous tone thing probably came from the review at InkJetArt (http://www.inkjetart.com/canon/wide/iPF5000.html) where they took a 0.25" x 0.375" section of an 8 x 10 print and blew it up to 4.167" x 5.931" @72dpi.
I've got a test print from them and looking at it with a 4X loupe, I am hard-pressed to see anything that looks like grain let alone what they show on their review. I would have to say that it is very continuous tone.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68422\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That's one, but Red River review also stated something similar.
"When viewed at the proper distance relative to the size of the print, the iPF5000 produces high quality photo reproductions. 9 out of 10 people could probably not tell they were looking at an inkjet print.
When viewed up close, prints off our Prograf 5000 showed a visible dot structure. We were suprised that they did not have a continous tone appearance. The dot pattern was present even at the top 2400x2400 quality setting (see left) and was more pronounced when we used resin coated photo glossy and luster papers. Dots were visible to a lesser extent on matte and art media. Under a loupe, the dot structure is revealed further, with dots overlapping far less often than on a competitive printer like the Epson 4800."
Canon 5000
(http://www.redrivercatalog.com/infocenter/articles/images/canondots_2.jpg)
Epson 4800
(http://www.redrivercatalog.com/infocenter/articles/images/epsondots_2.jpg)
G
-
It's impossible to know what settings they used or whether of not their printer was properly alligned.
I can report that on the iPF5000 that I have this is definately not the case. These prints have been viewed by a number of very experienced and knowledable observers, and none see anything other than continious tone.
It's time to put this issue to bed once and for all.
Michael
-
It's impossible to know what settings they used or whether of not their printer was properly alligned.
I can report that on the iPF5000 that I have this is definately not the case. These prints have been viewed by a number of very experienced and knowledable observers, and none see anything other than continious tone.
It's time to put this issue to bed once and for all.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68424\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Agreed. My father had many old sayings that he instilled in me, one was, believe 1/2 of what you see and none of what you hear. Michael your opinion I value and I'm sure your review will be complete and accurate. It was interesting to read the initial "reviews" in regards to the Canon IPF5000, because I thought I would be reading that this printer was going to set the standard by which all others would be judged.
G
-
There is no dot pattern. I don't know the methodologies others are using, but I'm in unidirectional 16 pass mode using Qimage and re-printing wedding prints I already did on my Epson R1800 on the IPF5000 and the IPF5000 pics look just as smooth even examined as close as you can get. This is true whether I print on Epsons premium luster or (what should tell if there would be a difference) on Epson Photo Glossy.
In addition, the color range difference is quite noticable in the shadows or in greens and blues not even in the shadows.
I printed some lake tahoe shots I did 2 weeks ago on both printers and they are just outstanding on the Canon. All the pics I've been printing where I've printed before, lay people and my graphics artist son prefer the Canon.
I have not played with the lower settings or bi-diretional yet to see if I can modify my workflow to produce dots. I'm not in a hurry anyway. I just wanted trouble free printing with a lower per page cost and a wider gamut. At this point, I'm getting exactly what I wanted.
My roll feeder addition is on order. I still can't print borderless yet. Also, the printer driver requires some careful print paper choices or the driver will not let you use the cassette tray, but that's just a learning curve issue and then a re-profile issue once you find a paper type that works.
Gone are the cartoony greens and the blues - just outstanding.
Here are the two specific pics where I noticed quite an improvement over what I had gotten from the Epson (and both printers are calibrated the same with Eye-one):
http://www.fototime.com/3E8A57AF6B5A338/orig.jpg (http://www.fototime.com/3E8A57AF6B5A338/orig.jpg)
(that's the ones where the greens look very cartoony on my Epson R1800)
http://www.fototime.com/03E002F1A9A2CBC/orig.jpg (http://www.fototime.com/03E002F1A9A2CBC/orig.jpg)
that's the one where the blues are outstanding on the Canon
Sorry - both pics are sRgb online. Printing aRGB on the Canon look better.
(edited to fix broken picture links)
-
There is a challange I am having with the ipF. I have been making profiles, so I am in the habit from Epson days of chosing usually gloss paper and heavywt (for heavier ink lay down) for printer media choices. So I do that, print targets, go to printing images - with the selected media choices - on 8.5x11 paper. Images are 8.1"x10.1". They are all clipped to about 8.1"x~8.8". This is using the top tray as so far these media choices I am using (and described) can not pull paper from the cassette - either top tray or roll (same as top tray anyway). There is a way around this of course, but at what quality cost? Also at the moment it is confusing as I have found no references to tell me about this - and Friday Canon CS actually said I was the problem - but I am certain it is not me - it is indeed features of the media choices and related settings. All I really want to do is put a lot of glossy paper in the cassette (8.5x11) and print at a high quality, photo images at 8.1x10.1. So far I have not been able to achieve that using sheets. Will review w/ Canon CS Monday - but like I said they don't seem to be up to speed about this either - at least not James (there are only 2 reps for this printer at this time I was told).
If you John have discovered anything please share or email me direct if open to it. Or any other of us new adaptors.
Gary
There is no dot pattern. I don't know the methodologies others are using, but I'm in unidirectional 16 pass mode using Qimage and re-printing wedding prints I already did on my Epson R1800 on the IPF5000 and the IPF5000 pics look just as smooth even examined as close as you can get. This is true whether I print on Epsons premium luster or (what should tell if there would be a difference) on Epson Photo Glossy.
In addition, the color range difference is quite noticable in the shadows or in greens and blues not even in the shadows.
I printed some lake tahoe shots I did 2 weeks ago on both printers and they are just outstanding on the Canon. All the pics I've been printing where I've printed before, lay people and my graphics artist son prefer the Canon.
I have not played with the lower settings or bi-diretional yet to see if I can modify my workflow to produce dots. I'm not in a hurry anyway. I just wanted trouble free printing with a lower per page cost and a wider gamut. At this point, I'm getting exactly what I wanted.
My roll feeder addition is on order. I still can't print borderless yet. Also, the printer driver requires some careful print paper choices or the driver will not let you use the cassette tray, but that's just a learning curve issue and then a re-profile issue once you find a paper type that works.
Gone are the cartoony greens and the blues - just outstanding.
Here are the two specific pics where I noticed quite an improvement over what I had gotten from the Epson (and both printers are calibrated the same with Eye-one):
http://www.fototime.com/3E8A57AF6B5A338/orig.jpg; (http://www.fototime.com/3E8A57AF6B5A338/orig.jpg;)
(that's the ones where the greens look very cartoony on my Epson R1800)
http://www.fototime.com/03E002F1A9A2CBC/orig.jpg; (http://www.fototime.com/03E002F1A9A2CBC/orig.jpg;)
that's the one where the blues are outstanding on the Canon
Sorry - both pics are sRgb online. Printing aRGB on the Canon look better.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68471\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I ended up using the Photo Paper set of choices so that I could profile paper and use the cassette. The two I have profiled and set up so far are the Epson Premium Luster and the Epson Premium Glossy.
As you ran into, if I pick the choices closest to those it would only let me load in the manaul tray.
Well, forget that. I want to have a stack to work with, not one at a time.
Picking the Photo Paper 'prefix' in the paper names allowed me to use the cassette and the profiles that I got were good with complete ink lay down.
I'm not sure the technical limitations on paper thickness etc, that make so many of the choices be forced to be the manual top tray. But the work around above worked fine for those 2 specific paper choices.
-
There is no dot pattern. I don't know the methodologies others are using, but I'm in unidirectional 16 pass mode using Qimage...
I went and had a look at one today. It's pretty big. There was a definite dot pattern in the prints I saw. I had them print out in 16 pass mode on a gloss paper. Not sure if it was uni or bi-directional. Given both you and Michael are seeing continuous tone it suggests it's not the printer that's the problem. Which only leaves the image or user error. The image they were printing was an 8-bit tiff given to them by Canon. They didn't have profiles for the paper they were using though as they'd only opened up the printer yesterday. I think they were still learning how to use it.
They should have profiles done by next week so I'll take an image of my own in to be printed on the new Innova Gloss Michael just reviewed.
Someone mentioned that the Photoshop plugin allows you to print 16-bit. I was wondering if that was the problem. Given you are using Qimage I guess it probably isn't...
BTW your links didn't seem to work for me.
Justin.
-
The several prints I've seen have ZERO dot pattern - NADA - NONE - on either matte or glossy prints.
I'm not saying people who see dots have vision problems. Perhaps there is a particular set of circumstances which can cause this phenominon, and those who haven't seen it simply haven't printed under those specific conditions. We have no way of knowing yet, without directed testing.
I'm very interested in questions about paper feed and centering. I'm wondering whether any who own the printer have tried to print with Epson Enhanced Matte 8.5*11 and A3 sheets in the tray and cassette and been able to stack the paper and produce centered prints.
-
I have 5 images printed from a demo model today and there is just NO visible dots, Ziltch.
four of the images were printed used the Standard Quality 4 pass setting on gloss paper and still no dots visible and the areas of large colour were what i would call continuous tone.
Now having said that a 1600dpi scan i did of one of the standard quality images does show what looks like dots, remember this is a 1600dpi scan though.
(http://ppweb.incanberra.biz/image/Image0075.jpg)
Just waiting on MR to post the review before pulling the credit card out.
cheers
Phil
-
I have printed even on plain paper - no dots. I am wildly guessing maybe the actual paper?? Anyway (not that I want to) I have NOT discovered how to have dots or other than continious tones.
Gary
I went and had a look at one today. It's pretty big. There was a definite dot pattern in the prints I saw. I had them print out in 16 pass mode on a gloss paper. Not sure if it was uni or bi-directional. Given both you and Michael are seeing continuous tone it suggests it's not the printer that's the problem. Which only leaves the image or user error. The image they were printing was an 8-bit tiff given to them by Canon. They didn't have profiles for the paper they were using though as they'd only opened up the printer yesterday. I think they were still learning how to use it.
They should have profiles done by next week so I'll take an image of my own in to be printed on the new Innova Gloss Michael just reviewed.
Someone mentioned that the Photoshop plugin allows you to print 16-bit. I was wondering if that was the problem. Given you are using Qimage I guess it probably isn't...
BTW your links didn't seem to work for me.
Justin.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68514\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I have printed even on plain paper - no dots. I am wildly guessing maybe the actual paper?? Anyway (not that I want to) I have NOT discovered how to have dots or other than continious tones.
Gary
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68535\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
hmmm...could be the paper, that's why I want to test on something like photo rag and Innova gloss. Could very well be the way it was printed, the sales guy picked a paper size and then used photoshop's scale to fit when he printed.
The dots were visible at arms length in areas of solid colour. I'm only interested in what's visible to the naked eye, not under a loupe, so I wasn't trying to pixel peep.
Anyway, Phil's scan seems to indicate there should be no dots visible to the naked eye. That's an incredible amount of detail in what would be a fairly small area of paper.
Justin.
-
John -
thank you! It works wonderfully. And the GlossyPaperHvywt profiles work just fine.
Canon CS - Donald - said he has printed ~500 8x10s so far from the 90ml carts, various levels of settings but all full color full size, and he still has roughly 1/2 full carts. This suggests good mileage from our ink.
Are you printing from the driver mostly? I have been mostly printing from the PS plug-in which I believe to be generally at least far superiour to the usual driver. I am shooting from the hip maybe, but the limited experiences I have had, this does described what I am noticing. Nevertheless, the images are looking so outstanding and I am so pleased to this point.
Gary
I ended up using the Photo Paper set of choices so that I could profile paper and use the cassette. The two I have profiled and set up so far are the Epson Premium Luster and the Epson Premium Glossy.
As you ran into, if I pick the choices closest to those it would only let me load in the manaul tray.
Well, forget that. I want to have a stack to work with, not one at a time.
Picking the Photo Paper 'prefix' in the paper names allowed me to use the cassette and the profiles that I got were good with complete ink lay down.
I'm not sure the technical limitations on paper thickness etc, that make so many of the choices be forced to be the manual top tray. But the work around above worked fine for those 2 specific paper choices.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68503\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
PS - (sorry I forgot this) -
Printing from the top tray did indeed require approximately 7/8" margin lead in and 1.25" margin exit. For the 8.5x11 I was using it meant that a full 10" length print was not possible (close of course). Print length was ~8.85".
Gary
John -
thank you! It works wonderfully. And the GlossyPaperHvywt profiles work just fine.
Canon CS - Donald - said he has printed ~500 8x10s so far from the 90ml carts, various levels of settings but all full color full size, and he still has roughly 1/2 full carts. This suggests good mileage from our ink.
Are you printing from the driver mostly? I have been mostly printing from the PS plug-in which I believe to be generally at least far superiour to the usual driver. I am shooting from the hip maybe, but the limited experiences I have had, this does described what I am noticing. Nevertheless, the images are looking so outstanding and I am so pleased to this point.
Gary
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68543\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I'm printing using QImage to the regular driver. I did try a print for grins from DPP with the plug-in, but not having Canon paper the results where not color matched at all on the Epson paper.
Printing with Qimage, turning all ICC off on the printer driver, tell QImage to use the profile created with Eye-one for that paper and pass settings (in my case 16pass) works great.
I'll have to re-profile and try the 4 pass and 8 pass settings, though. 16 pass unidirectional does not make this a speed demon. I don't know where the diminishing returns are for going bi-directional and 8 or 4 pass. But the speed should be mathematically higher if I try those other settings.
I'm assuming, though I haven't tested it, that bi-directional vs unidirectional should have no impact on a color profile. Just a safer alignment of dots. It'd be a lot of work to profile for uni/bi/4/8/16 or 6 combinations per paper I'm using. Ultimately, it'd be nice to print faster, and the type of paper may well have an effect on perceived quality at the different speed settings.
The 4 pass sample posted up looks pretty good. 4 pass,bi-directional should be about 8 times faster printing then what I'm doing now.
-
John -
When I talked with Donald this morning - he mentioned the Easy settings (I have always used advanced till now) in the driver - (printing preferences, choose paperplus, then easy settings) and mentioned using the digital camera setting instead of highest. I did, and my 8x10s are stunning with the profiles already made.
I think use the profiles and work downward with settings to see where the threshold is. So far the easysettings-digital camera is all I have experimented with.
Have you thought about joining posting at the CanonWideFormat (yahoo) list? We could be sharing this info more widely? Either way - I appreciate sharing, it is speeding me up!
Gary
I'm printing using QImage to the regular driver. I did try a print for grins from DPP with the plug-in, but not having Canon paper the results where not color matched at all on the Epson paper.
Printing with Qimage, turning all ICC off on the printer driver, tell QImage to use the profile created with Eye-one for that paper and pass settings (in my case 16pass) works great.
I'll have to re-profile and try the 4 pass and 8 pass settings, though. 16 pass unidirectional does not make this a speed demon. I don't know where the diminishing returns are for going bi-directional and 8 or 4 pass. But the speed should be mathematically higher if I try those other settings.
I'm assuming, though I haven't tested it, that bi-directional vs unidirectional should have no impact on a color profile. Just a safer alignment of dots. It'd be a lot of work to profile for uni/bi/4/8/16 or 6 combinations per paper I'm using. Ultimately, it'd be nice to print faster, and the type of paper may well have an effect on perceived quality at the different speed settings.
The 4 pass sample posted up looks pretty good. 4 pass,bi-directional should be about 8 times faster printing then what I'm doing now.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68562\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I'll try easy mode. I don't see how that will get the colors as good as I'm getting with a custom profile matched to the paper. But it's worth a sheet of 8.5x11 premium luster to try it.
Then I'll try a 4pass bidirectional and time it compared to my normal workflow with my existing profile.
Then I'll do my normal 16pass unidirectional and time it.
Not tonight - but tomorrow night I should have time.
Oh, I fixed my sample pic links in the earlier posting that showed the greens and blues that I printed much better on the Canon compared to my Epson.
I'll repeat them here for people that tried the links last time.
Here are the two specific pics where I noticed quite an improvement over what I had gotten from the Epson (and both printers are calibrated the same with Eye-one):
http://www.fototime.com/3E8A57AF6B5A338/orig.jpg (http://www.fototime.com/3E8A57AF6B5A338/orig.jpg)
(that's the ones where the greens look very cartoony on my Epson R1800)
http://www.fototime.com/03E002F1A9A2CBC/orig.jpg (http://www.fototime.com/03E002F1A9A2CBC/orig.jpg)
that's the one where the blues are outstanding on the Canon
Sorry - both pics are sRgb online. Printing aRGB on the Canon look better.
(edited to add broken link to two sample pics that produced pics everyone instantely preferred the Canon prints to the Epson)
-
Argh...it's been the 21st for sooo long here in Australia....
-
Agreed.... 21st here in good old Aus............
Beg Plead Cry....
Actually we should let Michael have a really nice sleep and post a nice review
Looking forward to reading about the printer the Credit Card just bought..
Cheers
Phil
-
I needed some additional information from Canon, which didn't arrive until yesterday afternoon. It's now morning of the 21st here in Toronto, and I expect to spend much of the day finalizing the report. It will be online late this afternoon (so still technically the 21st).
Michael
-
I needed some additional information from Canon, which didn't arrive until yesterday afternoon. It's now morning of the 21st here in Toronto, and I expect to spend much of the day finalizing the report. It will be online late this afternoon (so still technically the 21st).
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68735\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Michael,
Myself and Justin are just keen to read the review and it's just so hard when we have about 18hrs lead time on you....
At least i have something to look forward to reading at morning tea time tomorrow.
I have ordered my printer anyway based on the sample prints from my own images, and to me that is the only real test... do you the buyer like what the printer does.
I no doubt say this for a lot of people, thanks for a quite prompt review of what should be a very interesting printer for many people.
Cheers and best wishes for the day.
-
It's like waiting for the next John Grisham novel
I've been waiting and waiting and waiting, but now it's almost here.
G
-
To while away the time as you wait for the End of the 21st to roll around, why don't you ipf5000 lusters go out and rent a copy of the movie Groundhog Day, and set it to play continuously until Michael can post his review.
-
Hi michael
It looks like I will be getting one of these printers soon. Do you know of any third party ink manufactures that will make inks for this printer such as Lyson. Just a thought.
Thanks Denis
Looking forward to your review!!!
-
The review is now up. (3pm EDT).
Enjoy.
Michael
-
Michael,
In your review you mentioned how the ipf5000 uses its print driver to process a 16-bit image and send it to the printer as a 12 bit file. How does this compare with how my ImagePrint RIP processes and sends files to my Epson 9800? Are they also 12 bit files or just 8 bit?
-
Thank you so much for an interesting read. I got the 4800 a few months ago, and will probably make the jump when or if Canon releases a 24" version with these inks.
-
Thanks for the fine review. If I had the money and space, I'd get one. But I think I'll have to wait for my lowly Epson 2200 to die first.
Eric
-
Michael,
Nice review. However, as far as ink costs go this sounds way too good to be true. For Epson printers, ink coverage is around 2 ml/square foot from various estimates I have seen. Using your figures, the Canon uses 0.17 ml/square foot (1560 ml for 9000 square feet per the article). Either this is the most frugal printer around, or the coverage is only 10% of typical photographic prints--or the calculations are off by a factor of 10. If it really is this low, it would beat the heck out of the Epsons for cost of ink.
--John
-
Nice review. However, as far as ink costs go this sounds way too good to be true. For Epson printers, ink coverage is around 2 ml/square foot from various estimates I have seen. Using your figures, the Canon uses 0.17 ml/square foot (1560 ml for 9000 square feet per the article). Either this is the most frugal printer around, or the coverage is only 10% of typical photographic prints--or the calculations are off by a factor of 10. If it really is this low, it would beat the heck out of the Epsons for cost of ink.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68796\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The A2 prints I saw at a dealer here in Australia used 1.9-2.1 ml. That works out to roughly 8 ml/m^2 or about 0.74 ml/ft^2. This was using the windows printer driver in 16 pass mode. I guess it really depends on the prints you make.
-
Thanks, Michael.
This has been a useful revue of what is obviously a very interesting product and sets the scene for the bigger versions, the 60" 9000 currently appearing in Europe and Japan.
We still equire further analyses from experts in specific fields.
Mark is the obvious person to give a tight cost analysis. So far this aspect appears promising.Less clogging is a major plus.In both production and domestic situations it is the time wasted , more than the inks which is a real pain.
It will take a colour management expert like Bruce Fraser to thoroughly investigate the inkset linearity which high end users require. This has been a Canon weak point in the past.
Speed advantages over Epson appear somewhat marginal, which is disappointing for commercial users.
The increase in PhotoBlack DMax is very welcome , but the more serious Matte Black issue has not improved. This may be an area in which Epson can hit back.
The slight deficiency in reds, which Epson greatly improved with the K3 inkset , may well be addressed with custom profiles. This too, remains to be seen.
What is clear is that Epson have a formidable challenger. There is little brand loyalty now and with influential people like Michael moving to the new machines , there will be a strong following.
Epson will be aware that their complacency is over and they must respond, and do so very quickly.
Flushes of glossy advertising and cash backs will not work.
It is becoming progressively harder to pull rabbits out of the hat. Lowering ink costs will help, but I think speed (especially) and that matte DMax problem must be on the agenda.
The high end of the market is hotting up too. With the finish of the Epson-Roland agreement that Epson not enter the over 44" area the gloves are off here . Canon has played the first big card with the 9000, and rumours of Epsons 60" are becoming sounder. Rolands very expensive and buggy 12 colour pigment printers will be severely challenged. Canon and Epson have their huge consumer base to finance R&D.Roland may not survive in the fine art market. That could go for the others like Mimaki and Mutoh. Countering this is their concentration in the lucrative and cashed up signage area. Epson may well move in that direction to counter lost sales in the fine printing pigment area .
As I'm flowing with cliches this morning, I might as well do it again.
Interesting times.
Cheers,
Brian,
www.pharoseditions.com.au
-
Good review, thanks Michael. Pending seeing some actual prints I think I'll get one.
Now I wonder if this wonderful 16 bit plugin will be available for Lightroom (if it's ever released for Windows).
The plugin shows input resolution of 300dpi or 600dpi. So if I'm going to print an A2 sized print from my 30D do I need to res up the image to use the plugin? If I do, should I be ressing up to 300dpi or 600 dpi?
-
Michael,
Nice review. However, as far as ink costs go this sounds way too good to be true. For Epson printers, ink coverage is around 2 ml/square foot from various estimates I have seen. Using your figures, the Canon uses 0.17 ml/square foot (1560 ml for 9000 square feet per the article). Either this is the most frugal printer around, or the coverage is only 10% of typical photographic prints--or the calculations are off by a factor of 10. If it really is this low, it would beat the heck out of the Epsons for cost of ink.
--John
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68796\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
John, my data set for 8 months usage of the 4800 indicates about 1.75 ml/sq.ft. ink coverage on Epson Enhanced Matte, excluding allowance for routine cleaning and declogging.
-
Mark is the obvious person to give a tight cost analysis. So far this aspect appears promising. ...........
.......the more serious Matte Black issue has not improved. This may be an area in which Epson can hit back..................
The slight deficiency in reds, which Epson greatly improved with the K3 inkset , may well be addressed with custom profiles. This too, remains to be seen............
Cheers,
Brian,
www.pharoseditions.com.au
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68799\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Brian, I'm hoping to take delivery within several weeks; I do hope the software allows me to do the right kind of cost calculations; then it will require a period of usage long enough to see the machine settle into a stable and predictable pattern before producing an analysis. Not knowing this animal yet, hard to say how long it will take, but several months would not surprise me. All that said, my main interest in purchasing this machine is the unprecedented flexibility and superb print quality it offers.
One wonders about the Matte Black DMax issue. It seems for the time being that this kind of paper is just too challenging to get the kind of DR achieved with certain non-matte media. Not clear when or with what Epson will hit back - but with the march of tech progress being what it is, who knows........perhaps........
As for the reds, while gamut plots are one thing, seeing the reds in the prints is another thing. The samples I've seen indicate very satisfactory reds, regardless of what the gamut plots may indicate.
-
That works out to roughly 8 ml/m^2 or about 0.74 ml/ft^2.
That is more the same order of magnitude as my estimate, and 4-5 times as much ink as the article suggested. I wonder if the Canon really uses less ink than the Epson to make the same print?
--John
-
John, my data set for 8 months usage of the 4800 indicates about 1.75 ml/sq.ft. ink coverage on Epson Enhanced Matte, excluding allowance for routine cleaning and declogging.
This fits with the other estimates I have seen. I wonder if Michael has any stats on ink use. Does the IPF5000 tell you the amount of ink used for a job?
--John
-
This fits with the other estimates I have seen. I wonder if Michael has any stats on ink use. Does the IPF5000 tell you the amount of ink used for a job?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68810\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think you'll find that Michael's estimates are based on average cost per square foot people are seeing with previous Canon's (correct me if I'm wrong Michael), not on the actual ink usage. That'll be where the discrepancy is. I don't think it was meant to be a conclusive cost estimate.
-
I think you'll find that Michael's estimates are based on average cost per square foot people are seeing with previous Canon's (correct me if I'm wrong Michael), not on the actual ink usage. That'll be where the discrepancy is. I don't think it was meant to be a conclusive cost estimate.
I am sure that is what he meant. However, I am guessing that it is so far off as to be extremely misleading. If that is the case, seems that it would be prudent to remove this part from the article. Of course, I hope I am wrong
--John
-
Michael
A great review.
You mentioned that the carts would be good for 7200 prints. At a hundred prints a month, this would give 6 years of prints. I was under the impression that the ink once opened was only good for 6 months. Any coments?
-
Non-pro costs --
Michael's report of $900.00+ fill-up for replacement cartridges brings some thoughts:
If a serious amateur, interested in a top quality printer for 16 X 20's, but having no expectation of high useage rates, bites the money bullet and fills the printer, ...his costs will surely depend upon the shelf(or in-printer) -life of the inks. Will evaporation, settling, etc., degrade the ink over time, and find the user with an expensive collection of colorful gook, .....and quite likely a gummed-up machine?
Comments? (Other than "Have custom prints made by a pro." ;-)
Thanks.
-
Hello Michael,
What settings did you use to print on Epsons Enhanced Matte? Did you create a paper profile for proofing on CS?
Thanks
Oscar
-
I have no firm information on long term ink life. I have carts for my 4800 that have been in the machine for over a year that work fine.
I would imagine that anyone who didn't go through each cartridge over a couple of year period isn't likely to fid this printer meets their needs.
-
I doubt if ink life in the sealed cartridge will be a problem at all. The only likely problem could be settling , which occurs with a lot of pigmented inks. Epson seems to counter this by machine vibration, especially in the larger models on stands. They also recommend a gentle to and fro shaking before inserting a new cartridge. If a machine has been left standing for an extended period without use, you can remove inks , shake them and replace. You can probably do the same on the Canon.
Cheers,
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au
-
5000 with 16 bit plug-in vs. 4800 with RIP - TCO
Michael,
Good report!
I inferred from your report that the prints with a Canon 5000 with the 16-bit plug-in is similiar in quality to the Epson 4800 with the ImagePrint RIP (equal file, equal paper, etc.).
If you factor that into the total cost of ownership, the pendulum swings significantly towards Canon.
Alright Epson, Game On! Isn't competion great?
Don
P.S.
I was at a trade show last night and compared the same file printed on an Epson 4800 and a Canon 5000 on Hahnemuhle Matte - both were fantastic.
-
At a recent tradeshow in Sydney where Canon launched the ipf5000, a colleague and I discussed the subject of ink consumption with one of the Canon technical people on the stand.
The argument was that the 5000 did use noticably less ink than the Epson by virtue of not needing to "mix" inks as much - thanks to the additional red, blue, and green inks.
What was obvious from the show was that there was a gap in the line of announced printers using the new Lucia inks - no 24" or 36" models.
