New HP Z9+ Evaluation Video

[Mark Lindquist]

Just finished this video about the Z9+ 24-inch printer. 

HP DesignJet Z9+ 24-in Printer overview (re-loaded)
 
Didn't get too deep into the nuts and bolts, but this will give many of you an idea of what the Z9+ is, if you haven't seen it in person.

Also, a little bit about me and my studios.

Mark McCormick (MHMG) and I have done a lot of testing on several aspects of the Z9+ printer, but have not had the chance to discuss all of that - we've both been very busy. 

This video is more of an overview for those who are interested.

Best-

Mark

Edit: I republished the video and it now is starting view count from the beginning as of today. (One small edit in the video, now fixed.)

PS: LINK TO Z9+ UNBOXING AND SETUP VIDEO

[Royce Howland]

Nice overview, Mark. Thanks for sharing that. I have to say even though I'm fighting with a Z3200 right now, the Z9+ leads the pack in my consideration of what to get to build out my new core of printers. I only wish they made a 60" version!

[deanwork]

Mark,

Your sculptures are so beautiful and I had no idea they were that huge !

Nice ad for HP ( not really sold on the Bosa Nova though :-)  ).

As I said when they first came out, I will believe the light gray values are equal to my Z3100, Z3200, Ipf 8300, and Large format Epsons with the great QTR,  with the light gray dilution missing in that new inkset when I see it. I’m still very skeptical about that, which would be a deal breaker for me if it’s not at least equal to what I’m doing now or the other new offerings. Hp in their ads don’t even mention monochrome and that’s really scary to me because it was promoted so much in their previous Z tech. I wanted them to add another light light gray, not remove the one they had. For many people it might be a non issue. For me it’s critical.

Also I would like to see one on one gamut comparisons to the current Epson and Canon 12 channel printers . On Site used to do that, but not anymore. Guess there are too many printers and inksets coming out now.

The spectro is a huge factor with me as I am so dependent it for making quick profiles on crazy alternative media, I would miss that in a new Epson for sure! Also in that regard, last I heard HP had dumbed down the profiling firmware on the Z9+ leaving you with only small patch sets to work with. I certainly hope that can be overcome.i If not it is a step backward. Speed is far less of a concern than killer profiles with more patches for our primary media, especially since they already know how to make that possible.

John

Nice overview, Mark. Thanks for sharing that. I have to say even though I'm fighting with a Z3200 right now, the Z9+ leads the pack in my consideration of what to get to build out my new core of printers. I only wish they made a 60" version!

[Mark Lindquist]

Hopefully Mark McCormick will discuss the testing we did re: B&W.
I guarantee you will be amazed.
I’m advocating for the extended patch chart capabilities with HP.
They’ve told me it’s on their list but not immediately.
It’s no problem to make an extended patch target for the Z9+ using the Z3200 to output a tiff for the Z9 to print out.
Then the target can be fed in to the Z3200 to be scanned.
So that’s not an issue really. The Z9 will install it afterwards.
Continue to be a doubting Thomas - I have been in the past, but now having used the printer for my own work and in comparison testing, I’m no longer concerned.

I can tell you now- you will not believe how awesome the black and whites are.

I don’t mind a little ribbing about my style of video making. It’s a lot of work and a lot of time to bring you all my opinions. Maybe I should have asked you for some of your classical guitar tracks :-) the Bosa Nova is dated, like me :-)

Mark

[jimcamel]

Hey Mark, good overview in the video...and I appreciate that took some time to do.

I'll keep feeding you comments on my progress, as well.

cheers, jc

[MHMG]

Mark,

...As I said when they first came out, I will believe the light gray values are equal to my Z3100, Z3200, Ipf 8300, and Large format Epsons with the great QTR,  with the light gray dilution missing in that new inkset when I see it. I’m still very skeptical about that, which would be a deal breaker for me if it’s not at least equal to what I’m doing now or the other new offerings. Hp in their ads don’t even mention monochrome and that’s really scary to me because it was promoted so much in their previous Z tech. I wanted them to add another light light gray, not remove the one they had. For many people it might be a non issue. For me it’s critical.

