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

[jed best]

It is my understanding that Mirage DOES require a dongle. At least my version of Mirage 4 for the P5000 does. I have sent the company an email asking for clarification as I would love to be free of it.

[Joe Towner]

This is not correct. The code to check a dongle might be 8 lines (spoken as a long-term coder). The code to go online and check the software serial # against the database would be about the same. And the software could (should) give the user a grace period to keep using the program if the internet is out, or whatever.

But what's the full cost of the actual implementation since they'd be purchasing a new (expensive) licensing tool, and do you then maintain 2 methods of validating license.  Plus you now have to maintain an online service that is ALWAYS available as if it's down and someone can't print how pissed are they going to be?  None of the RIP products offer a 'free' trial basis - basically you can try the software but it'll watermark the whole thing - and the grace period would become the new 'I need to print' window.

Black Magic Design does a dongle for DaVinci Resolve - here's their thread of the same topic - treat the dongle like cash and don't misplace it: https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=30075

[Rhossydd]

"The dongle is the licence key. They are freely saleable and don't need registration to use so I recommend insuring the dongle like any other $995 valued item you can't do without.
Peter
DaVinci Resolve Product Manager"

Says it all.

[smthopr]

FWIW... Blackmagic as changed Resolve this past year to a software license key.  The dongles still work, but one can have them replaced with the software license with proof of purchase required...

[psorantin]

what Colorbyte decides to be their licensing policy is their decision

BUT:

- if you go their route and do not document that in (a) the user manual (b) software license agreement (c) web-site, than this is unacceptable in my ethical conduct and understanding.

They document all licensing clauses that are important for them (printer size etc.).

But this highly unusual customer-needs neglecting policy is not documented anywhere by Colorbyte.
Why is that ??
Are they maybe afraid of stating that policy to potential buyers?

The communication behavior to my emails is a different thing. That is just a question of John P. and professionalism in customer support.

Peter

[Rhossydd]

- if you go their route and do not document that in (a) the user manual (b) software license agreement (c) web-site, than this is unacceptable in my ethical conduct and understanding.

Did you actually read the EULA completely when installing or before this issue arose ?

I'm sure most of us don't. I think I've only bothered wading through one set myself.

[Rob Reiter]

There was a time in the dim, distant past (turn of the century) when ImagePrint was invaluable, if overpriced. Now, it's just overpriced.

[Rhossydd]

Now, it's just overpriced.

I'm sure you're right and that makes their attitude to long term existing customers even more silly.
Quietly offering an acceptable replacement would seem sensible in these days when there's the possibility of rapid widespread bad publicity on the internet that last a long time.

This thread has shown how good other options are at a fraction of the price and how poor their customer service is, #completefail

[vjbelle]

There was a time in the dim, distant past (turn of the century) when ImagePrint was invaluable, if overpriced. Now, it's just overpriced.

+1

[vjbelle]

I'm sure you're right and that makes their attitude to long term existing customers even more silly.
Quietly offering an acceptable replacement would seem sensible in these days when there's the possibility of rapid widespread bad publicity on the internet that last a long time.

This thread has shown how good other options are at a fraction of the price and how poor their customer service is, #completefail

+1

[jed best]

I heard from Mirag and you can do either, Dongle or TAN.

Jed

[dgberg]

Just sitting here in the background taking all this in.
I looked at Image Print a number of years ago when I had 3 printers and just could not justify the price point.
Today with a stable of 7 printers it is totally out of the question. Price of admission is somewhere north of $6,000.
Lightroom is that good to print from. We are using all the paper manufacturers profiles even though we have an i1Pro.
Would love to have a RIP to play with but at what cost. The tipping point for me would be around $500 for all my printers.
That puts it in excess of 10 times what I am willing to spend.
Sorry the return on investment is not there.

[Jeremy Roussak]

Did you actually read the EULA completely when installing or before this issue arose ?

I'm sure most of us don't. I think I've only bothered wading through one set myself.

Someone once said that the commonest lie told on the Internet is "I have read the Terms and Conditions".

Jeremy

[Mark D Segal]

Yes Jeremy, and perhaps more than sometimes one could not be blamed for thinking their lawyers draft these agreements in a manner to deter people from even trying to read them!