I have noticed that Canon (Australia) show an ipf500 (6 cartridge) and ipf5000 (12 cartridge) model, but also an ipf600 (6 cartridge) A1 model which is NOT a floor-standing model and has cassette feeding. This leads one to the conclusion that an ipf6000 model might be a possible future...
As I have been persisting with the Epson 4000, the next printer on my wish list is a 24". The move to 24" in the Epson has been discounted because I have room only for one printer and I enjoy the ability to feed sheets too much. The ink-juggle for matt/gloss is another killer issue.
Now a 24" desktop printer with 12 cartridges and cassette feed is something I will definitely consider!
Andrew
-
The prospect of a printer with great results that doesn't required a $1000 RIP software that is not user friendly is beyond the word happy. While Epson and Colorbyte have made a great package, it has been with a substatial cost in time and money. Michael, thank you for an excellent review. I can always count on you to give a true opinion of the products you evaluate.
Got to run place my order!
As a side note Canon does not make the manual for the IPF5000 available on their website. Hopefully, it is being converted to a pdf with index.
-
At a recent tradeshow in Sydney where Canon launched the ipf5000, a colleague and I discussed the subject of ink consumption with one of the Canon technical people on the stand.
The argument was that the 5000 did use noticably less ink than the Epson by virtue of not needing to "mix" inks as much - thanks to the additional red, blue, and green inks.
What was obvious from the show was that there was a gap in the line of announced printers using the new Lucia inks - no 24" or 36" models.
I have noticed that Canon (Australia) show an ipf500 (6 cartridge) and ipf5000 (12 cartridge) model, but also an ipf600 (6 cartridge) A1 model which is NOT a floor-standing model and has cassette feeding. This leads one to the conclusion that an ipf6000 model might be a possible future...
As I have been persisting with the Epson 4000, the next printer on my wish list is a 24". The move to 24" in the Epson has been discounted because I have room only for one printer and I enjoy the ability to feed sheets too much. The ink-juggle for matt/gloss is another killer issue.
Now a 24" desktop printer with 12 cartridges and cassette feed is something I will definitely consider!
Andrew
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68880\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The ipf5000 certainly looks like a great printer but I am a little disapointed Canon have not introduced a 24" / 36" (or even a 44") version with the Lucia ink to give Epson more compitition. Is there anybody out there with information on when wider format (specifically 24") Canon "iPFx000" with Lucia ink will be available?
Does anyone know if the 16-bit driver works in Lightroom, or will Canon have to release a seperate driver?
Before this printer came along I was looking at the Epson 7800 with ImagePrint now with the introduction of the ipf5000 I am going to hold off until either Canon release a 24" version or Epson get their act together and come up with a printer that does not need to swap cartridges.
Canon has a great opertunity here to steal the technological lead from Epson if they can get their firmware/driver/manual niggles sorted-out and release wider format printers before Epson can update their current range.
-
Interesting tidbit i picked up from the "Material safety Data Sheets" for the Canon ipf5000 ink tanks, that have since disappeared from the Australian site
The Sheets clearly had heading of "For iPF5000-iPF6500"
Does this make the iPF6500 the yet to be announced 24" (36") big brother for the 5000.
Found it Cached by Google
Product Name: Canon Ink Tank PFI-101Y
iPF5000_iPF6500
Product Code: 0886B
Company Name: Canon Inc.
Cheers
Phil
-
Interesting tidbit i picked up from the "Material safety Data Sheets" for the Canon ipf5000 ink tanks, that have since disappeared from the Australian site
The Sheets clearly had heading of "For iPF5000-iPF6500"
Does this make the iPF6500 the yet to be announced 24" (36") big brother for the 5000.
Found it Cached by Google
Product Name: Canon Ink Tank PFI-101Y
iPF5000_iPF6500
Product Code: 0886B
Company Name: Canon Inc.
Cheers
Phil
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68955\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Phil,
Quite likely.
As mentioned on this and other sites the 60" 9000 has been announced in Europe.
Rumours of the intermediate models have been quite solid for some time in Japan and elsewhere.
IMHO at the very latest we will see them at Photokina.
Canon will be attempting to sort out bugs with the 5000. Hopefully this will include hiring a new person to write the manuals. With a 1DS111 on the way, Canon will be creaming this year.
Epson (and Nikon)will have to come back with something in 2007. HP could be cooking, but they have shown no indication or perhaps interest in, the fine art market.
Don't buy a big x800 yet....
Cheers,
Brian,
www.pharoseditions.com.au
-
While waiting for my IPF5000 to arrive, I was looking at the ink capacity vs my EPSON 4800.
The IPF5000 has 12 at 130ml cartridges. The 4800 has 7 at 220ml.
1560 ml for the IPF5000 and 1540 ml for the 4800. With less mixing of ink I'm hopeful the IPF5000 will be somewhat lower in ink consumption.
-
The datasheet reference to a 6500 does not surprise me. I believe that a 24" version is definitely coming. I'm just not sure I've got the patience to wait for it... I've been pulling my hair out with three different Epson 4000's. Sour on Epson with the non-swapable ink setup on the 7800, so haven't bought one. Now it appears that what I really want is a 24" version of this Canon!
Thank you Michael for the very helpful and useful review !
-
While waiting for my IPF5000 to arrive, I was looking at the ink capacity vs my EPSON 4800.
The IPF5000 has 12 at 130ml cartridges. The 4800 has 7 at 220ml.
1560 ml for the IPF5000 and 1540 ml for the 4800. With less mixing of ink I'm hopeful the IPF5000 will be somewhat lower in ink consumption.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68997\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The 4800 has 8 at 220, not 7, but the tank capacity is irrelevant. What matters is ml per print and cost per ml. The extent of clogging and cleaning as a function of usage or non-usage is also a big deal on Epson printers. We shall see from operating experience with the Canon how all that shakes out.
-
Hi Folks,
I just purchased my iPF5000 yesterday at Calumet in Cambridge, MA. The print quality is great, but it is non-user friendly. For 2 grand I EXPECT a manual! I expect an override to the flakey LCD panel and I EXPECT to be able to print all sheet paper from the Casette. That's right, some paper such as the Watercolor is not selectable from the tray and has to be manually fed in one sheet at a time. I want to load the printer up with 20 sheets if I am working.
The positive? Set-up was a breeze and the 16 bit Photoshop driver looks to be very good, but there is a downside to that as well. Who has 16 bit ICC profiles? Will Crane, etc...develop 16 bit profiles? Are the Canon ICC profiles for just the 8 bit? Again, no documentation!
I use some Red River papers and they have profiles for this printer, but when I e-mailed and asked them if they were 16 bit I received a reply in which they state that they are indeed 8 bit ICC profiles and that the HOPE they will not need to develop 16 bit profiles.
My advice would be to profile within the plug-in and use a Gretag Eye-One aor send them off to a profiling service like Cathy's.
I am torn between really liking this printer or just returning it and getting an Epson 4800.
-
I'll let you know how the Red River Ultra Pro Satin works.
Here is what Red River sent me and a link to download if you use their paper.
Thank you for your inquiry. The UltraPro Satin profiles are here:
http://www.redrivercatalog.com/profiles/ca...orprofiles.html (http://www.redrivercatalog.com/profiles/canonipf5000colorprofiles.html)
The profiles were made on an 8-bit Photoshop setup. We are as of yet
unaware of problems with 16 bit systems (probably because they are still
rare). I greatly hope there are no issues because that would mean
re-profiling the entire lineup!
Please email or call with any questions.
Sincerely,
Drew Hendrix
Red River Paper
Inkjet Paper & Ideas
888-248-8774
-
Thanks for the review Michael, but I think you still have an internal inconsistancy in your numbers on printing costs, even after the correction. You say that A3 costs are $0.37 and 11X17 are $0.48, but based on the information I have about A3, it measures 11.7 inches by 16.5 inches and that makes it about 3.2% larger than 11X17 inch. Thus either the $0.37 or the $0.48 (or both) are wrong. I realize you're doing this all based on consumptions from another printer, but the cost estimate will vary by one third, depending on which set of numbers one assumes is correct.
-
Hi Folks,
I just purchased my iPF5000 yesterday at Calumet in Cambridge, MA. The print quality is great, but it is non-user friendly. For 2 grand I EXPECT a manual! I expect an override to the flakey LCD panel and I EXPECT to be able to print all sheet paper from the Casette. That's right, some paper such as the Watercolor is not selectable from the tray and has to be manually fed in one sheet at a time. I want to load the printer up with 20 sheets if I am working.
.............................
I am torn between really liking this printer or just returning it and getting an Epson 4800.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69002\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I recommend - indeed urge - that you send a letter to Canon USA telling them exactly this. I find the only way one makes headway with some of these companies is to make your presence felt politely but firmly in a way that they know if they don't respond appropriately it could cost them.
As for exchanging this machine for an Epson 4800 - be careful - first go down the learning curve, see where you end-up and think hard. The 4800 makes great prints, but the print-head maintenance and printing cost could well be greater than the Canon's, and there is a very high penalty for switching between matte and non-matte media.
-
So, when will we get it "ALL"? We wait for the Canon and various sites post "reviews" and they all state they don't like this or don't like that with the printer, but all printers are this way. At least with Epson we have some history, personally I just haven't had many problems with the Epsons, Canons or HP and use them all for, each for its' own task.
The Canon 5000IPF is the first in a series and it looks like within 1-2 years they will probably iron out the bugs, but by then Epson will have the Epson 5800 out with 24 inks, no changing of cartridges, pigment ink, but it wont take roll paper, it'll be something.
So we can wait or print and complain. I say print and complain as Mark has stated and hopefully the manufacturers will listen as we vote with our dollars who really makes the best printers.
Why do people worry so much about print cost? Since printing my own photos (many years ago) I have noticed a HUGE reduction in printing costs, the savings over the labs is substantial
G
-
There are indeed problems with the numbers. It's inherent in trying to develop usable information about a printer that has only been on the market for a few weeks, extrapolating from other data from similar machines, and too little data from this one.
It will all become more clear in the days ahead.
Michael
-
So we can wait or print and complain. I say print and complain as Mark has stated and hopefully the manufacturers will listen as we vote with our dollars who really makes the best printers.
Why do people worry so much about print cost? Since printing my own photos (many years ago) I have noticed a HUGE reduction in printing costs, the savings over the labs is substantial
G
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69006\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Indeed. When was anything perfect ever put on the market - if we wait to perfect everything we'd end up using nothing. The issue is whether the bugs can be worked around or lived-with. There is a world of difference between something that actually impairs quality of results or is just a nuissance. The latter should be manageable and correctable (Canon!!!) but the former is another matter. My take on Michael's review is that so far the negatives on this machine are in the nuissance category. That is what I am hoping for when I take delivery of mine - and I am also hoping that Canon fixes them and sends me the fixes!
For a professional who is well colour managed and selling work, the cost of making these prints should be quite a secondary consideration, but operational convenience and efficiency are valuable because that is time and professional time is worth much more than the ink and paper. I'm not selling my work, but still quality of results is also priority number one. That said, I like knowing how much it is costing me to use this technology, and I like knowing the financial break-even points for up-grading or not up-grading, but these items aren't determinative - quality and useability rank first.
-
Well guess what. The printer will not print panoramic size paper in eithe the photoshop plug-in or the regular driver. You can input customized sizes, but for 13x38 paper you only have this size available from the roll feeder. Guess what, I don't have the roll feeder as it was not available when I purcheased the printer. I get an error on the LCD screen saying it's looking for the foll paper feeder and when it can't find it it times out and then asks me to clear the paper. On my Epson 2400 and 4800 I can put the 13x38 sizes in and print sheet paper from Crane, Red River, etc.
I am a landscape photographer and my signature photos are panoramics. I tend to like the Crane and Red River Pano sheets over rolls as the rolls tend to curl more than the sheets. This is a HUGE bug for me.
This is being advertised as a fine art printer and a direct competitor to the 4800. Well, it has a ways to go. A well written manual to start would be nice. Not having double entry of paper sizes from the printer and driver would also be nice.
Oh, from the menu screen on the printer you can only go up to 699mm from the manual feed. Well short of the 965 mm in the 13x38 paper. If it came with the roll attachement like the Epson I would not be as upset.
-
While waiting for my IPF5000 to arrive, I was looking at the ink capacity vs my EPSON 4800.
The IPF5000 has 12 at 130ml cartridges. The 4800 has 7 at 220ml.
1560 ml for the IPF5000 and 1540 ml for the 4800. With less mixing of ink I'm hopeful the IPF5000 will be somewhat lower in ink consumption.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68997\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Isn't this 11x130ml = 1430ml?
Why discount one cartridge from the 4800 and not also from the Canon?
Andrew
-
Isn't this 11x130ml = 1430ml?
Why discount one cartridge from the 4800 and not also from the Canon?
Andrew
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69012\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I don't see the point of discounting anything from either, and in any case the number of cartridges and their capacities tell you NOTHING except the number of cartridges and their capacities.
-
Indeed. When was anything perfect ever put on the market - if we wait to perfect everything we'd end up using nothing. The issue is whether the bugs can be worked around or lived-with. There is a world of difference between something that actually impairs quality of results or is just a nuissance. The latter should be manageable and correctable (Canon!!!) but the former is another matter. My take on Michael's review is that so far the negatives on this machine are in the nuissance category. That is what I am hoping for when I take delivery of mine - and I am also hoping that Canon fixes them and sends me the fixes!
For a professional who is well colour managed and selling work, the cost of making these prints should be quite a secondary consideration, but operational convenience and efficiency are valuable because that is time and professional time is worth much more than the ink and paper. I'm not selling my work, but still quality of results is also priority number one. That said, I like knowing how much it is costing me to use this technology, and I like knowing the financial break-even points for up-grading or not up-grading, but these items aren't determinative - quality and useability rank first.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69009\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Mark I agree that knowing what the prints cost can be important and I was shooting from the hip a "little" since at work we do print a lot per month (probably 300 11x17 or more) and we have calculated costs, but when we were doing the math the Canons and Epsons were very close, however we use mostly Canons because speed is so important and the Canons are much quicker than the Epsons. Our problems with prints started when we had clients calling and telling us that their prints were fading (We are a residential design firm and we give clients prints of what their houses will look like after construction) and that they wanted to keep them, so for those people we run prints from our various Epson pigment printers. I actually still have a working Epson 1280 and quite frankly the print quality of the latest and greatest are NOT substantially better, they just last!
I will probably wait a month or two and then buy the Canon IPF5000, I agree with you, Michael's review of the printers seems to state the "problems" are not problems, but rather annoyances.
G
-
There is always a risk for the good and for the bad being an early adopter. Take the risk or don't, and if do, then find and share workarounds - like many of us here are starting (even already have been) doing. Me I choose to trust the quality and flexibility were worth it and that collectively we will work it out and I will be happy. Of course I will find out.
I have found little to no difference in general so far - with profiles made and then images printed in either 8 bit or 16 bit. I have heard at least one other comment from someone similiar. I project on 16x20 sizes it may show on more or some images, maybe depending on presences of gradiations, large ones, is my guess.
Look at your media guide. It prints out easily. It tells you what choices will use the cassette and what is roll or single sheet. Some of the settings seem to be redundant as for instance: PhotoPaperPlus and Heavyweight Glossy Photo Paper - (PPP) allows me to use the cassette and produce and identical result to HGPP from top tray. And I got this tip from Canon CS - where they are learning just like we are I guess. Rush to market I guess, but then I waited as long as I could, so I believe this choice and circumstances is still better than having the 4800 for me. And I love the ethernet being built in and not having to pay for it.
Trusting,
Gary
Hi Folks,
I just purchased my iPF5000 yesterday at Calumet in Cambridge, MA. The print quality is great, but it is non-user friendly. For 2 grand I EXPECT a manual! I expect an override to the flakey LCD panel and I EXPECT to be able to print all sheet paper from the Casette. That's right, some paper such as the Watercolor is not selectable from the tray and has to be manually fed in one sheet at a time. I want to load the printer up with 20 sheets if I am working.
The positive? Set-up was a breeze and the 16 bit Photoshop driver looks to be very good, but there is a downside to that as well. Who has 16 bit ICC profiles? Will Crane, etc...develop 16 bit profiles? Are the Canon ICC profiles for just the 8 bit? Again, no documentation!
I use some Red River papers and they have profiles for this printer, but when I e-mailed and asked them if they were 16 bit I received a reply in which they state that they are indeed 8 bit ICC profiles and that the HOPE they will not need to develop 16 bit profiles.
My advice would be to profile within the plug-in and use a Gretag Eye-One aor send them off to a profiling service like Cathy's.
I am torn between really liking this printer or just returning it and getting an Epson 4800.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69002\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I have been playing with the 5000 now for about a month. I use mainly glossy paper, some lustre. I have a 4800, 9800, 4000 and now the 5000.
I don't have the technical expertise of Michael, and his criticisms are well based and right on. I'm probably going to keep the machine because I do like it and it allows me to locate the 4800 to another home that I work at part of the time, but there are some things I'm not real excited about.
Build quality ... materials used give this printer a little more "plastic" less commercial feel. Probably not a big deal, but its like some camera bodies vs. others.
Paper tray ... very large and cumbersome to use. It is a great big huge tray and it is a little bit of a pain to work with ...to put in letter size sheets you must remove the tray from the printer.
Smaller paper sizes ... I like printing a lot of 5x7 (7x10 paper size) cards on Moabs entrada paper, and I don't think there is any way to get this printer to do it at all. I haven't found one yet. My 4000 did it fine, I haven't tried my 4800 but I assume it will work since the 4000 did.
paper choices ... I do not like the feel of canon papers and to select a "paper" that is similar is really a pain. Talking to Canon they did confirm that the "specials" are basically 5 different levels of ink, and to create a profile they recommended printing a test pattern of pure black box with a pure yellow box in the middle, and determine how how far can go before you see bleed.
When I create profiles (have Eye-One UV system), I get a slightly "cooler" look in some tones on the canon ... not a real problem since you can only see this compared side by side, and the resulting prints are very good.
At this point I do not like the look of B&W but I haven't messed with it enough. To me it looks "cool" vs. Epson, but maybe it truely is more neutral. I know I'll have to find a way to warm them up more closely to the epson to get something I like.
My biggest concern is in areas that should have more "micro" detail. I do quite a bit of multi-shot panorama work, and also work with a p45 on a hasselblad, so I have some pretty nice detail in many areas. I am seeing some "blocking" in regions and loss of very fine detail. This may be because I've gone too far with my ink saturation so I am re-profiling moving from Special 4 down to Special 3 on Epson Prem. Glossy paper.
If you do a lot of matte and glossy printing this printer is a great option. If you don't, I'm not sure it really beats the Epson. However, the 16bit driver is very intriguing, and once I get more familiar with it I may change my mind.
So there you go ... a firm "undecided" fairly useless opinion.
-
I don't see the point of discounting anything from either, and in any case the number of cartridges and their capacities tell you NOTHING except the number of cartridges and their capacities.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69013\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Actually since the Canon is only using 11 cartridges at any one time, but the Epson uses all 8 cartridges it seems that is the appropriate method of comparing ...
But I completely agree, how much ink they hold tells nothing useful anyway..
-
Actually since the Canon is only using 11 cartridges at any one time, but the Epson uses all 8 cartridges it seems that is the appropriate method of comparing ...
But I completely agree, how much ink they hold tells nothing useful anyway..
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69021\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Fair enough - on a "number used" basis that makes sense, but again, So What? I still don't see where that gets us.
-
I will probably wait a month or two and then buy the Canon IPF5000, I agree with you, Michael's review of the printers seems to state the "problems" are not problems, but rather annoyances.
Hi
I will be getting this printer in the next two weeks and reports from the dealer here in Sydney is the Canon IPF5000 has a better colour gamet than the Epson 4800. They sell both Epson and Canon and they feel this is the first Canon printer that is competion for Epson in this price bracket.
Currently I use the Canon i9950 and i used to own an Epson 1280. In this price bracket the Canon is a much better printer.
Thanks Denis
-
I have a 4800, 9800, 4000 and now the 5000.
................................
I'm probably going to keep the machine because I do like it and it allows me to locate the 4800 to another home that I work at part of the time, ..................................
My biggest concern is in areas that should have more "micro" detail.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69020\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Wayne - an Epson 4800 is not a machine you can use "part of the time". The clogging and cleaning from non-use will become tedious and expensive.
Sample prints I've seen show very fine detail. The droplet size is about the same as Epson's and I believe its native resolution may be higher - but I am treading on uncertain ground here; I would assume the dithering patterns differ between these machines). All and all on the face of it, hard to see why the Canon would produce a less detailed print than a 4800 does. It would be interesting to hear your view of this factor once you think you have all the settings and profiling right and you compare a micro-detailed Epson result with the same micro-detailed Canon result.
-
I will probably wait a month or two and then buy the Canon IPF5000, I agree with you, Michael's review of the printers seems to state the "problems" are not problems, but rather annoyances.
Hi
I will be getting this printer in the next two weeks and reports from the dealer here in Sydney is the Canon IPF5000 has a better colour gamet than the Epson 4800. They sell both Epson and Canon and they feel this is the first Canon printer that is competion for Epson in this price bracket.
Currently I use the Canon i9950 and i used to own an Epson 1280. In this price bracket the Canon is a much better printer.
Thanks Denis
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69023\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Are you comparing the i9950 (we own 3 of them, actually the i9900) and the Epson 1280? I can't say that I agree with you if you are saying the i9900 is a much better printer (from a print quality POV) than the Epson 1280. We own everything from Canon starting with the S9000 on up and the Epsons from the 1280 (1270 died) on up and none of them are what I would consider "Much Better". The Canon i9900 is incredibly fast, all the Canons are fast and the Epson 1280 is incredibly slow, but comparing the prints side by side, you'd be hard pressed to say which is better (subjective statement) Yes the Canon's are a little glossier comparing side by side, but it's minimal. I really don't believe that overall print quality has changed dramatically from the 1280 on and I still have framed prints from my 1280 that look great. I even believe that with the dye inks there are some prints that look better from a 1280 than a 1800 or 2400, but again that's just my opinion, YMMV!
G
-
Are you comparing the i9950 (we own 3 of them, actually the i9900) and the Epson 1280? I can't say that I agree with you if you are saying the i9900 is a much better printer (from a print quality POV) than the Epson 1280. We own everything from Canon starting with the S9000 on up and the Epsons from the 1280 (1270 died) on up and none of them are what I would consider "Much Better". The Canon i9900 is incredibly fast, all the Canons are fast and the Epson 1280 is incredibly slow, but comparing the prints side by side, you'd be hard pressed to say which is better (subjective statement) Yes the Canon's are a little glossier comparing side by side, but it's minimal. I really don't believe that overall print quality has changed dramatically from the 1280 on and I still have framed prints from my 1280 that look great. I even believe that with the dye inks there are some prints that look better from a 1280 than a 1800 or 2400, but again that's just my opinion, YMMV!
G
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69027\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi
We own the Canon i9950 which we have had for a year. Our Epson 1280 had a blue cast maby it was a problem one and we had it serviced to. Our first 1270 was a better printer to get prints out. At the moment we are using Jet Tec inks in the Canon i9950 and are getting excellent results plus saving over 80% on ink costs. In Australia we are paying about $25.00 per cartridge (Canon) , with 8x that is $200.00, we just reload the catridges as we go. these inks are made in the UK. Has anyone been using LYSON inks lately? i saw on there web page inks for the Epson 4800.
Thanks Denis
-
Hi
We own the Canon i9950 which we have had for a year. Our Epson 1280 had a blue cast maby it was a problem one and we had it serviced to. Our first 1270 was a better printer to get prints out. At the moment we are using Jet Tec inks in the Canon i9950 and are getting excellent results plus saving over 80% on ink costs. In Australia we are paying about $25.00 per cartridge (Canon) , with 8x that is $200.00, we just reload the catridges as we go. these inks are made in the UK. Has anyone been using LYSON inks lately? i saw on there web page inks for the Epson 4800.
Thanks Denis
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69037\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think you probably had a bad 1280, absolutely no cast with our 1280. Even though we still run all the printers we did recently purchase a color laser for a lot of the "draft" (it's acceptable to show, but it's NOT a photograph) work, it's an Okidata C9600 and for a color laser it's darn good, plus it'll do 12x18 or even 12.9 x 47.24 though we haven't tried it for this size yet. The speed is phenomenal (we are talking pages per minute, rather than minutes per page). This unit will phase out all of the inkjets eventually with the exception of the pigment based units because we still need archival prints for some clients.
These printers are incredible today, it seems like just yesterday HP came out with the "Photosmart" NOT a great photo printer, but again I still have prints from it that aren't terrible.
I've always been curious about 3rd party inks and why people use them, is it cost? Print quality? Archivability? I've always thought that the best inks and papers were generally the ones recommended by the manufacturers of the printers, but I've certainly have learned that there are some great papers out there, NOT just Epson and Canon (for Canon)
G
-
Something that may not be obvious is that while the printer confirms that the paper is the size that you say it is, it has no way of knowling if it is the type or thickness that the setting you choose would imply.
Therefore, if the printer isn't programmed to accept a certain paper thickness from the cassette (tray) tell it that it's something else and see what happens.
Michael
-
My question is consistency.
I have a friend who had one and immediately profiled it (and yes, he knows what he's doing) and loved the results. Initially. Then he found his profiles would not hold. IOW his colors would shift for the same print on a daily basis, like the nozzles were not laying down the ink in a consistent fashion. Short version is he returned it to Canon and is back to using his Epsons.
Obviously, he could have had a bad sample so I am curious what others will find as this printer fills the market.
-
Michael,
For the benefit of all those interested in this topic, your post has triggered in my mind an issue you have already explored but needs to be put on the table in a slightly different way.
You start your post by saying "Something that may not be obvious" - well, that is the genesis of problemo numero uno: for something as fundamental as putting paper into a printer, especially in a situation where we are dealing with four feeds, differing sizes, differing thicknesses and differing finishes it can get complicated if it isn't laid out properly; hence especially under these circumstances there should be NOTHING that "may not be obvious". It shouldn't be necessary to have to trick the printer into doing what it should do straightforwardly. If anything about this procedure is not obvious, Canon has a commercial and a moral obligation to all its customers to make it obvious. (Please tell them I said so - that will make them shake in their boots ) For sake of clarity if Canon is reading this material, the OBJECTIVE FUNCTION we are trying to satisfy is that users of this printer should be able to easily understand what papers can fit into what feed option properly and easily with the printer recognizing the choices made and accepting them as such. If Canon can't satisfy this objective function between the firmware, the software and the instruction manual someone there needs to be taken behind the shed for "re-education". (ouch )
Related to the foregoing, "experience accounts" are starting to appear in this thread, which is wonderful. We're getting some valuable real-life feedback which combined with your review provide more information to forthcoming customers - aways a good thing. But some of it causes concern. Wayne Fox mentions earlier in this thread an issue about rendering of detail, which he believes may be affected by excessive saturation resulting from the choice of "Special 4" versus "Special 3". What is this stuff? Apparently it is related to how the ink reacts with the paper choice. It seems we are dealing here with something that is conceptually different from what one finds in the Epson driver, and therefore another element of the adjustment set to be on top of - but again, that is facilitated with clear, detailed instructions from the manufacturer about what these special setttings do to the ink and the paper.
And perhaps more fundamentally underlying both of the above factors, in this day and age with virtually every customer wanting to use a whole variety of papers (one of the main reasons to buy this machine - no ink switching), Canon again - if they had solid commercial horse-sense - they would realise this and design the paper settings to be "brand-agnostic" and user-friendly for selecting the media type of our choosing. This way we would be quite at ease buying the Canon printer, buying their inks, and print happily onward on the media of our choice without mental gymnastics. Where the rubber hits the road on this issue is the point at which the need to fool around blind-folded with paper options and inking levels can impair the outcome of an otherwise properly colour-managed workflow.
Canon's commercial success with this printer and its successors could well be affected by how quickly and effectively it responds to these issues, assuming they are real issues.