John

John, I was also concerned but cautiously optimistic about the B&W performance on the new Z9 compared to the Z3200, so Mark L. ran a few specific tests for me to make an initial assessment of B&W quality. Based on those tests, I was able to confirm that the Z9 uses the same "trick" as the Z3200 to make great out of the box neutral B&W prints. It treats the RGB neutral triplets sent to the printer as 100% gray channel data, i.e. no other colors are blended to tweak neutral gray color. Canon and Epson don't do that, probably because their gray inks aren't as inherently neutral as HP's photo gray inks. The second thing HP has done to preserve the B&W dot structure quality in the light gray values was to add a second set of smaller nozzles and also alter the dot screening pattern in a very significant way.  Mark and I need to do further comparisons about "perceived" image sharpness, grain structure and micro tonality (i.e pixel peeping type nerdy stuff examining the dot structure of the printed output), but using a "stress target" to make a quick assessment, my preliminary conclusion is that the Z9 actually exceeds the image sharpness and smoothness we are used to with our Z3200's. Hence, I think Mark L's delight with the Z9's image quality, both color and B&W,  isn't just "new owner's confirmation bias". The Z9 is bringing some new tech mojo to the table as we should probably have expected given that the Z3200 print heads are decade old technology.

As for color gamut, it appears Z9 and Z3200 are very close but not totally equal. Z9 is better in highlight areas (which surprised me due to the Z9's elimination of LG, LM, and LC channels) but a little worse in some of the deep shadow colors. For the record, I'm not one to freak out about differences in gamut plots between different printers, inks and media. I'm more concerned about color and tonal accuracy over the printable color gamut, and in this regard, HP's built in spectrophotometer, calibration, and profiling routines are making it easier for printmakers to achieve excellent color and tone reproduction on any media they choose to explore, not just the canned OEM media promoted by the respective printer manufacturer.

If print permanence hasn't taken a step backwards (I don't think it will, but Canon proved me been wrong with that assumption once before ) then Hp's only real challenge is to step up its marketing game in order to win back some of its lost glory as a manufacturer of fine art and photography capable printers.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

[deanwork]

You guys have done more for positive  HP public communication than HP has. Far more.

That’s good for me that, decent sized targets can be read by my z3200 and used on the Z9, but not so good for people who don’t have one. Thankfully you guys are pushing for a serious firmware upgrade. That tech deserves it.

I guess I’d have to see a comparative neutral bw print from the Z9 and the Z3200 of one of my files on one of the best papers to believe you can remove the lightest gray and have the same dimensionality. If so it’s a radical innovation that HP is not even promoting. I’ll be glad to pay anyone to make one and even send you the paper.

As for color gamut, I’m not hugely picky either and favor longevity if things are close. I am satisfied with the Z3200 for most things. But other people are going to want the comparisons to be between the Epson P series and the new Canons not the previous Z models.

I think it is very important to have three successful fine art printer companies keeping each other on their toes. Two is not enough. I am very concerned about how HP has dropped support for the Z3200 and raised the prices of inks by $10.00 a cart on their website. IT supplies has better prices thankfully and I have a good tech in Atlanta.

Just joking about bossa, I’m learning Jobim’s Wave right now on the guitar, though I’ll never have that Brazilian soul that one should be born with.

John

John, I was also concerned but cautiously optimistic about the B&W performance on the new Z9 compared to the Z3200, so Mark L. ran a few specific tests for me to make an initial assessment of B&W quality. Based on those tests, I was able to confirm that the Z9 uses the same "trick" as the Z3200 to make great out of the box neutral B&W prints. It treats the RGB neutral triplets sent to the printer as 100% gray channel data, i.e. no other colors are blended to tweak neutral gray color. Canon and Epson don't do that, probably because their gray inks aren't as inherently neutral as HP's photo gray inks. The second thing HP has done to preserve the B&W dot structure quality in the light gray values was to add a second set of smaller nozzles and also alter the dot screening pattern in a very significant way.  Mark and I need to do further comparisons about "perceived" image sharpness, grain structure and micro tonality (i.e pixel peeping type nerdy stuff examining the dot structure of the printed output), but using a "stress target" to make a quick assessment, my preliminary conclusion is that the Z9 actually exceeds the image sharpness and smoothness we are used to with our Z3200's. Hence, I think Mark L's delight with the Z9's image quality, both color and B&W,  isn't just "new owner's confirmation bias". The Z9 is bringing some new tech mojo to the table as we should probably have expected given that the Z3200 print heads are decade old technology.

