Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: MT on January 25, 2019, 10:43:25 am
-
Hello,
I recently bought Imageprograf Pro 4000 from Canon. The first sample packs that arrived are from Canson, and I used my own art (entaglio etching) for a test prints.
I am a bit worried with visible dot pattern on colors - I imagined that "pro" printer for photography and art, wouldnt have such issues.
The input photo is around 1Gb big, 19114x13478 pixels with 600 dpi
Output was printed using Canons Proffesional print and layout app, executed from within PS CC, with print quality set Highest, black point compensation turned off, installed icc profile from Canson www, and Media information imported from Canson am1x file
Screen is calibrated using X-Rite i1 studio.
Output scanned with low quality scanner - Epson xp 610, at 600 dpi.
In areas with color - grain is visible when print is held in hands. Canson PrintMaKing 310gsm, from sample pack
Since I'm new to digital print - been printing art traditional way for years - is this the max I can expect from this printer?
Link to scan of output:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1BxZjgr__WkZx27kQNnYH1klcs2mqDuLn?usp=sharing
Thanks in advance for any input, I've been reading forum for long, so much interesting topics there, I'm glad to join and hope to keep learning new stuff.
-
The best settings you'd want for printing photo/fine art is have the software manage colors (Photoshop) and make sure to turn the color management off in the printer settings so you don't have double profiling happen, have Black Point Compensation checked and choose Relative Colormetric. Also, don't do the highest print quality since it's trying to apply more ink to the print which "may" have another effect as you already have it at 600dpi which is a lot of data per inch. Try Standard since it will still print very well on the Pro series. Not saying that Highest won't work as well, but may help on a lower print quality with requested DPI on the image.
If you scanned the image into the computer, the resolution may not be the greatest unfortunately, due to the way a low quality scanner can offer. Doesn't mean it will scan terrible, but it depends on the functionality of the scanner.
Hopefully that will work with those suggested settings. These are recommended by our color specialist for best print output.
-
While I do not scan prints, or view at high magnification, prints from our 4000, I'm not aware of a visible dot pattern.
I never print at 600 dpi. I nearly always print from LR at 300dpi; always use Highest Quality in the Canon driver, and print on a range of papers including Canson Baryta. For that paper I use a Custom Paper Preset that I made, and with a custom ICC profile. The results, again to my eyes and to other trained eyes, look really good.
The scan you post is a scan of your print, meant to depict your dot pattern, if I'm correct.
Might I suggest cropping a small area of your image and printing that at 300? I'd be happy to make a small print of your image with our 4000 and send you a scan of that print.
John Caldwell
-
Thank you for so quick replies!
The best settings you'd want for printing photo/fine art is have the software manage colors (Photoshop) and make sure to turn the color management off in the printer settings so you don't have double profiling happen, have Black Point Compensation checked and choose Relative Colormetric.
I'm afraid I don't get all of that info. Should I not use Canons Plugin in PS (File -> Automate -> Canon Professional Print&Layout)?
Only if I use the print function within PS, I can select options that you mentioned, if I go into CPP&L, I can't find a place where I would select what controls colors.
If you scanned the image into the computer, the resolution may not be the greatest unfortunately, due to the way a low quality scanner can offer. Doesn't mean it will scan terrible, but it depends on the functionality of the scanner.
Input file was scanned years ago on some big format OCE scanner - cant remember the name, but I think it was something with 4k in name. Input file looks great in PS, quality should be ok.
I wrote about low quality of scan for my output example - this one I made on my home scanner, just to show what dot pattern I am worried about.
Hopefully that will work with those suggested settings. These are recommended by our color specialist for best print output.
I will try to follow those instructions, will see how it goes.
I'm not aware of a visible dot pattern.
That's what I was expecting there, to not have visible dots all over paper :/
I never print at 600 dpi. I nearly always print from LR at 300dpi; always use Highest Quality in the Canon driver, and print on a range of papers including Canson Baryta. For that paper I use a Custom Paper Preset that I made, and with a custom ICC profile. The results, again to my eyes and to other trained eyes, look really good.
I had the same effect with other artwork I printed, and the source was in 300dpi :/
I didn't create my own icc profile, since Im waiting on delivery of all media (its very long waiting time there where I live) and all I had to use was sample pack.
Might I suggest cropping a small area of your image and printing that at 300? I'd be happy to make a small print of your image with our 4000 and send you a scan of that print.