-
My question is consistency.
I have a friend who had one and immediately profiled it (and yes, he knows what he's doing) and loved the results. Initially. Then he found his profiles would not hold. IOW his colors would shift for the same print on a daily basis, like the nozzles were not laying down the ink in a consistent fashion. Short version is he returned it to Canon and is back to using his Epsons.
Obviously, he could have had a bad sample so I am curious what others will find as this printer fills the market.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69050\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This is highly disturbing. We need an answer to this one , and quickly.
Such a serious matter must be refuted with empirical facts eg proveable Delta Ev variability, lucidly explained, or if fact, immediately fixed.
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au
-
This is highly disturbing. We need an answer to this one , and quickly.
Such a serious matter must be refuted with empirical facts eg proveable Delta Ev variability, lucidly explained, or if fact, immediately fixed.
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=69062\")
Ya... this doesn't sound all that good whatsoever.
On a different note though, I would like to point out that at least for me, the Epson 4800 does give me gorgeous blues, and nothing like the purple that Michael is suggesting.
Take a look at the picture below. A picture of a color on its on may not have much reference, but given the fact that I have blue markers, a Kingstron Pro card with a blue swatch on it, a Fujifilm simdle of DVDs in blue, and a purple swatch from Verbatim DVDs, it quite obviuos that the blue in my picture from a recenent wedding is gorgeous. So I'm not exactly sure while Michael says that hits blues from the Epson are purple compared to the Canon.
[a href=\"http://www.kiranpolach.com/DPreview/epsonblues.jpg]http://www.kiranpolach.com/DPreview/epsonblues.jpg[/url]
Kiran
-
The positive? Set-up was a breeze and the 16 bit Photoshop driver looks to be very good, but there is a downside to that as well. Who has 16 bit ICC profiles? Will Crane, etc...develop 16 bit profiles? Are the Canon ICC profiles for just the 8 bit? Again, no documentation!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69002\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Shouldn't be an issue. Profiles don't really have a "bit depth" like the files you send through the printer. In fact, Photoshop does all color conversions in ACE using 21 bit precision. So you could use Convert to Profile and then (I assume and hope) send the color managed data though the driver/export module. ImagePrint also has a 16-bit (high bit) path and works dandy with ICC profiles (supplied or ones you make).
-
My question is consistency.
I have a friend who had one and immediately profiled it (and yes, he knows what he's doing) and loved the results. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69050\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Excellent point. Not only would it be interesting to output a target of patches a few hours and days apart and compare the differences but also the differences from unit to unit. How consistent are the inks? Epson's are very, very consistent beasts. And Epson also supplies a utility to sync up (calibrate) multiple printers so a single profile can be used.
Michael, I don't know if you have a Spectrophotometer and something like ProfileMaker Pro. But if not, you could output a target (doesn't have to be large, 900 patches) and I could measure a bunch and let you know the average deltaE over the course of time. Ideally you'd also do this between switching one or more inks. Ideally the deltaE would be real low (4-5 or less would be nice).
-
Andrew,
I have an Eye One, and Babelcolor, so that's not an issue. The problem is that I am now at my place in the country, while the printer is in the city. I'll be here almost full time for the next few months, followed by trips to Iceland, Spain, and then Germany for Photokina. That take us till the end of October.
So, while I agree that this test is important, I won't have the ability to do it for some time. Someone else had better jump into the breach.
Michael
-
The problem is that I am now at my place in the country, while the printer is in the city. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69114\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
If it wasn't so heavy (you wrote about the palette) I'd suggest you just send it to me <g>.
If anyone else on the forum with the printer wants to run the test, I'd be happy to measure the targets and provide the results. Ideally you'd get a target from me I can read (very quickly) on my i0.
I only have an Epson 2400 and 2200 but I suspect that I could run tests with those units to come up with a consistency figure. I don't have one off the top of my head but my experience is that both printers are quite consistent in behavior even when replacing inks.
-
Here's a thought.
Let me have your patch. I'll make a print with mine, on belonging to a dealer that I know who has one on display, and a friend's. He's getting it in about a week.
You or I can then measure the results from these three printers.
Michael
-
Here's a thought.
Let me have your patch. I'll make a print with mine, on belonging to a dealer that I know who has one on display, and a friend's. He's getting it in about a week.
You or I can then measure the results from these three printers.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69117\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Just sent you the target. On the i0, it will take 3-4 minutes to measure so it's super fast and easy. I can also generate a profile from the data. With ProfileMaker Pro, I can compare any two targets and give you the delta's. By all means, hand it out to anyone you wish. Let's of course be consistent with paper and driver settings.
-
Got it.
When I have all three printers at hand, I'll make the prints and send them to you.
Should be in a few weeks.
We can publish the results here and as a follow-up to the review.
Do you have comparable measurements from different 4800s?
Michael
-
We can publish the results here and as a follow-up to the review.
Do you have comparable measurements from different 4800s?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69122\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Sure.
As for the 4800, output the targets as well on the same paper(s). I probably have dozens of measured data files from that printer but none I've printed. Plus, if you control it from square one, we know it's all Kosher.
What will be interesting is to see how the linearity of the patches appear between the two printers. Using the NO Color Adjustment settings on the Epson driver, the results are pretty non linear although much better than the last generation of printers from Epson. It will be interesting to see how the Canon compares using whatever comparable setting one would use to get this kind of output.
-
I have a friend who had one and immediately profiled it (and yes, he knows what he's doing) and loved the results. Initially. Then he found his profiles would not hold. IOW his colors would shift for the same print on a daily basis, like the nozzles were not laying down the ink in a consistent fashion. Short version is he returned it to Canon and is back to using his Epsons.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69050\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Jack, are you sure this isn't just curing. How long had they dried? There's no way I would attempt to compare two epson prints made a day apart without waiting at least a few days. Perhaps the Canon prints take a bit longer to settle.
- DL
-
On a different note though, I would like to point out that at least for me, the Epson 4800 does give me gorgeous blues, and nothing like the purple that Michael is suggesting.
Kiran
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69107\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Kiran,
That test chart Michael was using shows a pure blue (at least in the file numbers) - it is a well-known target which I also use for verifying my colour management. I print with an Epson 4800 and I too have no problem with sky blue etc, but the reason for that is that those blues are seldom "pure" blue - i.e. RGB= 0,0,255. Skys for example generally have some magenta content. So the shades of blue we usually expect in real-world conditions will reproduce realistically on the Epson, but if you try to reproduce a blue = 0,0,255 you will get the result that Michael shows on the target. I have tried it many times and that is what happens.
-
Kiran,
That test chart Michael was using shows a pure blue (at least in the file numbers) - it is a well-known target which I also use for verifying my colour management. I print with an Epson 4800 and I too have no problem with sky blue etc, but the reason for that is that those blues are seldom "pure" blue - i.e. RGB= 0,0,255. Skys for example generally have some magenta content. So the shades of blue we usually expect in real-world conditions will reproduce realistically on the Epson, but if you try to reproduce a blue = 0,0,255 you will get the result that Michael shows on the target. I have tried it many times and that is what happens.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69136\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I do understand what you are saying... but to me, with the exception of someone printing up product shots where matching color is necessary, it just isn't all that important to be able to print pure blue then. Pure blue is much too neon looking to be a color that ever makes it in every day life.
Besides this fact though, I hardly doubt that when the Epson tries to print a pure blue, it goes to purple. I've printed test charts before which showed gradients leading from pure white to pure blue, and I guess if the pure blue isn't something that the Epson wasn't capable of printing, it sure didn't jump out at me from looking at the print. Maybe if the Canon print was help up to it I'd see it better, but I certainly cannot understand why Michael is showing a purple swatch to represent a pure blue color that the Epson is giving him when I can get much much better looking blues, even if they do have lots of red in them. That's what I can't understand. Its as if he is saying that the best case scenario for getting a blue color out of an Epson is something which is somewhat purple, and this just isn't the case.
Kiran
-
Andrew,
I'll be back in the city later today, for a couple of days. I'll make prints on my iPF5000 and the one at the dealers, and send them off to you right away. When my friend get's his printer in a couple of weeks I'll send you another.
I'm as curious as anyone about this. Ill do my own measurements as well, though I'm sure yours will be more comprehensive.
Michael
-
I certainly cannot understand why Michael is showing a purple swatch to represent a pure blue color that the Epson is giving him when I can get much much better looking blues, even if they do have lots of red in them. That's what I can't understand. Its as if he is saying that the best case scenario for getting a blue color out of an Epson is something which is somewhat purple, and this just isn't the case.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69138\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
as an unbiased observer (i own neither printers) here's my take:
from the quote below, i don't see that micheal is saying that normal everyday prints from the epson have any odd purple tints to blues, just that the canon is producing more accurate blues than the epson on a test subject. the readings from his measurements show that the epson sample has more red in it, which would contribute to a more purplish look. that you interpret that as the same as saying the epson is producing an unacceptable purple tint in blues is your thing. i just don't see it written below.
"When I printed this chart for the first time on the iPF5000 I was knocked over by the blue gradient. I have never seen an inkjet print where this actually reproduced as blue. Every printer that I've ever used has reproduced this gradient as some shade of purple. With the new Canon printer it is a strong, saturated and very accurate blue.
In Photoshop the far left of the blue gradient measures R=0, G=0 and B=255.
Epson 4800 Canon iPF5000
I wondered how it would be possible to show on the web what the difference looked like. If I scanned the prints there'd be all kinds of pitfalls in trying to achieve accurate reproduction. Then, as I was measuring the results in BabelColor I realized that along with numerical readings from the spectrophotometer, the program also reproduces on screen a patch of the color being read. Via screen capture, these are seen in the illustration immediately above.
Now, reading these patches again in Photoshop, we get the following:
Epson 4800: R=58, G=42 and B=149
Canon iPF5000: R=0, G=44 and B=177"
-
Karin,
There are a lot of different blues in the world. They range from water, to sky, to butterfly wings, to soap boxes, to the colour of a little girl's eyes. I'm sure that few if any will measure as 0,0,255, the way the right end of the gradient on my test chart does.
But that's not the point.
The point is that Canon has added Red, Blue and Green inks. In theory this should allow for the more facile (I won't use accurate because it's a loaded word) reproduction of saturated colours in those parts of the spectrum, and in one (maybe one and half) cases it does.
Just a couple of days after I started testing the Canon iPF5000 there was a seminar which brought several of the industries leading colour management and printing experts to town. They came over to my home / ofice before dinner and we sat around comparing test prints which I had made from the Epson 4800 and Canon 5000.
I won't put words in anyone's mouth, but there was pretty general agreement that the blues produced by the Canon were "bluer". Some thought that the greens were as well (not universally agreed), and everyone thought that the reds were better from the Epson.
So, one can debate whether reproducing an artificial colour gradient, the way I did, tells us anything useful about how a printer reproduces real-world colour, but in this case it did, and seemed to correlate pretty closely with the gamut plots which I produced and which are seen in the article.
Michael
-
Epson 4800: R=58, G=42 and B=149
Canon iPF5000: R=0, G=44 and B=177"[/b]
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69150\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm not sure that's going to provide much real info considering the process to get the values and we're dealing with a device independent color space. The profile used alone could account for the blue shifts on the Epson (or Canon). Blues shifting to magenta or cyan is VERY common with many profiles! It's usually one of several good test for evaluating an output profile.
What you could do is this. Create a pure blue patch (R0/G0/B255 in a defined RGB working space) and output using both printers/profiles. Measure them with a Spectrophotometer to get LAB values. You could convert back to RGB using an Absolute Colorimetric intent to the original RGB working space. This gives you the values from source to printer back again (round trip values) however, once again, a profile could (does) severely tweak the values. It would tells us more about the profile than the potential of the printer I suspect.
Even if you turned off all color management, the "raw" behavior doesn't necessarily tell us about the potential of the printer. I guess what I'd do is use the same target and profile package and build a custom profile for both printers, then send images through them to examine the color as well as taking a peek at the 3d gamut maps. The various driver settings would play a huge role as well. I don't have a clue about the Canon but do know that for example, with NO Color Adjustments in the Epson driver, you get the greatest gamut potential at the expense of a non linear behavior. Using Color Controls might very well provide a better blue at the expense of other colors.
In the end, you could spend a heck of a lot of media and find that printer A produces better blues at the expense of Reds while the other printer does the opposite (which is what I've been told about these two devices). Then what do you do???
-
Hi Folks,
I just got off the phone with Felix from Canon USA and he was really knowledgeable and accomadating. He sat down in front of the ipf5000 printer at his location and walked through my list of concerns.
1. He acknowledged that the biggest complaint was the lack of a printed manual or even an indexed pdf. He is noting complaints and hopefully if enough of us compain Canon will at least put a new pdf manual up for download.
2. I was wrong about the need for a roller attachment for pano papers. You can can print cut sheets. You need to turn on the cut sheet function and turn off the roller attchment option which is on by default. This can be done from the panel on the printer from the menu (Feeder Section). Why it isn't shipped with the cut-sheet as the default since the roller attachment is an extra is beyond me. Also better documentation would have given guidance. This is similar to the problem Michael reported when selecting tray instead of cassette and then not knowing how to clear it. (I had the same problem until I read his review)
3. There is a way to take care of the mismatch error since it's a nag and the driver overides the setting inputed on the LCD. Go to System set-up then to warning warning and drill accross to ignore mismatch and you can turn it on/off from here.
4. I made him aware of the limited # of paper choices from the tray. They are tricking the printer by selecting one of the choices available for the tray such a photo paper pro and printing using the plug-in and profiles on a different type of media. I told him that it's geat that you can use this work-around, but that the printer should have a firmware upgrade to allow all papers and he agreed. I am hoping Canon takes note of my concerns and concerns of other owners and issues firmware and software updates quickly.
5. Attached is the media choices that was faxed to me from Canon for use in driver settings. This list would be beneficial in using the "Media Configuartion Tool" Michael, I also could not add or edit the paper types in the Media Configuartion Tool. This was news to them and I will call them back when I get home this afternoon and walk through the tool with them. Also, I was told there is an HTML file located in the Media Conguration Tool Folder with instructions. Again, hidden documentation. Hard copy manuals would have been NICE!
6. ICC Profiles. This question is for Andy from Digital Dog. I was told that the supplied Canon ICC profiles for theirm media are in 8 bit and that the Photoshop plug-in detects this and uses an algorithm to convert the the file to 8 bit so that it can be printed as the printer accepts only 8 bit files? I know that with the new Colorvision PrintFixPro that you can create 16 bit ICC profiles. Is it even worth using a 16 bit profile. Does any of what I say about the plug-in printer sound accurate? I thought I was well educated in colro mangement, but I am finding that there is a whole level above where I operate from the operational level to the scientific level.
The more I used the printer over the weekend the more I liked it even with the "annoyances." The printer provides geat output. Better than my 4800 in my opinion and output is the bottom line so I will live with work arounds. Andy I would also be glad to print any targets so we have a wide cross section to compare.
-
My question is consistency.
I have a friend who had one and immediately profiled it (and yes, he knows what he's doing) and loved the results. Initially. Then he found his profiles would not hold. IOW his colors would shift for the same print on a daily basis, like the nozzles were not laying down the ink in a consistent fashion. Short version is he returned it to Canon and is back to using his Epsons.
Obviously, he could have had a bad sample so I am curious what others will find as this printer fills the market.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69050\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Jack and others concerned about the consistency issue, I did have an opportunity to print the same file (of a reddish brick building with black fire escape shot in NYC) on both my Epson 4800 and a Conon ipf5000 to which I had access, both on enhanced matte paper. The results were so close that if you set them aside it would be hard to recall which was which later on. This is as it should be with good colour management in both setips. Admittedly a sample of one with a limited colour set, but reassuring nonetheless.
-
On the issue of consistency I would agree that more testing is necessary, but from a practical point of view I have a shot of Hopi Petroglyphs from May of this year with lots of Reds and a bright blue sky and on the Crane Museo Silver Rag the prints look "almost" identical from the 4800/R2400 and the iPF5000. I do not see a difference in the reds, but I do see a difference in the sky.
It may be apples/oranges as I used the icc profiles for my 4800/2400 from the Crane website and created the profile from my ipf5000 over the weekend with a custom profile created by a friend with the Gretag Eye One. I would also be hard pressed to tell which printer they came from unless I looked at the information I printed on the back of the prints. The only difference was in the saturation of the sky. The reds look alike.
I also printed a vertical panorama of a church steeple in the fall and the reds were not as strong, but more realistic along with the greens in the evergreen trees and the sky looked MUCH better!
Here are the images I used to test with.
-
Jack, are you sure this isn't just curing. How long had they dried? [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69129\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Don (et al):
It could be as I did not specifically ask, though given this individual's experience in printing, I doubt it. However, being a new printer it is possible that Canon inks take a couple of days to dry down properly...
-
it is possible that Canon inks take a couple of days to dry down properly...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69188\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Epson inks take a couple days to dry thoroughly although Ethan says you can get by with "overnight" if you lay a sheet of plain paper on top to help draw out the volatiles. With Epson, a three hour old print and three day old print definitely look different.
- DL
-
I have played with my IPF5000 FOR 2 DAYS NOW AND HAVE A FEW PROBLEMS;
1- I can't feed any paper from the front slot. no matter what I try.I can only feed from the top slot/tray. What is the trick to feed 13X19 hanrag from the front slot/tray?What needs to be selected in the front panel for the paper to move in?
2- I want to make profiles in the print plugin for hanrag, moab entrada natural ,innova smooth cotton as well as ilford satin, innova F gloss and later hanrag pearl and crane silver rag. What are you using for media type for the above fiber papers and coated papers. I also assume that for profiling, "no color correction" needs to be selected in output profile,right? I know that the"closest" driver must be choosen for matte/fiber/watercolor papers but I want to know what has worked for you. I hope Michael can chime in for this.
3- What coated/glossy/satin/pearl paper has shown the least bronzing so far?
Louis Bouillon
-
The printer doesn't want you to feed anything expect very heavy posterboard from the front. You can fool it by telling it that the paper is something esle, but i think you'll find feeding and allignment problems.
The issue of choosing which canoin papers to set for prpofiling and printing with third party papers is a horror.
I select Photo Paper Plus Semi-Gloss for glossy iblack prints because it will load their the cassette. Matte papers are less of a problem.
Michael
-
With Epson, a three hour old print and three day old print definitely look different.
Ambient humidity plays a large role here -- my prints do not change appreciably in tonality or color after three hours of dry-down. However I do agree in principle and let my prints dry-down overnight before moving them and at least three (and preferably five) days before mounting and framing. But I can profile after an overnight dry-down with zero problems.
Cheers,
-
The printer doesn't want you to feed anything expect very heavy posterboard from the front. You can fool it by telling it that the paper is something esle, but i think you'll find feeding and allignment problems.
The issue of choosing which canoin papers to set for prpofiling and printing with third party papers is a horror.
I select Photo Paper Plus Semi-Gloss for glossy iblack prints because it will load their the cassette. Matte papers are less of a problem.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69204\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Michael,
Are you saying that there is no straight paper path possible for this printer? I usually use straight path for hanrag and entrada 308 on my 2200.I am told that the new crane, hanrag pearl and innova f gloss are thick and rigid. How did you run those papers? Straight path or upper slot/tray? Do they get warped from upper tray due to the curvature involved?
Louis Bouillon
-
> Ambient humidity plays a large role here
and I'm sure ambient temperature. I live on the coast where indoor humidity hovers around 40% year around and temp rarely rises above 70. I sometimes also profile after letting the target dry only 24 hours but prefer to give it two or three days.
- DL
-
As mentioned in the review, there are four paths, from the cassette, front the top, from the roll holder and front the front.
You can handle just about any media type of thickness through one of these. The issue that I'm complaining about revolves around the fact that unless you tell the printer the type of paper being used in "Canon" paper terms, it doesn't understand, and then you have to lie to it.
I feed Han and Entrada 308 from the cassette all the time, with no problem.
Michael
-
As mentioned in the review, there are four paths, from the cassette, front the top, from the roll holder and front the front.
You can handle just about any media type of thickness through one of these. The issue that I'm complaining about revolves around the fact that unless you tell the printer the type of paper being used in "Canon" paper terms, it doesn't understand, and then you have to lie to it.
I feed Han and Entrada 308 from the cassette all the time, with no problem.
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69261\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks for the quick response. I "discovered" auto(monochrome photo) yesterday and although all the controls are present and very promising, I seem to get a non neutral print using the "neutral "setting.My print comes out with what seems to be a slight sepia tone to my eyes. BW from an RGB file through the driver with anICC selection seems to be more neutral . Did you play with any settings in the box to get a neutral output? I am growing more fond of this printer everyday but can't wait for IP!
Louis Bouillon
-
Michael,
Did you get a chance to check the printer linearization (maximum shadow/minimum highlight)?
louis Bouillon
-
Another day of testing. The problem I reported yesterday of not being able to print anything longer than 24" unless you are using the roll attachment has been confirmed by Felix at Canon USA and has been reported to the engineers back in Japan. I will returning the printer to Calumet as I do alot of prinitng on the Crane Pano papers and the Red River Pano papers as well. I am very suprised that using the manual feed they would limit the length on this type of printer.
Read my other posts on how to clear the mismatch error on the LCD screen., etc.
-
I printed charts from two printers and have sent them to Andrew Rodney for his evaluation.
There should be something to report in a few days, depending on Andrew's availability.
Michael
-
I think some of the bigger issues at the present time is the general overall lack of paper choices from the tray unless you "trick" it.
The limited size of paper when using the manual feed.
The fact that I just sent screen shots to Canon because the media configuration tool does not work
A non-indexed HTML manual meaning that you stumble about while learning to use this beast while wasting valuable dollars in your consumables.
-
Mark,
Agreed. Unless Canon fixes these flaws, and quickly, they will not only suffer a black eye, but could kill their opportunity to have fielded a potentially very competative product.
Lots of great products fail in the marketplace due to just such fumbled launches.
Michael
-
Mark
What media selection did you use in print plugin to print the profile targets for PK papers(silver rag.han pearl,f type gloss ect.) and for MK papers hanrag,entrada, innova smooth ect.
Louis Bouillon
-
Mark
What media selection did you use in print plugin to print the profile targets for PK papers(silver rag.han pearl,f type gloss ect.) and for MK papers hanrag,entrada, innova smooth ect.
Louis Bouillon
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69331\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I am in Maine today (I love Starbucks and wireless on my laptop..yes Maine does have Starbucks!) and will not in front of the printer until tonight, but I belive I used the driver setting of Heavyweight Semi-glossy Photo Paper for the Hahnemuehle Fine Art Pearl and Crane Silver Rag.
For my Epson @Watercolor I used the Fine Art Watercolor and for the Entrada I used Premium Matte Paper.
By the way IT Supplies (http://www.itsupplies.com/) has the roll attachment in the NY warehouse. I got mine the day after the printer came. It works great for the "17 Crane roll paper. I got one great Pano from it so far in limited testing. I am still peeved about the manual feed and 50 sheets of Museo 365 gsm PAN Pro Panoramic Paper I have sitting here that can't be fed through it.
Michael, attached in this PDF are the screen shots of the "Media Configuration Tool" and the problems I ran into. I am also using OS X 10.4.6 and wondered if they were similar to your problems. Felix at Canon was unaware of these problems and I gave him a link to your review and this discussion forum.
If you would like his contact information shoot me an e-mail at markahiggins@msn.com
-
Michael sent me two targets today he printed on two different Canon 5000's (same paper from the same box). Note this isn't really enough data to say anything conclusive but it is interesting. The targets contain 918 color patches of known value. I measured both on the i1 i0 and saved the resulting spectral data as text files. This allows me to load both into the ProfileMaker Pro MeasureTool module using what is called the compare mode. The two sets of 918 spectral data measurements are compared and depending on what formula I select, I get a deltaE value. Note I set MeasureTool to provide what I feel is the best way to calculate small changes in delta, that being deltaE 2000. I've uploaded the screen dump. Let me explain what is being shown here.
The worst 10% of the matches are shown with a yellow square around the color. This is useful to show you which solid colors are the farthest apart visually. You might notice one patch with a red border (it's a gray patch) and when I click on it, the deltaE is supplied below. So here's the skinny. The average deltaE is 2.81. The worst 10% are 6.99 which I think is pretty high. That one gray patch is 12.42 which isn't good at all (note that a deltaE of one or less isn't perceivable and a deltaE of 6 or less is consider "accpetalbe" matching although you can easily see the difference.
To give you an idea, I did the same test with an Epson 2200 however, I only printed one target, the other was from a customer so the papers where certainly not the same lot. This was Luster paper too. The worst 10% deltaE was 4.84, MUCH lower! The worst patch (a very dark gray) is a deltaE of 6.47.
I'd like to see far more samples from different printers as well as the same printer and paper being used over the course of days or even weeks to plot the stability. But this initial test does back up the one poster who said they build a profile and it wasn't all that usable later.
-
Andrew,
I would be curious to know the delta E 2000 between two Epson 4800, 7800 or 9800 targets you have measured on Epson Premium Luster. Presumably with calibration info burned into ROM at the factory these printers would be much closer together than even the Epson 2400. Since the Epson 4800 is the competing printer size wise, this information would be valuable.
--John
-
Andrew,
I would be curious to know the delta E 2000 between two Epson 4800, 7800 or 9800 targets you have measured on Epson Premium Luster. Presumably with calibration info burned into ROM at the factory these printers would be much closer together than even the Epson 2400. Since the Epson 4800 is the competing printer size wise, this information would be valuable.
--John
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69366\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Me too but looking over all the saved data files I have, I can't find any two from the same printer and paper combo's. I have lots of 4800 or 9800 files but I'm having difficulty finding two from the same paper (go figure). That's why I used the 2200.
-
Here's a question that occured to me a few days ago, and this seems like as good a time as any to bring it forward.
Epson claims that all "Pro" printers are individually calibrated and linearized at the factory. But, since these printers (4800, 7800, 9800) are deliverd with dry heads and ink lines how is this process done? For each printer / head combination to be calibrated means printing, yet if prints were made with that system, how do they then arrive dry and clean?
Michael
-
Here's a question that occured to me a few days ago, and this seems like as good a time as any to bring it forward.
Epson claims that all "Pro" printers are individually calibrated and linearized at the factory. But, since these printers (4800, 7800, 9800) are deliverd with dry heads and ink lines how is this process done? For each printer / head combination to be calibrated means printing, yet if prints were made with that system, how do they then arrive dry and clean?
Michael
When I bought my 9600 there were still some fainter colors in some of the lines. When I posted, I was assured by those on Epson Wide Format group that this was normal as printers are tested with ink before leaving the factory. I guess they just didn't do as good a job cleaning out the lines on mine.
--John
-
Can't get this darn screen dump to fly so to view it, click this link:
http://www.digitaldog.net/files/deltaE.jpg (http://www.digitaldog.net/files/deltaE.jpg)
-
Can't get this darn screen dump to fly so to view it, click this link:
http://www.digitaldog.net/files/deltaE.jpg (http://www.digitaldog.net/files/deltaE.jpg)
That doesn't exactly look like a random distribution of colors with the yellow boxes (worst 10%). The significant differences are confined to certain colors. Looks like you would definitely want a custom profile. The key question is whether a particular printer changes significantly over time.
--John
-
That doesn't exactly look like a random distribution of colors with the yellow boxes (worst 10%). The significant differences are confined to certain colors. Looks like you would definitely want a custom profile. The key question is whether a particular printer changes significantly over time.
--John
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69379\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
From the measured data, a custom profile was generated.
There's no real rhyme or reason why some colors have the yellow squares. We're simply seeing the differences between two sets of measured data per color. I frankly don't know why those colors differ as much as they do. Interesting that the worst patch is a gray however. I suspect that's not good.
Yes, I'd love to measure targets from the same printer over time (something we will do). So again, this is just a small snippet and nothing to take to the bank other than these two printers are not behaving in a similar fashion as much as I'd like (and see from Epson).