As for color gamut, it appears Z9 and Z3200 are very close but not totally equal. Z9 is better in highlight areas (which surprised me due to the Z9's elimination of LG, LM, and LC channels) but a little worse in some of the deep shadow colors. For the record, I'm not one to freak out about differences in gamut plots between different printers, inks and media. I'm more concerned about color and tonal accuracy over the printable color gamut, and in this regard, HP's built in spectrophotometer, calibration, and profiling routines are making it easier for printmakers to achieve excellent color and tone reproduction on any media they choose to explore, not just the canned OEM media promoted by the respective printer manufacturer.

If print permanence hasn't taken a step backwards (I don't think it will, but Canon proved me been wrong with that assumption once before ) then Hp's only real challenge is to step up its marketing game in order to win back some of its lost glory as a manufacturer of fine art and photography capable printers.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

[MHMG]

As for color gamut, I’m not hugely picky either and favor longevity if things are close. I am satisfied with the Z3200 for most things. But other people are going to want the comparisons to be between the Epson P series and the new Canons not the previous Z models.

I agree that color gamut volume plots are frequently used by printer and media reviewers as a measure of the printer's color output quality. However, those plots only illustrate the potential of the system to make vivid colors, not the color and tonal accuracy of the system when printing within the printable gamut where color fidelity in the neutrals, low chroma, and moderate chroma areas of the prints are far more critical to perceived image quality than high chroma value reproduction.  That said, I tend to agree with you that the color gamut thing is going to be an HP marketing challenge when going up against Epson's latest 12 color WF printers. Gamut plots make the color quality differences seem huge. However, I believe the I* metric can put that issue into much better context, i.e., how important are ultra vivid colors in a typical photo image...perhaps in some specific instances, but I’d wager the typical camera source file never pushes those boundaries to extremes, thus rendered color and tonal accuracy overall is probably a much better qualifier for image quality than are gamut volume plots.

cheers,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

[John Nollendorfs]

Be interesting to see how the prints compare on fading with the Z3200. My hunch is they should do just as well if not better. I am especially impressed with HP using a universal print head. Makes it so simple to keep a spare or two around, compared with the pre-filled variety of the 3200! Of course  the HP print heads seem to be very durable anyway. I'm  only on my 3rd set on my 12-year-old Z3100. And the price is quite minimal compared to what Canon charges for theirs. Also interesting that HP is using the 300ml cartridges now, compared to the 130's. Of course, most of us have already discovered that we can use the 300 ml 772 carts in our Z printers, just by swapping out the chipped cap from a 130 ml cart. Just lose the ability to check ink levels.

Cudos to both Marks on their work and contributions to this list! Will be looking forward to Mark's fade tests, which I'm sure are in the works?

[MHMG]

Cudos to both Marks on their work and contributions to this list! Will be looking forward to Mark's fade tests, which I'm sure are in the works?

Thanks John for the kind words.

Funding at Aardenburg is not there yet for another new round of light fade tests and far short of being able to acquire the new printers (which is much more efficient with my time compared to working with other printer owners when the test matrix gets complex). However, the Z9 output ranks high on my testing roadmap, the new Epson 7570/9570 series as well. I'd like to run both ink sets and Z3200 Vivera for good measure on a set of several matched media batches, to illustrate in no uncertain terms how important media choice is these days! It's going to happen. A matter of when not if, I believe.

best,
Mark
http://www.aardenburg-imaging.com

[Richard.Wills]

Mark, thank you for the video - informative and beautiful work.

Looked like you were printing to a Baryta paper, and then letting the auto cut drop the print into the basket; in a dozen years of printing for clients, I've not tried that, except for vinyls, graphics, and schematics. Does the ink settle fast enough to really do that?
How does the printer handle robust paper - thinking the Canson Prestige Baryta (which I run a lot of) - I scarcely use the last couple of yards on a roll, as the curl is inviting head strikes on our 8400.

