Topic: The Future of Imageprint? (Read 8323 times)

tlavin1 · « **on:** September 15, 2015, 06:28:28 pm »

I purchased Imageprint 9 about a year ago, with a promise that I'd get a free upgrade to Imageprint 10 when it was released in the near future. I recently purchased an Epson P800 printer, but found out it's not supported by Imageprint 9. I wrote to the company, and they told me 4 weeks ago it Imageprint 10 would be released in 3 weeks, but I've since seen statements that Imageprint 10 would be released at the end of September......of 2014! Does anyone know what's going on with this company? I get the feeling that Imageprint 10 is never going to happen.

Mark D Segal · « **Reply #1 on:** September 15, 2015, 06:51:50 pm »

Why not use your P800 with the Epson driver and a good printer/paper profile. You may find you can live very nicely without ImagePrint, unless you need it for special layout and print archiving functions.

r010159 · « **Reply #2 on:** September 15, 2015, 08:35:13 pm »

I thought ImagePrint was used by those wanting an optimal B&W solution? But the current Epson printers do very well with this without ImagePrint? FWIW here is a link to a description of this upcoming version of the software.

https://imageprinttoday.wordpress.com/

I did a Google on this version of the software and found very sparse references to it, except for one reference by a beta tester that ImagePrint 10 will be coming out "very soon", whatever that actually means.

So I also cannot find any release date on this product. So it looks like that it is a real version that will be released by ColorByte.

BTW ImagePrint looks like a commercial version replacement to QImage.

Mark D Segal · « **Reply #3 on:** September 15, 2015, 08:42:08 pm »

My review of the Epson P800 on this website provides you with reasonably comprehensive information about how this printer handles B&W simply using its own driver. It's not clear to me that a third-party processor would do any better, but I haven't tested any. I think it would be really difficult to improve upon what's "in the box", particularly if you use the ABW feature.

Mark D Segal · « **Reply #4 on:** September 15, 2015, 08:43:35 pm »

I should add, you may also find it useful to consult Keith Cooper's review over at NorthLight Imaging. He takes his B&W "seriously".

Kevin Raber · « **Reply #5 on:** September 15, 2015, 10:14:49 pm »

I believe ImagePrint is waiting for the next MAC OS update. I have been using ImagePrint 10 Beta and I swear by it. I'm sure they will catch up to the new Epson printers very quickly.

Jager · « **Reply #6 on:** September 16, 2015, 06:13:14 am »

Last October (2014), when I was researching whether my black and white prints could be improved over Epson's OEM product, the two solutions that presented themselves were ImagePrint and Piezography. I ended up going to Jon Cone's K7 Piezography system, but certainly saw great potential in ImagePrint's RIP. What's interesting is that even then, eleven months ago, ImagePrint 10 was supposedly "imminent." I'd have to agree with the OP that such a long period of "any day now" does not bode well.

I'd also agree with Mark that the new Surecolor inkset in the P800 is a clear improvement over its predecessor and the output from OEM ABW is truly outstanding - though not quite to the level of K7 Piezography. That said, the license cost of ImagePrint is not trivial. I can certainly understand the desire to make use of an expensive product one has already paid for. And I, for one, would love to hear how that RIP works with the new inks.

One, indeed, hopes ColorByte gets their act together.

Mark D Segal · « **Reply #7 on:** September 16, 2015, 07:04:18 am »

I think once ImagePrint does produce a workable version for the P800 it would be interesting for a license holder to do a side-by-side comparison of image quality (particularly blacks, deep shadow detail and tonal gradations) between the Epson driver (P800) and ImagePrint to see whether differences are substantial. I would do it myself if I had an ImagePrint license and an Epson P800, but I don't so I can't.

Of course there are other benefits to a well-designed RIP apart from image quality, but this is where it must start. In that regard, let me observe that having recently produced a couple of 12 foot panos from my Epson 4900 with Photoshop CC2015 and the Epson driver, if I were doing much more of this I would be in the market for a more reliable and efficient solution. Don't get me wrong - the panos look fine - it's the operational headaches producing them, even following the instructions in the 4900 manual exactly and in detail.

