Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: Wayne Fox on November 12, 2007, 03:13:00 pm
-
I know a few have the EyeOne i0. Any suggestsion/help with this problem are greatly appreciated.
When reading most papers the device works pretty good, especially lustre and gloss. I normally use Bill Atkinsons's 5202 targets for these papers. Often on one of the pages (normally 2nd or 3rd), the device claims too many errors, and suggests low res or patch mode. Flipping the page 180 degrees or just repositioning it normally solves the problem, it usually reads fine the second time without resorting to either of the other two modes.
My problem is with heavy matte papers. I'm puzzled by the results because it doesn't make too much sense. On two printers, 3800 and ipf6100, a 1728 patch test on Museum Etching reads in fine.
On my new printer, 11880, the only way I can read in the Museum Etching is patch mode.
So what kind of error is the software seeing? Is the fact I can't read in the 11880 but can read the others hinting I should try a different paper type or reduce the ink density? Would you suspect the test chart, the EyeOne i0, or just it's the nature of heavy papers such as this?
-
I don't have any specific experience or knowledge, but was considering buying an Eye One IO. After reading about people having them die after a month or two, DOA, problems reading patches, etc. I decided to skip the purchase. I hope you aren't experiencing the unreliability I read about. Andrew Rodney has one, I believe, and it works pretty well for him from what I can recall about his postings.
--John
-
The error checking in the software is at times goofy. It could also be Bill's targets (try making your own in MeasureTool to see for sure). Worst case, you do have to do a slow one patch at a time measure but it always works. I think the Too Many Error's is a software issue. I've reported this to them.
-
Oh, one other thing is the EyeOne Pro you have. I have both the A and B rev's. I've found that in cases where I have the Too Many Error's with the newer (and faster) B rev, switching out this for the older, slower A rev, no problems. That's why I say I think its a software, not hardware issue. The older unit scans slower, it produces less so called errors. Again, IF you use the patch mode, it always works. So its not the hardware IMHO.
-
Oh, one other thing is the EyeOne Pro you have. I have both the A and B rev's. I've found that in cases where I have the Too Many Error's with the newer (and faster) B rev, switching out this for the older, slower A rev, no problems. That's why I say I think its a software, not hardware issue. The older unit scans slower, it produces less so called errors. Again, IF you use the patch mode, it always works. So its not the hardware IMHO.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=152256\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
How long does it take to read a 4000 patch target in patch mode? Have you been overall satisfied with the IO? Do you recommend this product? I last checked almost a year ago and there were apparently some production problems and sounded kinda shaky to me.
--John
-
How long does it take to read a 4000 patch target in patch mode? Have you been overall satisfied with the IO? Do you recommend this product? I last checked almost a year ago and there were apparently some production problems and sounded kinda shaky to me.
--John
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=152257\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I've never attempted to measure 4000 patches in patch mode. I suspect it would take a few hours. I have a Spectrolino Spectrascan, it worked the same way (patch mode). And was noisy too.
Patch mode is a last ditch effort. Shouldn't be necessary.
I don't know why the too many error issue happens but I've seen it a few times, but this isn't regular behavior. Short of this, I've had no mechanical problems with my i0.
I'm now using the iSis for all my work.
-
Have you been overall satisfied with the IO? Do you recommend this product? I last checked almost a year ago and there were apparently some production problems and sounded kinda shaky to me.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=152257\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The iO has been plagued with problems since day one and continues to do so. I called XRite today to check the availability for a client and they said there aren't any in the country and they are not sure when there will be. They have identified a hardware problem and the part needed for the fix is constrained. It's too bad as the iO is the only automated game in town for those working with thick materials. Those that don't need the ability to read thick materials (thicker than the thickest inkjet papers) should go for the iSis instead. Although the iSis has generally been quite reliable, if you get one with a problem they aren't able to repair them in the US yet and aren't sure when they will be able to do so. The DOA iSis unit I received over six months ago is still at XRite's repair center waiting for some TLC. Probably just an isolated case, though - the iSis is great.
-
Those that don't need the ability to read thick materials (thicker than the thickest inkjet papers) should go for the iSis instead. Although the iSis has generally been quite reliable, if you get one with a problem they aren't able to repair them in the US yet and aren't sure when they will be able to do so. The DOA iSis unit I received over six months ago is still at XRite's repair center waiting for some TLC. Probably just an isolated case, though - the iSis is great.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=152279\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Don't these things come with some kind of warranty? If they can't fix it in a timely manner while it is under warranty, aren't they obligated to replace it?