This also links into the profile generation. A Lot of the  work we do gets cold mounted to various substrates, and it would be great to be able to print a patch set, laminate it and mount to a light weight substrate subtitute (i.e. 1mm whight forex) and read the patches, all through the printer (with an extended patch set). Currently, with the most laminated / mounted combinations we use, we run 2033 patches, then wait 24 hours, then hand read... I'm not sure how I would replicate the reflectance of an aluminium backing...
And, with profile generation, how rapidly were you able to sensibly read the patches? Are we still looking at a 24 hour delay (at least with the Canons) before the images have cured?
(Side note, was at a print trade show in the UK last month, and saw an amazing Mimaki printer which produced scratch proof images almost immediately, with all sorts of spot varnish (All over varnish??) options, complete with auto (any shape) cut, and the ability to print to uncoated stock...)

WRT productivity, I'm printing through EFI express - there's a lot of ganging up prints, and I love the ability to build settings for repeat jobs and "presets" - did you see anything in the HP s/w that would allow us to dispense with a dedicated RIP?

The Canon ain't broke, but is getting a bit long in the tooth, and iot's been too long since the last toy new development in client service enhancement

Sorry, that was a lot of questions.

And sorry, I guess this belongs better in the HP Designjet Z9 - HP has launched a new large format photo printer thread.

Also sorry for the bad habbit I've developed of starting sentences with And; and sorry... Need a faster printer, that doesn't need baby sitting late into the evening.

[eternal camper]

So, Mark, I was directed to your video by a friend of mine, Jim Camelford, whom is also a regular on this site. What the 2 of you have in common, it seems, is your love for the Z9+ printer. So, I was an owner of an Epson Stylus 4900, but due to its constant clogging challenges, I sold it and am now on a search for a replacement, and have decided to look for a 24" printer.  I started looking at 24″ printers, and have looked at Canon, their P2000, and have had a company in Toronto where I live make arrangements with Canon to use their printer lab to print a few of my pics on 3 separate occasions.  I am also looking at the new HP Z9+ series 24″ and am pleased, but am still a little worried that the colour gamet can not be the same with 9 colours as the Canon can be with 11, but have printed a few of my pics that I printed on the Canon P2000 on the HP Z9 and was pleased! I have been trying to decide which one I should get, and at this time favour Canon only due to the fact the they are offering a rebate at this time). I am also really not convinced yet about B & W prints, and even though you stated a few times in your review how neutral the B & W prints are from the Z9+, I still feel that with one or 2 additional greys, the B&W prints would look even better.


I am waiting for a photo show that takes place mid November in Toronto put on by a local photo shop (they have several stores across Canada), which I have attended the past few years and where they do offer some incentives to buy during the 2 days of the show.
Mark, I really did enjoy your video, and your clear explanation of where it outshines the Z3200, but I am trying to compare prints from the Canon P2000 to the prints from the Z9+, and see if the differences in prints really do exist, and if the differences will be worth the differences in the price of the two.
I do hope to decide before the end of the year!

Stephen

[Mark Lindquist]

Mark, thank you for the video - informative and beautiful work.

Looked like you were printing to a Baryta paper, and then letting the auto cut drop the print into the basket; in a dozen years of printing for clients, I've not tried that, except for vinyls, graphics, and schematics. Does the ink settle fast enough to really do that?
How does the printer handle robust paper - thinking the Canson Prestige Baryta (which I run a lot of) - I scarcely use the last couple of yards on a roll, as the curl is inviting head strikes on our 8400.

Hi Richard,

Actually I was printing on a good Pearl paper, not  Baryta, but I do use Innova Exhibition Baryte and installed the ICC profile for the Z9+ from Innova's website and it's pretty danged good. And yeah, inks are dry enough to allow it to drop in the basket.  When setting up the paper preset, I used an extended drying time and it works fine.

I do mostly let the paper drop in the basket with the Z9+.  If I'm concerned, I turn off the cutter, then at my leisure, just go cut the print and hold on to it.  Other times I put a table that's at the right height in front of the printer and let the print slide onto the table and it auto cuts it.

For robust papers like Moab Entrada Natural (a favorite that MHMG turned me on to), I usually turn off the cutter and hold onto it while it cuts.  I use the paper sliding onto the table then auto-cutting when unattended. This would work with heavier papers you use, no problem.

I roll out the end of the roll and cut it and decurl it and use it as sheets.  All printers get hung up in this area.