-
It would appear that the typical Epson solution "buy Colorbyte and use their profiles as is" won't do with the Canon, right?...
With such a large variation from printer to printer, it wouldn't make too much sense to use pre-cooked profiles.
It looks like my Monaco might become useful again.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
It would appear that the typical Epson solution "buy Colorbyte and use their profiles as is" won't do with the Canon, right?...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69382\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Is there any plans from ColorByte to support this printer? I'd think that's a key question.
-
Is there any plans from ColorByte to support this printer? I'd think that's a key question.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69383\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Andrew,
I thought I saw comments from Michael hinting that the were planning to support it within 3 months, or did I misunderstand?
Or are you saying that you results might lead them to reconsider the whole story?
By the way, isn't there a possibility that the current discrepency results from differnt quality of head alignements with the 2 printers? Isn't this related to the graininess seen in some samples when the heads are pooly aligned? I mean, doesn't such a graineness endup affecting the color?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Or are you saying that you results might lead them to reconsider the whole story?
By the way, isn't there a possibility that the current discrepency results from differnt quality of head alignements with the 2 printers? Isn't this related to the graininess seen in some samples when the heads are pooly aligned? I mean, doesn't such a graineness endup affecting the color?
Cheers,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69385\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I can ping John P at ColorByte and ask him. Took an awfully long time just to write the 2400 driver but it's possible they are working on the Canon.
Can't answer you question about the alignment. I just measured the targets.
-
I can ping John P at ColorByte and ask him. Took an awfully long time just to write the 2400 driver but it's possible they are working on the Canon.
Can't answer you question about the alignment. I just measured the targets.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69389\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Just received an email from John today...his response was between 60 and 90 days.
-
Just received an email from John today...his response was between 60 and 90 days.
Translated into earth time, that would be 6-9 months. Or did I misread the track record of Colorbyte when it comes to release dates?
--John
-
This may be obvious to everyone but me. But this does seem like the place to ask. I just got a ipf 5000 and am getting ready to profile it with monaco Profiler platinum. Is everyone making profiles as a RGB printer or as a seven color printer? Can the printer even recognize a 7 color profile or does everything have to be sent to it as a RGB 8 or 16 bit file? I don't have a roll feed yet so dealing with the top "tray" has been pretty much impossible with canvas.
AWOL
6. ICC Profiles. This question is for Andy from Digital Dog. I was told that the supplied Canon ICC profiles for theirm media are in 8 bit and that the Photoshop plug-in detects this and uses an algorithm to convert the the file to 8 bit so that it can be printed as the printer accepts only 8 bit files? I know that with the new Colorvision PrintFixPro that you can create 16 bit ICC profiles. Is it even worth using a 16 bit profile. Does any of what I say about the plug-in printer sound accurate? I thought I was well educated in colro mangement, but I am finding that there is a whole level above where I operate from the operational level to the scientific level.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69167\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Michael sent me two targets today he printed on two different Canon 5000's (same paper from the same box). Note this isn't really enough data to say anything conclusive but it is interesting.
<snip>
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69364\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
One possibility that hasn't been mentioned yet is that the two printers may be using ink from different batches, and the underlying problem is that Canon haven't got their consistency tight enough with ink manufacture yet.
This may sound unlikely, but I recall a problem with Epson inks a few years ago when batches of their ink made in China was noticeably different from ink made in Japan.
So the printers might be well-calibrated (using a 'standard' ink in the factory - but what if that varies as well??) but the ink isn't.
So how about a test involving 2 printers but 1 set of cartridges? i.e. print target from one, transfer carts to other printer, print target from other printer, then compare.
This would help Canon to narrow the problem down to 'printer' or 'ink'.
Of course, _both_ ink and printers might vary :-)
Regards,
Alan
-
This may be obvious to everyone but me. But this does seem like the place to ask. I just got a ipf 5000 and am getting ready to profile it with monaco Profiler platinum. Is everyone making profiles as a RGB printer or as a seven color printer? Can the printer even recognize a 7 color profile or does everything have to be sent to it as a RGB 8 or 16 bit file? I don't have a roll feed yet so dealing with the top "tray" has been pretty much impossible with canvas.
AWOL
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69412\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Profile it as an RGB device. The driver will do the conversion from RGB to the 12 color Seps. Quickdraw and GDI drivers only understand RGB anyway.
I'm not sure where all this 16-bit profile stuff is coming from but I suspect Canon has some documentation somewhere that is causing confusion. Profiles unlike images don't have a bit depth. Some products allow you to control the number of nodes used to build the profile but this isn't a "8-bit versus 16-bit" issue whatsoever. In fact, it is sometimes the case that a smaller node used to build the profile will produce a better result. So if you guys want to consider 16-bit files fine but don't worry about profiles. Get good ones and don't concern yourself with the node or "bit depth".
After you build the profile, you can use either an 8-bit or 16-bit file just like you can with ANY file you print out of Photoshop.
-
One possibility that hasn't been mentioned yet is that the two printers may be using ink from different batches, and the underlying problem is that Canon haven't got their consistency tight enough with ink manufacture yet.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69419\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hardware or ink, doesn't really matter with respect to consistency between this product and the competition (at this point).
Again, with only two targets under our belt, this is far from a definitive statement however, the initial results are not comforting.
-
Hardware or ink, doesn't really matter with respect to consistency between this product and the competition (at this point).
Again, with only two targets under our belt, this is far from a definitive statement however, the initial results are not comforting.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69425\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Personally I'm far less interested in consistency between two printers than consistency of one printer over time. I guess the former issue is of interest to those using canned profiles, but with custom profiles I just don't see it as something to be concerned about.
-
One thing I'm wondering about is the 16-bit driver interface, and how "open" Canon will be with this. Are we only going to have the option of using the two Plug-ins Canon has provided so far? Will Canon give Mike Chaney the time of day so that he can add 16-bit support to QImage? What about Adobe Lightroom?
Right now I use QImage for my 2400 not so much for the interpolation/sharpening (in fact for large prints I disabled those and do my own), but for the page layout capabilities and the convenience of associating driver settings with ICC profiles. With a large-format printer the layout capabilities would be even more important; I'd hate to be stuck using "Print with Preview" for all my printing needs....
-
Whether we are interested in differences between printers or differences in each printer over time, we'll eventually have to come to grips with the issue of sample size and how to make sense of the data.
Statisticians call the voyage we've embarked on Experimental Design (remember that statistics course you had to take that you couldn't figure out how you would ever need it?), manufacturers call it Process Control. The tools are available to state whether there is a significant difference between two or more printers and to what extent the difference is attributable to time. The tools require that sample size be adequate and that all extraneous influences be controlled.
If we simply want to know whether printers significantly differ on a measure, assuming all extraneous influences are controlled, a sample size of roughly 25 to 30 is needed. If we also want to know the affects of extraneous influences such as manufacturing batch, usage time, paper type, paper batch, ink batch, etc., sample requirements become very large.
If we want to know whether each printer changes over time while also determineing whether printers significantly differ and why, we're thrown into the world of longitudinal design which requires much more data and different methods of analysis.
Of course, Canon should be doing this. Their excellent process control in other areas of manufacturing demonstrates that they know how to do it and can get it done. But this relatively new manufacturing group will have to learn the lessons other Canon groups have solved.
My DsII proves that Canon can solve these problems, but it will take time.
-
Personally I'm far less interested in consistency between two printers than consistency of one printer over time. I guess the former issue is of interest to those using canned profiles, but with custom profiles I just don't see it as something to be concerned about.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69435\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
While I agree with you in theory, in practice I see the problem a bit more significant. If there is not consistency between two of the same model printers, it does not bode well for the canned profiles out of the gate, demanding one builds custom profiles for their machine. Moreover, this shows a lack of concern for consistency on Canon's part which then begs the questiopn if the same lack of concern spills over into the ink manufacturing. If it does, then it becomes a more significant problem IMO.
-
Whether we are interested in differences between printers or differences in each printer over time, we'll eventually have to come to grips with the issue of sample size and how to make sense of the data.
Statisticians call the voyage we've embarked on Experimental Design (remember that statistics course you had to take that you couldn't figure out how you would ever need it?), manufacturers call it Process Control. The tools are available to state whether there is a significant difference between two or more printers and to what extent the difference is attributable to time. The tools require that sample size be adequate and that all extraneous influences be controlled.
If we simply want to know whether printers significantly differ on a measure, assuming all extraneous influences are controlled, a sample size of roughly 25 to 30 is needed. If we also want to know the affects of extraneous influences such as manufacturing batch, usage time, paper type, paper batch, ink batch, etc., sample requirements become very large.
If we want to know whether each printer changes over time while also determineing whether printers significantly differ and why, we're thrown into the world of longitudinal design which requires much more data and different methods of analysis...[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69445\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Fred,
Very interesting perspective but I cannot help but comment here. Your initial sample size calculation of 25-30 to compare one printer to another of the same make and model may be accurate, assuming you have the power calculation done correctly. I think that this comparison is critical since you have to assume that the printers are clones of each other like inbred animal strains. There really should be no difference at all between the printers. If there is, it speaks of quality control issues which I believe you alluded to.
Regardless, it is likely that only you and I appreciate your analysis which I personally found intriguing probably because it fits my usual day-to-day paradigm. If you decide to do the study, let me know. It will definitely have to be multi-center!
Carl Laskin
-
Here's a question that occured to me a few days ago, and this seems like as good a time as any to bring it forward.
Epson claims that all "Pro" printers are individually calibrated and linearized at the factory. But, since these printers (4800, 7800, 9800) are deliverd with dry heads and ink lines how is this process done? For each printer / head combination to be calibrated means printing, yet if prints were made with that system, how do they then arrive dry and clean?
Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69370\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Michael
Stange I know, that the printers are clean when u get them. However I have on many occasion seen a Epson with traces of ink and what looks like testing has been carried out. How they clean them again is a mystery.
Cheers
Mark
-
My Canon iPF5000 was delivered to me on 29/6/06 in London U/K and it took a few days to sort out the set-up and begin printing.There are the same gliches that have been noted by other artists on web sites but they are no big problem there appears to have been an update to the initial software on my install discs.
The article by Michael Reichmann describing his experiances setting up and printing with the iPf5000 was very helpful -thank you.
I use a lot of bright colour often primary in my drawings and prints and find this printer has taken such printing to a new level where Epson printers cannot compete,I have used such printers in the past but this canon printer is better all round.Michael in his in-depth article articulates very well and I do agree with the problems he has noted.The intersting discovery is imagePROGRAF Print Plug-in and I agree it is better to print using this new piece of software .The paper profiles are very good ,colour reproduction and intensity astonishing far better than using standerd driver and photoshop,but the detail and print quality are better than other makes of A2 inkjet printers.
The paper used so far are Fotospeed High white smooth 315gsm.Fotospeed Matt duo 200gsm printer drivers do not like this paper Matt Photo was best setting and Hanemuehle Photo rag 308 gsm setting Fine Art heavywieght photo,same also for first paper .
My next step is to obtain profiles for the papers I print with and develop my ability to print using the iPF5000 using twelve colours it ‘s opening a new area in fine art printing and will help introduce many artists in fine art painting,sculpture and printmaking to inkjet printing.
Martin Mitchell
-
Martin,
Thanks for that qualitative appraisal.
The fine art area is probably the most critical of all .Your further experiences would be of great interest. Reports on color accuracy , linearity and consistency, from early adopters are very important.
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au
-
Hello.
I'm using the Canon iPf5000 - slowly to print images and beginning to make profiles using PrintfixPRO,problems are beginning to appear in the software supplied by Cannon.
Using imagePrograph Photoshop plug-in problems are.
1]The types of paper described in supplied print profiles are of limited use when choosing to use the cassete why this should happen is incredibaly shortsighted and lousy writting of software by Canon,it's near impossible to print a gloss type paper through cassete,most of the time the photoshop plug-in sends you to manual or paper-roll for paper insertion to printer,the same with other paper choices from supplied profiles.This has to be rectified by Canon otherwise the printer will not sell to the public.This problem rears its head yet again when using Photoshop and Print Management why is beyond belief!!!
2]Often the printer will print the previous image when using imagePrograf unless you cancel that image before printing the current image.
3]Each time one powers up the printer it does a head cleaning cycle is this really neccessary?
4]The most trying problem is when one tries to put paper into tray [top loader !] it works one time in five a problem that was evident back at the factory to any of the technicians developing this printer.
These noted problems are extreme,for Canon to send a printer to market aimed at the proffesional printer is stupid and word travels fast about a printers failings,instead of its attributes
but for all of these problems I will carry on using my Canon iPF5000.The colour prints I'm producing cannot be eqalled by any other inkjet printer in this class on the market today the colour reproduction is fantastic and detail is becoming more pronounced as I develope tricks to tease increasingly better prints out of this printer.Creating ones own paper profiles is the direction one should take with this printer unlike when using an Epson printer where many artists use existing profiles and then play with color management tools.Lazy push button injet art!!!!! for feeble galleries.
One question.
What experiance have other users of this printer had using Setting 1 to 5 and what influence do these settings have when creating paper profiles?
Me.
I'm a painter,printmaker and animater living in London U.K using a Powermac G5 Quad 6mb of ram,pair of viewsonic screens an old Epson 1290 printer using Lyson Fotonic ink in refillable cartridges and my wonderful new CanoniPF5000printer.Software mainly Photoshop CS2 plus some attachments and Maya 7 which is amazing to print rendered images from much softer and detailed than Photoshop.The Canon picks out very delicate changes in colour and tone gradation when printing from Maya 7 rendered images.Animated films are edited using Final Cut Pro 5 but that is another story I'm here for the ink jet printing knowledge passed on by individuals with far more experiance than me.
Thanks.
Martin Mitchell
-
Hello.
The colour prints I'm producing cannot be eqalled by any other inkjet printer in this class on the market today the colour reproduction is fantastic and detail is becoming more pronounced as I develope tricks to tease increasingly better prints out of this printer...........................I'm here for the ink jet printing knowledge passed on by individuals with far more experiance than me.
Thanks.
Martin Mitchell
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70953\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
From what I've seen so far (a limited sample), if you place a Canon IPF5000 print of a real-world photograph (not a test chart) beside an Epson 4800 print, all else equal and using matte paper, for the same image an independent observer would be hard-put to say which print came from which printer. Using glossy paper, the Canon has better D-Max for rendering deep shadow detail.
I cancelled my order for the Canon printer, because the total cost would come to over 3000 CAD, I'm not in the mood to spend all this money on unperfected merchandise, Canon has a number of issues to sort out and I don't know what they are doing about them, there is not enough operating experience to know which issues are more critical than others, and my Epson 4800 continues to make fine prints, albeit with the well-known issues from that technology. Each to his/her own of course, and those who are more adventurous than I am, therefore buying the Canon printer will be doing the rest of the community a service by noting the problems and making sure that Canon is aware of them. No doubt that with the necessary amount of juggling, users are getting fine results from it too.
-
Hello,
My use of the Canon iPF5000 for printing is for coloured images and drawings not for photographs,Ihave no experiance of using this printer to print photographs which is an area for producing images more involved with pixels,light,tone and a different use of light and shadow.My images are drawn using wacom pad or scanned in with an epson scanner.Occassionaly I'l use Alias SketchBook Pro to part create an image then develope it in photoshop so my way of using this canon printer is different from a photographer,it's the wide colour gamut and clear bright colours produced when printing on hahnamuhle paper that attracted me to this printer even with its numerous failings.
Once problems with this printer have been resolved then I'm sure many photographers will print using a Canon iPF5000.
Note .
Last night when trying to print colour test chart in imagePrograf plug-in discovered it clips both ends of the chart.
Come on canon sort out problems with this printer,my canon dealer just told me he has twenty such printers in stock but nobody appears to be buying them here in U/K ---------WHY?
Thanks
Martin Mitchell
-
.........................
Come on canon sort out problems with this printer,my canon dealer just told me he has twenty such printers in stock but nobody appears to be buying them here in U/K ---------WHY?
Thanks
Martin Mitchell
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70985\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Martin, perhaps this was a rhetorical question, but nonetheless deserves being though about. It is - in my mind anyhow - truly perplexing how an extremely sophisticated, experienced and wealthy corporation like Canon could so effectively botch their entry to - what is for them - a new market niche that they obviously intended to take very seriously. This market niche is also sophisticated. People who buy these machines know what they're doing and are generally deliberate about their purchasing decisions.
But these things happen. Companies periodically just "get it wrong" - because they underestimate - or fail to estimate - the importance of just enough factors to create unsold inventory on dealers' shelves. To err is human (and all these firms are run by people, let us not forget); but less excusable is the total silence about how they view these issues and what they intend to do about the ones they think are the most critical.
Of course, this quickly gets deep into issues of corporate and commercial culture, so I won't go there - in any case it doesn't matter - what does matter is that if they want the inventory to move off the shelves they will have to say something and do a few things very soon, otherwise they will miss the boat - and there may not be a return trip. The reason is that they themselves have "upped the ante" by targeting the weak points of Epson's technology. I'm sure neither Epson nor HP are sitting back waiting for Canon to take over their markets. I believe that within the next six to eight months there will be strong market entries from both Epson and HP, which will be great for us consumers. I've decided that I'm just not going to rush myself into the next printer purchase. My 4800 is less than a year old, and I've decided to keep using it until I am truly conmvinced it is worthwhile replacing with whichever brand turns out best for my purposes - I have no brand loyalty whatsoever - it all depends on costs and results.
-
Hello all,
Just got my Canon IPF5000 today. First prints are amazing! It does have some annoying features (I don't like using the front panel), but in the end I love the prints (so far). Can someone tell me how to use cut sheets to print panos? I know that was mentioned. I can't find the "feeder section" from the main menu on the front panel to disable the roller attachment. I have a roller attachment on order...hope it shows up soon.
BTW, if anyone is trying to decide between the Epson 4800 and CanonIPF 5000, you can get test prints (of your own images) made on both printers at www.itsupplies.com for free. And no I'm not affliated with this company in any way, I stumbled onto their website looking for someone that could get me a test print from the Canon IPF5000.
I think once I get a good workflow figured out for the IPF5000 it is going to be an outstanding printer. I've been struggling a bit with the printer driver, media selection, where is the printer going to take the paper from, etc... but should get all its quirks figured out soon.
-
Hello all,
Just got my Canon IPF5000 today. First prints are amazing! It does have some annoying features (I don't like using the front panel), but in the end I love the prints (so far). Can someone tell me how to use cut sheets to print panos? I know that was mentioned. I can't find the "feeder section" from the main menu on the front panel to disable the roller attachment. I have a roller attachment on order...hope it shows up soon.
Hello SRB
Cut sheets are inserted into Canon iPF5000 via the top tray but from reading other entries on LLF the longest print is restricted to 24 inches.Using paper roll you can print longer prints.
You do not disable paper roll from printer controll panel [my experiance] it's done by iMagePrograf photo shop plug-in [File-Export] depending on the paper proflle chosen.
This printer knows from sensors paper roll is not attached.
Suggest spend couple of days reading all info on this printer plus manuel on one of the disc need slow confident approach because this ai'nt no epson printer like clone !!!
When you attach paper roll you might have to clean install canon sofware but definately get printer to record length and make of paper with a bar code.Only put on roll feed with a roll of paper,bar code then dismantle if you wish to print sheets of paper which enter via top tray.
Note;
`Discovered last night that paper profiles created using settings 1-5 allows one to use cassete to print in imagePrograff.
Bye Martin
-
Martin, perhaps this was a rhetorical question, but nonetheless deserves being though about. It is - in my mind anyhow - truly perplexing how an extremely sophisticated, experienced and wealthy corporation like Canon could so effectively botch their entry to - what is for them - a new market niche that they obviously intended to take very seriously. This market niche is also sophisticated. People who buy these machines know what they're doing and are generally deliberate about their purchasing decisions.
Hello Mark
I agree with much of what you are saying and the silence from Canon is deafening on these issues many of us are raising in this forum concerning the iPF5000 printer.
If I had a Epson 4800 printer idear of buying this canon printer would not enter my mind the competition will respond.Ink jet printer models appear to improve in leaps every 18 months or so like chips without the fish!!
Bye
Martin
-
Martin,
as a new person to wide format printing and a total non epson user ever but a happy ipf5000 owner i have a couple of comments.
my work flow as a casual photographer who sells a few prints does not involve printing from PS so i can't directly comment on the plug-in issues but your issues seem to be more generic and not really plugin related.
Although for me the plugin failed to install on MS Vista using remote desktop so i gave up, will have to go back and have another go.
I personally use Qimage for all my printing tasks and have profiled all my paper stock with PFP.
Comments on your points inline below....
Hello.
I'm using the Canon iPf5000 - slowly to print images and beginning to make profiles using PrintfixPRO,problems are beginning to appear in the software supplied by Cannon.
Using imagePrograph Photoshop plug-in problems are.
1]The types of paper described in supplied print profiles are of limited use when choosing to use the cassete why this should happen is incredibaly shortsighted and lousy writting of software by Canon,it's near impossible to print a gloss type paper through cassete,most of the time the photoshop plug-in sends you to manual or paper-roll for paper insertion to printer,the same with other paper choices from supplied profiles.This has to be rectified by Canon otherwise the printer will not sell to the public.This problem rears its head yet again when using Photoshop and Print Management why is beyond belief!!!
The only paper type that seems to be not supported in the cassette is Gloss paper, i can see this will be a pain and i have yet to find a work around.
Just about everything else uses the MK ink anyway and it's just a matter of selecting the closest cassette paper type when feeding from it.
Experiments are starting to show which media types lay down more or less ink, i have some canvas that i actually use plain paper HQ setting with.
the media quide is a good starting point but i too wish it was more complete and gave indications of ink laydown for each type.
2]Often the printer will print the previous image when using imagePrograf unless you cancel that image before printing the current image.
Certainly not my experience with qimage, this sounds like a process step that needs to be completed that's not obvious, this is typical of Canon's instructions if it's missing.
3]Each time one powers up the printer it does a head cleaning cycle is this really neccessary?
Certainly NOT my experience and my printer will be on for days at a time with no printing and has been off for days as well, i have seen it do two head cleans both were quick, one at turn on and one after coming out of sleep mode. twice out of multiple cycles seems fair.
4]The most trying problem is when one tries to put paper into tray [top loader !] it works one time in five a problem that was evident back at the factory to any of
the technicians developing this printer.
Again not my experience, the trick is to ensure that the left hand guide is accurately positioned to the width of the media, this aids in keeping everything straight. iv'e suffer maybe 1 in 20 misfeeds and all due to rushing the feed. I am getting better though and managed to feed a number of 17" wide canvas sheets that were quite flexible without any feed problems last night.
These noted problems are extreme,for Canon to send a printer to market aimed at the proffesional printer is stupid and word travels fast about a printers failings,instead of its attributesv
but for all of these problems I will carry on using my Canon iPF5000.The colour prints I'm producing cannot be eqalled by any other inkjet printer in this class on the market today the colour reproduction is fantastic and detail is becoming more pronounced as I develope tricks to tease increasingly better prints out of this printer.Creating ones own paper profiles is the direction one should take with this printer unlike when using an Epson printer where many artists use existing profiles and then play with color management tools.Lazy push button injet art!!!!! for feeble galleries.
Searching of old posts on DPR show similar comments from new epson users, all printers seem to have little quirks.
People using these printers generally would be professionals and i would expect professionals to correctly colour profile the printer for their paper stock. no doubt the major papers will end up with generic profiles for the printer but the serious user should and will tweak anyway, so what's the issue with having to generate some profiles.
Like epson the canon will output good quality on their own brand paper with their profiles....mmmm not much difference there.
occasionally in qimage i forget to set the correct profile for the print and send a default sRGB profile, funny thing is that the actual output to friends i have shown these prints to is how nice they look, not "oh look at the slightly wrong colours". To me this says that the printer does a great job all on its own to convert a standard sRGB profile to the nominated paper type specified.
One question.
What experiance have other users of this printer had using Setting 1 to 5 and what influence do these settings have when creating paper profiles?
Me.
I'm a painter,printmaker and animater living in London U.K using a Powermac G5 Quad 6mb of ram,pair of viewsonic screens an old Epson 1290 printer using Lyson Fotonic ink in refillable cartridges and my wonderful new CanoniPF5000printer.Software mainly Photoshop CS2 plus some attachments and Maya 7 which is amazing to print rendered images from much softer and detailed than Photoshop.The Canon picks out very delicate changes in colour and tone gradation when printing from Maya 7 rendered images.Animated films are edited using Final Cut Pro 5 but that is another story I'm here for the ink jet printing knowledge passed on by individuals with far more experiance than me.
Thanks.
Martin Mitchell
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=70953\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I would also like to work out the 1-5 setting and i may get time to play this weekend, very remiss of Canon to not better document this.
Having bought this printer without the Epson/HP user experience i had no real expectation of usability.
I like the setting of paper type and size from the front panel, but i have turned of the mismatch warning as the printer is not in the same room as my workstation.
Otherwise i have found it simple and easy to use and get along with.
-
All,
I am new to the forum, and also this is my first "real" printer, the ipf5000. I have to say i am very pleased both with the operation and esp. the print quality from my Canon. I looked at the 4800 and after careful consideration i decided on the Canon and i am not looking back.
I also am not rich, but i have spent tens of thousands of dollars on camera bodies and lenses, this printer was roughly $2100. w/ roll feeder USD. If it is not perfect, or without its short comings, is it the end of the earth?
Again, i am not trying to overstep my bounds but these things happen with new gear alll the time. With every new camera or new lens we all could go to a forum and find 30% of us folks slamming it as crap.
How many times do we find that a lot of the ones slamming the product do not even have it in their possesion? All i can say is if you are looking to purchase a new 17" printer, for what ever reason, the ipf5000 gives one great results. If you just bought an Epson 4800 6 months ago and you are here pointing out how crap the Canon is.... why? Go shoot some frames and print them on your Epson and have a nice day. Why turn it into rocket science?
We will all be long dead before our prints start to fade regardless of whether you have the 4800 or the ipf5000, so enjoy!
John
Martin,
as a new person to wide format printing and a total non epson user ever but a happy ipf5000 owner i have a couple of comments.
my work flow as a casual photographer who sells a few prints does not involve printing from PS so i can't directly comment on the plug-in issues but your issues seem to be more generic and not really plugin related.
Although for me the plugin failed to install on MS Vista using remote desktop so i gave up, will have to go back and have another go.
I personally use Qimage for all my printing tasks and have profiled all my paper stock with PFP.
Comments on your points inline below....
The only paper type that seems to be not supported in the cassette is Gloss paper, i can see this will be a pain and i have yet to find a work around.
Just about everything else uses the MK ink anyway and it's just a matter of selecting the closest cassette paper type when feeding from it.
Experiments are starting to show which media types lay down more or less ink, i have some canvas that i actually use plain paper HQ setting with.
the media quide is a good starting point but i too wish it was more complete and gave indications of ink laydown for each type.
Certainly not my experience with qimage, this sounds like a process step that needs to be completed that's not obvious, this is typical of Canon's instructions if it's missing.
Certainly NOT my experience and my printer will be on for days at a time with no printing and has been off for days as well, i have seen it do two head cleans both were quick, one at turn on and one after coming out of sleep mode. twice out of multiple cycles seems fair.
Again not my experience, the trick is to ensure that the left hand guide is accurately positioned to the width of the media, this aids in keeping everything straight. iv'e suffer maybe 1 in 20 misfeeds and all due to rushing the feed. I am getting better though and managed to feed a number of 17" wide canvas sheets that were quite flexible without any feed problems last night.
Searching of old posts on DPR show similar comments from new epson users, all printers seem to have little quirks.
People using these printers generally would be professionals and i would expect professionals to correctly colour profile the printer for their paper stock. no doubt the major papers will end up with generic profiles for the printer but the serious user should and will tweak anyway, so what's the issue with having to generate some profiles.