[Smoothjazz]

I admit it is a shame that the lost dongle incurs a new license fee. One would think that Colorbyte could verify a dongle use, since each one has a unique code. Having said that, I have to say that I have used the Image Print ver,10 for the last 6 months now, and the results are fantastic. There is nothing like their output sharpening, which uniquely sharpens the final image going to the printer in a way that I cannot match in Photoshop. I don't know all the technical details, but apparently the sharpening of the print file on the way to the printer is different in some unique way that cannot be matched in the sharpening of the image in Photoshop.
If I don't use Image Print 10, and print only with the Photoshop/Epson print profiles, even after downloading the paper profiles from the manufacturer, my pictures seem anemic, and less sharp.
The ColorByte program also saves a great deal of time with paper print errors and size mismatches.
My wish is that the program would become more affordable in the future, so more photographers could try it out.

[Mark D Segal]

I admit it is a shame that the lost dongle incurs a new license fee. One would think that Colorbyte could verify a dongle use, since each one has a unique code. Having said that, I have to say that I have used the Image Print ver,10 for the last 6 months now, and the results are fantastic. There is nothing like their output sharpening, which uniquely sharpens the final image going to the printer in a way that I cannot match in Photoshop. I don't know all the technical details, but apparently the sharpening of the print file on the way to the printer is different in some unique way that cannot be matched in the sharpening of the image in Photoshop.
If I don't use Image Print 10, and print only with the Photoshop/Epson print profiles, even after downloading the paper profiles from the manufacturer, my pictures seem anemic, and less sharp.
The ColorByte program also saves a great deal of time with paper print errors and size mismatches.
My wish is that the program would become more affordable in the future, so more photographers could try it out.

What sharpening applications have you tested when printing with Photoshop? When not printing from ImagePrint, were you using a one-off sharpening, or a sharpening workflow differentiating between Capture sharpening and Output sharpening? I ask because I haven't seen better sharpening results than obtainable with Photokit Sharpener as deployed for Photoshop or adapted into Lightroom. Based on sharpening principles as explained in Jeff Schewe's book on sharpening, output sharpening is basically a rote process that depends on print dimensions, resolution, print process and paper type. The only thing unique about it is that the settings change depending on these parameters, and the application handles that automatically. There is more user control for Capture and Creative sharpening, where judgment becomes important regardless of the printing process. Each sharpening stage is directed at different issues affecting apparent sharpness.

What do you mean by "paper print errors" and "size mismatches"? Are you talking about the user making wrong choices in the printer driver relative to what the printer expects? If so, don't you also need to make those choices correctly in a RIP to get the expected results?

[loganross]

See the notes earlier in the thread. QImage gives the same workflow as Imageprint, including automatic output sharpening. In fact, after using IP for 5 years, but trying QImage and custom profiles for 1 month (see my posts on experience), last night I unplugged my dongle.  It had nothing to do with this thread. I simply made a decision to make my experimental workflow change permanent and I feel my output is as good as it can possibly get.

I admit it is a shame that the lost dongle incurs a new license fee. One would think that Colorbyte could verify a dongle use, since each one has a unique code. Having said that, I have to say that I have used the Image Print ver,10 for the last 6 months now, and the results are fantastic. There is nothing like their output sharpening, which uniquely sharpens the final image going to the printer in a way that I cannot match in Photoshop. I don't know all the technical details, but apparently the sharpening of the print file on the way to the printer is different in some unique way that cannot be matched in the sharpening of the image in Photoshop.
If I don't use Image Print 10, and print only with the Photoshop/Epson print profiles, even after downloading the paper profiles from the manufacturer, my pictures seem anemic, and less sharp.
The ColorByte program also saves a great deal of time with paper print errors and size mismatches.
My wish is that the program would become more affordable in the future, so more photographers could try it out.

[Smoothjazz]

Mark,

What I meant by mismatches was that often times my Epson print page did not match the Photoshop print information , and it could result in the wrong format or size or profile, etc. I know that experts may say this should be straightforward, but all too often I had one parameter that was off, and the print would need to be re-done. How many times did I forget to reset the paper type, or scale to the right size. It just seemed that for every print I had to carefully review each check box each time- a bit of tedium. With IP 10, I have my favorites set for papers and sizes, an it is two or three clicks, and exactly what I want each time.

[Mark D Segal]

I see, thanks. Unless I need Absolute Rendering Intent for proofing (which is in Photoshop), I print everything from Lightroom. Easy and no surprises.

[BobShaw]

I use Mirage Print. This also uses a dongle. Even though the dongle was from version 2 and the software is now version 3.
One advantage of this system is that i can use it on any computer. Just move the dongle.
I don't really find it a problem. Just don't lose it.

The print system works great, much better than any editing application.