Epson P8000 and P9000, only color gamut difference?

[FRA_]

Hello,
In many years of printing professionally any kind of photographs with an Epson 9890 I don't remember ever having problems with color gamut limitation, despite the fact this printer has "only" 8 colors, now I'm considering to buy a new printer and I'd like to know if the extra colors like green and orange of the Epson P9000 make sense or I can stay with the cheaper Epson P8000. Is the advantage only in the wider gamut or the extra colors are used even in combination to "normal colors" in other ways, to reproduce better skin tones for example?

Thank you 

[digitaldog]

Can't answer exactly but can show you the gamut volume difference between my P800 and newer P900:

[FRA_]

Thanks digitaldog!
But... just to be more precise... color gamut has never been a big concern for me, I wonder if the extra cartridges (green and orange) can give you some advantages beyond the color gamut, maybe better skin tone, better gradients, less ink consumption, less metamerism... just to give some examples

[digitaldog]

Thanks digitaldog!
But... just to be more precise... color gamut has never been a big concern for me, I wonder if the extra cartridges (green and orange) can give you some advantages beyond the color gamut, maybe better skin tone, better gradients, less ink consumption, less metamerism... just to give some examples

Make prints and view em.
FWIW, metamerism is a really good and helpful attribute. Metamerism is a simple attribute: two (2) samples with different spectra compared to each other with a given set of viewing conditions, produce a match. Matches are useful, but metameric failure, not so much.

[dgberg]

"Make prints and view them" is the answer.
Years ago (2009)I had a 7900 and 9900 with orange and green.
When they got to the end of the road I looked at the P8000 and P9000. I looked at them very closely and ended up with two P8000's.
If their is a difference I could not see it easily. The cost difference is not that much, maybe $500 plus the two extra inks.
The P8000 is light years ahead of the older 7900/9900 when it comes to less clogging. 3 years into our first P8000 and it rarely clogs if ever. Knock on wood.

[FRA_]

Thanks dgberg! Your report is precious!

I did some soft-proofs in photoshop on Eizo screen converting from AdobeRGB to P9000 and P8000 paper profiles. You can't see any difference in most real world photographs, I had to oversaturate some greens and reds to start seeing something. I can't immagine a real use case of that colors for photography.

At this point I'm only considering the marketing aspect: I could tell to my clients that I print in 10 colors... 

[digitaldog]

I did some soft-proofs in photoshop on Eizo screen converting from AdobeRGB to P9000 and P8000 paper profiles. You can't see any difference in most real world photographs, I had to oversaturate some greens and reds to start seeing something. I can't immagine a real use case of that colors for photography.

Not a good test. Printing will. Profiles have two tables, one for output, one for soft proofing. They don't necessarily sync up. Plus, there are a lot of colors that you can capture and print that fall outside the gamut of your Eizo.

[FRA_]

Not a good test. Printing will. Profiles have two tables, one for output, one for soft proofing. They don't necessarily sync up. Plus, there are a lot of colors that you can capture and print that fall outside the gamut of your Eizo.

Using "convert to profile" or "soft-proof" function gives the same results in my case.

The Eizo should cover 99% of AdobeRGB, this means you need photographs exported from raw to some exotic color space like Prophoto RGB to exceed the screen gamut, however I don't see the advantage of printing colors you can't see on the screen. This seems more a graphic need, if you want to reproduce some Pantone colors for example.

Anyhow at the end I bought the P9000 over the P8000, the price difference was minimal and I can advertise I have a 10 colors printer , this is the only reason.

[digitaldog]

Using "convert to profile" or "soft-proof" function gives the same results in my case.

We've been over this. If you think this is an effective test, fine (it isn't Colorimetrically).

The Eizo should cover 99% of AdobeRGB, this means you need photographs exported from raw to some exotic color space like Prophoto RGB to exceed the screen gamut

Yes, you can and you should**. Unless you believe that raw image data cannot be rendered and exceed Adobe RGB (1998) color gamut. That is incorrect.

I don't see the advantage of printing colors you can't see on the screen

I and others do. Because we CAN capture colors, we CAN output to a print. For some of us, the final print and what it is able to produce is more important than an intermediary device with a limited color gamut. But if you want to clip colors you can capture and print, just to see them on a display; by all means, it's your data.

**