Like epson the canon will output good quality on their own brand paper with their profiles....mmmm not much difference there.
occasionally in qimage i forget to set the correct profile for the print and send a default sRGB profile, funny thing is that the actual output to friends i have shown these prints to is how nice they look, not "oh look at the slightly wrong colours". To me this says that the printer does a great job all on its own to convert a standard sRGB profile to the nominated paper type specified.
I would also like to work out the 1-5 setting and i may get time to play this weekend, very remiss of Canon to not better document this.
Having bought this printer without the Epson/HP user experience i had no real expectation of usability.
I like the setting of paper type and size from the front panel, but i have turned of the mismatch warning as the printer is not in the same room as my workstation.
Otherwise i have found it simple and easy to use and get along with.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71218\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
You've missed the point of this discussion - no-one is slamming anything as crap, and as far as I've read, none of the observations about the teething problems of the Canon printer were made in spite by owners of Epson 4800s. Most of the identification of problems came from new owners of the Canon IPF5000. One of the real values of a discussion forum such as this one is that it informs the manufacturers they have issues which they really need to address, and it provides useful information to prospective buyers. I think we all know nothing is perfect, but different issues mean different things to different people, so we may as well all know what they are and make our own decisions accordingly.
-
Most of us are putting high hopes in newly purchased products, and it is always annoying to find out that some issues have been overlooked by the designers...
Some things seem obvious for experienced users, but just didn't appear important enough for the design team to devote time and money to.
In my field (engineer software), it is overall very difficult to get an accurate representation of what users actually want, so that I find it interesting for Canon to get the chance to get free feedback from top class users about their new product. Problems should be discussed openly and this is what is being done in this thread.
It is true though that the discussion might look like it is over-stressing some issues of a product that still appears to be best in class, if not totally perfect yet.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
i'm with Mark and Bernard.
Even my long winded reply to Martin was about the facts as i see them as a ipf5000 owner.
This thread has been generally constructive
Cheers
Phil
-
Most of us are putting high hopes in newly purchased products, and it is always annoying to find out that some issues have been overlooked by the designers...
It is true though that the discussion might look like it is over-stressing some issues of a product that still appears to be best in class, if not totally perfect yet.
Cheers,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71232\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Bernard, just to provide context for my comments in this thread, I own and use an Epson 4800 and I had ordered a Canon IPF5000 primarily for ease of media switchability - the real Achilles-heel of the Epson X800 series. I was really looking forward to making the change in order to solve this problem once and for all. As I mentioned previously in this thread I cancelled the order because there emerged just too many "unknowns" and issues for someone who already owns a world-class machine such as the 4800.
In making this decision I also had the privilege of doing some direct comparisons between 4800 and IPF5000 prints on both Matte and Gloss media. It is not clear that the IPF5000 is overall "best in its class". Based on my limited sample of results, I would say it is best in some respects and no better in others. I shall be making more such comparisons over the coming weeks as circumstances permit to get a more reliable sample of outputs. So far what I have seen is that D-Max and rendering of three-quartertone detail is better from the IPF5000 on gloss media but not on Matte, because for matte the media and not the printer is the critical constraint. The IPF5000 seems no better than the 4800 at colour rendition in real world photographs (though it does have much more accurate blue in a test chart) and no better than the 4800 at reendering fine detail. In fact, the Epson may have a slight edge here, but I want to test that issue further. I was also disappointed to read that despite its 12 inks the red and yellow gamut of the IPF5000 is not as good as Epson's K3. This is possibly a limitation, just as one example, to those doing urban photography in places like Thailand and China where deep reds and yellows abound and gamut compression is already an issue with the Epson printer.
-
Hello Ausiphil
"Comments on your points inline below....
The only paper type that seems to be not supported in the cassette is Gloss paper, i can see this will be a pain and i have yet to find a work around.
Just about everything else uses the MK ink anyway and it's just a matter of selecting the closest cassette paper type when feeding from it.
Experiments are starting to show which media types lay down more or less ink, i have some canvas that i actually use plain paper HQ setting with.
the media quide is a good starting point but i too wish it was more complete and gave indications of ink laydown for each type".
-------------------||
I'm using Powermac G5 and OSX so my printing experiance will be different to you but tells us about your printing paper choice and which paper profile you choose---what the result looks like also I'm keen to hear about your experiments and idears about ink laydown etc'.How you work with PrintFixPro and the results once printing with CanoniPF5000.--Thanks
The problems I have outlined in previous articles are common problems outlined on a number of websites and do not revolve around how I operate my printer but some can be worked around by operating printer in different ways,this thread is helping me to understand these 'workarounds'.
Hopefully Canon will hear of these operating problems and rectify them for future users of this printer , as an artist this printer suits my artwork because I can print flat forms of primary colour unlike the Epson 4800 which has a more limited primary colour range.
Hope to hear about your canon iPF5000 printing experiances in more detail soon
Thanks
Martin Mitchell
-
Hello John S,
I do not understand what you are trying to say?
Perhaps if you were constructive in your critique of contributors to this thread concerning the Canon iPF5000 inkjet printer,individual writers could develop a dialogue with you.
Have you ever considered building and using a pinhole camera?
Thanks
Martin Mitchell
-
Martin,
I will get back to you when my custom Holga is finished! I may have to run to the store for some more electrial tape!
All the best!
John
Hello John S,
I do not understand what you are trying to say?
Perhaps if you were constructive in your critique of contributors to this thread concerning the Canon iPF5000 inkjet printer,individual writers could develop a dialogue with you.
Have you ever considered building and using a pinhole camera?
Thanks
Martin Mitchell
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71299\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
In making this decision I also had the privilege of doing some direct comparisons between 4800 and IPF5000 prints on both Matte and Gloss media. It is not clear that the IPF5000 is overall "best in its class". Based on my limited sample of results, I would say it is best in some respects and no better in others. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71265\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Mark,
Fair enough, I haven't had the chance to try the Canon myself, and my comment was based on different reviews that were basically saying that the Canon addressed many of the known shortcomings of the Epson printer (as you know I own a 4000 myself), and that the image quality on glossy stock was overall a bit better.
It is interesting to read that you current assessement is not as clear cut. Looking forward for additional feedback from you.
cheers,
Bernard
-
For Gloss paper through the cassette choose PhotoPaperPlus. Been running Epson Premium Gloss Photo paper through just fine. I personally felt that the 1-5 choices were not the route for experimenting early on. I did profile through photopaperplus settings. I am happy. Where as Canon obviously could have and still could do better with information, the settings provided are turning out to be pretty flexible if we are not overly literal about interpreting them is what I am learning. I am using a Canon paper roll - Premium Super-gloss that the driver has not yet heard about. Now for that I am using Proofing paper, again made a profile, and everything is happy over here.
The prints I reviewed comparing Espon and Canon, loosely suggested that there was not going to be a world of difference in prints, just incremental in some areas. What really sold me was 12 inks and near instant switching between media types and matblack / glossblack. And that is so wonderful...
Otherwise good success (or struggle, to some degree we do choose).
Gary
Hello.
I'm using the Canon iPf5000 - slowly to print images and beginning to make profiles using PrintfixPRO,problems are beginning to appear in the software supplied by Cannon.
Using imagePrograph Photoshop plug-in problems are.
1]The types of paper described in supplied print profiles are of limited use when choosing to use the cassete why this should happen is incredibaly shortsighted and lousy writting of software by Canon,it's near impossible to print a gloss type paper through cassete,most of the time the photoshop plug-in sends you to manual or paper-roll for paper insertion to printer,the same with other paper choices from supplied profiles.This has to be rectified by Canon otherwise the printer will not sell to the public.This problem rears its head yet again when using Photoshop and Print Management why is beyond belief!!!
-
Hello Garycay,
This inforemation you posted is helpful and will try more open minded appoach to profiles supplied by Canon-thanks.
For Gloss paper through the cassette choose PhotoPaperPlus. Been running Epson Premium Gloss Photo paper through just fine. I personally felt that the 1-5 choices were not the route for experimenting early on. I did profile through photopaperplus settings. I am happy. Where as Canon obviously could have and still could do better with information, the settings provided are turning out to be pretty flexible if we are not overly literal about interpreting them is what I am learning. I am using a Canon paper roll - Premium Super-gloss that the driver has not yet heard about. Now for that I am using Proofing paper, again made a profile, and everything is happy over here.
Note.
A] Settings 1-5 seem to be concerned with the amount of ink laid down when printing = 1 supplies less ink than 5 discovered after a few printing experiments.
B] When inserting paper into tray {top loader] using PrintFixPro to print out color charts there are no paper feed problems for me.Aussiephil in post 174 appears to not have paper feed problems with 'tray' when using Qimage software to print with the Canon iPF5000.
Does this suggest that the paper feed problem for the tray could be related to the software supplied with the printer by Canon or an issue with OSX-Tiger?
Thanks
Martin Mitchell
-
Our Epson 1280 had a blue cast maby it was a problem one and we had it serviced to.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69037\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Dennis, my 1290 also has a blue cast (actually, blues are purple and greens aren't great) which to me occurred after Epson changed the mother board to solve another problem. did your 1280 get fixed? my printer is still under extended warranty (the last optional year) so maybe I should get it 'fixed' again.
did you get custom profiles made for your 1280? which service/software did you use?
I'd be interested to know if anyone has used the 1280/1290 to print on the new Innova F-type paper.
one problem with the 1280/1290. the ink isn't archival.
regards,
Gregory
-
I use the ipf5000 from a month and I'm satisfied with the results. Up to now I used only two types of paper, Canon Photo Paper Plus (sheets) and Canon High Glossy Heavy Photo Paper (roll) with the canned ICC profile. Now I'd like to buy a spectrophotometer and software for make by itself profile, so which one is right for a printer with 12 colours?
Thanks
Claudio
-
Dennis, my 1290 also has a blue cast (actually, blues are purple and greens aren't great) which to me occurred after Epson changed the mother board to solve another problem. did your 1280 get fixed? my printer is still under extended warranty (the last optional year) so maybe I should get it 'fixed' again.
Hi
No even after it was repaired in New Jersey the blue cast was there. No fault to the service they said it was OK. In the end we moved to Sydney Australia and we were using the 1280 on a step down transformer the problem continued and in the end we gave it away. We purchased the i9950 and with Jet Tec inks this is one great printer faster, quieter and NO BLUE CAST!!! Plus you can clean the head yourself with fliud cleaner from JET TEC.
Thanks Denis
-
1)Wherea have you found the papers? A couple of weeks ago I could not find most of the canon papers listed in the media guide for the iPF5000.
2)Take a look at the Colovision Printfix Pro Suite: probably the most bang for the buck out there. You can spend more and get better - maybe only slightly better for lots more. Lots depends on your parameters. Me I am happy with Colorvision and not having spent $1000+, instead more like $500ish. The 12 inks, or 4 inks, or 6, or 8 inks... don't interfere with the process....
Good luck. Yahoo has a support group for Colorvision.
Gary
I use the ipf5000 from a month and I'm satisfied with the results. Up to now I used only two types of paper, Canon Photo Paper Plus (sheets) and Canon High Glossy Heavy Photo Paper (roll) with the canned ICC profile. Now I'd like to buy a spectrophotometer and software for make by itself profile, so which one is right for a printer with 12 colours?
Thanks
Claudio
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71681\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
1)Wherea have you found the papers? A couple of weeks ago I could not find most of the canon papers listed in the media guide for the iPF5000.
Tanks Gary
you are right, the Canon's documentation is abominable.
At this link http://www.canon.de/For_Work/Products/Medi...PageID=341915#2 (http://www.canon.de/For_Work/Products/Media/Media/index.asp?ComponentID=27197&SourcePageID=341915#2)
you can find a matrix of compatibility (only codes).
Bye
Claudio
-
Has anyone found any new information or reviews on the ipf5000. I have looked everywhere I know to look and haven't seen anything with any detail. I am patiently waiting to buy a new printer and would love to find out how the Canon is measuring up.
David
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65557\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Here is a PDF that details the iPF5000
www.inkjetart.com/canon/wide/iPF5000_brochure.pdf
I hope this is useful.
Tom
-
Michael sent me two targets today he printed on two different Canon 5000's (same paper from the same box). Note this isn't really enough data to say anything
Hi Andrew & Michael
I have been following both of your revues for over a month now. Every thing started very positively but I get the feeling that the original enthusiasm has disappeared.
As far as I can see there is very little constructive feed back or revues for this printer apart from Luminous Landscape.
I postponed buying a Epsom 7800 when I saw Michael review with the idea of buying the IPF 9000 when it becomes available in the UK.
Question to Michael:- are you still using this printer and do you still have your original enthusiasm for it.
Question to Andrew:- has the variation in colour between printers been resolved.
Robert
-
Question to Andrew:- has the variation in colour between printers been resolved.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73686\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I haven't received any additional targets.
-
I haven't received any additional targets.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73696\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks for your quick response Andrew
I suppose that is an answer in it self. their are probably not a lot of printers in the professional environment yet.
Robert
-
I haven't received any additional targets.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73696\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Andrew, I'd be happy to provide a target off of my IPF5000 in Santa Fe if that would help..
Tony
-
Hi
Is there anyone who is making third party inks for this Canon yet?
Thanks Denis
-
Uwe S. at Outback has started a 5000 diary
http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsigh...i043/essay.html (http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsights/pi043/essay.html)
-
Andrew, I'd be happy to provide a target off of my IPF5000 in Santa Fe if that would help..
Tony
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73743\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
For the test to be valid, you'd have to use the same paper as Michael (and the same driver settings).
-
For the test to be valid, you'd have to use the same paper as Michael (and the same driver settings).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73771\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Makes sense. Michael, if you are reading this thread, and would like for me to print a target, just email me privately. I don't live far from Andrew. I've been testing the Canon as time permits for about three weeks.
-
Hi Andrew & Michael
I have been following both of your revues for over a month now. Every thing started very positively but I get the feeling that the original enthusiasm has disappeared.
Hi,
I agree with Homebrewer that it seems that the iPF5000 is used but enthusiastic stories stopped. I also postponed the purchase of a 4800 because I had enough of EP marketing pitches ( booby-traps). Starting with buying a 2100 for B&W with the ever so praised “ Gray Balancer” $$#@@#$%%#$@@@@ . Wanted to upgrade to the 2400 but for economical reasons, 220 ml carts, to the 4800 with the $70 premium for changing from matte to gloss!! I welcomed the Canon as replacement for the 4800. But I doubt that Canon sees this themselves. I talked to the Dealer in the Netherlands, where I buy all my stuff, who was invited by Canon on their introduction for their new printers in Barcelona some weeks ago. He felt that Canon promotes this printer much more in the CAD CAM area as in the fine art printing arena. They also call this not a printer but a Plotter!!. The demo center they call it the Plotting centre. I think that this is one off the major reasons that Cannon is so slack in response. Canons European marketing is not aware off forums discussing this printer! I see the dealer next week and will view photo’s they took with them from Barcelona, made at the exhibition. In the B&W he sees still some bronzing and is not totally convinced of the metamerism. On the positive side he sees that the accuracy off laying drops on the paper is better than EP and the possibility of changing the printheads your self.
The price is also something to consider. Including tax in The Netherlands this printer will cost US$ 2945.00 (B&H US$ 1895.00 ex. tax) all without the roll feeder. And a 130 ml cart US$ 81.00 (B&H US$ 74.95).
Outbackphoto ( thanks Tim) is publishing their day to day findings in using the 5000 so I will see what there feed-back is. As a pensioner I do not have the possibilities to buy and write off when not good. So I have to relay on others like Michael, Uwe Steinmueller, the dealer and you, members off this forum!
I think I will just wait a couple of weeks and than will bite the bullet. My guts tell me that the @@#$$#@@%% Epson probably again will win. Keep you posted on my findings.
Henk
-
Henk, if you are not urgently pressed to buy a printer within the next month, I recommend that you don't buy anything yet and just wait. There will be important announcements coming from HP that could have a significant impact on the range of viable choices for us consumers. Also it is very hard to believe that Canon at least in North America isn't reading all the commentaries and just sitting back doing nothing about it, but they aren't saying anything yet.
-
Henk, if you are not urgently pressed to buy a printer within the next month, I recommend that you don't buy anything yet and just wait. There will be important announcements coming from HP that could have a significant impact on the range of viable choices for us consumers. Also it is very hard to believe that Canon at least in North America isn't reading all the commentaries and just sitting back doing nothing about it, but they aren't saying anything yet.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73831\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Mark, thanks for the information but HP? I use them for years as a generic printer and Office yet 4 in one but never for fine art printing. Will they present them on the Photokina end September? I will attend that exhibition since it is not far from where I live. Some pre information somewhere on the net?
Henk
-
I read a funny post elsewhere that may have some relavance here -
The poster was responding to specualtion and lamenting from mostly Epson users on the wide format list about how the Canon wasn't proven and good enough.... His post was that "hey I am sick of reading all the complaining speculation from non users and I am too busy printing to get into any more...but I am having a great time with my Canon". Those of us that are users are busy (at least I am - and my enthusiasm(sp) has not gone away (and yes it has only been since mid June for me).
1)Canon iPF5000 users do not yet have an agreed upon easy to use location to share yet. Here is OK but a Yahoo type site would really be easier (and better). The Canon Wide format list is basically an option I suppose, but it is mostly inactive now and occasionally gets spamed. The epson wide format list will accept Canon iPF5000 posts, but it is unknown if that will work long term. Having a list home would really be nice - and having it generally known how to find it would be nice too, and no I am not the one to take that on.
My current interest is learning about the different papers from Canon and Espon and how the gamuts are on my 5000 without buying them all to test! Info on this is scarce and of course sharing is scarce too.
And I could possibly supply a target for the comparison of printers.
And for Tony - Hey just 1 state over from you!
Gary
Hi Andrew & Michael
I have been following both of your revues for over a month now. Every thing started very positively but I get the feeling that the original enthusiasm has disappeared.
Hi,
I agree with Homebrewer that it seems that the iPF5000 is used but enthusiastic stories stopped.
-
Gary,
Yes, the Canon Wide Format list at Yahoo seems to have petered-out. I can't get into the Epson one anymore because after I complained twice to the moderator about spam coming accross it, we had some words about moderating responsibility whereupon I withdrew from the list and he banned me - so end of story - I have no idea what has been happening on that list recently. Anyhow, too much on that list was consumed with issues that people could better resolve by reading the instruction manual and consulting Epson's email tech support.
I think there is nothing that prevents you and other users from starting a new thread on this Forum dedicated to operational experience with the Canon IPF 5000. This would be helpful both to those using the printer and those who are interested in that experience, in order to decide whether or not to buy one.
Henk,
Yes, these printers are supposed to be announced in conjunction with Photokina. They will be pigment ink, archival printers in various dimensions. I have not been told what the exact model sizes will be, because that is still proprietary information, but it is factual and mentionable that they will be announcing these new models. They will be able to handle a wide variety of media, and I am told they will have many other sophisticated features, but I don't know the details because that is also still proprietary. I agree HP is best known in the public at large for office type machines. However, it so happens that HP has been manufacturing very large format printers for commercial imaging that produce stunning results. They tend to put high quality machinery on the market, so I am very hopeful about these new entrants. I am now using an Epson 4800, which I like very much except for two issues: the paper switching problem and clogging; but I shall not replace it until I see in detail what HP is coming-up with and whether Canon produces fixes for the issues already identified with the IPF5000. I am reliably informed that Epson will not be changing anything on the 4800 model, but they are being very tight-lipped about whether or when they will have a new model replacing it.
-
Canon needs to spend some money and hire some GOOD software engineers and programmers. What they have now is dreadful, and I meen DREADFUL!
How can a company like this have such terrible programmers?
Brian
-
They also need to hire talent who can write competent and comprehensive instruction manuals, because this is a complex piece of machinery and the operational guidance they have produced is equally dreadful. This is a major issue and one of the reasons - amongst others - why I didn't buy this printer.
-
I took the printed menu operations (front) and menu page (back) sheet that came with the printer (~11x17), laminated it, and refer to it whenever I want or need to make something work better. IE: I have some paper that the head was hitting for some reason. I went in and changed the vacuum strenth and raised the head - poof no more problem. This list of menu choices is large. As far as the operational guidance goes, seems from where I sit and what I hear from users, most of us that actually have them are not having any major issues. Perhaps many of us are experienced with printers, some of us just experiment rather than stop, just guesses. In either case I think about half the people that have access to good manuals dont, and common sense seems to have gone a long way for me with this printer so far. I do not understand the other posters comment about the programming being dreadful. For instance I love the plug-in for Photoshop.
Thats all I am done.
Thank you for the idea about the subject heading for this list. Perhaps that will helpf some, but getting word out is still very important.
Gary
They also need to hire talent who can write competent and comprehensive instruction manuals, because this is a complex piece of machinery and the operational guidance they have produced is equally dreadful. This is a major issue and one of the reasons - amongst others - why I didn't buy this printer.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73880\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Gary, where you say users you are talking to have no major issues - this is interesting. How many users are you talking about?
As for "getting the word out", I guess I find that kind of meaningless, because there is no one "word" to get out. The printer has pros and cons. It's been well-discussed in a number of places. I've seen excellent output from it, and I've seen frustrations. Small samples, but enough to tell me that before I plunk over 3000 Canadian dollars into a venture like this, there are things to be fixed. Maybe my tether for experimenting with things that one shouldn't need to experiment with is shorter than yours. So be it.
-
Gary, where you say users you are talking to have no major issues - this is interesting. How many users are you talking about?
As for "getting the word out", I guess I find that kind of meaningless, because there is no one "word" to get out. The printer has pros and cons. It's been well-discussed in a number of places. I've seen excellent output from it, and I've seen frustrations. Small samples, but enough to tell me that before I plunk over 3000 Canadian dollars into a venture like this, there are things to be fixed. Maybe my tether for experimenting with things that one shouldn't need to experiment with is shorter than yours. So be it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73890\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Mark,
I still really like my IPF5000, it is doing a great job for me, especially on the A2 Canvas sheets i have been using nearly exclusively lately.
Still on the initial set of cartridges though so i'm not a heavy user by any means.
I seen a head clean the other day after it had sat turned off for around 14 days and was moved from one room of the house to another, seemed straight forward and quick.
For me at least i have found this to be a simple and easy to use piece of printing equipment that i have taken a little bit of time to work out what paper selections to use without actually trying to match types/names to the actual paper in use.
Select the one that enables me to feed from the required source and lays down enough ink to do the job without saturating the paper then profile that combination and write all the settings down.
cheers
Phil
-
Getting the word out was in the context of directing users to a group forum to discuss and share experience. I hope that clarifys that. I know that in June there were ~100 units out. Another wave hit sometime in July. I know some of these people visit various groups, a few post from time to time like me, but I really do not know numbers. Maybe I have read or shared with 5 or 6 other users??
Been on the epson list so long...had several Epsons too, HP also...experimenting always has seemed to be unavoidable to me, I know there are degrees of it. From that the experimenting the Canon requires of me seems little, in fact so far it has been little (albeit a little blind during the first attempts at it, but rapidly turning in to more informed and easier from the experience). The diary of Uwe(sp?) on the Canon seems to be similiar - as in experimenting isn't that demanding. Yes your experimenting fuse is seems shorter with this than mine at this time. We do what we do...
Gary
Gary, where you say users you are talking to have no major issues - this is interesting. How many users are you talking about?
As for "getting the word out", I guess I find that kind of meaningless, because there is no one "word" to get out. The printer has pros and cons. It's been well-discussed in a number of places. I've seen excellent output from it, and I've seen frustrations. Small samples, but enough to tell me that before I plunk over 3000 Canadian dollars into a venture like this, there are things to be fixed. Maybe my tether for experimenting with things that one shouldn't need to experiment with is shorter than yours. So be it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73890\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Phil, Mark -
Phil's statement (though I am not using Canvas) is like my experience. And I still am on my first carts to (though 1 is down to 20%). My roll unit had to be replaced - some part must have failed because the printer couldn't recognize it being installed. The new unit came overnight and works fine.
Phil - any ideas of your own about where a group might find a home??
Gary
Mark,
I still really like my IPF5000, it is doing a great job for me, especially on the A2 Canvas sheets i have been using nearly exclusively lately.
Still on the initial set of cartridges though so i'm not a heavy user by any means.
I seen a head clean the other day after it had sat turned off for around 14 days and was moved from one room of the house to another, seemed straight forward and quick.
For me at least i have found this to be a simple and easy to use piece of printing equipment that i have taken a little bit of time to work out what paper selections to use without actually trying to match types/names to the actual paper in use.
Select the one that enables me to feed from the required source and lays down enough ink to do the job without saturating the paper then profile that combination and write all the settings down.
cheers
Phil
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=73927\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
its been odd having this printer, my own experiance has been very positive. The manuals are garbled, the software slightly strange but having used it for day by day work its excelent, and the commercial benifits are looking very good. Printed 36m2 so far, Y,PC,PGY,GY,MBK,PM, carts are down to 20% the rest at 40%. Over the next few weeks it should get far more usage. I suppose untill it has become a well tested printer and more serious reviews come out there is going to speculation and potential purchaces are wary. My own experiance dosn't match the slightly negative tone discussions on most forums have about this printer.
tony
-
I too am finding this printer to have a lot of strengths. The more I use it, the more I like it. Admittedly, Canon has to do a better job on the documentation, but the 16 bit PS plug-in is pretty good and most of the other stuff with the standard driver can be figured out with a little patience. The media/size selection options and menus really need some work, but once again, its not a disaster or anything, and you can sort it out with some testing and patience. Some things are very annoying, like having to use A4 or larger paper just to print out "information" from the driver or do alignment and nozzle checks.. Geesh ! Profiles are still a major issue if you aren't set up to make your own, etc. Like many others here, I come from an Epson wide format background and this is definitely a different beast.
I have been compiling a list of "issues", concerns, etc. in preparation for a review I'll be authoring in the NM ASMP Newsletter. I think one of the issues is not knowing how well and aggressively Canon will support this product. Epson's support program is well known by the pro community... Canon's "camera" program is well known and respected as many of us are Canon CPS members. But Canon's "printer" program is an unknown entity with serious users and pros. Canon really needs to demonstrate their committment to these new printers by not dragging their feet with firmware and software updates, etc.
Generally though, I'm optimistic. Time will tell. But I think I'll be keeping this baby.. no more 4000's, no 4800, just the Canon IPF5000, and looking forward to bigger models down the road (this fall ?).
Tony Bonanno
-
Hello,
The mid summer lull appears to be over and comments are once again developing on Luminous Lanscape concerning the Canon iPF5000 injet printer.
Some of the comments seem trivial from MarkDS because my experiance with this printer contradicts his negative statements,perhaps he should just invest his obsession with money in a savings bank!
As for raptorys let no more be said?
My Canon printer arrived in June and I have been printing since regularly,using a few different papers and getting to know how to use this printer.There are a few problems with the software but it is early days and Canon will rectify this otherwise sales will be affected,but there are ways around such problems,it's fun to work around such issues just apply lateral thinking and the prints roll out of this printer with ease.
I have been an avid supporter and user of various Epson printers for a number of years but decided to buy this printer because the 12 inks suite me as an artist,amazing to have red,green,blue and yellow inks to print with none of the dead red,yellow green and blue from the Epson 4800 when making coloured prints and the 4800 appears to be a modified 4000 so where is the comparison concerning new printers.`````the Canon iPF5000 is the new leading printer in this class of printers.The colour gamut is larger the prints once you sort out the machine to your particular printing style produces better prints [more detail and better shadow depth] and tonal range.Plus it's cheaper to run.
There is no argument here just go and buy one of these fabulous machines.
-
Hello,
The mid summer lull appears to be over and comments are once again developing on Luminous Lanscape concerning the Canon iPF5000 injet printer.
