Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper  (Read 1757 times)

MT

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #20 on: January 26, 2019, 01:00:12 pm »

Hi MT,
I downloaded and examined the files from the Google drive. Are the dots you observing a repeated pattern as you said or random white dots on the black areas of the print?
Many times I start to worry when I see artifacts on a print just to realize that there were there in the file from the beginning. As it was said above the printer is going to reproduce even very small details as in your situation artifacts from the scan process (hair, dust etc). For a perfect print of a scanned artwork very good retouching is required.

When you look on scan of bull, on any color area - yellow background, with orange dots on top. Those orange dots are visible, those are not artifacts from scanning.

I have even problem with a that reference file linked above, not only mine own works
Logged

rasworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 351
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #21 on: January 26, 2019, 01:48:19 pm »

Hard for me to tell from the scan whether it's color variation in the sky or paper texture.  I can tell you that on resin coated paper, i.e. glossy/semi-gloss/luster, that normally will be a smooth continuous blue.

I'm sure you've read thru the use manual about alignment, color calibration, etc.  I will say it's difficult to judge if there are subtle problems with the printer without using resin coated paper, because the matte/fine art papers increase the dot size.

Again, have you done a nozzle check on plain paper?  Otherwise, I'm out of advice, other than I would urge you to stick with the reference image until you achieve satisfactory printing, so that there is no question as to the image characteristics/quality.

Richard Southworth
Logged

John Caldwell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 701
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #22 on: January 26, 2019, 02:40:14 pm »

From the start, I'll say that I never study prints in this kind of magnification, so the test I've done may not be what you were hoping for. To my eye, the prints look nice.

Your Bull file was printed on the Pro 4000 to maximum size on 8.5" x 11" CAFA Baryta Photographique, making the long dimension of the Bull artwork about 10.4". The Lotus image was also maxed out on letter size, making the long dimension about 8.2".

The files was sent to the Canon driver as is, using a custom ICC profile for that paper, a Custom Paper Preset for the 4000, Perceptual Rendering Intent, at Maximum Quality. The Bull was printed at 360 dpi, and also at 600 dpi. The Lotus printed only at 600dpi.

Print sections of interest were scanned at 900 dpi in Silverfast with Epson 750 flatbed, again with all Silverfast controls set "flat". I tried to focus on the color areas, rather than on the grayscale areas of your artwork.

Posted here are the gross appearance of the three prints, and jpg files of the 900 dpi print scans. Since I am deeply inexpert in understanding what dithering patters should look like, I have no idea if what we are seeing is appropriate, or even truly different from what your prints look like.

I'll do my best to respond to questions.

John-
Logged

John Caldwell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 701
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #23 on: January 26, 2019, 02:43:26 pm »

Three letter size prints:
Logged

John Caldwell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 701
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #24 on: January 26, 2019, 02:44:31 pm »

900dpi scan of Bull print (360dpi):
Logged

John Caldwell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 701
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #25 on: January 26, 2019, 02:45:11 pm »

900dpi scan of Bull print (600dpi):
Logged

John Caldwell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 701
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #26 on: January 26, 2019, 02:45:58 pm »

900dpi scan of Lotus print (600dpi):
Logged

MT

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #27 on: January 26, 2019, 03:12:27 pm »

From the start, I'll say that I never study prints in this kind of magnification, so the test I've done may not be what you were hoping for. To my eye, the prints look nice.

Your Bull file was printed on the Pro 4000 to maximum size on 8.5" x 11" CAFA Baryta Photographique, making the long dimension of the Bull artwork about 10.4". The Lotus image was also maxed out on letter size, making the long dimension about 8.2".

The files was sent to the Canon driver as is, using a custom ICC profile for that paper, a Custom Paper Preset for the 4000, Perceptual Rendering Intent, at Maximum Quality. The Bull was printed at 360 dpi, and also at 600 dpi. The Lotus printed only at 600dpi.

Print sections of interest were scanned at 900 dpi in Silverfast with Epson 750 flatbed, again with all Silverfast controls set "flat". I tried to focus on the color areas, rather than on the grayscale areas of your artwork.

Posted here are the gross appearance of the three prints, and jpg files of the 900 dpi print scans. Since I am deeply inexpert in understanding what dithering patters should look like, I have no idea if what we are seeing is appropriate, or even truly different from what your prints look like.

I'll do my best to respond to questions.