Ernst Dinkla · « **Reply #8 on:** September 16, 2015, 08:52:41 am »

Windows based Qimage Ultimate gives no operational headaches on pano or leperello printing. Some time ago I had to print 4 leporellos lengthwise, 15' long and all four fitting within the width of a 44" roll. I actually distributed lengthwise the images of each one with QU too with its Print to File feature and after that nested the created four long images on the 44" width print page in Qimage Ultimate. The cutting by hand lengthwise was the real challenge. There is little wrong with OEM drivers + custom RGB profiles + QU's features that I would think I need something like ImagePrint, B&W printing included. IP does not drive HPs either. Once I bought a more expensive RIP and regretted it.

There are software jewels; inexpensive, universal, often upgraded and last but not least give fast interaction with the developer, usually a "one" man shop. Qimage Ultimate, Vuescan, QTR, RawTherapee, and for Android; DSLR Control, ArgyllPro, and way more.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
December 2014 update, 700+ inkjet media white spectral plots

Kevin Gallagher · « **Reply #9 on:** September 16, 2015, 09:12:03 am »

Quote from: Ernst Dinkla on September 16, 2015, 08:52:41 am

Windows based Qimage Ultimate gives no operational headaches on pano or leperello printing. Some time ago I had to print 4 leporellos lengthwise, 15' long and all four fitting within the width of a 44" roll. I actually distributed lengthwise the images of each one with QU too with its Print to File feature and after that nested the created four long images on the 44" width print page in Qimage Ultimate. The cutting by hand lengthwise was the real challenge. There is little wrong with OEM drivers + custom RGB profiles + QU's features that I would think I need something like ImagePrint, B&W printing included. IP does not drive HPs either. Once I bought a more expensive RIP and regretted it.

There are software jewels; inexpensive, universal, often upgraded and last but not least give fast interaction with the developer, usually a "one" man shop. Qimage Ultimate, Vuescan, QTR, RawTherapee, and for Android; DSLR Control, ArgyllPro, and way more."

Couldn't agree with you more Ernst, I've been a happy Qimage user since the early 2000's (when I was still on the PC side of things). After switching to OS X Qimage was the main reason I ended up adding Parallels to my iMac. Absolutely no disrespect is intended here to either Imageprint or it's proponents, just telling my story that's all.

Mark D Segal · « **Reply #10 on:** September 16, 2015, 09:12:43 am »

No Mac version of QImage, so that's out for roughly half the imaging market. The QTR manual for Mac says nothing about how to manage borderless printing of panos with roll paper in an Epson 4900. At least the Epson manual covers the topic pretty well - whether it always works as advertised is the issue. :-) Another print application worth considering of course is LSI's PrinTao 8, but it seems not to accommodate Photoshop PSB format. Unfortunate, because it provides a nice easy-to-use print GUI.

hokuahi · « **Reply #11 on:** September 16, 2015, 05:52:02 pm »

I've been using IP10 with my retired 3880 since January since it was offered as an "early release." Haven't used it much lately since I purchased my P800 and probably won't be buying a version for that printer if and when Colorbyte gets around to providing one.
That said, if I remember, most of the improvements had to do with layout and being able to 'softproof' image adjustments in IP side by side. I don't recall any profiles being updated although the software now has an 'auto' update feature which although was painfully slow to download, was fairly consistent.

That said, I'm offering my transferable license and dongle for IP10 for the Tabloid version for $599 vs the $895 for version 9 (with a preview version of IP10) that it is currently selling for. (I also have a version 9 license which I can include.)

Please excuse that I posted that offer here rather than in "For Sale."