Some of the comments seem trivial from MarkDS because my experiance with this printer contradicts his negative statements,perhaps he should just invest his obsession with money in a savings bank!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74138\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Martin, there are facts and then there is how one deals with the facts. What you think is trivial other people may not think is trivial, and those views are just as valid as yours. My only "obsession" with money is to optimize my expenditure of it because I don't have unlimited resources, and I know that within the next few months there will be some additional considerable options from which to chose. I have a clear perception from hands on experience what the Canon printer does relative to an Epson 4800, I know the strengths and weaknesses of my Epson 4800 extremely well, and I've decided that the optimal solution to the two issues I want resolved may be around the corner, but are not quite here yet. So my strategy and your strategy simply differ. I wish you all the best of continued happy use and good results with your Canon IPF5000.
-
Hello,
Here are web links to reviews of new HP B9180 A3 inkjet printer-looks like another interesting make of ink jet printer to consider instead of Epson.
http://www.neilsnape.com/HP9180_review.htm (http://www.neilsnape.com/HP9180_review.htm)
http://www.inkjetart.com/news/archive/IJN_07-27-06.html#2 (http://www.inkjetart.com/news/archive/IJN_07-27-06.html#2)
http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_hp_...t_pro_b9180.php (http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_hp_photosmart_pro_b9180.php)
Bye
Martinmitch
-
Martin, there are facts and then there is how one deals with the facts. What you think is trivial other people may not think is trivial, and those views are just as valid as yours. My only "obsession" with money is to optimize my expenditure of it because I don't have unlimited resources, and I know that within the next few months there will be some additional considerable options from which to chose. I have a clear perception from hands on experience what the Canon printer does relative to an Epson 4800, I know the strengths and weaknesses of my Epson 4800 extremely well, and I've decided that the optimal solution to the two issues I want resolved may be around the corner, but are not quite here yet. So my strategy and your strategy simply differ. I wish you all the best of continued happy use and good results with your Canon IPF5000.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74161\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hello MarkDS,
Thanks for the reply but what is the difference if I say:
"If spring was arriving in Dec' I may notice,but only because I look foreward to the day we have a white Christmas"|.
Please tell us what are these facts you talk about,options you are considering and solutions you wish to resolve relative to inkjet printers?
Most important what is the experiance you have using a Canon iPF5000 and in what circumstances?
All the Best
Martinmitch
-
Hello MarkDS,
Thanks for the reply but what is the difference if I say:
"If spring was arriving in Dec' I may notice,but only because I look foreward to the day we have a white Christmas"|.
Please tell us what are these facts you talk about,options you are considering and solutions you wish to resolve relative to inkjet printers?
Most important what is the experiance you have using a Canon iPF5000 and in what circumstances?
All the Best
Martinmitch
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74679\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Martin, you can pick it all up in previous posts (not only mine, but others too) in this and other threads on L-L and other Forums. Thanks for posting the links to the HP reviews. They are useful. I had seen the InkjetArt one. HP will be announcing more printers either at or before Photokina. It is one of the reasons I put-off buying a Canon - I'm not in a panic to replace my 4800 and the more choice the better - that's my strategy. The two issues I want to resolve are nozzle clogs/ink droppages and being able to switch between matte and glossy paper without flushing ink. And of course print quality at least as good as I have now. Trust me - I've seen comparative output from an IPF 5000 and an Epson 4800 using my own files and both can produce excellent prints - no doubt about it.
Cheers
-
Hello MarkDS
I have looked at many Forums on the Web and on L-L concerning the Canon iPF5000 and the two points you mention nozzle clogs and seperately,flushing inks when switching between matte and glossy papers have been resolved by Canon with this printer.
My experiance during last two months is this printer is economical with ink usage,there are no clogging issues so far [early days],discovered it's better for printer to be left on in sleep mode so it does not perform major head clean if switched on to mains electricity and there is no problem as in Epson 4800 switching between matt and gloss papers there are 12 inks in the Canon.The colour gamut is proving to be greater than the Epson somewhere on the web last week I came across examples showing this point it was difficult for me to understand - color theory language et'c [if have time will try and find web page],this brings me to paper profile developement for the Canon iPF500.
A few weeks ago purchased PrintFixPro to make paper profiles but sent it back and given refund under the 30 days option because it was mechanical profile machine ,one had to press
click for each colour patch 729 clicks for each profile madness was the only outcome.After searching web bought from Chromix X-RITE Pulse ColorElite a sensible piece of kit and the software is much easier to use.
http://www.chromix.com/colorgear/shop/prod...CFUBdEAodLjiMFg (http://www.chromix.com/colorgear/shop/productdetail.cxsa?toolid=1118&pid=1.gpulse&gclid=CK3-09nIsoYCFUBdEAodLjiMFg)
The lesson is always buy the best gear at time of purchase!
The one problem with the Canon that cannot be altered is smallest size of paper it will print is A4.
The HP B9180 would solve this problem if I had one they sell in U/K from Sept' 06,but do not have another car to sell for printer purchase.
Next few months will teach myself colour print theory,profile different papers then hopefully write about linearity,delta E and colour gamut in relation to Canon iPF5000.
X-rite documation is good it arrived with printed manuel.
Bye
Martinmitch
-
I am reading this with as much interest as ever. Since the announcements of the Canon printers , and having inside information on HP (some Epson too), I see this is the most exciting year in digital imaging ever.
I saw the early Canon's in December. Then in February, then in March. I saw leaps of progress each time and as expected my statements of Canon eng. are very talented and smart people capable of making these printers work.
That seems to be the case, many of you are saying just this. I missed my chance to print on one in the beginning of July, much to my chagrin.
What I see as an inconvenience is the pains of early models. Yet I don't see this as a sacrifice, merely a hindrance to what are perfectly sellable and usable fine art prints.
Does Epson rightfully deserve it's place in pigment FA printing. You bet.
Are they overthrown by HP and Canon? I think not. Will we have to put up with software, documentation, and some hardware first model problems with HP and Canon? Yes definitely.
Will Epson users be jumping ship immediately? No, no way but they will have options now. Will Epson have to make better products if they want their client base stay with them. Yes definitely, and I do believe they'll do just that. Yet this is the first time they have any serious competition. And it's not just to try to chase the current model. Both Canon and HP are moving the features well beyond any current Epson model. Hence my statement that Epson will be forced to better their models. But please don't think that Epson are not capable of doing so , and doing so quickly.
Let's have fun talking about these printers as we are at a point now where we can all do just that.
-
Hello MarkDS
I have looked at many Forums on the Web and on L-L concerning the Canon iPF5000 and the two points you mention nozzle clogs and seperately,flushing inks when switching between matte and glossy papers have been resolved by Canon with this printer.
My experiance during last two months is this printer is economical with ink usage,there are no clogging issues so far [early days],discovered it's better for printer to be left on in sleep mode so it does not perform major head clean if switched on to mains electricity and there is no problem as in Epson 4800 switching between matt and gloss papers there are 12 inks in the Canon.The colour gamut is proving to be greater than the Epson somewhere on the web last week I came across examples showing this point it was difficult for me to understand - color theory language et'c [if have time will try and find web page],this brings me to paper profile developement for the Canon iPF500.
A few weeks ago purchased PrintFixPro to make paper profiles but sent it back and given refund under the 30 days option because it was mechanical profile machine ,one had to press
click for each colour patch 729 clicks for each profile madness was the only outcome.After searching web bought from Chromix X-RITE Pulse ColorElite a sensible piece of kit and the software is much easier to use.
http://www.chromix.com/colorgear/shop/prod...CFUBdEAodLjiMFg (http://www.chromix.com/colorgear/shop/productdetail.cxsa?toolid=1118&pid=1.gpulse&gclid=CK3-09nIsoYCFUBdEAodLjiMFg)
The lesson is always buy the best gear at time of purchase!
The one problem with the Canon that cannot be altered is smallest size of paper it will print is A4.
The HP B9180 would solve this problem if I had one they sell in U/K from Sept' 06,but do not have another car to sell for printer purchase.
Next few months will teach myself colour print theory,profile different papers then hopefully write about linearity,delta E and colour gamut in relation to Canon iPF5000.
X-rite documation is good it arrived with printed manuel.
Bye
Martinmitch
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74714\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Martin, yes, the Xi-Rite Pulse or the Gretag Eye-One would be the packages of choice if I were to buy one of them.
I know the Canon printer solves both the problems I mentioned, which is why I took a very early interest in it. Now I'm waiting for HP's offerings. And who knows- Epson may also be announcing something, but so far there isn't even a hint.
-
I am reading this with as much interest as ever. Since the announcements of the Canon printers , and having inside information on HP (some Epson too), I see this is the most exciting year in digital imaging ever.
I saw the early Canon's in December. Then in February, then in March. I saw leaps of progress each time and as expected my statements of Canon eng. are very talented and smart people capable of making these printers work.
That seems to be the case, many of you are saying just this. I missed my chance to print on one in the beginning of July, much to my chagrin.
What I see as an inconvenience is the pains of early models. Yet I don't see this as a sacrifice, merely a hindrance to what are perfectly sellable and usable fine art prints.
Does Epson rightfully deserve it's place in pigment FA printing. You bet.
Are they overthrown by HP and Canon? I think not. Will we have to put up with software, documentation, and some hardware first model problems with HP and Canon? Yes definitely.
Will Epson users be jumping ship immediately? No, no way but they will have options now. Will Epson have to make better products if they want their client base stay with them. Yes definitely, and I do believe they'll do just that. Yet this is the first time they have any serious competition. And it's not just to try to chase the current model. Both Canon and HP are moving the features well beyond any current Epson model. Hence my statement that Epson will be forced to better their models. But please don't think that Epson are not capable of doing so , and doing so quickly.
Let's have fun talking about these printers as we are at a point now where we can all do just that.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74722\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Neil, agreed. We will be able to have lots of fun talking about printers - and even buying. It is very exciting because this is indeed the first time the Fine Art printer market is becoming competitive with that some apparently great technical breakthroughs. I have no doubt Epson is working hard. The question is how soon do they announce something (and what) to sustain a lead on HP and Canon?
-
Hello.
nell snape has insider inforemation-fantastic lets read more about all three inkjet manufacturers - Epson,Canon and HP because all three are becoming competative with their respective printers Canon seem to be first out of the box then HP are offering new machines in next few weeks,obviously Epson will respond with another technical developement but when and it's but when because there does not seem to be any gossip on the internet unless someone out there knows something -please tell.
Eventually before end of year I will have to buy another inkjet A3 printer for prints smaller than A4 [Canon smallest A4 only] and one thing I have learnt since taking up the computer three and half years ago from nil experiance one could say blank mind! is do not wait for the next best developement.My Canon iPF 5000 will be obsolete within three years and in the print trade the turn over for new flatbed inkjet printers is phenomenal.Technical developement does appear to be increasing and the print market is expanding as photographers,artists and punters in suburbia demand better prints from machines that they think will be easier to use but are they?
Bye
martinmitch
-
Yes, these are exciting times for folks like us... I think Mark, Neil, Martin, most of us are on the same sheet of paper at the moment. I've got the Canon 5000 in Studio at the moment (replacing an Epson 4000). Enjoying it for the most part, but still some issues typical of a new product, but overall very good. I found Neil's review most interesting and thinking that maybe it I will be looking at a 13" HP model this Fall to see what it can do compared to the Epson R2400, etc. Yes, CHOICES are good for us.. spurs development and better products. What I'm really looking forward to is the 24" models coming down the road. A 24" pigment printer and a smaller 13" model (for small cut sheet) would cover all my needs pretty well, although my current client base doesn't call for much larger than 16", but hoping that might change. Yeah !
Tony
-
Hello,
Neil is it possible for you to elaborate on the use of Hahnemuhle paper by HP with thier new inkjet B9180 printer?
I use a lot of Hahnemuhle photo rag 308gm because it brings out the colour in my fine art prints.
Thanks
Martinmitch
-
Hello,
Neil is it possible for you to elaborate on the use of Hahnemuhle paper by HP with their new inkjet B9180 printer?
I use a lot of Hahnemuhle photo rag 308g/m2 because it brings out the colour in my fine art prints.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74759\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
HP signed an agreement with Hahnemuhle to make a lot of Fine Art media for the 9180 and others to come.
The Equivalent of the Photo Rag optimized for the 9180 is a 265 g/m2 very bright yet not optically brightened base (around L97) , a smoother surface than the off the shelf H308 PR. It has higher acutance than the OEM media and other mechanical attributes that make it a slightly more robust media than H308 or 188. It is perhaps an excellent choice for Canon iP Graf's or Epson pigments.
It has as you can see from a plot in Colorthink a very good gamut as does Hahnemuhle PhotoRag with no surprises, only good things. One thing I do appreciate is the white of the HP media is much more neutral to the eye than the yellowish H308.
When I compare the watercolor and Aquarella the gamut , color range and Dmax are all almost exactly the same so the look remains constant throughout the range of FA media.
-
Neil,
Thanks for the reply.
Problem for me is I have just purchased X-rite so just beginning to teach myself paper profiling and then rest of colour printing theory so Colorthink is down along the learning curve-just looked at the software on Chromix website and it looks interesting.
The paper Hahnemuhle have developed for HP is most interesting from your description especially being whiter in appearance and having a smoother surface,it will help with printing bright colours.I use Fotospeed matt duo for rough proofing a print it is a cheap but usefull inkjet paper.Does this new HP paper have a name or title to date?
Thanks
Martinmitch
-
The Equivalent of the Photo Rag optimized for the 9180 is a 265 g/m2 very bright yet not optically brightened base (around L97) , a smoother surface than the off the shelf H308 PR. It has higher acutance than the OEM media and other mechanical attributes that make it a slightly more robust media than H308 or 188. It is perhaps an excellent choice for Canon iP Graf's or Epson pigments.
It has as you can see from a plot in Colorthink a very good gamut as does Hahnemuhle PhotoRag with no surprises, only good things. One thing I do appreciate is the white of the HP media is much more neutral to the eye than the yellowish H308.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74775\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Do you have any spectro measurements of either the HP or Hahnemuhle papers to go along with your observations? I just measured paper white on two pieces of HPR 308 using my Eye One Spectro (no UV cut). From a box of 13x19 that I bought a month ago I got 96.9, 0.5, 0.0 and from a box of Letter-size sheets that I just took shipment of today I got 97.1, 0.6, 0.1. Hardly what I would call "yellowish", and if the HP media looks noticeably whiter when compared side by side this makes me wonder if it's actually a bit on the bluish side (which would be quite an accomplishment without OBA's I think).
I like the texture and thickness of the HPR 308, so if the HP media is smoother and thinner that's actually a bit of a disappointment to me.
-
Yes I measured H308 that I have in boxes. <96L +0.9b here.
No there are no additional OBA's in the HP media.
The media is thinner, not by much but much easier handling.
There is or will be H308 non optimised (OEM rebranded) as there always has been later. What will be different is possible sheets as before it was 36" rolls only.
By your measurements I see huge inconsistencies in Hahnemuhles own production. I hope that is not the case with the specified media for HP.
BTW if you like H308 for it's surface and whiteness/brightness just use that.
No matter what benefits optimisation could have , one's favorite media can be used with full confidence. What the HP FA Smooth offers is another choice but not an obligation.
-
hello
A general question to artist on this forumin using Canon iPF5000
1]What are your experiances using papers like hahnemuhle on the CanoniPF5000?
2]Again,what are your experiances using Canon stock papers?
3]Comparative experiance between these two paper types?
The inforemation supplied by neil concerning paper types for HP 9180 is exciting because inkjet manufactures are at last taking notice of paper used by artists instead of plugging their own brands and means printers will be optimised to produce better prints with certain specialist papers when using specified manufactured paper profiles.This will broaden the injet market and increase sales et' etc'.
bye
martinmitch
-
I love the the results from the iPF5000, so much so that I sold our Epson 7600 running Lysion CIS and have pre-ordered an iPF8000 for our larger output.
Yes, the paper handling was a little irritating at first but 'photopaper plus' works for Museo Silver Rag and 'premium matte' works for Museo Fine Art. The plug-in is very simple to use but a larger preview would be great and I miss the ability to drag and drop unopened files, batch a few smaller prints to one page and queue jobs in the Colorbyte RIP.
The superiority of colout gamut of this printer over the Epson and our Pictrography printers is obvious to the eye, and the custom profiles we made clearly show it too.
What is more interesting (as many have made the above comments already) is that we have moved from the European Hahnemuehle papers to American Crane papers - for a couple of reasons. The Hahnemuehle papers don't want to load from the cassette. That goes for the satin, photorag and the A5 cards. The Crane Museo Fine Art paper loads without a hitch and also demonstrates considerable increase in gamut over the European paper. I am also fond of the natural colour of the paper.
The Museo Silver Rag is nothing short of incredible with this printer, I tried the Innova gloss N surface but it is a nightmare to handle, it marks if you just look at it! What a shame because it is available at a very low price here.
So despite spending a LOT more on imported paper, it is definitely worth the ease of use and for the better quality result.
We just need Colorbyte to release their RIP for the Canons asap!
-
We just need Colorbyte to release their RIP for the Canons asap!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74843\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Why is the IP rip essential to this printer as many say the driver on multipass is excellent?
I use ImagePrint for other reasons, but if the driver is working well I can say that Qimage would do many things via the driver. Does Qimage work with this printer?
-
Why is the IP rip essential to this printer as many say the driver on multipass is excellent?
I use ImagePrint for other reasons, but if the driver is working well I can say that Qimage would do many things via the driver. Does Qimage work with this printer?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74844\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
QImage should work with any printer that has a Windows print driver. The only problem is if you don't use the IPF5000 PHotoshop plug-in you'll be giving up 16-bit printing. Mike Chaney has indicated that he currently has no intention of trying to support the 16-bit printing interface because he doesn't think it would be make any difference (even though many ipf5000 users claim otherwise).
-
Yes I measured H308 that I have in boxes. <96L +0.9b here.
No there are no additional OBA's in the HP media.
The media is thinner, not by much but much easier handling.
There is or will be H308 non optimised (OEM rebranded) as there always has been later. What will be different is possible sheets as before it was 36" rolls only.
By your measurements I see huge inconsistencies in Hahnemuhles own production. I hope that is not the case with the specified media for HP.
I've purchased HPR several times over the last year and the paper white measurements have been extremely consistent. I've never seen anything close to +0.9b, I think the highest it's ever measured for me is +0.2b but more often it's 0.0 or 0.1.
-
Why is the IP rip essential to this printer as many say the driver on multipass is excellent?
I use ImagePrint for other reasons, but if the driver is working well I can say that Qimage would do many things via the driver. Does Qimage work with this printer?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74844\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Quite simply Neil, we are Mac based and have been for 18 years, with no reason to change that. Mike Chaney in his wisdom has chosen not to support that platform.
Also (imho) there is a difference when printing from a 16 bit base on the Canon. There are reports that the driver is a pain to use, I wouldn't know as I haven't tried it.
IP is a pleasure to use, I already have it (including the postscript CMYK Proofing extension) so would only need to add the Canon module when it becomes available.
-
I love the the results from the iPF5000, so much so that I sold our Epson 7600 running Lysion CIS and have pre-ordered an iPF8000 for our larger output.
Yes, the paper handling was a little irritating at first but 'photopaper plus' works for Museo Silver Rag and 'premium matte' works for Museo Fine Art. The plug-in is very simple to use but a larger preview would be great and I miss the ability to drag and drop unopened files, batch a few smaller prints to one page and queue jobs in the Colorbyte RIP.
The superiority of colout gamut of this printer over the Epson and our Pictrography printers is obvious to the eye, and the custom profiles we made clearly show it too.
What is more interesting (as many have made the above comments already) is that we have moved from the European Hahnemuehle papers to American Crane papers - for a couple of reasons. The Hahnemuehle papers don't want to load from the cassette. That goes for the satin, photorag and the A5 cards. The Crane Museo Fine Art paper loads without a hitch and also demonstrates considerable increase in gamut over the European paper. I am also fond of the natural colour of the paper.
The Museo Silver Rag is nothing short of incredible with this printer, I tried the Innova gloss N surface but it is a nightmare to handle, it marks if you just look at it! What a shame because it is available at a very low price here.
So despite spending a LOT more on imported paper, it is definitely worth the ease of use and for the better quality result.
We just need Colorbyte to release their RIP for the Canons asap!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74843\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Martin, thanks for the inforemation on paper types you are using with a Canon iPF5000 and great to hear you are using a Mac.
You have encouraged me to try Crane Museo Fine Art assume you are based in UK so who is your supplier in USA for this paper?
Glad you also have understood the increased colour gamut and other benefits in this new Canon printer and that it performs much better than the Epson series.
Hope some of the other punters who read LL will be encouraged to move over to or just go and buy one of these Canon iPF 5000 inkjet printers instead of waiting or dithering.
Thanks
Martinmitch
-
Martinmitch - to be serious, let us not be brand-name evangilists - there are all kinds of ways to skin a cat and everyone's needs and situation are not the same. Anything you can do on a Mac you can do on a PC at least as well - and I'm not responding to any debate about that. It is a fact of life these days. As for printers, anyone in the market for a new "Fine Art" printer and isn't in a panic to buy, should wait for the forthcoming announcements from HP, then wait a bit more to see how they work, then wait a bit more to see whether Epson is responding. I would give this whole cycle about another 4 or so months, by which time consumers will have a broader and deeper base of selections and information from which to make a good choice most relevant to their particular requirements. This doesn't cast any doubts on anything that is on the market right now - it just says at this particular point in time there may be good strategic reasons to watch and see before jumping in.
-
Martin, thanks for the inforemation on paper types you are using with a Canon iPF5000 and great to hear you are using a Mac.
You have encouraged me to try Crane Museo Fine Art assume you are based in UK so who is your supplier in USA for this paper?
Glad you also have understood the increased colour gamut and other benefits in this new Canon printer and that it performs much better than the Epson series.
Hope some of the other punters who read LL will be encouraged to move over to or just go and buy one of these Canon iPF 5000 inkjet printers instead of waiting or dithering.
Thanks
Martinmitch
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74856\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
My supplier is Chris Burslem at on-linepaper.co.uk who is helpful and very pleasant to deal with.
As for platforms, I have too much experience invested to change, that's all.
As for printing, I had to get a printer to fill a need for very small print sizes, it was urgent and the Canon is fast and offered the best quality at the time. I expect the 44" to become available in October after the announcement at Photokina, which again may well fulfil our requirements at this size. At the next sheduled replacement - in two years - the cycle may favour another.
We print commercially, daily, on gloss and matt and cannot wait around for the next best thing, time is money!
-
Quite simply Neil, we are Mac based and have been for 18 years, with no reason to change that. Mike Chaney in his wisdom has chosen not to support that platform.
Also (imho) there is a difference when printing from a 16 bit base on the Canon. There are reports that the driver is a pain to use, I wouldn't know as I haven't tried it.
IP is a pleasure to use, I already have it (including the postscript CMYK Proofing extension) so would only need to add the Canon module when it becomes available.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74852\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes I prefer to use Apple when I can. Yet I also used to do a lot of development on RIPs and they were mostly PC based. When you look at what you can do with Qimage , it is too bad that it is PC only. I suggested to HP they buy the company but they didn't!
I forgot the plug-in is separate from the driver. Drivers can be 16 bit but Canon chose to do their own thing for whatever reason. IP takes 16 bit files and screens them well with internal proprietary technology that is not from the OEM driver. I do believe ImagePrint to be the finest of photographic RIPs. For proofing GMG is at the top now but it's not intended as a photographic rip.
BTW I have always had the Postscript versions of IP.
The Canon printer is going to be a challenge for all developers. To exploit the N channel capabilities of the 12 ink set the color maps and screening options are many times more difficult than 8bit 8 ink rgb workflows.
That said many of you making profiles are maybe not doing so (yet) in n-channel profiles. I think that's where you'd see the Canon controlled with finesse beyond the rgb workflow. Yet I don't think much is documented about the frameworks, screens, linearisation curves, CLT's etc so that will be an area that ImagePrint will justify a surcharge for this printer or other multi-channel printer.
I do know some of the eng. at Colorbyte and I can tell you they can do all of this.
I was just asking why from a users point of view, not my theoretical view.
-
Martinmitch - to be serious, let us not be brand-name evangilists - there are all kinds of ways to skin a cat and everyone's needs and situation are not the same. Anything you can do on a Mac you can do on a PC at least as well - and I'm not responding to any debate about that. It is a fact of life these days. As for printers, anyone in the market for a new "Fine Art" printer and isn't in a panic to buy, should wait for the forthcoming announcements from HP, then wait a bit more to see how they work, then wait a bit more to see whether Epson is responding. I would give this whole cycle about another 4 or so months, by which time consumers will have a broader and deeper base of selections and information from which to make a good choice most relevant to their particular requirements. This doesn't cast any doubts on anything that is on the market right now - it just says at this particular point in time there may be good strategic reasons to watch and see before jumping in.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74859\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
MarkDS,I don't understand what you are trying to say except possible repeat what you have said before!!!!
My mentioning Macs is because it is easier to exchange inforemation concerning the use of the Canon iPF5000 if one is using the same type of computer.There are many differences between using a mac or pc especially in animation and in the operating systems but to me all this is part of a different debate.The reference to [hope some of the other punters who read LL will be encouraged to move over to or just go and buy one of these Canon iPF 5000 inkjet printers instead of waiting or dithering.] is in reference to a number of private e-mails I've received from individuals who have read about the Canon iPF5000 on this web site and wanted more inforemation before buying this printer .The inforemation I gave them included refering them to other web sites and the HP9180 inkjet plus other idears to help them be sure of their choice because £1760-00 is a lot of money.Also,I have said on this site that I will be buying an HP9180 to produce smaller prints in a couple of months time or when the printer becomes available in U/K.
Bye
Martinmitch
-
My supplier is Chris Burslem at on-linepaper.co.uk who is helpful and very pleasant to deal with.
As for platforms, I have too much experience invested to change, that's all.
As for printing, I had to get a printer to fill a need for very small print sizes, it was urgent and the Canon is fast and offered the best quality at the time. I expect the 44" to become available in October after the announcement at Photokina, which again may well fulfil our requirements at this size. At the next sheduled replacement - in two years - the cycle may favour another.
We print commercially, daily, on gloss and matt and cannot wait around for the next best thing, time is money!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74864\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Martin,thanks for the inforemation.
Martinmitch
-
MarkDS,I don't understand what you are trying to say except possible repeat what you have said before!!!!
My mentioning Macs is because it is easier to exchange inforemation concerning the use of the Canon iPF5000 if one is using the same type of computer.There are many differences between using a mac or pc especially in animation and in the operating systems but to me all this is part of a different debate.The reference to [hope some of the other punters who read LL will be encouraged to move over to or just go and buy one of these Canon iPF 5000 inkjet printers instead of waiting or dithering.] is in reference to a number of private e-mails I've received from individuals who have read about the Canon iPF5000 on this web site and wanted more inforemation before buying this printer .The inforemation I gave them included refering them to other web sites and the HP9180 inkjet plus other idears to help them be sure of their choice because £1760-00 is a lot of money.Also,I have said on this site that I will be buying an HP9180 to produce smaller prints in a couple of months time or when the printer becomes available in U/K.
Bye
Martinmitch
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74876\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Martin - you are encouraging people not to dither - fine - that's your opinion. All I'm saying is that for some people there may well be good reasons to dither. Nothing more, nothing less. As I did say before - a matter of strategy how one approaches the marktet in these dynamic times.
Cheers,
Mark
-
Yes I prefer to use Apple when I can. Yet I also used to do a lot of development on RIPs and they were mostly PC based. When you look at what you can do with Qimage , it is too bad that it is PC only. I suggested to HP they buy the company but they didn't!