I will try to crop it to some manageable size ;)
Just in case that it changes anything, I'm currently on OSX Mojave
-
Thank you for so quick replies!
I'm afraid I don't get all of that info. Should I not use Canons Plugin in PS (File -> Automate -> Canon Professional Print&Layout)?
Only if I use the print function within PS, I can select options that you mentioned, if I go into CPP&L, I can't find a place where I would select what controls colors.
All the printing should be done using Canon Print Studio Pro under "Automate". There you'll find k the mentioned options. Forget about printing directly from PS Print until you get yourself accustomed to the printing workflows on PRO-x000 series.
As I can see as of now you're using "Canon Professional Print&Layout" instead of "Canon Print Studio Pro" and I see no particular reason in doing so unless you're using DPRAW functions on an specific model of Canon camera (5D Mk4 or EOS R system). Try switching back and you'll find the missing options.
I own a PRO-2000 and have never, ever seen any coarse printing like that you're mentioning. Since I don't have access to the the source image it's kinda hard to get a better understanding of what's going on there.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I'd be happy to make a small print of your image with our 4000 and send you a scan of that print.
John, I uploaded 2 files into that gdrive link. Crop_Bull is crop out of the file I used to print.
Crop_Lotus is small part of big work that I also printed on sample of Canson Museum Velin - that flower looked all dotted when printed.
I'm really curious of results from someone more experienced from me.
-
My advice is to take smaller steps, given you have a new printer and limited experience.
First, print a known high quality reference image, I use http://www.jirvana.com/printer_tests/PrinterEvaluationImage_V002.zip. Keep your setup simple to begin with, I recommend directly out of LR or PS, whichever you are most comfortable with, NOT using the Canon plug-in. I would use a standard Canon paper to begin, something like Photo Paper Premium Semi-gloss. If you would rather use the Canson make sure you have the correct profile downloaded and installed into your system. And be careful of confusion between ppi (pixels per inch) and dpi (dots per inch). I don't want to be insulting, but it appears to me reading this thread there is at least a lack of definition, your printer will print up to 1200x2400 dpi, but you should be able to feed the image in at 300 ppi and achieve full quality. If it were me, I would run the printer highest quality, making sure that is consistent with the Canson profile requirements.
Assuming you have a calibrated/profiled monitor, you should be able to compare the printed output to your monitor and verify if you are doing the steps, including color management settings, correctly. Once you are comfortable with the basic process, then layer on additional steps, such as the plug-in. Only after you can make the system operate properly with a known-good reference image should you start with your images, IMO.
Richard Southworth
-
John, I uploaded 2 files into that gdrive link. Crop_Bull is crop out of the file I used to print.
Crop_Lotus is small part of big work that I also printed on sample of Canson Museum Velin - that flower looked all dotted when printed.
I'm really curious of results from someone more experienced from me.
I have looked and rechecked a few times both your Bull scan and the "Crop_Bull" and I am not able to get the exact fault, the dots you're seeing. It might be because the scan is of very poor quality, I don't know.
But the "original" image (Crop_Bull) isn't, from a printer perspective, a top notch image either: it's noisy, it's got quite a lot of cloth marks, and it's rough by its nature, which is understood given it's a work of art reproduction (photographed) and not a photography in itself. Thus I think you should not expect wonders from your PRO-4000. It will mercilessly reproduce the quality of your input photo including the roughness. But there might be those dots you're telling about I am not able to clearly distinguish.
Could you try to take a photo of the actual print in an controlled light environment (as much as possible controlled!) and post it? I think it would still do much more justice to the print and help trace the problem than the poor quality scan.
Unfortunately I don't have that paper type at hand to reproduce your print ... :(
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
All the printing should be done using Canon Print Studio Pro under "Automate". There you'll find k the mentioned options. Forget about printing directly from PS Print until you get yourself accustomed to the printing workflows on PRO-x000 series.
As I can see as of now you're using "Canon Professional Print&Layout" instead of "Canon Print Studio Pro" and I see no particular reason in doing so unless you're using DPRAW functions on an specific model of Canon camera (5D Mk4 or EOS R system). Try switching back and you'll find the missing options.
I own a PRO-2000 and have never, ever seen any coarse printing like that you're mentioning. Since I don't have access to the the source image it's kinda hard to get a better understanding of what's going on there.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I honestly had no idea there are2 apps, they have exactly same manual, look same (with Digital Pro being less interactive in interface, and uglier).