This also links into the profile generation. A Lot of the  work we do gets cold mounted to various substrates, and it would be great to be able to print a patch set, laminate it and mount to a light weight substrate subtitute (i.e. 1mm whight forex) and read the patches, all through the printer (with an extended patch set). Currently, with the most laminated / mounted combinations we use, we run 2033 patches, then wait 24 hours, then hand read... I'm not sure how I would replicate the reflectance of an aluminium backing...
And, with profile generation, how rapidly were you able to sensibly read the patches? Are we still looking at a 24 hour delay (at least with the Canons) before the images have cured?
(Side note, was at a print trade show in the UK last month, and saw an amazing Mimaki printer which produced scratch proof images almost immediately, with all sorts of spot varnish (All over varnish??) options, complete with auto (any shape) cut, and the ability to print to uncoated stock...) WRT productivity, I'm printing through EFI express - there's a lot of ganging up prints, and I love the ability to build settings for repeat jobs and "presets" - did you see anything in the HP s/w that would allow us to dispense with a dedicated RIP?

The current limitation of the ESP in the Z9+ is limited to 464 patches.  I use the Z3200 to generate a tiff for the Z9 to print out, then run it back through the Z3200 for scanning and reading.  So, no bueno at this point what you are suggesting with the Z9. HP is working on this limited patch target capability of the spectro, but it's hard to say when they will implement it.  When they do, wowzer, it will be smokin' fast. As it is, I can do what you are talking about in about a couple of hours with the HP Z3200, all said and done. And yeah, could do the backing at the same time with the Z3200 reading it. Piece of cake.

No 24 hour delay.  30 minutes to an hour is sufficient.

From the standpoint of ganging prints, etc., there is a piece of software HP has called "Click" that should let you do that, but doubtful it would have the control you'd be looking for.

Good news is that they have an embedded web server and you can go into the job queue and do repeat prints no problem and stack them in the queue. 

No problem asking those questions here - AND, no need to apologize, lol.

Best,

Mark

[Mark Lindquist]

So, Mark, I was directed to your video by a friend of mine, Jim Camelford, whom is also a regular on this site. What the 2 of you have in common, it seems, is your love for the Z9+ printer. So, I was an owner of an Epson Stylus 4900, but due to its constant clogging challenges, I sold it and am now on a search for a replacement, and have decided to look for a 24" printer.  I started looking at 24″ printers, and have looked at Canon, their P2000, and have had a company in Toronto where I live make arrangements with Canon to use their printer lab to print a few of my pics on 3 separate occasions.  I am also looking at the new HP Z9+ series 24″ and am pleased, but am still a little worried that the colour gamet can not be the same with 9 colours as the Canon can be with 11, but have printed a few of my pics that I printed on the Canon P2000 on the HP Z9 and was pleased! I have been trying to decide which one I should get, and at this time favour Canon only due to the fact the they are offering a rebate at this time). I am also really not convinced yet about B & W prints, and even though you stated a few times in your review how neutral the B & W prints are from the Z9+, I still feel that with one or 2 additional greys, the B&W prints would look even better. I am waiting for a photo show that takes place mid November in Toronto put on by a local photo shop (they have several stores across Canada), which I have attended the past few years and where they do offer some incentives to buy during the 2 days of the show.
Mark, I really did enjoy your video, and your clear explanation of where it outshines the Z3200, but I am trying to compare prints from the Canon P2000 to the prints from the Z9+, and see if the differences in prints really do exist, and if the differences will be worth the differences in the price of the two.
I do hope to decide before the end of the year!

Stephen

Hi Steven - glad you liked the video.  I only know Jim through this forum and that he has a Z9+ printer as well. I suggest you go to Aardenburg Imaging and WIR (Wilhelm) and look up the differences between Canon and Epson inks as well as preliminary results on the Z9+.  Don't underestimate the dual dot technology HP has introduced with the Z9+.  Also, take into consideration the ability to make in-house custom ICC profiles with the Z9+. Powerful mojo going on there.

Please read the comments in MHMG's responses above to understand how the HP is superior in the B&W area.

I can only give my opinions and they are based on over a decade printing with Z3200 printers and my current use of the Z9+, in addition to working with Mark McCormick, one of only a few top level color scientists working in this arena.  Look at what he says.

