Colorbyte's lost dongle policy is repaying software - does this only concern me?

[loganross]

Hi,
I find that for some images printed on the P800, I can get better tonal gradations in the skin tones usng custom profiles.  I also felt like skin tones were a little less lifelike than I wanted when printing with Imageprint.  As I said, it was only some cases.  I also felt that not every profile was equally as pleasing.

I now have a Canon Pro 1000.  I prefer the output over the p800, regardless of whether I am using imageprint.  See my thread here:My P800 Pro 1000 Thread

However, using Imageprint on my Canon 1000 forced me to switch to perceptual rendering and play with the shadow slider.  If not, the shadows had issues.  I have almost always printed using RC rendering intent.  It was torture, as all of a sudden I was having to tweak, defeating the whole reason I used Imageprint.  Customer service was not able to help me.  I also felt the results of some profiles were better than others, but that may have been the rendering intent issue.   Finally, not sure it matters for most images, but colorthink does show my custom profiles as consistently having a bigger gamut.

Again very interesting observation Logan. Could you inform: what printer are you using - especially is it the same one for both with and without ImagePrint, and when you say "better prints" - could you elaborate a bit indicating in what respects?

[Mark D Segal]

I’ve been using QtR for black and white with any inset on Epson printers for at least 18 years and it was far bettter than Imageprint ages ago and now because you could/ can always Linearize it yourself for any media, and it was always $50.00.

I believe QTR is a different ball-game from ImagePrint, insofar as, if I'm not mistaken, QTR is specialized to B&W, whereas ImagePrint accommodates both colour and B&W printing.

[Mark D Segal]

Hi,
I find that for some images printed on the P800, I can get better tonal gradations in the skin tones usng custom profiles.  I also felt like skin tones were a little less lifelike than I wanted when printing with Imageprint.  As I said, it was only some cases.  I also felt that not every profile was equally as pleasing.

I now have a Canon Pro 1000.  I prefer the output over the p800, regardless of whether I am using imageprint.  See my thread here:My P800 Pro 1000 Thread

However, using Imageprint on my Canon 1000 forced me to switch to perceptual rendering and play with the shadow slider.  If not, the shadows had issues.  I have almost always printed using RC rendering intent.  It was torture, as all of a sudden I was having to tweak, defeating the whole reason I used Imageprint.  Customer service was not able to help me.  I also felt the results of some profiles were better than others, but that may have been the rendering intent issue.   Finally, not sure it matters for most images, but colorthink does show my custom profiles as consistently having a bigger gamut.

Thanks Logan. It seems most of your qualms with IP stem from the Rendering Intent issue. I'm wondering why one should have to use Perceptual on a Pro-1000, and not Relative Rendering Intent. Seems counter-intuitive that software of this kind would trigger such a limitation.

[PeterAit]

This is an important observation Peter. It could be useful to know which papers you used for these comparisons. It would be interesting for an appropriately equipped person to redo these kinds of comparisons now that Epson has produced the deepest Maximum Black in its history with the new SC-PX000 printers, and to use first-rate custom profiles with the Epson driver rather than OEM profiles. That set of tests would add another data point along with your observations.

It was a while ago, but IIRC I used Epson Exhibition Fiber and maybe their Premium Luster.

[Mark D Segal]

It was a while ago, but IIRC I used Epson Exhibition Fiber and maybe their Premium Luster.

Thanks Peter - OK, both high OBA content which has implications for the profile measurement condition spec, but wide gamut, which is useful for comparing printing workflow capabilities.

[Ernst Dinkla]

I believe QTR is a different ball-game from ImagePrint, insofar as, if I'm not mistaken, QTR is specialized to B&W, whereas ImagePrint accommodates both colour and B&W printing.