What's the purpose of them both, as seems that one have more then the other (in Professional Print and Layouts I can automatically get info about loaded media, and it's much easier to put more works on 44" roll).
I have looked and rechecked a few times both your Bull scan and the "Crop_Bull" and I am not able to get the exact fault, the dots you're seeing. It might be because the scan is of very poor quality, I don't know.
But the "original" image (Crop_Bull) isn't, from a printer perspective, a top notch image either: it's noisy, it's got quite a lot of cloth marks, and it's rough by its nature, which is understood given it's a work of art reproduction (photographed) and not a photography in itself. Thus I think you should not expect wonders from your PRO-4000. It will mercilessly reproduce the quality of your input photo including the roughness. But there might be those dots you're telling about I am not able to clearly distinguish.
Could you try to take a photo of the actual print in an controlled light environment (as much as possible controlled!) and post it? I think it would still do much more justice to the print and help trace the problem than the poor quality scan.
Unfortunately I don't have that paper type at hand to reproduce your print ... :(
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I uploaded photos, I hope the imperfections I'm bothered with are visible.
My advice is to take smaller steps, given you have a new printer and limited experience.
First, print a known high quality reference image, I use http://www.jirvana.com/printer_tests/PrinterEvaluationImage_V002.zip. Keep your setup simple to begin with, I recommend directly out of LR or PS, whichever you are most comfortable with, NOT using the Canon plug-in. I would use a standard Canon paper to begin, something like Photo Paper Premium Semi-gloss. If you would rather use the Canson make sure you have the correct profile downloaded and installed into your system. And be careful of confusion between ppi (pixels per inch) and dpi (dots per inch). I don't want to be insulting, but it appears to me reading this thread there is at least a lack of definition, your printer will print up to 1200x2400 dpi, but you should be able to feed the image in at 300 ppi and achieve full quality. If it were me, I would run the printer highest quality, making sure that is consistent with the Canson profile requirements.
Assuming you have a calibrated/profiled monitor, you should be able to compare the printed output to your monitor and verify if you are doing the steps, including color management settings, correctly. Once you are comfortable with the basic process, then layer on additional steps, such as the plug-in. Only after you can make the system operate properly with a known-good reference image should you start with your images, IMO.
Richard Southworth
Thank you, I will try to follow on that.
-
My advice is to take smaller steps, given you have a new printer and limited experience.
First, print a known high quality reference image, I use http://www.jirvana.com/printer_tests/PrinterEvaluationImage_V002.zip. Keep your setup simple to begin with, I recommend directly out of LR or PS, whichever you are most comfortable with, NOT using the Canon plug-in. I would use a standard Canon paper to begin, something like Photo Paper Premium Semi-gloss. If you would rather use the Canson make sure you have the correct profile downloaded and installed into your system. And be careful of confusion between ppi (pixels per inch) and dpi (dots per inch). I don't want to be insulting, but it appears to me reading this thread there is at least a lack of definition, your printer will print up to 1200x2400 dpi, but you should be able to feed the image in at 300 ppi and achieve full quality. If it were me, I would run the printer highest quality, making sure that is consistent with the Canson profile requirements.
Assuming you have a calibrated/profiled monitor, you should be able to compare the printed output to your monitor and verify if you are doing the steps, including color management settings, correctly. Once you are comfortable with the basic process, then layer on additional steps, such as the plug-in. Only after you can make the system operate properly with a known-good reference image should you start with your images, IMO.
Richard Southworth
This is weird, I am not able to select cut sheet source of paper within driver, if I use Plugin it downloads data from printer, and I can select my custom paper. If I try to print directly from PS, only roll (plain paper 80g), is visible. I updated media from driver, utility tool to check what medias are loaded into printer correctly shows 2 kind of papers - yet in driver cut sheet is greyed out.
I printed reference photo using plugin, Highest quality, on Canson Rag Photographique210 - colors are grainy, the picture with sky between arch is grainy, it's far from being acceptable
-
I believe you should provide information as to your system and configuration, including screenshots of settings. Have you gone to the Canon website and downloaded/installed the latest drivers? How is your printer connected to the system? Time to get into the details.
Richard Southworth
Added by edit - I'm not familiar with this printer, hopefully one of the many experts on this forum will check in. Have you done a nozzle check? Are there any alignment procedures called out in the manual, to be performed before printing?
