Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings  (Read 6148 times)

Zachary Goulko

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 160
Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings
« on: January 08, 2017, 04:21:10 pm »

So after my 9900 died for the second time 2 weeks ago, I decided not to have the print head fixed and ordered a P9000. It was delivered last week, so I set it up and I started profiling papers that I use most frequently. My profiling method has not changed since before I owned the 9900. I use a Spectroscan along with Bill Atkinson's 1,728 patch target, and Profilemaker. While I wasn't expecting a major difference between the two printers in terms of gamut, I thought that the P9000 would have an increase in gamut volume given the new inkset, but to my surprise the P9000 actually has a slightly smaller gamut volume overall. Below are the gamut plot comparisons of the first 2 papers that I profiled which are the Epson SWOP3 Proofing Paper, and Epson Premium Luster paper. The difference in volume is larger on the Luster paper. I'm pretty sure that I read somewhere that the new HDX inkset had an increase in gamut over the older HDR inkset. Wondering if anyone else had the same experience.
Logged
Zachary Goulko
www.goulko.com

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings
« Reply #1 on: January 08, 2017, 04:35:05 pm »

The difference between 964K and 944K is insignificant and other factors may influence comparative colour appearance. You should open the RGB, White and Black point tabs in those Profile Inspector results to see numerically roughly where the differences may be coming from. Have you tried making comparative test prints with known printer test images yet?
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

deanwork

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1937
Re: Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings
« Reply #2 on: January 08, 2017, 06:35:45 pm »

That is a small price to pay for twice the permanence.




The difference between 964K and 944K is insignificant and other factors may influence comparative colour appearance. You should open the RGB, White and Black point tabs in those Profile Inspector results to see numerically roughly where the differences may be coming from. Have you tried making comparative test prints with known printer test images yet?
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings
« Reply #3 on: January 08, 2017, 07:18:38 pm »

In observable reality it's no price. And your point is well-taken - notably Yellow is supposed to have much improved permanence; as well, based on what I know of the P800, Maximum Black should be slightly more dense.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

Wayne Fox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4237
    • waynefox.com
Re: Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings
« Reply #4 on: January 09, 2017, 09:27:11 pm »

Epson doesn't mention  increased gamut in relation to the new inkset.  Improvements were in the black inks, achieving a blacker black which can yield better shadow detail, and longevity (achieved mainly because of the change in the yellow inks). I'm not sure the magenta/cyan inks were changed at all.

As far the slightly lower "gamut", as Mark mentioned insignificant.  But in my case my p9000 black density was a measurable difference, and in the Outback Photo Test I can see the difference 0 and 2.  I couldn't see the 2 square with my 9900.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2017, 01:11:02 am by Wayne Fox »
Logged

Idololab

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 181
    • http://WWW.IDOLOLAB.GR
Re: Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings
« Reply #5 on: January 10, 2017, 10:16:52 am »

I agree with you Wayne that P9000 has more detail in the shadows, but i could not see a visible difference in maximum black in comparison with the 9900.
Have you noticed this difference visually?
Thank you
Logged
George Marinos
http://www.idololab.gr/
Fine art Photolab
Athens,Greece

unesco

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 212
Re: Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings
« Reply #6 on: January 10, 2017, 12:55:15 pm »

Yes, it (black) is visible and measurable, especially on matt papers, but not only.

As for the gamut, I have made some research comparing dozens of paper vendor profiles for the old and new series of Epson printers for both 8 and 10 inksets. In most cases (>90%), in numbers, gamuts for the new ones were slightly smaller than for the old ones as on the figures in the first post. Also when I have made my own profiles for 8 ink case machines. The difference is not big, visually can be negligible, but tendency is obvious. Assuming that black is deeper, gamut volume should be wider, so a few percent shrink is evident.

Perceptually, prints are virtually the same, maybe a bit smoother in the new series, with some drawbacks in blues compared to Canons or HP, but with crazy greens and excellent warm tints.
Logged

Wayne Fox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4237
    • waynefox.com
Re: Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings
« Reply #7 on: January 10, 2017, 01:04:54 pm »

I agree with you Wayne that P9000 has more detail in the shadows, but i could not see a visible difference in maximum black in comparison with the 9900.
Have you noticed this difference visually?
Thank you
I’m not sure I can say it is obviously “blacker” to my eye, but to me this would account for better shadow rendering, the black doesn’t block up quite as early (thus the reason I can see the 2 square on the target file I mentioned).
Logged

alifatemi

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 278
    • ali fatemi photography
Re: Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings
« Reply #8 on: January 12, 2017, 03:50:12 pm »

This website measurments proofs otherwise. They have compareed 7000 vs 7900 and found out  7000 got 17% larger gamut! Since 9000 snd 7000 use same inks we can expect the same result with 9000 vs9900

https://blog.lexjet.com/2015/11/30/first-take-review-of-epsons-new-surecolor-p-series-printers/
Logged

Wayne Fox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4237
    • waynefox.com
Re: Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings
« Reply #9 on: January 12, 2017, 11:46:00 pm »

This website measurments proofs otherwise. They have compareed 7000 vs 7900 and found out  7000 got 17% larger gamut! Since 9000 snd 7000 use same inks we can expect the same result with 9000 vs9900

https://blog.lexjet.com/2015/11/30/first-take-review-of-epsons-new-surecolor-p-series-printers/
interesting.  I would be curious as to their methodology .  I use a 4101 patch target read with an i1iSis in i1 Profiler.  The workflow is stored as are all the profile settings, so when I profile a new paper all parameters remain constant.  My results are similar to the OP, my p9000 profile is 902,775 on exhibition fiber, the 9900 profile is 928,146.