I forgot the plug-in is separate from the driver. Drivers can be 16 bit but Canon chose to do their own thing for whatever reason. IP takes 16 bit files and screens them well with internal proprietary technology that is not from the OEM driver. I do believe ImagePrint to be the finest of photographic RIPs. For proofing GMG is at the top now but it's not intended as a photographic rip.
BTW I have always had the Postscript versions of IP.
The Canon printer is going to be a challenge for all developers. To exploit the N channel capabilities of the 12 ink set the color maps and screening options are many times more difficult than 8bit 8 ink rgb workflows.
That said many of you making profiles are maybe not doing so (yet) in n-channel profiles. I think that's where you'd see the Canon controlled with finesse beyond the rgb workflow. Yet I don't think much is documented about the frameworks, screens, linearisation curves, CLT's etc so that will be an area that ImagePrint will justify a surcharge for this printer or other multi-channel printer.
I do know some of the eng. at Colorbyte and I can tell you they can do all of this.
I was just asking why from a users point of view, not my theoretical view.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74865\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hello Neil,
I'm just starting to teach myself how to make profiles for the Canon iPF5000 printer using X-rite pulse and would be grateful if you could elaborate on profiling for a 12 ink printer and n-channel profiles.One could learn a great deal from your experiance in colour management.
Thanks
Martinmitch
-
Hello Neil,
I'm just starting to teach myself how to make profiles for the Canon iPF5000 printer using X-rite pulse and would be grateful if you could elaborate on profiling for a 12 ink printer and n-channel profiles.One could learn a great deal from your experiance in colour management.
Thanks
Martinmitch
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74879\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Neil, I second what Martin is suggesting.. Any light you can shed on profiling the 12 ink system on the Canon would be helpful I'm sure. I've spent a few hours tryng to create some profiles for the IPF5000 also using an X-Rite Pulse ColorElite (rgb & cmyk), but have run into some problems with the hardware. I have to admit, I'm a beginner at profiling. Anyway, you seem to have a great deal of expertise. I've found your posts quite informative and helpful. One of the strengths of this forum is the sharing so much knowledge and experience from so many here.
Tony
-
Hello Neil,
I'm just starting to teach myself how to make profiles for the Canon iPF5000 printer using X-rite pulse and would be grateful if you could elaborate on profiling for a 12 ink printer and n-channel profiles.One could learn a great deal from your experiance in colour management.
Thanks
Martinmitch
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74879\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Treat it as an RGB device (that is, send it the RGB target).
-
Treat it as an RGB device (that is, send it the RGB target).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74882\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hello digitaldog,think you have to be a little more explicit!!
I do know how to make profiles and read your book Colour Management for Photographers last year.
Thanks for joining the debate.
bye martinmitch
-
Hello digitaldog,think you have to be a little more explicit!!
I do know how to make profiles and read your book Colour Management for Photographers last year.
Thanks for joining the debate.
bye martinmitch
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74906\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Martin, if I understand between the few words Andrew wrote, I think he's saying it doesn't matter how many inks or what bit depth the printer works with - the key thing is to output a properly produced target from the printer, read it with the spectro and let the profiling software generate a profile from that data, which you then load into the appropriate folder of your O/S. Andrew do I have it right? I'm interested because I may be getting into this too once I have a printer that makes it practical to switch media between matte and gloss.
-
General Question.
Concerning X-rite Pulse and Canon iPF5000
Read today in instruction manual that Monaco GamutWorks only supports upto 8 colours inside inkjet printers so cannot plot and display colour gamut and look at Delta E-values et'c for Canon..
Does this also mean the Pulse colourelite has problems creating output profiles for the Canon iPF5000 because of the 12 inks that it uses?
Thanks
matinmitch
-
I'll post question to Neil Snape in more detail.
The Canon printer is going to be a challenge for all developers. To exploit the N channel capabilities of the 12 ink set the color maps and screening options are many times more difficult than 8bit 8 ink rgb workflows.
That said many of you making profiles are maybe not doing so (yet) in n-channel profiles. I think that's where you'd see the Canon controlled with finesse beyond the rgb workflow. Yet I don't think much is documented about the frameworks, screens, linearisation curves, CLT's etc so that will be an area that ImagePrint will justify a surcharge for this printer or other multi-channel printer.
Neil could you please elaborate on this quote with your greater knowledge of colour managemant.
What are N-Channels etc'?
Thanks
martinmitch
-
General Question.
Concerning X-rite Pulse and Canon iPF5000
Read today in instruction manual that Monaco GamutWorks only supports upto 8 colours inside inkjet printers so cannot plot and display colour gamut and look at Delta E-values et'c for Canon..
Does this also mean the Pulse colourelite has problems creating output profiles for the Canon iPF5000 because of the 12 inks that it uses?
Thanks
matinmitch
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74909\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Martin, something mysterious to me is going on and you may be onto something important here. It may be a good idea to put this question to X-Rite Tech Support (and let us kow what they tell you), because if their package is limited to a certain number of inks in a printer, this would be a concerning limitation, and one wonders whether it applies to Gretag's other profiling packages as well. I have assumed that a profile should not depend on how many inks the printer needs to generate the right numbers, but perhaps this is an incorrect assumption.
-
Martin, if I understand between the few words Andrew wrote, I think he's saying it doesn't matter how many inks or what bit depth the printer works with - the key thing is to output a properly produced target from the printer, read it with the spectro and let the profiling software generate a profile from that data, which you then load into the appropriate folder of your O/S. Andrew do I have it right? I'm interested because I may be getting into this too once I have a printer that makes it practical to switch media between matte and gloss.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74908\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hello MarkDS
My questions are going a bit further than creating a profile I'm more interested in editing the profile saturation,lightness and output curves etc' but have found a problem with Monaco gamutworks supplied with X-rite Pulse it does not support 12 inkset printers and wondered if this anomaly could in any way cause problems when constructing rgb profiles for the Canon iPF5000.
Hold on martnmitch I might have misunderstood - the wording in manuel is :-
Monaco Gamut Works allows users to: plot and display the colour gamut of any RGB,CMYK,5-8 color ICC-complaint profile,or RGB/CMYK image file[BMP,JPEG,PNG,OR TIFF] in two or three dimensions.
My General Question refraised is does this mean it will or will not support 12 inkset in Canon iPF5000?
My head is beginning to spin but will get to learn this colour management eventually!
Thanks martinmitch
-
Okay this is going to be hard to explain, or at least harder to explain than why it is easier as Andrew says treat it as an rgb (CMY) device.
The volume of the rgb numbers leave enough room for pretty much any combination of colors possible within the scope of any ink jets we currently use.
The PCS stands for something like Profile Connection Space is in almost every case these days L*a*b* for printers. The numbers go from your image in rgb to the mathematically equated nearest values run through a (grid) fixed precision LUT. Up until here all's well.
For the output side most profile packages do rgb or better CMYK.
Some top end packages will take this up to 12 or more separate color channels.
They are very expensive, take much higher training, and are seldom usable in system level drivers.
So are there any advantages?
Yes, but maybe as many disadvantages.
If you can control each ink independently you can have pure graduations with finer control of composite colors than if they PCS numbers have to be made composite and re-divided into the driver or hardware level color maps.
Yet when you use n-channel device profiles, Photoshop doesn't at this time use or preview N color profiles. You need at least 12 bits of precision in screening if you want to have any decent number of tonal separation. Because of this separate rips and or drivers are required.
I've always wanted to muck about with these, but had no RIP's capable of doing so. You could with the Canon I assume. I believe that the next operating system are able to handle both >16 bit driver level separation and N-channel device profiles too.
Before you had to work with plug-ins, saving out as DCS 2 files , RIPs etc to even get near this level reserved for high end offset or Roland printers.
Today it's looking like it will become easier. Just have to dust off my skills and re-read the Profile Maker guide.
Oh , yes most of the viewers will choke on esoteric profiles.
-
I think you guys are making this far more complicated than it has to be. I've built a few profiles for this printer (in RGB) and don't know that there were any issues with those profiles. Building ncolor profiles is a big, expensive and complicated deal that produces profiles that are going to require a vastly different means to use than what we have in say Photoshop.
But if you want to drop $5000+ on ProfileMaker for the packaging module and do that dance, by all means...
-
Neil, you are right - it was hard to explain.
I think the main point of interest here is whether or not (and why) our current profiling packages produce (and allow to be edited) profiles that will work properly with Inkjet printers that have more than eight inks - such as the Canon IPF5000, and there will probably be more such printers to come. I couldn't see how your post specifically contributed to clarity on that issue. Could you try again?
-
I think you guys are making this far more complicated than it has to be. I've built a few profiles for this printer (in RGB) and don't know that there were any issues with those profiles. Building ncolor profiles is a big, expensive and complicated deal that produces profiles that are going to require a vastly different means to use than what we have in say Photoshop.
But if you want to drop $5000+ on ProfileMaker for the packaging module and do that dance, by all means...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74917\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks Andrew, I thought as much, and nothing speaks like actual results. What profiling package did you use for those jobs? Do you think some packages may be more limited than others in being able to handle different printers, or should the printer's ink set-up be largely irrelevant?
Also I'm not sure whether Martin actually got poor profiles for his Canon from the X-Rite package, or whether he is only running into issues when trying to edit them for refinement. This would be good for Martin to clarify.
-
Okay this is going to be hard to explain, or at least harder to explain than why it is easier as Andrew says treat it as an rgb (CMY) device.
The volume of the rgb numbers leave enough room for pretty much any combination of colors possible within the scope of any ink jets we currently use.
The PCS stands for something like Profile Connection Space is in almost every case these days L*a*b* for printers. The numbers go from your image in rgb to the mathematically equated nearest values run through a (grid) fixed precision LUT. Up until here all's well.
For the output side most profile packages do rgb or better CMYK.
Some top end packages will take this up to 12 or more separate color channels.
They are very expensive, take much higher training, and are seldom usable in system level drivers.
So are there any advantages?
Yes, but maybe as many disadvantages.
If you can control each ink independently you can have pure graduations with finer control of composite colors than if they PCS numbers have to be made composite and re-divided into the driver or hardware level color maps.
Yet when you use n-channel device profiles, Photoshop doesn't at this time use or preview N color profiles. You need at least 12 bits of precision in screening if you want to have any decent number of tonal separation. Because of this separate rips and or drivers are required.
I've always wanted to muck about with these, but had no RIP's capable of doing so. You could with the Canon I assume. I believe that the next operating system are able to handle both >16 bit driver level separation and N-channel device profiles too.
Before you had to work with plug-ins, saving out as DCS 2 files , RIPs etc to even get near this level reserved for high end offset or Roland printers.
Today it's looking like it will become easier. Just have to dust off my skills and re-read the Profile Maker guide.
Oh , yes most of the viewers will choke on esoteric profiles.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74916\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks Neil for the reply,have read it a few times and can follow what you are saying and appreciat that it is another level,i have read a few books on color profiling lack the practical experiance but can follow theory.
Thanks
martinmitch
-
I knew it would be!
The finer points are still the same, it comes down to control over each channel that can have pure blends at the right time and place.
Bad news is , also stated before there are not enough tools for this to happen for many users.
It's interesting, but the gain on the Canon shouldn't be that significant as it's not a huge gamut printer according to users here.
-
Also I'm not sure whether Martin actually got poor profiles for his Canon from the X-Rite package, or whether he is only running into issues when trying to edit them for refinement. This would be good for Martin to clarify.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74919\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[/quote]
I think therefore !
I'm one of those people who will read in great detail books and manuels on a subject before starting on the practical side so just starting to make my own profiles for the iPF5000 before they were purchased or made for me by person in paper profiling business.Don't think I have as yet tripped up just want to ask more questions from printers with more experiance than me in my quest to produce amazing inkjet prints from my drawings and animation images.
Just tried to email X-rite but I am from across the water and they will not accept my e-mail so sent questions about Pulse to Chromix in Seattle.
Thanks everyone for your help.
martinmitch
-
I used ProfileMaker Pro. And I have the packaging module and could build a nColor Profile. But then what would I do with it?
Guys, there have been nColor printers (Epson 6, 7 and 8 ink) printers for years now. We've treated them (depending on the driver) as RGB or CMYK devices. The use of nColor profiles is primary intended for the packaging market and the ability to produce nColor profiles is pretty new.
KISS!
-
I used ProfileMaker Pro. And I have the packaging module and could build a nColor Profile. But then what would I do with it?
Buy a iPF5000 and play with the 16 bit driver------!! then entertain us with banter.
Bye
martinmitch
-
I used ProfileMaker Pro. And I have the packaging module and could build a nColor Profile. But then what would I do with it?
Guys, there have been nColor printers (Epson 6, 7 and 8 ink) printers for years now. We've treated them (depending on the driver) as RGB or CMYK devices. The use of nColor profiles is primary intended for the packaging market and the ability to produce nColor profiles is pretty new.
KISS!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74925\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It has always worked better in rgb for Epson outside of the Roland and Colrspans multi colored inks with specific rip s. They were almost non user configurable as N channel and in fact much easier to do also as rgb.
Yet the new Canon is going in the right direction with the color gamut, and the plug-in should be capable of using output profiles on a higher level than Epson can with the current drivers.
One thing is not well known, some RIP's and drivers internally use color maps with N-channel profiles from 3 and 4 color data to the 6 or more color inks. These are not output profiles however>just color maps.
-
I used ProfileMaker Pro. And I have the packaging module and could build a nColor Profile. But then what would I do with it?
Buy a iPF5000 and play with the 16 bit driver------!! then entertain us with banter.
Bye
martinmitch
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74927\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You know for a fact it will use the nColor profile I build in PMP? How do I soft proof it?
-
I think the point Andrew is trying to make is that the fact the IPF5000 uses 12 inks (actually, 11) instead of 8 is completely irrelevent as far as the profiling workflow is concerned. The 16-bit driver still only exposes an RGB interface. Even if you _could_ create an n-color profile, you wouldn't be able to use it unless you could find a RIP that exposes that capability. Heck, even if ImagePrint adds support for the IPF5000, it's my understanding that IP only allows users to create RGB profiles, not CMYK or n-color. So you'd still be using an RGB profile.
-
I think the point Andrew is trying to make is that the fact the IPF5000 uses 12 inks (actually, 11) instead of 8 is completely irrelevent as far as the profiling workflow is concerned. The 16-bit driver still only exposes an RGB interface. Even if you _could_ create an n-color profile, you wouldn't be able to use it unless you could find a RIP that exposes that capability. Heck, even if ImagePrint adds support for the IPF5000, it's my understanding that IP only allows users to create RGB profiles, not CMYK or n-color. So you'd still be using an RGB profile.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74935\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes. This is where the problem will lie until the operating system allow multiple channel ripping (already possible in Quartz) or in Vista ( if it's not disabled as were many of the announced color features!) . Otherwise it will be as it always has been> third party rips.
There is the possibility now that I think of it in Gutenprint rip if anyone has the heart to try where the entire system is unlocked. Even the screens can be over ridden there for those who dare....
The Canon plug in though is offering only what is needed, yet has a lot of potential in the frameworks. For the time being if rgb is not only the easiest but the only workflow possible N-Channel profiles aren't going to do anything.
Could some of you post some canned profiles for the iP5000?
-
Could some of you post some canned profiles for the iP5000?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74938\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[/quote]
-
I think the point Andrew is trying to make is that the fact the IPF5000 uses 12 inks (actually, 11) instead of 8 is completely irrelevent as far as the profiling workflow is concerned. The 16-bit driver still only exposes an RGB interface. Even if you _could_ create an n-color profile, you wouldn't be able to use it unless you could find a RIP that exposes that capability. Heck, even if ImagePrint adds support for the IPF5000, it's my understanding that IP only allows users to create RGB profiles, not CMYK or n-color. So you'd still be using an RGB profile.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74935\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Jeff, If ImagePrint does not already support this printer, I believe it is in the works. Your understanding that the number of inks in the printer should be irrelevant to regular RGB inkjet printer profiling is what I thought as well until Martin brought to our attention (in post #248) some words to the effect that his Monaco package does not support more than 8 inks. One of the key purposes for buying this printer is to be able to use various media without wasting gobs of ink like we are now stuck with on our EpsonX800 series. But this means one needs to be able to have reliable profiles, so whether the usual profiling packages can operate properly with this printer needs to be nailed-down with certainty.
-
Jeff, If ImagePrint does not already support this printer, I believe it is in the works.
Last I heard, they were hoping to support it in the next 90 days or so. Considering how long it was from the time they first said that R2400 support would be out "next week" to the time they actually shipped it, I wouldn't hold my breath.
Your understanding that the number of inks in the printer should be irrelevant to regular RGB inkjet printer profiling is what I thought as well until Martin brought to our attention (in post #248) some words to the effect that his Monaco package does not support more than 8 inks. One of the key purposes for buying this printer is to be able to use various media without wasting gobs of ink like we are now stuck with on our EpsonX800 series. But this means one needs to be able to have reliable profiles, so whether the usual profiling packages can operate properly with this printer needs to be nailed-down with certainty.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74961\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The n-color profile support in Monaco Profiler or ProfileMaker Pro is a different beast altogether from the RGB profiles that we create for our printers. When using the standard drivers and creating RGB profiles, the profiling software has absolutely no idea how many inks the printer has, how could it?
Now if you had a RIP that supported the ipf5000 and allowed the use of a true 12-color profiles, I suppose it would be a problem if the Monaco software could only support up to 8-color profiles. But this situation is completely hypothetical because to my knowledge such a RIP does not exist.
-
Last I heard, they were hoping to support it in the next 90 days or so. Considering how long it was from the time they first said that R2400 support would be out "next week" to the time they actually shipped it, I wouldn't hold my breath.
The n-color profile support in Monaco Profiler or ProfileMaker Pro is a different beast altogether from the RGB profiles that we create for our printers. When using the standard drivers and creating RGB profiles, the profiling software has absolutely no idea how many inks the printer has, how could it?
Now if you had a RIP that supported the ipf5000 and allowed the use of a true 12-color profiles, I suppose it would be a problem if the Monaco software could only support up to 8-color profiles. But this situation is completely hypothetical because to my knowledge such a RIP does not exist.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=74967\")
Hello,
I have tried to e-mail x-rite concerning my hypothetical problems with their software but because I'm not from the USA they will not allow me to or accept my email- how odd!
So need help :- could one of you helpful individuals e-mail x-rite at:-
[a href=\"http://www.xritephoto.com/support/]http://www.xritephoto.com/support/[/url]
and ask:
1] Does the Pulse ColorElite rgb standerd version V.1.0.2 support the creation of external profiles for the 12 ink Canon iPF5000 inkjet printer? [probably does but need horses mouth to speak]
2] Does the Monaco GamutWorks utility supplied with the Pulse ColorElite again support the 12 ink Canon iPF5000 or is it restricted to 8 inks or 8 colours?
Thanks it has been a most enligthening day on L.L. website.
Tried in earlier post to load canon canned profiles onto message but L.L. would not accept file.
Sometimes I can miss the obvious even aeroplanes or trip over cead ducks!
Ta Much
martinmitch
-
Jeff, If ImagePrint does not already support this printer, I believe it is in the works. Your understanding that the number of inks in the printer should be irrelevant to regular RGB inkjet printer profiling is what I thought as well until Martin brought to our attention (in post #248) some words to the effect that his Monaco package does not support more than 8 inks. One of the key purposes for buying this printer is to be able to use various media without wasting gobs of ink like we are now stuck with on our EpsonX800 series. But this means one needs to be able to have reliable profiles, so whether the usual profiling packages can operate properly with this printer needs to be nailed-down with certainty.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74961\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
ProfileMaker 5x builds quite nice profiles for the Canon. I have been using a larger sample target (3600) with it to get try to get a better sample of the range of the printer, but beyond that, the profiles I have so for are working fine.
-
When using the standard drivers and creating RGB profiles, the profiling software has absolutely no idea how many inks the printer has, how could it?
Now if you had a RIP that supported the ipf5000 and allowed the use of a true 12-color profiles, I suppose it would be a problem if the Monaco software could only support up to 8-color profiles. But this situation is completely hypothetical because to my knowledge such a RIP does not exist.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74967\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Jeff, OK, now let us drill down a bit. I agree, the profiling software itself cannot know how many inks the printer has. The spectro reads the patches (printer OUTPUT), and the numbers go back to the software which generates a profile. This profile describes the device and is used in the process of correlating "device color values" with corresponding "device-independent" source values describing the colour we want to see. The "device color values" (let us say usually RGB) are control signals going to the printer to make it reproduce the colour we expect as described by the source profile. If that's a correct (but superficial) description of the colour management anatomy we are dealing with, the question then is what is going on "under the hood" when these control signals go to the printer. Recalling - these control signals are device-dependent colour values - data - so far devoid of anything that says 8, 10 or 12 ink tanks. BUT once those signals are sent, SOMETHING needs to convert them into how much C,M,Y, K, etc. ink the printer lays down to describe on paper each pixel. That something could be the RIP or the Printer Driver (after Photoshop manages the source to destination profiling). So the question here I think is whether at this point, the device profile plays any role at all in how these signals get converted to CMYK (and for Canon IPF +RGB) ink drops. I would expect not - what I DO expect is that when the printer gets a signal to produce colour X, the printer driver (or the RIP) takes over the process and selects from whatever number of ink tanks it has to reproduce that hue. But as I mentioned above, there seems to be some evidence (post 248) that it may not be thus.
-
Hello,
I have tried to e-mail x-rite concerning my hypothetical problems with their software but because I'm not from the USA they will not allow me to or accept my email- how odd!
So need help :- could one of you helpful individuals e-mail x-rite at:-
http://www.xritephoto.com/support/ (http://www.xritephoto.com/support/)
and ask:
1] Does the Pulse ColorElite rgb standerd version V.1.0.2 support the creation of external profiles for the 12 ink Canon iPF5000 inkjet printer? [probably does but need horses mouth to speak]
2] Does the Monaco GamutWorks utility supplied with the Pulse ColorElite again support the 12 ink Canon iPF5000 or is it restricted to 8 inks or 8 colours?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74970\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Martin, I just tried to do this. I live in Canada. I got back a gibberish error message. So much for them. I haven't bought their stuff yet and if that is the quality of tech support one can expect from X-Rite I probably won't.
-
Martin, I just tried to do this. I live in Canada. I got back a gibberish error message. So much for them. I haven't bought their stuff yet and if that is the quality of tech support one can expect from X-Rite I probably won't.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=74974\")
X-Rite website is over complicated and confusing.
I managed to find my way through their website and have made contact at second attempt:-
Hear is coppy of first e-mail
Dear Mr. Mitchell,
This new Canon printer, while a different kind of beast in many ways, is still a device that produces color. As long as you can print a profiling target through it, you can make an output profile for it.
Normally, I would tell people: If you are printing through Photoshop, then the profiles you make are not going to be used in the printer anyway. They are actually going to be used in Photoshop. But this printer has two ways of printing: A standard RGB driver, and the 16-bit driver. The above holds true for the standard Canon driver.
The 16-bit driver works differently than other drivers - as a Photoshop plug in. From what I've heard a custom profile works best when used within the 16-bit driver, rather than in the Photoshop print with preview dialog. I don't know yet whether this device is considered an RGB or a CMYK device. It is most likely RGB. I believe your Pulse colorelite is the standard version which does not do CMYK so this is a consideration.
This is such a new printer that we haven't had a chance to get our hand on one, so I wish I could tell you more.
Pat Herold
herold@chromix.com
206.985-6837 ext #6
On Aug 30, 2006, at 6:25 AM, martin mitchell wrote:
Hello
A general question concerning the new 12 ink Canon iPF5000 inkjet printer.
1] Does the Pulse colorelite - standard,support the creation of external profiles for the Canon?
2]Does Monaco Gamut Works allow the use of profiles from the Canon?
Basically,is this Canon 12 ink printer compatible with the X-rite pulse software?
Thanks
Martin mitchell
My Reply:-
Hello Pat ,
The second question concerning the Monaco GamutWorks still troubles me could you enlighten me - maybe.
There has been a lot of discussion concerning profiling and the Canon iPF5000 on Luminous Landscape website at :-Pages 11 to 14 are most interesting.
[a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=10914&st=220]http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....ic=10914&st=220[/url]
Thanks for your help
Martin Mitchell
Still waiting for reply.
Bye martinmitch
-
The only product in the X-Rite line that builds nColor profiles is PROFILER Platinum and it doesn't support 12 channel profiles. The max is 8 channel.
PULSE in theory (in reality) can read the targets to build such a profile but you'd need PROFILE and you'd be 4 channels shy of what you need.
-
Treat it as an RGB device (that is, send it the RGB target).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74882\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Andrew,
That's exactly what I tried doing.. printed the RGB target, both basic and "best" or whatever, and then scanning the RGB printed target with the Pulse spectrophotometer, but never could get it to display the patches as it should in tethered mode.
The other thing that totally threw me is the targets that came out of the IPF5000 "LOOKED" like the CMYK targets, colors totally different than the RGB target that appeared on screen (and exactly like the CMYK target preview) ????? Color Management was turned off. Never seen anything like that happen before.
Maybe my kit is broken ??
Tony
-
Hi Andrew,
That's exactly what I tried doing.. printed the RGB target, both basic and "best" or whatever, and then scanning the RGB printed target with the Pulse spectrophotometer, but never could get it to display the patches as it should in tethered mode.
Tony
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74986\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Displayed? You mean the before and "after" patches shown in the UI don't match? That's totally normal. I'm not sure what you mean.
-
Martin,
Great - you beat me to it - I was just about to find another way of getting those answers. It is good that you succeeded, and I think the answer they gave you is both honest and sensible. Let us assume the printer is an RGB device - it would appear that there is confidence in the profile when used with the standard driver and a lack of knowledge at source about what happens when the profile is used with the 16 bit Photoshop plug-in. So that's where this issue stands - too bad in a way because the 16 bit plug-in is supposed to be a key feature of this printer. I hope this profiling compatibility question gets clarified more completely soon, and your efforts at doing so are valuable.
-
The only product in the X-Rite line that builds nColor profiles is PROFILER Platinum and it doesn't support 12 channel profiles. The max is 8 channel.
PULSE in theory (in reality) can read the targets to build such a profile but you'd need PROFILE and you'd be 4 channels shy of what you need.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74978\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Profiler platinum supports 8 colors, not channels. Variations in density as in 4 blacks or two shades of magenta or cyan count as one color. So the Ipf series only uses 7 colors in Profiler platinum you could add an extra color in theory.
-
Displayed? You mean the before and "after" patches shown in the UI don't match? That's totally normal. I'm not sure what you mean.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74987\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Anyway, I guess this is pretty off topic from where the rest of the group is going.. still wondering if this machine IS an RGB device or maybe CMYK ?
Tony
-
X-Rite website is over complicated and confusing.
I managed to find my way through their website and have made contact at second attempt:-
Hear is coppy of first e-mail
Dear Mr. Mitchell,
This new Canon printer, while a different kind of beast in many ways, is still a device that produces color. As long as you can print a profiling target through it, you can make an output profile for it.
Bye martinmitch
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74975\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hmm, interesting response they sent you Martin.. I know a couple of folks out there are making decent profiles for this beast... just wondering how ?
-
Anyway, I guess this is pretty off topic from where the rest of the group is going.. still wondering if this machine IS an RGB device or maybe CMYK ?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74991\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It's way beyond OT at this point.
You can profile a device as RGB or CMYK once you first determine what the driver "wants" to be fed.
As for channels versus colors, the PROFILER manual uses both to describe their profiles (assuming you want to get anal here with the terms). See page 208, 216 and 226 of their manual.
-
Looking at the canned profiles from Canon for the IPF5000 with ColorThink 2.2, it says the color space is RGB.
-
Looking at the canned profiles from Canon for the IPF5000 with ColorThink 2.2, it says the color space is RGB.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74999\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks David .. I sure thought it would be RGB, but after my profiling attempts, I was beginning to wonder..