John-

Thank you so much, I will look carefully on your files and get back with questions.
Logged

Ryan Mack

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 145
    • Ryan Mack on Facebook
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #28 on: January 26, 2019, 06:21:49 pm »

Yes thereís visible dithering on the pro-4000 if you are looking closer than about 1 foot from the print. If you are seeing pixelation further away then Iíd wager itís in the original image and may be exaggerated by manual or automatic output sharpening. I have corrected vision and am printing on Hahnemuhle photo gloss baryta 320. The dithering is most visible in solid colors or slight gradients.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2019, 06:51:36 pm by Ryan Mack »
Logged

John Caldwell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 701
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #29 on: January 26, 2019, 08:07:50 pm »

Viewing the A4 print of the Bull, in nose-to-print fashion, I detect no defects.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged

dehnhaide

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 87
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #30 on: January 27, 2019, 01:27:50 am »

Viewing the A4 print of the Bull, in nose-to-print fashion, I detect no defects.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
+1

I can add too... Viewing the A3 (this time) print of the Bull, in nose-to-print fashion, I detect no defects.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged

MT

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #31 on: January 27, 2019, 06:10:56 am »

This is hard issue for me, because I don't know are things I see "normal", and I am overreacting, or there is some fault with my printer.


When I look on printed artwork of bull, I printed all artwork on A4 size - on yellow elements, I can see orange dots, for me its not fluent/solid coloring - but this is scan of my Entaglio Etch, who knows maybe quality of .tiff is bad.
When I look on printed Lotus - he is in the middle of bigger work, so on A4 size he isnt so big - I can see on his petals, that there where its supposed to be darker color, its achieved by tons of single darker dots.
When I look printed reference file that was linked back there by Rasworth - those small elements are inside of grey frame - this grey frame for me is a grey background with tons of small, each visibile darker grey dots on top of them. Skin of kids is all with visible dotting. Sky between rock arch is dotted.

Yesterday Dehnhaide spent a lot of time (thank you so much) with me on Teamviewer and call. First I shown how do I print, later we swapped and I observed him explaining his process and printing bull on his Pro. The only difference is I was using Proffesional Print and Layout plugin, he uses Digital Studio Pro plugin. All other steps, media configuration and stuff, I was doing same before, when I was receiving results that I did.
To note, I did print in DSP afterwards, to same results as before.

Dehnhaide have some other reference file that he uses, when I print that one, I can still see grains in color? It looks like that dithering that was mentioned by Ryan Mack.


I'm at that point, that I have no roll of paper to use with - need to wait for Canon oem media to arrive - Canson papers I have only sample packs, so cant really make a proper calibration on them.


All I can base my "guaranty" claim now, is that other users - John, Dehnhaide - are sayin that there is no dotting on their Pro printers. Ryan is the first to mention that this happens.

I printed nozzle check, absolute perfect result - I thought that maybe my printhead is at fault there? It's 1 month old only though...


I'm thankful for all insights and help, I'm looking to some more of them - as at this moment I have no solution to my issue :(





Logged

Ryan Mack

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 145
    • Ryan Mack on Facebook
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #32 on: January 27, 2019, 06:50:31 am »

So for what it's worth I always print with ImagePrint 10. I'll try to reproduce with Lightroom but for some reason it won't let me choose Cut Sheet in the print dialog and I don't want to print a test image on a 24" roll (please share if you know how to fix this). Edit: Got Canon PSP plugin to work and confirmed the dithering behavior is the same as ImagePrint.

In my experience if you print anything with a solid color you naturally get dithering because the inks available will rarely if ever exactly match the desired color. Color calibration charts are great examples of this. If you look at the print through a 2x loop it's pretty obvious. If you find a situation where the color is nearly the same as an ink then the small number of differently colored dots stand out more because they are spaced out so much. In those situations I can still see the dithering with the naked eye. On photographs with a lot of detail you would have a hard time noticing this. I believe (but haven't evaluated this myself) that the problem is worse on good RC papers because the droplets are fixed well and retain a very clear shape without bleeding.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2019, 07:06:10 am by Ryan Mack »
Logged

MT

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #33 on: January 27, 2019, 08:02:44 am »

From the start, I'll say that I never study prints in this kind of magnification, so the test I've done may not be what you were hoping for. To my eye, the prints look nice.

Your Bull file was printed on the Pro 4000 to maximum size on 8.5" x 11" CAFA Baryta Photographique, making the long dimension of the Bull artwork about 10.4". The Lotus image was also maxed out on letter size, making the long dimension about 8.2".

The files was sent to the Canon driver as is, using a custom ICC profile for that paper, a Custom Paper Preset for the 4000, Perceptual Rendering Intent, at Maximum Quality. The Bull was printed at 360 dpi, and also at 600 dpi. The Lotus printed only at 600dpi.

Print sections of interest were scanned at 900 dpi in Silverfast with Epson 750 flatbed, again with all Silverfast controls set "flat". I tried to focus on the color areas, rather than on the grayscale areas of your artwork.

Posted here are the gross appearance of the three prints, and jpg files of the 900 dpi print scans. Since I am deeply inexpert in understanding what dithering patters should look like, I have no idea if what we are seeing is appropriate, or even truly different from what your prints look like.

I'll do my best to respond to questions.

John-

John, on your scan of bull print, when slightly zoomed in begins to see orange/dark yellow dots on top of yellow patches. Can you see those dots with your naked eye, when holding work in hands? Do they start to be visible when you "hold it next to your nose"? Those dots are the ones that are bothering me, I can see them when my bull lays on table 90 cm high, and I'm standing next to it (Im 1,56cm) so my eyes are further away than mentioned by Ryan 1 foot.