-
This is weird, I am not able to select cut sheet source of paper within driver, if I use Plugin it downloads data from printer, and I can select my custom paper. If I try to print directly from PS, only roll (plain paper 80g), is visible. I updated media from driver, utility tool to check what medias are loaded into printer correctly shows 2 kind of papers - yet in driver cut sheet is greyed out.
I printed reference photo using plugin, Highest quality, on Canson Rag Photographique210 - colors are grainy, the picture with sky between arch is grainy, it's far from being acceptable
Dear MT,
If this helps you we could arrange a TeamViewer session, later today (evening), to help you go through the print or just validate together the setup, settings and steps you're taking before printing. If it's ok with you just drop me a PM and we can discuss the details.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
MT,
Perhaps the choice of paper limits the feed options? In any event you should avail yourself of dehnhaide's kind offer, always better to go thru these things in an interactive mode.
I'm curious, you stated you purchased the printer from Canon? I would think for an item of this cost they would provide some setup assistance, at least by phone.
Richard Southworth
Added by edit - went to the Canon website and looked thru materials related to your printer, quite a beast you have purchased. I did note several late 2018 driver/software items for Mojave, did the install process automatically update to the latest versions? There was also firmware dated 12/18.
-
MT,
Perhaps the choice of paper limits the feed options? In any event you should avail yourself of dehnhaide's kind offer, always better to go thru these things in an interactive mode.
I'm curious, you stated you purchased the printer from Canon? I would think for an item of this cost they would provide some setup assistance, at least by phone.
Richard Southworth
I live in Croatia, the team that was setting up printer saw it first time in their life - we know more about it from reading manuals available on canon support than them. They set up printer, print test page and went away.
I ordered Canon papers, but they need 5 weeks to come there - since they first need to come to Netherland, then to Croatia, then to me.
I can have Canson papers within 3 days, as I order and deal directly with their Italian HQ, Hahnemuhle also needs weeks and weeks before I can have them.
Only paper atm I have is 42" roll of 80gsm plain paper, without coating, just bough to print anything and not leave printer not printing, and sample packs from Canson, and some 'noname budget' 100 sheets of A4 matte photo paper 170 gsm.
I'm open for any interactive help, I know there is a lot little steps that can matter, I just don't believe that working in PS and AI from Adobe for years, selecting plugin and printing would be a place to make mistakes - I'm afraid that cause of problem is somewhere else.
I would love to see any photo of artwork on non-photo paper printed by someone else. Maybe I am overreacting, and I believed marketing materials too much in promised quality of prints - but on that reference photo mentioned by you (Rasworth), I can see with naked eye single dots of colors on color patches. I believe I would achieve such results on my old desk Epson 610.
-
John, I uploaded 2 files into that gdrive link. Crop_Bull is crop out of the file I used to print.
Crop_Lotus is small part of big work that I also printed on sample of Canson Museum Velin - that flower looked all dotted when printed.
I'm really curious of results from someone more experienced from me.
Your files are downloaded and I'll print the crop bull file by tomorrow. So I understand the output you were viewing, at what physical size did you print the file (10808 x 7621) ? I may not print the overall identical size for your test, but I'll print a portion of the file to the same relative physical size.
-
MT,
You should definitely NOT see dots with your printer, something is wrong. Please check my last post again, add by edit, wrt to verifying latest drivers/software/firmware loaded in your system. Rather than waste your good paper use the budget paper, select a similar Canon paper. You're not looking for perfection at this point.
Richard Southworth
-
Your files are downloaded and I'll print the crop bull file by tomorrow. So I understand the output you were viewing, at what physical size did you print the file (10808 x 7621) ? I may not print the overall identical size for your test, but I'll print a portion of the file to the same relative physical size.
I was printing on Sample Packs from Canson - A4 paper size. So I print that Bull on full A4 (as much as borders allowed).
Added by edit - thank you very much for doing this!
-
I was printing on Sample Packs from Canson - A4 paper size. So I print that Bull on full A4 (as much as borders allowed).
Added by edit - thank you very much for doing this!
Sure. A4, meaning Letter size, 8.5" x 11", correct?
-
Sure. A4, meaning Letter size, 8.5" x 11", correct?