-
It's way beyond OT at this point.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74996\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It wasn't OT and got a civil answer that was useful to the person who asked the question. It also helps me to have that confirmed - possibly for future reference, in case after all is said and done I end-up buying one of these beasts.
-
Let us assume the printer is an RGB device
It is, in the sense that the print drivers (both 8-bit and 16-bit plugin) are RGB. The translation of the RGB values into actual inks happens in the driver.
it would appear that there is confidence in the profile when used with the standard driver and a lack of knowledge at source about what happens when the profile is used with the 16 bit Photoshop plug-in. So that's where this issue stands - too bad in a way because the 16 bit plug-in is supposed to be a key feature of this printer.
Re-read the email reply. Specifically this statement:
From what I've heard a custom profile works best when used within the 16-bit driver, rather than in the Photoshop print with preview dialog.
So I'm not sure why you think there's a question about whether profiles can be used with the 16-bit plugin. Read any of the reviews of the IPF5000 that cover the plug-in and you'll see that full ICM support is provided, including the ability to disable print-driver color management and use canned or custom profiles at the application level. Mr Reichmann's own review covers these details, as well as stating that he was able to create profiles for both the 8-bit and 16-bit print drivers.
-
So I'm not sure why you think there's a question about whether profiles can be used with the 16-bit plugin. Read any of the reviews of the IPF5000 that cover the plug-in and you'll see that full ICM support is provided, including the ability to disable print-driver color management and use canned or custom profiles at the application level. Mr Reichmann's own review covers these details, as well as stating that he was able to create profiles for both the 8-bit and 16-bit print drivers.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75024\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have no doubt one can generate and select profiles to be used with the 16-bit plug-in. I've seen it done. If there is any issue at all, it is about what the profile is actually doing. Go back to post 272, where Chromix (not X-Rite) tells Martin:
<<The 16-bit driver works differently than other drivers - as a Photoshop plug in. From what I've heard a custom profile works best when used within the 16-bit driver, rather than in the Photoshop print with preview dialog. I don't know yet whether this device is considered an RGB or a CMYK device. It is most likely RGB. I believe your Pulse colorelite is the standard version which does not do CMYK so this is a consideration.
<<This is such a new printer that we haven't had a chance to get our hand on one, so I wish I could tell you more.>>
When I see phrases like "from what I've heard", "it is most likely", and "this is such a new printer that we haven't had a chance to get our hands on one...." it tells me that there is uncertainty in the mind of the writer.
Perhaps that uncertainty is just an excess of caution in this case, because we know it is an RGB device. We also know that other participants in this discussion have reported good results making and using their own profiles, but those reports weren't based on the use of MonacoGamut software.
All said and done, Jeff, I agree with you - unless I heear convincingly otherwise - I don't see any reason why such a profiling package shouldn't work just as well for any of these high-end RGB printers regardless of how many inks they use. That is where the logic takes one, but of course undrlying logic are technical details and the devil is often in those details.
Cheers.
-
Dragging this off the profile issue, and on to a more general printer use, has anyone seen documentation on what the Special 1-5 paper settings on the printer are doing? They can make a significant difference in profile shape, and I cannot find anything that really says what each is intended for.
Dana Rasmussen
Seattle, WA
-
Dragging this off the profile issue, and on to a more general printer use, has anyone seen documentation on what the Special 1-5 paper settings on the printer are doing? They can make a significant difference in profile shape, and I cannot find anything that really says what each is intended for.
Dana Rasmussen
Seattle, WA
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75059\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
There was an indication that higher numbers set down more ink by at least one 5000 user (see post #94 by Wayne Fox). What kind of differences are you seeing in the profiles, is it just a difference of gamut size or do certain color ranges seem to be more affected?
-
As I continue my "wait and see" approach to whether or not I should buy this printer, it is exactly this kind of thing that has turned me off so far. I admire and appreciate you guys who are prepared to put the time and effort into experimentation, fishing around for answers that should be easily and directly accessible in the instruction material provided with the printer. I looked yet again through that material, which I happen to have, and couldn't find it. I hope Canon is reading these various website discussion threads, because it should be very embarassing to them that technically savvy people like yourselves need to fish around the internet for elementary instruction that Canon itself should be providing with a machine in this class. One hopes this is one of the issues they are attending to as the competition heats-up.
-
The software overrides the printer presets. The warnings give you information that something has changed from what you set in the printer so you can do something about it if you choose to. They can be turned off in the printer if you want.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=66203\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Could you tell me how the warning messages can be turned off, I did not think this possible.
Thx,
Troy
-
Could you tell me how the warning messages can be turned off, I did not think this possible.
Thx,
Troy
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75075\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not sure if this these are the warning messages you were referring to, but on the printer, select Menu, System Setup, Warning, set Ignore Mismatch - ON.
-
Dragging this off the profile issue, and on to a more general printer use, has anyone seen documentation on what the Special 1-5 paper settings on the printer are doing? They can make a significant difference in profile shape, and I cannot find anything that really says what each is intended for.
Dana Rasmussen
Seattle, WA
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75059\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I experimented with profiles for Fotospeed matt duo in settings 1-5,some weeks ago using Print fix pro and setting 1 produced a print using less ink than setting 5. One was thin and washy looking five fuller colour but not heavy colour if using canon profile premium matt highest but I do artwork not photography.
martinmitch
-
Hello.
Been offline all-day setting up new Raid hard drive configuration.
e-mailed X-Rite again early this morning
MarkDS I am communicating with X-Rite not Chromix managed to get through last night.
Here is second communication :-
Hi Martin,
You asked “A general question to clarify a previos e-mail. In the user guide for the Pulse ColorElite section 9-Viewing Gamuts it says Monaco GamutWorks allows users to: plot and display the color gamut of any RGB,CMYK,5-8 color ICC-complaint profile,or RGB/CMYK image file [BMP ,JPEG,PNG,or TIFF] in two or three dimensions. The Question-----: the Canon iPF5000 has a twelve color inkset so can this printer be used with the Monaco GamutWorks?”
I assume you are still creating RGB or CMYK profiles for this device. If you are using the printer connected to the computer then use should be creating RGB profiles because the information the printer receives is still technically RGB. If you are connected via a RIP then the information will probably be CMYK meaning the profile will be CMYK. It only really tends to be printing presses with CMYK inks plus special colours that require 5-8 colour profiling.
I am not familiar with this particular printer but if the above is the case then yes gamutworks will have no problem displaying your profiles.
Best Regards
David Stewart
Applications Specialist
Printing, Graphic Arts & Digital Imaging
x-rite Ltd
The Acumen Centre
First Avenue
Poynton, Cheshire
SK12 1FJ
+44 (0)1625 871100 (Office)
+44 (0)7714 521124(Mobile)
Martinmich
-
Hello,
Just found a third e-mail this one is from Chromix:-
These profiles are not strickly speaking "from" the Canon printer. They are actually made "for" the Canon printer, by a separate piece of software like a Monaco profiler for example. Therefore, if the profiles are ICC-compliant, then Monaco GamutWorks should be able to handle them.
GamutWorks features the ability of "evaluating and graphing ICC-compliant profiles."
Pat Herold
herold@chromix.com
206.985-6837 ext #6
On Aug 30, 2006, at 3:42 PM, martin mitchell wrote:
Hello Pat ,
The second question concerning the Monaco GamutWorks still troubles me could you enlighten me - maybe.
There has been a lot of discussion concerning profiling and the Canon iPF5000 on Luminous Landscape website at :-Pages 11 to 14 are most interesting.
http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....ic=10914&st=220 (http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=10914&st=220)
Thanks for your help
Martin Mitchell
martinmitch
-
Good work Martin - I think it's established now that this is indeed an RGB device (unless one uses it with a CMYK RIP) and Pulse Elite w. GamutWorks should give reliable profiles. All very good news. It seems to me that perhaps the key to success in profiling this printer will be to note carefully ALL the various settings one uses for creating the profile and being sure to replicate them EXACTLY when making prints. Also seems to suggest testing various settings is unavoidable to see how difrerent ones perform with different papers. To some extent this is the case for any printer - less so if one is using the printer manufacturers' own papers - decreasingly the case these days with the profusion of really interesting third party media to have hit the market over the past months.
-
Good work Martin - I think it's established now that this is indeed an RGB device (unless one uses it with a CMYK RIP) and Pulse Elite w. GamutWorks should give reliable profiles. All very good news. It seems to me that perhaps the key to success in profiling this printer will be to note carefully ALL the various settings one uses for creating the profile and being sure to replicate them EXACTLY when making prints. Also seems to suggest testing various settings is unavoidable to see how difrerent ones perform with different papers. To some extent this is the case for any printer - less so if one is using the printer manufacturers' own papers - decreasingly the case these days with the profusion of really interesting third party media to have hit the market over the past months.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75107\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It's pretty much like profiling any printer. Select the paper, paper source, resolution and turn off all printer color management in the printer driver and print the chart. After the profile is generated printing is pretty similiar to other printers. Select the output profile either in PS for the 8-bit driver or select the profile in the 16-bit driver, select the paper, resolution and paper source, make sure color management is turned off in the printer driver and let it print. Seems like people are perhaps over-thinking the process and making it more complicated than it needs to be.
-
It's pretty much like profiling any printer. Select the paper, paper source, resolution and turn off all printer color management in the printer driver and print the chart. After the profile is generated printing is pretty similiar to other printers. Select the output profile either in PS for the 8-bit driver or select the profile in the 16-bit driver, select the paper, resolution and paper source, make sure color management is turned off in the printer driver and let it print. Seems like people are perhaps over-thinking the process and making it more complicated than it needs to be.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75118\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
David - yes and no. ANY printer settings that can affect how the printer lays down ink need to be verified and kept the same for both making and using the profile, otherwise the profile will not necessarily perform as intended. You've mentioned the most usual culprits, but that is not the whole story. I'm not saying it's horrendously complicated - just that one needs to be mindful of all that can matter.
-
David - yes and no. ANY printer settings that can affect how the printer lays down ink need to be verified and kept the same for both making and using the profile, otherwise the profile will not necessarily perform as intended. You've mentioned the most usual culprits, but that is not the whole story. I'm not saying it's horrendously complicated - just that one needs to be mindful of all that can matter.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75119\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Mark,
Again, yes and no. The paper settings are a bit confusing at first. I generally print on luster-type papers and most papers recommend the Canon Photo Paper Semi-Gloss for printing on a luster surface. This has worked out pretty well for me and I have seen no need to play with the Special 1-5 paper types.
Looking at the printout of the settings the printer has for the various paper types, I didn't see anything different between them other than using the Photo or Matte black inks. I'm sure there are some settings somewhere that determine how much ink is laid down, but I haven't found them yet. But for my needs at this time it is probably irrelevant since I have a combination that seems to be working with good results. Others may have to experiment with different media types until they find the best for the paper that they are using.
Canon certainly needs to fix the documentation and the IPF 5000 Media Configuration Tool really needs to be fixed. At this time it seems to do nothing useful. It seems that I should be able to add a paper type using it but nothing happens. All it does now is load a paper setting file to the printer and doesn't give you the ability to change that file.
-
Just noticed that on the UK site, the GARO Status Monitor has been updated to V2.71. The US site still appears to have V2.5. I downloaded the new version from the UK and it works OK. There is no log of changes from the previous version. It looks the same, but probably has some under the hood bug fixes.
-
David,
The dysfunctiuonality of the media configuration tool has been known very soon after the printer was released and tested. It is simply amazing that Canon hasn't fixed this yet. Maybe they'll issue a fix discretely like perhaps they've done with the status monitor. As I said, cudos to you guys, but I'm biding my time while I watch developments with close interest.
The one saving grace is that it does make very good prints without having to flush ink when changing media. That is worth a whole lot, but is a distinct Epson issue that Epson will have to fix if they want to preserve any kind of market share going forward.
-
David,
The dysfunctiuonality of the media configuration tool has been known very soon after the printer was released and tested. It is simply amazing that Canon hasn't fixed this yet. Maybe they'll issue a fix discretely like perhaps they've done with the status monitor. As I said, cudos to you guys, but I'm biding my time while I watch developments with close interest.
The one saving grace is that it does make very good prints without having to flush ink when changing media. That is worth a whole lot, but is a distinct Epson issue that Epson will have to fix if they want to preserve any kind of market share going forward.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75136\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hello
This conversation to me has gone full circle bringing up issues many ownners of Canon Ipf5000 brought up back in June 06 when these machines were delivered to us in U/K in States it was a month or so earlier.
martinmitch
-
Not sure if this these are the warning messages you were referring to, but on the printer, select Menu, System Setup, Warning, set Ignore Mismatch - ON.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75083\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Excellent, thanks.
Troy
-
Hello
This conversation to me has gone full circle bringing up issues many ownners of Canon Ipf5000 brought up back in June 06 when these machines were delivered to us in U/K in States it was a month or so earlier.
martinmitch
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75142\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Martin, yup - you're right - but let me suggest something - let's think about WHY for a moment. Here you have a top-flight technological corporation by World standards -one of the biggest/best players in fact - every time they release a major new product they hang their reputation and that division's bottom line on it. Nonetheless important stuff slips between the cracks (perhaps once again a lesson about more haste - less speed) and MONTHS go by with nary a word from them even recognizing there are problems, let alone fixing them. And potential customers like me are lined-up with cash in hand waiting to buy - but we want these very tractable, nuissance flaws simply fixed-up first. And the longer it goes on, the more sensible it is just to wait for the forthcoming options to also expand the range of choice. So that's how the circle gets rounded - one looks accross the diameter in time and asks in some wonderment "what's going on?" with all these supposedly savvy corporate folks.
Cheers
-
and MONTHS go by with nary a word from them even recognizing there are problems,
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75165\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Mark,
I think you've hit the proverbial nail on the head here. I've already got mine and love it, but am really frustrated by the lack of communications from Canon about all the problems that have been brought up and when updated software/firmware/drivers will be available.
When I was writing controller software for large video production switchers, I talked to the customers and listened to their problems and requests for features. Bugs were immediately worked on and we let the customers know that fixes would be available and when they would be available.
This is a pro printer, not something you buy off the shelf at Staples or Best Buy. I think we deserve more from Canon.
We need a Chuck Westfall for this line of printers.
-
Mark,
I think you've hit the proverbial nail on the head here. I've already got mine and love it, but am really frustrated by the lack of communications from Canon about all the problems that have been brought up and when updated software/firmware/drivers will be available.
We need a Chuck Westfall for this line of printers.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75177\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hello
Yes,I aso support both of you in this area of debate it appears there are numerous individuals purchasing Canon iPF5000 printers and 3 months have passed since thes printers were released in the UK and yet, Canon have not acknowledged problems with printer software or been in contacct with printer et,c to hear first hand the issues we have found.
Maybe there is a story concerning communicating with `canon about this printer' out there on the web?Please tell.
martinmitch
-
We need a Chuck Westfall for this line of printers.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75177\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Indeed.
Perhaps to trigger that event someone needs to put all these discussions under Canon's nose to make sure they know the stakes are worth it.
-
Indeed.
Perhaps to trigger that event someone needs to put all these discussions under Canon's nose to make sure they know the stakes are worth it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75199\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Mark, you and David have been reading my mind :-). Several times I've thought about contacting Chuck to see who his counterpart is on the Printer side of the house. I did put together a document outlining some of my concerns and emphasizing the need for Canon to demonstrate their support to this product if they are serious about the pro and artist market. I gave the document to one of their dealers who is an associate of mine who was planning to have a conference with someone in the iPF 5000 circle at Canon. He wound up sending the doc to the guy and then we never heard another word. Oh well... I still remain cautiously optimistic. I don't think I'll be buying a Canon 24" until we see how this all plays out the next several months.. who knows, maybe HP is in my future (which I never thought would be likely).
-
Perhaps to trigger that event someone needs to put all these discussions under Canon's nose to make sure they know the stakes are worth it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75199\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I just sent an email to Chuck Westfall about this and the need for someone from Canon to step up and let us know that Canon is listening and doing something about the problems and concerns that have been raised. Hopefully there will be some sort of response.
-
I just sent an email to Chuck Westfall about this and the need for someone from Canon to step up and let us know that Canon is listening and doing something about the problems and concerns that have been raised. Hopefully there will be some sort of response.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75220\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
David, this is great. Anything positive they do about it is good for everyone. Do please keep us posted.
-
I just sent an email to Chuck Westfall about this and the need for someone from Canon to step up and let us know that Canon is listening and doing something about the problems and concerns that have been raised. Hopefully there will be some sort of response.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75220\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hello,
Thanks and you have my support from otherside of Atlantic Ocean.
Would it be a good idear if we all started to list the issues we have with the Canon iPF5000 on this website in a simple and clear manner?
Leaving out opinions etc'.
martinmitch
-
Would it be a good idear if we all started to list the issues we have with the Canon iPF5000 on this website in a simple and clear manner?
Leaving out opinions etc'.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75227\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I think the concept of collecting all the problems is a good one. I'm not sure that a discussion forum is the best vehicle for accomplishing that. Seems like we might end up with another 300+ message thread.
If we could collect the problems and issues in a format that would be suitable to sending to Canon that would be best. Not sure at the moment how to best accomplish this in a collabrative manner.
Perhaps someone knows of a tool that would allow us to do this. I wonder if someone like Michael has a contact in the Canon printer division that the results could be sent to.
-
I just sent an email to Chuck Westfall about this and the need for someone from Canon to step up and let us know that Canon is listening and doing something about the problems and concerns that have been raised. Hopefully there will be some sort of response.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75220\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Good move David.. Maybe I'll clean up that document I put together and also send to Chuck. Might be good if he hears from a few of us just to reinforce the issue.
Cheers,
Tony
-
I'd like to suggest that Tony, Martin or David take the lead in putting a document together - it need not be lengthy - a bullet style list with very brief description of the key issues. Put it up as a post in this discussion thread, give it several days for anyone interested to make comments, revise accordingly and then whoever has the best contacts there send it to Canon with a hyperlink to the discussion history. As I don't own one of these printers, regardless that I am quite familiar with some of the issues, I think it is preferable if IPF5000 owners were to take the initiative doing this. I intend to remain interested because the IPF5000 is still an eventual option for me.
-
I'd like to suggest that Tony, Martin or David take the lead in putting a document together - it need not be lengthy - a bullet style list with very brief description of the key issues. Put it up as a post in this discussion thread, give it several days for anyone interested to make comments, revise accordingly and then whoever has the best contacts there send it to Canon with a hyperlink to the discussion history. As I don't own one of these printers, regardless that I am quite familiar with some of the issues, I think it is preferable if IPF5000 owners were to take the initiative doing this. I intend to remain interested because the IPF5000 is still an eventual option for me.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75246\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hi Mark,
Actually I just sent my notes to Chuck Westfall a few minutes ago.. These were notes that I put together for another ASMP member who happens to be a Canon dealer. They certainly were not "all inclusive" as you are suggesting, but perhaps might be helpful in getting the "printer folks" to pay attention. I will email a copy to you.
Tony
-
Thanks Tony, looking forward to seeing it. I have sent you my email address.
Cheers,
Mark
-
Actually I just sent my notes to Chuck Westfall a few minutes ago.. These were notes that I put together for another ASMP member who happens to be a Canon dealer. They certainly were not "all inclusive" as you are suggesting, but perhaps might be helpful in getting the "printer folks" to pay attention. I will email a copy to you.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75247\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Tony and I got responses from Chuck indicating that he would be sending our comments and observations on to the Professional Products Marketing Division for review. Hopefully something will come of this. Chuck indicated that most of them would be at Photoshop World so if anyone is going, perhaps one of them could be approached with our concerns.
Mark,
Tony's comments pretty well cover the gamut of the problems that we have been discussing. We've spoken on the phone a couple times and seem to be of the same mind about the printer. Tony has a little more experience with some features since I only use the cassette and roll holder for feeding and keep pretty much the same paper sizes.
After you've seen the comments from Tony (nice job Tony!) perhaps we can revisit the idea of gathering more observations and problems in a document to send to Canon.
As for me, my ProfileMaker 5 just arrived so I'll probably be somewhat distracted from this over the weekend.
I think we are making some good progress here, so let's keep up the momentum.
-
Tony and I got responses from Chuck indicating that he would be sending our comments and observations on to the Professional Products Marketing Division for review. Hopefully something will come of this. Chuck indicated that most of them would be at Photoshop World so if anyone is going, perhaps one of them could be approached with our concerns.
Mark,
Tony's comments pretty well cover the gamut of the problems that we have been discussing. We've spoken on the phone a couple times and seem to be of the same mind about the printer. Tony has a little more experience with some features since I only use the cassette and roll holder for feeding and keep pretty much the same paper sizes.
After you've seen the comments from Tony (nice job Tony!) perhaps we can revisit the idea of gathering more observations and problems in a document to send to Canon.
As for me, my ProfileMaker 5 just arrived so I'll probably be somewhat distracted from this over the weekend.
I think we are making some good progress here, so let's keep up the momentum.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=75266\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
David, I read Tony's note to Chuck Westfall and based on all I've personally seen and/or heard about this printer I think it is very good. The one missing item is about the very poor quality of the documentation; I recommended to Tony that he send Chuck a follow-up email covering that rather important matter.
Chuck Westfall's response is encouraging. "The camel's nose is in the tent." But given the hoops within large outfits like Canon to actually get results, I think it will be useful to follow this up in the manner you suggest above.
Enjoy your ProfileMaker 5 - and please do tell us what it is doing for you!
Cheers
Mark
-
I hade profiles made for my favorite papers from Cathys profiles http://www.cathysprofiles.com/ (http://www.cathysprofiles.com/) and had great luck. worth the $40. I did make a few mistakes along the way so if you are using the 16 bit driver, print your targets through the 16 bit driver (I reread the LL review a couple of times to confirm what I was doing) take the time to make sure all the menus are set correctly and with no color management, many of the sub menus have memory and I made a few mistakes by not being thorough. It did take me a week to realize that the 16 bit driver was under the output not print menu so I had a profile created for the windows driver by mistake first. But this mistake confirmed what was stated in the review that a different profile is required for each driver. The 8 bit profile when used in the 16 bit driver is not as good as the 16 bit profile in the 16 bit driver as one would expect?
hope this helps
Marc
-
Could some of you post some canned profiles for the iP5000?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
(http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=74938\")
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=74949\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[/quote]
I hade profiles made for my favorite papers from Cathys profiles [a href=\"http://www.cathysprofiles.com/]http://www.cathysprofiles.com/[/url] and had great luck. worth the $40. I did make a few mistakes along the way so if you are using the 16 bit driver, print your targets through the 16 bit driver (I reread the LL review a couple of times to confirm what I was doing) take the time to make sure all the menus are set correctly and with no color management, many of the sub menus have memory and I made a few mistakes by not being thorough. It did take me a week to realize that the 16 bit driver was under the output not print menu so I had a profile created for the windows driver by mistake first. But this mistake confirmed what was stated in the review that a different profile is required for each driver. The 8 bit profile when used in the 16 bit driver is not as good as the 16 bit profile in the 16 bit driver as one would expect?
hope this helps
Marc
-
You've missed the point of this discussion - no-one is slamming anything as crap, and as far as I've read, none of the observations about the teething problems of the Canon printer were made in spite by owners of Epson 4800s. Most of the identification of problems came from new owners of the Canon IPF5000. One of the real values of a discussion forum such as this one is that it informs the manufacturers they have issues which they really need to address, and it provides useful information to prospective buyers. I think we all know nothing is perfect, but different issues mean different things to different people, so we may as well all know what they are and make our own decisions accordingly.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=71225\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Agree:These points are most important for someone like me who has just joined to gen up of the pros and cons of the canon v Epson printer, I have not bought one yet but want to soon to prin t up my photographs
I need to hear these user experiences to make an informed decidion, I don't think the printer is being derided, just intelligently criticised
-
Agree:These points are most important for someone like me who has just joined to gen up of the pros and cons of the canon v Epson printer, I have not bought one yet but want to soon to prin t up my photographs
I need to hear these user experiences to make an informed decidion, I don't think the printer is being derided, just intelligently criticised
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=88151\")
Simon,
I'm loving my iPF5000 so far. There are issues with all of these printers and software packages. One just needs to decide which best suits his/her needs in printing.
This Wiki may help you with your process if you've not seen it: [a href=\"http://canonipf5000.wikispaces.com/]http://canonipf5000.wikispaces.com/[/url]
--
Dale
-
A thought than came to mind reading the desire of users here to educate Canon about their concerns regarding the ipf5000. I wonder what the ratio is of users who share this desire are versus the total number of ipf5000 printers sold by Canon.
In other words, it's a handful of folks posting here about the printer, is it only a handful of ipf5000's that have been sold by Canon? Likely not the case. But as the manufacturer, they have got to be looking at the percentages when deciding what issues to prioritize. It's just a thougt process I've gone through reading these posts, since I am very interested in this printer myself.
I personally am waiting to see what the ImagePrint RIP for the 5000 performs like, since it should make most of these issues moot.
-
The new HPs have come out now so I'm even more inundated with choice!
However having read ALL the posts on this threadthe single thing that imresses me most is the MR review where he refers to the true blues
AS mainly landscape photog the Sky is obviously going to need accurate reproduction.
After reading all the posts on profilng I now realise it may not be that simple, in fact unlikely to be - at the moment I have the luxury of waiting to see whter the canon sorts out the problems mentioned here enough of my use or whether the HP or Epsons usurp them i.e. pip them at te post
I may wait til feb when a) will have more money so it won't be a pinch to buy as it is now and there's a trade show in Feb as I recall to .. thansk for all the info and keep it coming I really appreciate all your expert (compared to me) opinions and experiences
-
So if you guys want to consider 16-bit files fine but don't worry about profiles. Get good ones and don't concern yourself with the node or "bit depth".
After you build the profile, you can use either an 8-bit or 16-bit file just like you can with ANY file you print out of Photoshop.
Here is a cut and paste from the initial 5000 review at LL;
"I discovered early on that one actually needs to have different profiles for the regular OS level driver and the special 16 bit driver."
This led me (and others I suppose) to believe the difference Michael was referring to was a bit depth selection at the time of creating the profile. If there is no bit depth to a profile what is the difference he is referring to?
thanks,
Charlie
-
Here is a cut and paste from the initial 5000 review at LL;
"I discovered early on that one actually needs to have different profiles for the regular OS level driver and the special 16 bit driver."
This led me (and others I suppose) to believe the difference Michael was referring to was a bit depth selection at the time of creating the profile. If there is no bit depth to a profile what is the difference he is referring to?
thanks,
Charlie
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92709\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Here I go talking to myself
The target to be profiled is printed in 16 bit mode.
I think that is the difference...
-
This led me (and others I suppose) to believe the difference Michael was referring to was a bit depth selection at the time of creating the profile. If there is no bit depth to a profile what is the difference he is referring to?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=92709\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You get a different/larger gamut when printing with the 16-bit driver vs the 8-bit driver, hence the use of different profiles for each driver. If you only print with one driver, you only need one profile made with that driver for each paper.
-
Profile it as an RGB device. The driver will do the conversion from RGB to the 12 color Seps. Quickdraw and GDI drivers only understand RGB anyway.
I'm not sure where all this 16-bit profile stuff is coming from but I suspect Canon has some documentation somewhere that is causing confusion. Profiles unlike images don't have a bit depth. Some products allow you to control the number of nodes used to build the profile but this isn't a "8-bit versus 16-bit" issue whatsoever. In fact, it is sometimes the case that a smaller node used to build the profile will produce a better result. So if you guys want to consider 16-bit files fine but don't worry about profiles. Get good ones and don't concern yourself with the node or "bit depth".
After you build the profile, you can use either an 8-bit or 16-bit file just like you can with ANY file you print out of Photoshop.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69424\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Is it possible to make a n-channel profile for a Epson 3800 or Canon ipf5000? Could it effectively be used overstepping GDI drivers (using software with postscript/rip (?)) ? What it be compatible with Photoshop?