Go to Aardenburg-Imaging.com - benefit from his hard work - make a donation!

Thanks!

Mark L.

[Mark Lindquist]

Be interesting to see how the prints compare on fading with the Z3200. My hunch is they should do just as well if not better. I am especially impressed with HP using a universal print head. Makes it so simple to keep a spare or two around, compared with the pre-filled variety of the 3200! Of course  the HP print heads seem to be very durable anyway. I'm  only on my 3rd set on my 12-year-old Z3100. And the price is quite minimal compared to what Canon charges for theirs. Also interesting that HP is using the 300ml cartridges now, compared to the 130's. Of course, most of us have already discovered that we can use the 300 ml 772 carts in our Z printers, just by swapping out the chipped cap from a 130 ml cart. Just lose the ability to check ink levels.

Cudos to both Marks on their work and contributions to this list! Will be looking forward to Mark's fade tests, which I'm sure are in the works?

Hey John - thanks for the kind words.  Good to see you here.

Mark

[MfAlab]

Z9+ is still not available in my country. But I'd used Z3200(44") for over one year, experience is terrible. Mechanical is totally disaster. In that year, I had to change circuit board twice and two belt, not to mention the idiotic sheet paper loading and star wheels. And it's extremely slow, have to wait the "checking.."(for what?) minutes after printing every time. Sorry to HP lovers for my rudely complaint. But bad experience causes no effect to my view of Z9+ spec below.

Back to Z9+, although HP developed variable ink drop, and smallest size down to 3 pl. Two sizes, big drop is 7 pl. But it's only available on C, M, PK, B and Gray, other color Y, MK, R, G is still bigger 6 pl. Compared to Epson, also variable ink drop but every color has 3.5 pl minimum droplet. Canon is 4 pl, all colors for sure. I don't think HP can get any advantage in granularity and resolution performance. Additionally, Z9+ has no light color ink and only K2 gray. It may be coarsely in high key if look closely. New chromatic green and chromatic blue may increase gamut in some way. Yes, HP has most light resistance pigments and good color gamut, but image detail and fineness is not as good as a Canon or Epson printer. Attach scan of Epson 9880 and HP Z3200 prints, all by driver no RIP.

[kers]

Z9+ is still not available in my country. But I'd used Z3200(44") for over one year, experience is terrible. Mechanical is totally disaster. In that year, I had to change circuit board twice and two belt, not to mention the idiotic sheet paper loading and star wheels. And it's extremely slow, have to wait the "checking.."(for what?) minutes after printing every time. Sorry to HP lovers for my rudely complaint. But bad experience causes no effect to my view of Z9+ spec below.

Back to Z9+, although HP developed variable ink drop, and smallest size down to 3 pl. Two sizes, big drop is 7 pl. But it's only available on C, M, PK, B and Gray, other color Y, MK, R, G is still bigger 6 pl. Compared to Epson, also variable ink drop but every color has 3.5 pl minimum droplet. Canon is 4 pl, all colors for sure. I don't think HP can get any advantage in granularity and resolution performance. Additionally, Z9+ has no light color ink and only K2 gray. It may be coarsely in high key if look closely. New chromatic green and chromatic blue may increase gamut in some way. Yes, HP has most light resistance pigments and good color gamut, but image detail and fineness is not as good as a Canon or Epson printer. Attach scan of Epson 9880 and HP Z3200 prints, all by driver no RIP.

Hello MfAlab,

Your experience with the Z3200 sounds terrible indeed, but how is it possible to need two belts in a year? Mine lasts 7 years.... you have been out of luck.
The detail photos are clear; Would be nice to see details of the z9 next to those.
Must say i have never seen dots with my naked eye, only when there was a problem with the printheads.
Main real problem in printing quality i find is banding, occuring in the slow graduals. Sometimes i have to make a special ICC profile to solve it.

[deanwork]

There are good belts and bad belts out there. The good belts can indeed last 5 years and more with regular use.

As to print quality, resolution, banding, etc. it is really important to do four things.

1. Make sure print heads are replaced when warranty expires. I know we dont often do that but we should for finest dither.

2. Make sure the paper advance is calibrated for the media being used for best results. Some people go for many years without ever doing a paper advance calibration.

3. Always do a paper calibration ( linearization ) for each new roll of media. It is automatic and only takes a few minutes.