Yes, I believe its so close to each other that those few mm won't matter at all :)
(https://images.uk.onlinelabels.com/images/learning-center/A4-vs-US-Letter.png)
I believe you should provide information as to your system and configuration, including screenshots of settings. Have you gone to the Canon website and downloaded/installed the latest drivers? How is your printer connected to the system? Time to get into the details.
Richard Southworth
I went to canon support www, downloaded all and installed once again (I unplugged and removed printer before doing that).
Connected via Lan, Cat5e cables. Media configuration tool updated, driver update of media configuration afterward.
Printed from PS reference file on photo mat 170gsm and grainy colors again :/
-
Hi MT,
I downloaded and examined the files from the Google drive. Are the dots you observing a repeated pattern as you said or random white dots on the black areas of the print?
Many times I start to worry when I see artifacts on a print just to realize that there were there in the file from the beginning. As it was said above the printer is going to reproduce even very small details as in your situation artifacts from the scan process (hair, dust etc). For a perfect print of a scanned artwork very good retouching is required.
-
Hi MT,
I downloaded and examined the files from the Google drive. Are the dots you observing a repeated pattern as you said or random white dots on the black areas of the print?
Many times I start to worry when I see artifacts on a print just to realize that there were there in the file from the beginning. As it was said above the printer is going to reproduce even very small details as in your situation artifacts from the scan process (hair, dust etc). For a perfect print of a scanned artwork very good retouching is required.
When you look on scan of bull, on any color area - yellow background, with orange dots on top. Those orange dots are visible, those are not artifacts from scanning.
I have even problem with a that reference file linked above, not only mine own works
-
Hard for me to tell from the scan whether it's color variation in the sky or paper texture. I can tell you that on resin coated paper, i.e. glossy/semi-gloss/luster, that normally will be a smooth continuous blue.
I'm sure you've read thru the use manual about alignment, color calibration, etc. I will say it's difficult to judge if there are subtle problems with the printer without using resin coated paper, because the matte/fine art papers increase the dot size.
Again, have you done a nozzle check on plain paper? Otherwise, I'm out of advice, other than I would urge you to stick with the reference image until you achieve satisfactory printing, so that there is no question as to the image characteristics/quality.
Richard Southworth
-
From the start, I'll say that I never study prints in this kind of magnification, so the test I've done may not be what you were hoping for. To my eye, the prints look nice.
Your Bull file was printed on the Pro 4000 to maximum size on 8.5" x 11" CAFA Baryta Photographique, making the long dimension of the Bull artwork about 10.4". The Lotus image was also maxed out on letter size, making the long dimension about 8.2".
The files was sent to the Canon driver as is, using a custom ICC profile for that paper, a Custom Paper Preset for the 4000, Perceptual Rendering Intent, at Maximum Quality. The Bull was printed at 360 dpi, and also at 600 dpi. The Lotus printed only at 600dpi.
Print sections of interest were scanned at 900 dpi in Silverfast with Epson 750 flatbed, again with all Silverfast controls set "flat". I tried to focus on the color areas, rather than on the grayscale areas of your artwork.
Posted here are the gross appearance of the three prints, and jpg files of the 900 dpi print scans. Since I am deeply inexpert in understanding what dithering patters should look like, I have no idea if what we are seeing is appropriate, or even truly different from what your prints look like.
I'll do my best to respond to questions.
John-
-
Three letter size prints:
-
900dpi scan of Bull print (360dpi):
-
900dpi scan of Bull print (600dpi):
-
900dpi scan of Lotus print (600dpi):
-
From the start, I'll say that I never study prints in this kind of magnification, so the test I've done may not be what you were hoping for. To my eye, the prints look nice.
Your Bull file was printed on the Pro 4000 to maximum size on 8.5" x 11" CAFA Baryta Photographique, making the long dimension of the Bull artwork about 10.4". The Lotus image was also maxed out on letter size, making the long dimension about 8.2".
The files was sent to the Canon driver as is, using a custom ICC profile for that paper, a Custom Paper Preset for the 4000, Perceptual Rendering Intent, at Maximum Quality. The Bull was printed at 360 dpi, and also at 600 dpi. The Lotus printed only at 600dpi.
Print sections of interest were scanned at 900 dpi in Silverfast with Epson 750 flatbed, again with all Silverfast controls set "flat". I tried to focus on the color areas, rather than on the grayscale areas of your artwork.