So I'm not sure why the reviewer was getting a larger gamut with the new printer.  I have no idea what their profiling method was, and if it was identical when both profiles were made.  But there may easily be an explanation based on the profiling methods such as a different device, different software, different target size.

But as mentioned, the gamut is plenty large, the new inks are definitely an improvement.

When I get more time I may research this a little more - am a little curious.
Logged

deanwork

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1937
Re: Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings
« Reply #10 on: January 13, 2017, 09:39:27 am »

I can't imagine that. If the new pigments were almost 20% larger in gamut, which is huge, don't you think they would be yelling it at the top of their lungs! Especially since they have doubled the longevity.
Logged

Zachary Goulko

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 160
Re: Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings
« Reply #11 on: January 13, 2017, 09:42:00 am »

Something had to be different in the profile creation from one printer to the other, or perhaps they were using the "commercial" version of the P7000 with the violet ink and a larger gamut, because their tests make no sense.
I've already profiled 6 papers on the P9000 , all with the same exact workflow as the 9900 and my comparison has been nearly identical across the board. While the difference is not HUGE, the P9000 has a tiny bit smaller gamut volume.
Indeed this is not something that is visible in the real world. I've made several prints on the P9000 so far and compared them side by side with the same exact prints from a 9900 in a D50 viewing booth, and I cannot tell them apart. As far as the longer permanence goes, that is certainly a welcomed improvement.
I just hope the heads on these newer models last longer than 2 years.

So I'm not sure why the reviewer was getting a larger gamut with the new printer.  I have no idea what their profiling method was, and if it was identical when both profiles were made.  But there may easily be an explanation based on the profiling methods such as a different device, different software, different target size.
Logged
Zachary Goulko
www.goulko.com

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings
« Reply #12 on: January 13, 2017, 11:01:53 am »

Something had to be different in the profile creation from one printer to the other, or perhaps they were using the "commercial" version of the P7000 with the violet ink and a larger gamut, because their tests make no sense.
I've already profiled 6 papers on the P9000 , all with the same exact workflow as the 9900 and my comparison has been nearly identical across the board. While the difference is not HUGE, the P9000 has a tiny bit smaller gamut volume.
Indeed this is not something that is visible in the real world. I've made several prints on the P9000 so far and compared them side by side with the same exact prints from a 9900 in a D50 viewing booth, and I cannot tell them apart.

Based on some analysis I've done with different Epson printers and papers using Epson's own profiles I think your findings and observations are completely credible.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."

DeanChriss

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 592
    • http://www.dmcphoto.com
Re: Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings
« Reply #13 on: January 13, 2017, 01:11:19 pm »

In looking at this thread I remembered reading something about the P series gamut here.

An excerpt:
"From old to new we measured on the same product a gamut increase of 17.4%. By the naked eye we could definitely see a deeper black and richer reds, but when comparing the gamut on a 3D and 2D map with both profiles of our newly acquired P7000 versus the Stylus Pro 7900 onto our most popular Sunset Photo E-Satin Photo Paper, the visual speaks for itself. The new printer gamut map triumphs over the old in a very uniform fashion, which means Epson has broadened the color spectrum on all corners of the map, not just in certain areas."

Of course this place sells printers, so perhaps the results should be taken with a grain of salt.
Logged
- Dean

deanwork

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1937
Re: Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings
« Reply #14 on: January 13, 2017, 04:58:17 pm »

If I hear that from Epson I would believe it, if  hear it from Lexjet, never.

They are also testing on their "favorite" paper, one of their own media, that says a lot right there.
Logged

Mark D Segal

  • Contributor
  • Sr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12512
    • http://www.markdsegal.com
Re: Epson 9900 vs P9000 - my findings
« Reply #15 on: January 13, 2017, 05:11:06 pm »

If I hear that from Epson I would believe it, if  hear it from Lexjet, never.

They are also testing on their "favorite" paper, one of their own media, that says a lot right there.

Well, I noticed that, but I'm not sure what it says. Regardless of the paper I think the key in all this, as Wayne has alluded to above, is the coherence and consistency of methodology and materials deployed in the comparisons. I too find the results of their testing at odds with other findings and my own reported in this thread, but I don't think paper is the issue.
Logged
Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....."
Pages: [1]   Go Up