IanBarber · « **Reply #12 on:** September 19, 2015, 05:26:20 pm »

I am wondering if the licence for IP9 is transferable to the P800

hokuahi · « **Reply #13 on:** September 21, 2015, 06:09:19 pm »

A license is transferable, it is the Dongle that is model specific.

bvalente · « **Reply #14 on:** September 24, 2015, 12:18:38 am »

I've been using the imageprint 10 beta for quite a while now. It's a nice piece of software, the rip is plenty capable.

reasons you would want it:
- you multiple prints on a single print run (like a long roll) and need a way to lay them out
- you want better icc profiles than the canned ones that come with the papers/epson/whomever
- you do a lot of subtle tinting for B&W (Imageprint does really great here, i have to admit)

why you don't want it
- super expensive
- not the most modern user interface
- can be finnicky and crash sometimes
- tends to lock you in

regards

Brian

Stefan Ohlsson · « **Reply #15 on:** September 24, 2015, 04:44:26 am »

Quote from: Mark D Segal on September 16, 2015, 07:04:18 am

I think once ImagePrint does produce a workable version for the P800 it would be interesting for a license holder to do a side-by-side comparison of image quality (particularly blacks, deep shadow detail and tonal gradations) between the Epson driver (P800) and ImagePrint to see whether differences are substantial.

I've done some tests where I compared the results from Epson's ABW, ImagePrint and Piezography. We sent a file to be printed by InkJetMall and printed the same file on our Epson 9900 with the Epson ABW and with ImagePrint. The print made with ABW didn't have the separation in the shadow areas as the two others had. The maximum black areas were very similar on all three. We decided to keep our ImagePrint system as we didn't see any real advantage in the Piezography system. We could still use our printer for both color and B&W.

And I really like the results that I get when I use the tinting function. In IP9 I can adjust the tint in highlights, mid tones and shadow areas separately, which gives a result that closely matches what I got when I printed and toned in the darkroom.

Rob Reiter · « **Reply #16 on:** September 25, 2015, 01:36:11 pm »

Whatever your feelings are towards the efficacy of their software, Colorbyte's tendency to vague predictions of a particular version's availability is nothing new. They touted compatibility with the Canon iPF printers for well over a year before pulling the plug on that. Past Epson support has usually come through, but never in any timeframe resembling the predictions.

Quote from: tlavin1 on September 15, 2015, 06:28:28 pm

I purchased Imageprint 9 about a year ago, with a promise that I'd get a free upgrade to Imageprint 10 when it was released in the near future. I recently purchased an Epson P800 printer, but found out it's not supported by Imageprint 9. I wrote to the company, and they told me 4 weeks ago it Imageprint 10 would be released in 3 weeks, but I've since seen statements that Imageprint 10 would be released at the end of September......of 2014! Does anyone know what's going on with this company? I get the feeling that Imageprint 10 is never going to happen.

jed best · « **Reply #17 on:** September 25, 2015, 08:37:59 pm »

I would second Kevin's comments. I have been using a beta of IP 10 for a considerable time and it is terrific. I now have added a P 800 and after chats with Colorbyte, I of the impression that their driver for that printer is imminent. While I also make my own profiles with an ISIS I like the flexibility to use IP 10 to explore other papers that may be better than what I am already using.

robgo2 · « **Reply #18 on:** September 27, 2015, 03:40:07 pm »

I have been happily using Imageprint 10 for about 3 months, and I love it, especially for gray profile images that can be soft proofed. Regarding support for the new Epson P800, one has to expect some delay, given the necessity of creating IP-specific color and gray profiles for a huge number of papers from many different manufacturers. I cannot imagine that this printer will not be supported, but you might contact ColorByte to find out for sure.

r010159 · « **Reply #19 on:** September 27, 2015, 11:39:24 pm »

This is why I have purchased the 3880 at the same price. I usually wait several months after its introduction before considering to purchase the printer. Getting back to the tooic, I sm interested in this ImagePrint. I want to see what happens next.

Bob

Author Topic: The Future of Imageprint? (Read 8323 times)