With several grey and black inks in a 8-12 ink printer and them used in an OEM driver B&W mode QTR can at least do something to B&W profile that mode with its profiler. Used that even for the Z3100 in the past. For several Epson models it can substitute that OEM B&W driver mode + linearise and profile, while the color inks are still aboard. A step further is changing the inks to a more suitable B&W set on Epsons.  Based on what I recall of the possibilities about 5 years ago.

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
March 2017 update, 750+ inkjet media white spectral plots

[loganross]

If I were to summarize (talking print output only), it would be:

(1) issue with RC rendering intent (Canon only)
(2) skin tones (note I am hyper sensitive to this)
(3) to a much lesser extent - profile consistency from paper to paper.

For many people, especially taking into account  different types of images, the output will be more than good enough.  For me, it was when I recently moved to Canon that I started to realize that changing my workflow could improve my output. As other people have alluded, printers have become good enough that it would be hard to improve output with "secret sauce".

I don't want this thread to turn into bashing colorbyte (although I agree the dongle issue is a big issue). The Imageprint workflow is good, and they provide a product and service that still works wonders for many. It served me well enough for a long period of time and I have personally felt their customer service to be exceptional.  In fact, had I not tried QImage for layout and workflow, I would have moved to the upcoming Imageprint Red, which gives me the workflow, but let's me use the manufacturer drivers and my own custom profiles.  I guess it was just a matter of timing.  FYI, I assume that Imageprint Red is a reflection of the fact that printers have improved significantly.  I still own Imageprint and I will be watching for improvement updates that may shift my thinking.

Thanks Logan. It seems most of your qualms with IP stem from the Rendering Intent issue. I'm wondering why one should have to use Perceptual on a Pro-1000, and not Relative Rendering Intent. Seems counter-intuitive that software of this kind would trigger such a limitation.

[psorantin]

Update on the dongle issue:

Colorbyte's John Pannozzos sent me finally an email response: message:

"I know people who have found dongles they misplaced days after the fact to years."

So his approach to dealing with this support issue is "keep searching, some people have success years after they lost the dongle".

Given Kevin Raber's review of Imageprint v10, I think it would make sense to add the the lost dongle policy (or more accurately: the lack of a documented policy) to Kevin's review. You need to know that as a potential customer.

That idea came up earlier on this thread and it is in the interest of the readers of the LL site and Forum.

Regards,
Peter

[Mark D Segal]

Update on the dongle issue:

..............Colorbyte's John Pannozzos sent me finally an email response: message:

"I know people who have found dongles they misplaced days after the fact to years."

So his approach to dealing with this support issue is "keep searching, some people have success years after they lost the dongle".

It's the kind of response that probably isn't going to do his company any good over the longer term. Very disappointing. They would make a much better showing with an overall more innovative and constructive approach, but it's not for me to tell them how to run their company. They'll sleep in the bed they make.

[Joe Towner]

Welcome to the outcomes from software piracy, ColorByte is doing what it has to in order to stay in business.  I've dealt with Point of Sale registers who also have this USB dongle requirement, and we had to install a lockbox that prevented folks from accidentally removing it thinking it was a usb thumb drive.  It sucks, especially for a home user who doesn't print that often.

But these are the times we live in.  For them to change would be a major undertaking, and chances are they'd have to roll that cost into the next upgrade.  There is no perfect answer, especially when something is licensed based on how wide, or how many printers can be controlled at once.  Anything less than full price encourages folks to be dishonest if they need additional licenses.  Microsoft & Adobe have a customer base that it doesn't kill them, but for specialized software vendors every sale is critical.

I'm sorry you lost your usb fob, but when was the last time you printed?  Order one of these and when you find it, lock it inside.
https://www.amazon.com/Lucas-Distribution-USB-DONGLE-LOCKBOX/dp/B01MQJZW2E

-Joe

[Mark D Segal]

................ ColorByte is doing what it has to in order to stay in business. ............
-Joe

You mean there are no feasible alternatives that are safe for the company and easier on the customers? I'd be very surprised based on what's done elsewhere - even for smallish companies.