--John
-
(try making your own in MeasureTool to see for sure).
Apparently despite thousands of dollars I didn't pay enough to get this feature activated. After generating the patches, my button remains dim, and according to G/B website that indicates my dongle doesn't have that feature licensed. I also cannot average multiple readings, something I would like to do for my main papers. I'm not sure what it takes or how much more I have to pay. Just haven't gotten around to calling my dealer to see what's going on.
I have both the A and B rev's. I've found that in cases where I have the Too Many Error's with the newer (and faster) B rev, switching out this for the older, slower A rev, no problems.
The UV cut I have been using is rev B. I do have an older unit, which is most likely rev. A. I will try that.
How long does it take to read a 4000 patch target in patch mode? Have you been overall satisfied with the IO? Do you recommend this product? I last checked almost a year ago and there were apparently some production problems and sounded kinda shaky to me.
--John
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=152257\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Despite it's quirks, most of the time it reads the charts in fine, and to this point while occasionally frustrated, I don't regret the purchase. I like being able to use large patch samples and I can't imagine doing that without the table. It's probably all in my head, but my logic tells me that a device like a printer can choose to be quirky and non-linear in weird places, so the more patches the less likely one of those will not be caught.
As far as patch mode, Andrew is right ... it never fails in patch mode. When it was new it was horrible at reading in charts, so I read many with patch mode. A 1728 patch mode read will take hours, let alone a 4000 one. A firmware upgrade has made it much better, just this quirky thing once and a while with odd papers.
To make matters more confusing, when I got home tonight I powered down my system to make a hard drive change, including the Mac and the i0. After starting it back up, I decided to give the chart another go in auto mode (failed at least 10 times yesterday), and it didn't miss a single strip, read the entire chart in about 2 minutes. It didn't even try to reread a strip. (It tries reading a strip 5 times before it errors out).
Baffling.
I'm curious as to the hardware fix mentioned.
Anyway, when it whacks out again, first thing I'll try is re-powering everything back up, or the rev a.
Thanks to all.
-
I know a few have the EyeOne i0. Any suggestsion/help with this problem are greatly appreciated.
When reading most papers the device works pretty good, especially lustre and gloss. I normally use Bill Atkinsons's 5202 targets for these papers. Often on one of the pages (normally 2nd or 3rd), the device claims too many errors, and suggests low res or patch mode. Flipping the page 180 degrees or just repositioning it normally solves the problem, it usually reads fine the second time without resorting to either of the other two modes.
My problem is with heavy matte papers. I'm puzzled by the results because it doesn't make too much sense. On two printers, 3800 and ipf6100, a 1728 patch test on Museum Etching reads in fine.
On my new printer, 11880, the only way I can read in the Museum Etching is patch mode.
So what kind of error is the software seeing? Is the fact I can't read in the 11880 but can read the others hinting I should try a different paper type or reduce the ink density? Would you suspect the test chart, the EyeOne i0, or just it's the nature of heavy papers such as this?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=152199\")
The instrument should be working correctly in the first place but you could try some practical solutions:
I'm still using my SpectroCam next to the Z3100 integrated Spectrometer and it is fine. For QTR I have made my own targets and I have up and downsized and assembled color targets to fill the width of my paper rolls or sheets more economically. What you could try is changing the size of the target with nearest neighbour in PS to see whether the black and white strips between the low contrast patches are too small or good enough. I can also set the frequency and maximum readings per patch in my SpectroCam software to get better results but assume that the EyeOne modes you refer to are the same.
Ernst Dinkla
try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
-
I've had a few issues with my IO, namely the dE i sometimes get from the same patches around the edge of the charts.
after talking to level 3 support at xrite it turns out the hight adjustment on the IO id a waste of time and it should just be put down as far as it can go.
-
the hight adjustment on the IO id a waste of time and it should just be put down as far as it can go.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=152356\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
IMO, the height adjustment is what makes the iO unique and a must have for signage printers that print on thick gatorboard, glass, metal, wood, etc.
-
Apparently despite thousands of dollars I didn't pay enough to get this feature activated. After generating the patches, my button remains dim, and according to G/B website that indicates my dongle doesn't have that feature licensed.
OK then just use one of the pre-built targets and reference files (TC 918). Need to know if this is a target/reference issue or a hardware issue (or a software issue).
The UV cut I have been using is rev B. I do have an older unit, which is most likely rev. A. I will try that.