4.  Do not go with the basic 740 patch calibration targets for profiling, which most people do! . There you can create 1728 patch targets that are great,

http://z3200.com/Making_Profiles_For_HP-Z3200_Printers.htm

Even more expansive custom targets can be created that show clearly visible improvements in resolution, dynamic range, and print color, smoothness, and gamut. But realistically 1728 is the minimum and Hp never bothered to tell us or promote their own tech.

All the communication about this capability goes to Geraldo Garcia who shared his experiments,Mark Lindquist and Mark McCormick for helping the rest of us understand it and put it into practice. Reading patches with an i1 is not the same ball game even if one had the patience to do it. A couple of us made 2200 patch x-rite calibrations read by hand and they were not as good as the 1728 internally calibrated profiles.

I just printed a 40x40 HPZ3200 neutral monochrome  print last night from a great 16 bit drum scan of Hasselblad film and it blows away anything I’ve done for the last 10 years on my 9890 and 7890 Epson with QTR and Epson inks or my Canon 8300 with true black and white. The color accuracy is also better than I can achieve on these printers with oem inks. That profile was one Mark helped me make with 6000 patches.

Does the Z3200 sheet feeding suck and should that have been resolved 10 years ago, yes. It their software glitchy and the website poorly conceived and managed, yes. Yes the Z3200 is slow and unlike the Canons bidirectional output that doubles the speed is not recommended, just not sharp enough.

Now with the emergence of these new Epson and Canon 12 ink printers that have been improved I have no idea how they will stack up against the new HPs. One thing though, you won’t be able to use QTR with the new Epsons.

John

Hello MfAlab,

Your experience with the Z3200 sounds terrible indeed, but how is it possible to need two belts in a year? Mine lasts 7 years.... you have been out of luck.
The detail photos are clear; Would be nice to see details of the z9 next to those.
Must say i have never seen dots with my naked eye, only when there was a problem with the printheads.
Main real problem in printing quality i find is banding, occuring in the slow graduals. Sometimes i have to make a special ICC profile to solve it.

[MfAlab]

Hello MfAlab,

Your experience with the Z3200 sounds terrible indeed, but how is it possible to need two belts in a year? Mine lasts 7 years.... you have been out of luck.
The detail photos are clear; Would be nice to see details of the z9 next to those.
Must say i have never seen dots with my naked eye, only when there was a problem with the printheads.
Main real problem in printing quality i find is banding, occuring in the slow graduals. Sometimes i have to make a special ICC profile to solve it.

Yes, I have been out of luck on that Z3200. Have I mentioned two or three heads were replaced?

Banding, head alignment, feeding and so on, is correctable and can be calibrated. But ink drop size is not, it is a hardware specification. I can fine tune light ink transition curve to minimum granularity, but I can't make the dot smaller. For ink efficiency and longevity, Z3200 is a good printer. For finest detail, it's not. Allow me to note that: Ink dots in the images is quite small. Most of time, people will say that is a okay. I just found that in the very beginning printer testing. If HP let me try new Z9+, I will be happy to show a side by side details comparison with Canon and Epson's new printer.

[deanwork]

The precision of the way the ink drops are rendered and the resulting image quality is greatly effected by the number of patches used in making the profile and the media used. How many patches were you using? Of course you replace heads occasionally. That’s the nature of the system and the heads are very inexpensive and don’t clogg.

As to how the Z9 holds up in this area of resolution and whether they can be run in bidirectional mode effectively will be interesting to see. I suspect Epson is in first place followed by Canon, then HP.

But we’ll see. Clearly catching up in the speed department was a major concern for HP or they would have been completely out of the running.

John

Yes, I have been out of luck on that Z3200. Have I mentioned two or three heads were replaced?

Banding, head alignment, feeding and so on, is correctable and can be calibrated. But ink drop size is not, it is a hardware specification. I can fine tune light ink transition curve to minimum granularity, but I can't make the dot smaller. For ink efficiency and longevity, Z3200 is a good printer. For finest detail, it's not. Allow me to note that: Ink dots in the images is quite small. Most of time, people will say that is a okay. I just found that in the very beginning printer testing. If HP let me try new Z9+, I will be happy to show a side by side details comparison with Canon and Epson's new printer.