[digitaldog]

You mean there are no feasible alternatives that are safe for the company and easier on the customers?

In this case, the very feasible alternative would be for ColorByte to sell the customer a dongle for JUST the cost of the dongle! Or find better copy protection.
The answer provided by John (whom I've know for a very long time) is very disappointing to say the least. No excuse, not for what they charge. Hopefully the push back here will be enough whereby John comes to his senses and takes care of a customer who dropped a lot of money on his product.

[PeterAit]

Update on the dongle issue:

Colorbyte's John Pannozzos sent me finally an email response: message:

"I know people who have found dongles they misplaced days after the fact to years."

Translation: "Well seems these people were being honest all along but we screwed them anyway."

[Joe Towner]

You mean there are no feasible alternatives that are safe for the company and easier on the customers? I'd be very surprised based on what's done elsewhere - even for smallish companies.

They've baked their anti-piracy solution into the code base - to replace it with something else isn't just replace a few lines.  Plus to switch it now, you'd have 2 different solution methods in the field, as in some folks have a dongle, some folks have _____.  Online activation would require adding in logic that looks to the clock and makes sure you can't roll it backwards.  Plus you'd have to constantly ping online to verify that the machine is the only one activated.  Are you sure you want your print stations constantly polling online?  Wouldn't you block their internet access, just to keep them running with zero change.

Here's a case in point.  To implement a new method of copy protection, ColorByte would be wise to make it Windows 10 only.  That way they can leverage things in the latest OS.  But then you're at Microsoft's mercy because you'll be getting every Windows 10 update even if it crashes your setup, because the computer will have to always be connected to the internet.  Then we'd wish for the dongle based solution because you can run your old printer in XP with the drivers that just work, with zero chance things change or get screwed up.  It just keeps printing the same amazing colors, week after month after year.

Yes, the replacement cost for just the 'dongle' is the cost of the full software package.  Because with just that dongle, you can sell a computer with ColorByte software loaded and it'll work forever.

I'm sorry if I come off mean, but this is a business decision they need to stick to.  Otherwise, every week another person 'lost their dongle' and they saw on LuLa that so-and-so got theirs replaced for cheap.  Maybe this is a time to test out some of the other RIP packages, or Lightroom, or the Epson/Canon/HP print utility.

-Joe

[Mark D Segal]

The problem with all this is that the world isn't only Windows - at least 50% of the graphic arts/photography market is on OSX, so any solution needs to be OS agnostic, and people upgrade their computers and change their hard drives all the time, so protection solutions need to accommodate that as well. Then there is the fact that MOST of the software sold to this market never needed or no longer needs dongles. And on top of that, even if you could make a business case for not investing whatever it would cost them to catch up with 21st century protection solutions, this manner of treating CUSTOMERS with zero trust and zero tolerance for mishaps is just plain DUMB. Sorry, no cigar.

[enduser]

Mike Chaney has priced Qimage at a point where there is just no sense in using it any other way than by purchasing it.  Colorbyte should talk to him and see whether the Qimage model suits their financial aims.

[Mark D Segal]

Mike Chaney has priced Qimage at a point where there is just no sense in using it any other way than by purchasing it.  Colorbyte should talk to him and see whether the Qimage model suits their financial aims.

Do you think it could be that the applications are different enough in terms of design and technical services offered to explain the big price differences?

[enduser]

No idea. That's a suggestion for them.

[digitaldog]

Do you think it could be that the applications are different enough in terms of design and technical services offered to explain the big price differences?

Sounds like a good idea for a LuLa review Mark! So while I'm not a massive fan of CB's profiles, they DO offer free profiles for ANY paper; Qimage? Difference in Dither?

[Mark D Segal]

No idea. That's a suggestion for them.

Well, the issue is whether the suggestion has any a priori basis that commends it to be potentially useful. OK, you don't know, fair disclosure.