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.