Posted here are the gross appearance of the three prints, and jpg files of the 900 dpi print scans. Since I am deeply inexpert in understanding what dithering patters should look like, I have no idea if what we are seeing is appropriate, or even truly different from what your prints look like.
I'll do my best to respond to questions.
John-
Thank you so much, I will look carefully on your files and get back with questions.
-
Yes there’s visible dithering on the pro-4000 if you are looking closer than about 1 foot from the print. If you are seeing pixelation further away then I’d wager it’s in the original image and may be exaggerated by manual or automatic output sharpening. I have corrected vision and am printing on Hahnemuhle photo gloss baryta 320. The dithering is most visible in solid colors or slight gradients.
-
Viewing the A4 print of the Bull, in nose-to-print fashion, I detect no defects.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Viewing the A4 print of the Bull, in nose-to-print fashion, I detect no defects.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
+1
I can add too... Viewing the A3 (this time) print of the Bull, in nose-to-print fashion, I detect no defects.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
This is hard issue for me, because I don't know are things I see "normal", and I am overreacting, or there is some fault with my printer.
When I look on printed artwork of bull, I printed all artwork on A4 size - on yellow elements, I can see orange dots, for me its not fluent/solid coloring - but this is scan of my Entaglio Etch, who knows maybe quality of .tiff is bad.
When I look on printed Lotus - he is in the middle of bigger work, so on A4 size he isnt so big - I can see on his petals, that there where its supposed to be darker color, its achieved by tons of single darker dots.
When I look printed reference file that was linked back there by Rasworth - those small elements are inside of grey frame - this grey frame for me is a grey background with tons of small, each visibile darker grey dots on top of them. Skin of kids is all with visible dotting. Sky between rock arch is dotted.
Yesterday Dehnhaide spent a lot of time (thank you so much) with me on Teamviewer and call. First I shown how do I print, later we swapped and I observed him explaining his process and printing bull on his Pro. The only difference is I was using Proffesional Print and Layout plugin, he uses Digital Studio Pro plugin. All other steps, media configuration and stuff, I was doing same before, when I was receiving results that I did.
To note, I did print in DSP afterwards, to same results as before.
Dehnhaide have some other reference file that he uses, when I print that one, I can still see grains in color? It looks like that dithering that was mentioned by Ryan Mack.
I'm at that point, that I have no roll of paper to use with - need to wait for Canon oem media to arrive - Canson papers I have only sample packs, so cant really make a proper calibration on them.
All I can base my "guaranty" claim now, is that other users - John, Dehnhaide - are sayin that there is no dotting on their Pro printers. Ryan is the first to mention that this happens.
I printed nozzle check, absolute perfect result - I thought that maybe my printhead is at fault there? It's 1 month old only though...
I'm thankful for all insights and help, I'm looking to some more of them - as at this moment I have no solution to my issue :(
-
So for what it's worth I always print with ImagePrint 10. I'll try to reproduce with Lightroom but for some reason it won't let me choose Cut Sheet in the print dialog and I don't want to print a test image on a 24" roll (please share if you know how to fix this). Edit: Got Canon PSP plugin to work and confirmed the dithering behavior is the same as ImagePrint.
In my experience if you print anything with a solid color you naturally get dithering because the inks available will rarely if ever exactly match the desired color. Color calibration charts are great examples of this. If you look at the print through a 2x loop it's pretty obvious. If you find a situation where the color is nearly the same as an ink then the small number of differently colored dots stand out more because they are spaced out so much. In those situations I can still see the dithering with the naked eye. On photographs with a lot of detail you would have a hard time noticing this. I believe (but haven't evaluated this myself) that the problem is worse on good RC papers because the droplets are fixed well and retain a very clear shape without bleeding.
-
From the start, I'll say that I never study prints in this kind of magnification, so the test I've done may not be what you were hoping for. To my eye, the prints look nice.
Your Bull file was printed on the Pro 4000 to maximum size on 8.5" x 11" CAFA Baryta Photographique, making the long dimension of the Bull artwork about 10.4". The Lotus image was also maxed out on letter size, making the long dimension about 8.2".
The files was sent to the Canon driver as is, using a custom ICC profile for that paper, a Custom Paper Preset for the 4000, Perceptual Rendering Intent, at Maximum Quality. The Bull was printed at 360 dpi, and also at 600 dpi. The Lotus printed only at 600dpi.