I wanted to offer printing for artists and photographers, not only to print my own works. The way this tests prints look - I do not like what I see. Color/tone reproduction is on point, and I love it, but those dots!!
Logged

MT

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #34 on: January 27, 2019, 08:04:27 am »

So for what it's worth I always print with ImagePrint 10. I'll try to reproduce with Lightroom but for some reason it won't let me choose Cut Sheet in the print dialog and I don't want to print a test image on a 24" roll (please share if you know how to fix this). Edit: Got Canon PSP plugin to work and confirmed the dithering behavior is the same as ImagePrint.

In my experience if you print anything with a solid color you naturally get dithering because the inks available will rarely if ever exactly match the desired color. Color calibration charts are great examples of this. If you look at the print through a 2x loop it's pretty obvious. If you find a situation where the color is nearly the same as an ink then the small number of differently colored dots stand out more because they are spaced out so much. In those situations I can still see the dithering with the naked eye. On photographs with a lot of detail you would have a hard time noticing this. I believe (but haven't evaluated this myself) that the problem is worse on good RC papers because the droplets are fixed well and retain a very clear shape without bleeding.

So what you are saying, this is acceptable and "normal"? If I print panorama photography, and there will be this dithering in the sky, this is InkJet standard?
Logged

Ryan Mack

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 145
    • Ryan Mack on Facebook
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #35 on: January 27, 2019, 08:38:14 am »

So what you are saying, this is acceptable and "normal"? If I print panorama photography, and there will be this dithering in the sky, this is InkJet standard?

I'm not sure I'm qualified to state what's normal but with my limited experience this seems expected behavior. It never really bothered me, I bought a 44" printer to make large prints for wall display with a viewing distance of a few feet. There may be other inkjet printers or other printing technologies that are better for small prints held in the hand. I know for black and white there's piezography which is an inkjet ink set with 8 shades of grey so you use more solid areas of ink and dither less. There's also a print shop near me that use a Lightjet to expose photographic paper and then develops with traditional chemistry and toning which I think avoids any dithering because the intensity of the laser is adjusted continuously.
Logged

MT

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #36 on: January 27, 2019, 08:49:19 am »

To add a bit of perspective, I printed file linked by Rasworth on my old desk Epson xp 610 - colors are worse (but only some, not all of them), and grain/dithering is same as on Canon Pro 4000.
I printed crop of bull that John and dehnhaide printed on their pros - again, on Epson xp 610. Color reproduction is bad, dithering/dotting is similar/same as on pro 4000.

I can't believe that printer for 119 USD and printer for 4000 USD would produce similar results, I begin to panic...
Logged

rasworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 351
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #37 on: January 27, 2019, 09:59:12 am »

MT,

One of the senior members of this forum, Mark Segal, has posted reviews on the Pro-1000 and Pro-2000 printers, both having the same "print engine" as yours.  I urge you to read his reviews, they are highly technical, but his conclusions is the printers are capable of very high quality printing.  Perhaps they will reassure you that you have a quality instrument, here is the link to the Pro-1000 review:  https://luminous-landscape.com/canon-imageprograf-pro-1000-printer-review/

Search the forum, you will find many posts by Mark, I would encourage you to send him a private message, perhaps he will assist.  He has also evaluated several papers.

Richard Southworth
Logged

rasworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 351
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #38 on: January 27, 2019, 10:09:56 am »

Here is the link for Mark's review of the Pro-2000: https://luminous-landscape.com/canon-pro-2000-review-and-related-items-of-interest/

Again, lots of technical info, but also many sample images.  I'm hoping by reading these reviews, and perhaps contacting Mark, you can tell whether your problem is setup or expectation related.

Richard Southworth
Logged

John Caldwell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 701
Re: Imageprograf Pro 4000 and Canson paper
« Reply #39 on: January 27, 2019, 11:01:49 am »

John, on your scan of bull print, when slightly zoomed in begins to see orange/dark yellow dots on top of yellow patches. Can you see those dots with your naked eye, when holding work in hands? Do they start to be visible when you "hold it next to your nose"? Those dots are the ones that are bothering me, I can see them when my bull lays on table 90 cm high, and I'm standing next to it (Im 1,56cm) so my eyes are further away than mentioned by Ryan 1 foot.

I wanted to offer printing for artists and photographers, not only to print my own works. The way this tests prints look - I do not like what I see. Color/tone reproduction is on point, and I love it, but those dots!!

I'll have to recuse myself from the dot discussion. Prints from the 4000 look, wrt dot and dither patterns, just like our Epson 9900 and 4900. By this I mean I detect no such problems under anything I'd call real world viewing conditions. That you could see this kind of dither  pattern at 1.5 meters viewing distance suggests your eyes are much, much more trained and precise than my eyes.

But as stated when I began the tests, I'm just not even a little bit experienced with this kind of print analysis.

John Caldwell
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up