It will say on the bottom of the unit.
Despite it's quirks, most of the time it reads the charts in fine, and to this point while occasionally frustrated, I don't regret the purchase. I like being able to use large patch samples and I can't imagine doing that without the table. It's probably all in my head, but my logic tells me that a device like a printer can choose to be quirky and non-linear in weird places, so the more patches the less likely one of those will not be caught.
It could be the printer settings (use Color Controls on the Epson driver for a more linear output and see if it measures). Here's the deal, the patches should be scrambled ideally since the software needs to 'know' where each patch resides. If it gets confused, if it thinks two patches are one or something like that, it may pop the error you're seeing. So it could be the target. I don't think Bill scrambles them which may make the unit confused when scanning, something that doesn't happen with patch mode of course.
-
IMO, the height adjustment is what makes the iO unique and a must have for signage printers that print on thick gatorboard, glass, metal, wood, etc.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=152394\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes but it should be set carefully. As the arm extends, it can get sloppy in reading patches around the corners as mentioned, due in large part to the setting of the height.
One can measure the target in various orientations and use the Compare tool in MeasureTool to see the average deltaE of the unit.
This is one reason why I'm now using the iSis instead of the i0 for most work. Its a little slower but overall less work to setup but the unit is very, very repeatable and it never touches the print surface. I feel I'm getting better profiles from this unit however, I still keep the i0 for think materials and think for many users, its a great solution since you have, for the money a product that scans quickly (or you can use patch mode), allows you to use the EyeOne Pro for other uses (pop it off but at least on the Mac, don't do this while the software is running or it crashes).
-
IMO, the height adjustment is what makes the iO unique and a must have for signage printers that print on thick gatorboard, glass, metal, wood, etc.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=152394\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes, sorry. i should point out this only applies to photo media work < 350gsm stock.
-
If the rev B is having too many errors, it is or could be half the instrument, half the chart. The i1s separate the strips with a minimum dE across patches. On matte media, with high patch charts there is always the risk of not enough deviation between adjacent patches. Rev B units seem to have more problems in reading diffuse material, which seems to be your case too. When using an i1 in particular the Rev A you measure slower, so more oversampling can help to iron out the patch averages on diffuse surfaces.
-
This may be a related topic, but when I first got my iO about 4 months ago, I was having consistent reading errors on the second page of my target. I had created a new custom target from within Colorport, and wanted to have a 2-page 1728 patch target that could fit on either A4 or 8.5x11 sheets of paper. So here I was racking my brain trying to figure what the heck it could be, and then all of a sudden it dawned on me. On the second page, last line of patches, there were no more patches to actually read. The 1728th patch finished mid-row. So when I was registering the 3 corners to do my readings, I was actually putting the next to the last row and not the last row into the software, thus putting the whole entire sheet out of registration.
Stupid me. But it is a good lesson.
Based on what I am hearing, I was near the end of the line on availability for the iO. If I had to do it all over again, I would have probably gone for the iSis instead. My 2 year old kid loves to watch the iO arm move around, though.
-
I appreciate very much all of the feedback and suggestions. After working with it for another day, I believe there probably are some software issues, but I believe the device itself may have some problems based on a couple of things.
Last night, I had a couple of occasions were it failed to read the first strip if the 3rd page. Rather than trying to take 5 readings, it moved back to the calibration pad, then tried to read it again, this time moving at an incredibly slow speed (I would say 1/15th or worse of normal speed). It sounded strange, and then would error out with the too many errors message.
I shut everything down, and brought it back up. At this point I can no longer read in a test I did a few days ago without any problem, it errors out on the second page. It seems quite possible that something in the device is wearing or is loose, and causing tracking errors that are getting worse.
However, to confuse the issue, I switched to the revision A, which Andrew suggested, and while it reads much slower, it was able to read in the Canon paper that I was never able to read in with the Rev. b. So for now at least it is usable again. I don't have a problem using the rev. A, but I'm worried that whatever reason has suddenly made it unusable with the rev B device may eventually show up and make it unusable altogether.
I guess despite my claim yesterday, after seeing some comments here it seems that x-rite may be abandoning the device, I am beginning to regret not going with the iSis. My dealer is contacting their distributer. He wasn't too pleased at my issues, and is going to push the distributer for either a new one, or a full credit towards an iSis. From what I"m reading here a new one may not be possible, so at this point I'm hoping the iSis option opens up. I'm sure I won't be that lucky but I'll keep fingers crossed.