Print sections of interest were scanned at 900 dpi in Silverfast with Epson 750 flatbed, again with all Silverfast controls set "flat". I tried to focus on the color areas, rather than on the grayscale areas of your artwork.
Posted here are the gross appearance of the three prints, and jpg files of the 900 dpi print scans. Since I am deeply inexpert in understanding what dithering patters should look like, I have no idea if what we are seeing is appropriate, or even truly different from what your prints look like.
I'll do my best to respond to questions.
John-
John, on your scan of bull print, when slightly zoomed in begins to see orange/dark yellow dots on top of yellow patches. Can you see those dots with your naked eye, when holding work in hands? Do they start to be visible when you "hold it next to your nose"? Those dots are the ones that are bothering me, I can see them when my bull lays on table 90 cm high, and I'm standing next to it (Im 1,56cm) so my eyes are further away than mentioned by Ryan 1 foot.
I wanted to offer printing for artists and photographers, not only to print my own works. The way this tests prints look - I do not like what I see. Color/tone reproduction is on point, and I love it, but those dots!!
-
So for what it's worth I always print with ImagePrint 10. I'll try to reproduce with Lightroom but for some reason it won't let me choose Cut Sheet in the print dialog and I don't want to print a test image on a 24" roll (please share if you know how to fix this). Edit: Got Canon PSP plugin to work and confirmed the dithering behavior is the same as ImagePrint.
In my experience if you print anything with a solid color you naturally get dithering because the inks available will rarely if ever exactly match the desired color. Color calibration charts are great examples of this. If you look at the print through a 2x loop it's pretty obvious. If you find a situation where the color is nearly the same as an ink then the small number of differently colored dots stand out more because they are spaced out so much. In those situations I can still see the dithering with the naked eye. On photographs with a lot of detail you would have a hard time noticing this. I believe (but haven't evaluated this myself) that the problem is worse on good RC papers because the droplets are fixed well and retain a very clear shape without bleeding.
So what you are saying, this is acceptable and "normal"? If I print panorama photography, and there will be this dithering in the sky, this is InkJet standard?
-
So what you are saying, this is acceptable and "normal"? If I print panorama photography, and there will be this dithering in the sky, this is InkJet standard?
I'm not sure I'm qualified to state what's normal but with my limited experience this seems expected behavior. It never really bothered me, I bought a 44" printer to make large prints for wall display with a viewing distance of a few feet. There may be other inkjet printers or other printing technologies that are better for small prints held in the hand. I know for black and white there's piezography which is an inkjet ink set with 8 shades of grey so you use more solid areas of ink and dither less. There's also a print shop near me that use a Lightjet to expose photographic paper and then develops with traditional chemistry and toning which I think avoids any dithering because the intensity of the laser is adjusted continuously.
-
To add a bit of perspective, I printed file linked by Rasworth on my old desk Epson xp 610 - colors are worse (but only some, not all of them), and grain/dithering is same as on Canon Pro 4000.
I printed crop of bull that John and dehnhaide printed on their pros - again, on Epson xp 610. Color reproduction is bad, dithering/dotting is similar/same as on pro 4000.
I can't believe that printer for 119 USD and printer for 4000 USD would produce similar results, I begin to panic...
-
MT,
One of the senior members of this forum, Mark Segal, has posted reviews on the Pro-1000 and Pro-2000 printers, both having the same "print engine" as yours. I urge you to read his reviews, they are highly technical, but his conclusions is the printers are capable of very high quality printing. Perhaps they will reassure you that you have a quality instrument, here is the link to the Pro-1000 review: https://luminous-landscape.com/canon-imageprograf-pro-1000-printer-review/
Search the forum, you will find many posts by Mark, I would encourage you to send him a private message, perhaps he will assist. He has also evaluated several papers.
Richard Southworth
-
Here is the link for Mark's review of the Pro-2000: https://luminous-landscape.com/canon-pro-2000-review-and-related-items-of-interest/
Again, lots of technical info, but also many sample images. I'm hoping by reading these reviews, and perhaps contacting Mark, you can tell whether your problem is setup or expectation related.
Richard Southworth
-
John, on your scan of bull print, when slightly zoomed in begins to see orange/dark yellow dots on top of yellow patches. Can you see those dots with your naked eye, when holding work in hands? Do they start to be visible when you "hold it next to your nose"? Those dots are the ones that are bothering me, I can see them when my bull lays on table 90 cm high, and I'm standing next to it (Im 1,56cm) so my eyes are further away than mentioned by Ryan 1 foot.
I wanted to offer printing for artists and photographers, not only to print my own works. The way this tests prints look - I do not like what I see. Color/tone reproduction is on point, and I love it, but those dots!!
I'll have to recuse myself from the dot discussion. Prints from the 4000 look, wrt dot and dither patterns, just like our Epson 9900 and 4900. By this I mean I detect no such problems under anything I'd call real world viewing conditions. That you could see this kind of dither pattern at 1.5 meters viewing distance suggests your eyes are much, much more trained and precise than my eyes.
But as stated when I began the tests, I'm just not even a little bit experienced with this kind of print analysis.
John Caldwell
-
I'll have to recuse myself from the dot discussion. Prints from the 4000 look, wrt dot and dither patterns, just like our Epson 9900 and 4900. By this I mean I detect no such problems under anything I'd call real world viewing conditions. That you could see this kind of dither pattern at 1.5 meters viewing distance suggests your eyes are much, much more trained and precise than my eyes.
But as stated when I began the tests, I'm just not even a little bit experienced with this kind of print analysis.
John Caldwell
I wrote about 60 cm, not 150 - that would be Superman vision ;) - I don't have any other big printer, P4000 is my first, and I can't on my own decide whats normal and what is not. You printed part of my picture, so your insight on this is worth much - I don't ask for magnifying glass inspection.
It's matter of single color dotting visible on color patches of this artwork, when you write that you dont see anything different than vs Epson printer - I don't know how Epson prints, so I can't decide does it mean that dotting is visible, or not on Epson.
-
I will update this thread after I make more test prints, but today I received sample packs from Hahnemuhle.
I was disappointed with profiles on Hahnemuhle www - only .icc, without am1x, and in broschure attached to profile info to choose Canon HW Fine Art. At that moment I thought that Canson have it much better, giving am1xes to download.
First print of bull was great, to find any sort of dotting, I had to look hard for it, and found it only because I was trying so hard to find some, and this was with my eyes 5 cm from paper. Totally different quality of picutre than on Canson.
A bit sad, I had much better pricing offer on Canson, I liked papers more - I thought better of company based on my history with their traditional art papers.
Since I spent almost all of Canson packs on tries where I had bad results, I didnt had much left. But I did pick one Rag Photographique duo 220gsm, and print on him using .ICC profile provided by Canson, but chose paper same as for Hahnemuhle, without using provided .am1x. Print was much better, still worse than on Hahnemuhle, but a lot better than before.
Confused, looks like profiles in media configurator can screw up a lot - I'm going to investigate more.
-
Which Hahnemuhle paper did you print on?
Brian.
-
Which Hahnemuhle paper did you print on?
Brian.
German Etching
-
Well, I finally received Canon papers: Fine Art Premium Smooth, and Glacier Photo - printing on both looks great, dither/dothing not visible, only if using magnifying glass.
Same with Hahnemuhle.
I am in a lively discussion with Canson, trying to solve the issue - but at last we eliminated that it was user error/faulty hardware.
-
Well, I finally received Canon papers: Fine Art Premium Smooth, and Glacier Photo - printing on both looks great, dither/dothing not visible, only if using magnifying glass.
Same with Hahnemuhle.
I am in a lively discussion with Canson, trying to solve the issue - but at last we eliminated that it was user error/faulty hardware.
Just a thought. I don't know if it has something to do with the problem you are facing. Here it goes:
Canson custom media types (am1x) include a calibration target to perform unique color calibration. Did you perform color calibration (and the feed adjustment too) when you imported the custom media type in your printer? Maybe it is required for the custom media type to run smoothly with the supplied icc profile.
-
As I stated on beginning of this post, I had only received Sample packs - so 1 sheet of each paper. Calibrating on so small amount of media wasn't possible
-
I've had this printer for 2 years and I've done more tests on more papers than I can remember. There's only one thing that's worked perfectly for me.
For context I'm a photographer and I've always used Adobe and honed my best out of Lightroom print module, print studio pro, a few rip software, affinity etc...
Nothing I've ever done in them was close to what I've produced printing direct from Capture One Pro 20. Not even close. I've been putting a video together on how effortless it is. Command + P and a couple of dropdowns and you get what you bought this bloody massive thing for.
If I can help in any way please contact me on Facebook, phone or email as I'll probably forget I've posted this ;)