Thanks for all the help.
-
Last night, I had a couple of occasions were it failed to read the first strip if the 3rd page. Rather than trying to take 5 readings, it moved back to the calibration pad, then tried to read it again, this time moving at an incredibly slow speed (I would say 1/15th or worse of normal speed). It sounded strange, and then would error out with the too many errors message.
That's normal behavior. The software is telling the instrument to slow down. Apparently it's not working and takes a dump anyway.
However, to confuse the issue, I switched to the revision A, which Andrew suggested, and while it reads much slower, it was able to read in the Canon paper that I was never able to read in with the Rev. b. So for now at least it is usable again. I don't have a problem using the rev. A, but I'm worried that whatever reason has suddenly made it unusable with the rev B device may eventually show up and make it unusable altogether.
Again, the hardware is behaving as I've experienced in the past, I think you have nothing to worry about. What I do is use the B unless the unit has such issues, then just switch to the A (since this is rare). Or you can just keep the A on there all the time but it is slower (and that's why it works). I'm pretty darn sure this is all a software issue. That and a target issue.
And I seriously doubt the i0 will be abandoned just because of the iSis. Two different beasts. Rather than throw the baby out with the bath water, X-Rite just needs to update its software and maybe their target spec's (although I again suspect that using their targets, you might not have these errors).
-
Stupid question, but are you confident that the patches are large enough to be read consistently? As a side question, what is the minimum size that the i1 / iO will support?
-
just some input from my side on the IO...
we have one (11106/REVB) which was DOA and has been in service at GMB/XRITE twice afterwards. to be honest i'm quite disappointed by the craftsmanship of the device (we had a non levelled arm and a non working static mat due to the flex cable to be broken). plus a ac-adaptor thet failed (received an onsite exchange part).
in the past devices like the spectroscan or the iccolor were designed more robust.
we also ha a iSis in use which is quite nice but make quite some very high pitch noise (guess this will be solved once i get beyong 50 years of age *g*) - otherwise it's fast, fast, fast - simply lacking thick stock materials plus transparent media.
our solution to all issues mentioned above - the Spectro LFP RT from Barbieri. wonderfully crafted, quite fast and capable of pretty much everything you might imagine to measure.
PLUS tech support never seen before - we had some minor issues with the transparency lamp - within an hour or so mr barbieri himself called and dispatched of a spare. we needed a very special chart - next day we had the reference files plus the target.
they were also very cooperative in arranging a try & buy offer thru their german distributor...
just take a look at http://www.barbierielectronic.com/ (http://www.barbierielectronic.com/)
bye,
lorenz
-
I am at a client's site today where the owner would love to buy a perfectly functioning iO off of any of you guys that wish you had gotten an iSis instead. Contact me at scott@on-sight.com if you would like to unload an iO table without the EyeOne.
-
I am at a client's site today where the owner would love to buy a perfectly functioning iO off of any of you guys that wish you had gotten an iSis instead. Contact me at scott@on-sight.com if you would like to unload an iO table without the EyeOne.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=152794\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Perfectly functioning and EyeOne i0 are rarely used in the same sentence.
-
Perfectly functioning and EyeOne i0 are rarely used in the same sentence.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=152798\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Look guys, I have the first production unit of the i0 and its been working great for me when there isn't a target/software issue (I've had no mechanical issues). And I suspect I've built a few thousand profiles with it.
-
Stupid question, but are you confident that the patches are large enough to be read consistently? As a side question, what is the minimum size that the i1 / iO will support?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=152691\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Currently using the charts produced by Bill atkinson for the EyeOne i0, and I don't resize. He has an explanation of how he determined the DPI and size of the charts. I have been creating several profiles a week for the past couple of months, first for a new 3800 I purchased, then for the ipf6100 Canon sent as a trade trial, and now for the Epson 11880. For about the past two months with the Canon I haven't had any problem reading any chart whatsoever. Flawless, occasionally a page would error out, and a 180 degree flip resolved it. Then the problems started, and have gotten continually worse, to the point that the Rev. B will no longer read in a target that it read quite easily just last week.
I am working on enabling my software to produce charts based on Andrews suggestion they read better if the colors are random. I like how Bill's charts are produced because you can compare them to the targets printed by other printers, but that's not really important. Bill's targets utilize a black/white line between each patch to supply a contrast change for the device. I'm not sure if measure tool targets have that or just never but two similar densities next to each other.
I'll keep working on it.