Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 17 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: ipf5000  (Read 381604 times)
jclacherty
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 42


« Reply #40 on: June 19, 2006, 09:30:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I have printed even on plain paper - no dots. I am wildly guessing maybe the actual paper?? Anyway (not that I want to) I have NOT discovered how to have dots or other than continious tones.
Gary
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68535\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

hmmm...could be the paper, that's why I want to test on something like photo rag and Innova gloss.  Could very well be the way it was printed, the sales guy picked a paper size and then used photoshop's scale to fit when he printed.

The dots were visible at arms length in areas of solid colour.  I'm only interested in what's visible to the naked eye, not under a loupe, so I wasn't trying to pixel peep.

Anyway, Phil's scan seems to indicate there should be no dots visible to the naked eye.  That's an incredible amount of detail in what would be a fairly small area of paper.

Justin.
Logged
Gary Damaskos
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 125


« Reply #41 on: June 19, 2006, 10:23:56 AM »
ReplyReply

John -
thank you! It works wonderfully. And the GlossyPaperHvywt profiles work just fine.
Canon CS - Donald - said he has printed ~500 8x10s so far from the 90ml carts, various levels of settings but all full color full size, and he still has roughly 1/2 full carts. This suggests good mileage from our ink.

Are you printing from the driver mostly? I have been mostly printing from the PS plug-in which I believe to be generally at least far superiour to the usual driver. I am shooting from the hip maybe, but the limited experiences I have had, this does described what I am noticing. Nevertheless, the images are looking so outstanding and I am so pleased to this point.
Gary


Quote
I ended up using the Photo Paper set of choices so that I could profile paper and use the cassette.  The two I have profiled and set up so far are the Epson Premium Luster and the Epson Premium Glossy.

As you ran into, if I pick the choices closest to those it would only let me load in the manaul tray.

Well, forget that.  I want to have a stack to work with, not one at a time.

Picking the Photo Paper 'prefix' in the paper names allowed me to use the cassette and the profiles that I got were good with complete ink lay down.

I'm not sure the technical limitations on paper thickness etc, that make so many of the choices be forced to be the manual top tray.  But the work around above worked fine for those 2 specific paper choices.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68503\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Gary Damaskos
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 125


« Reply #42 on: June 19, 2006, 10:32:51 AM »
ReplyReply

PS - (sorry I forgot this) -

Printing from the top tray did indeed require approximately 7/8" margin lead in and 1.25" margin exit. For the 8.5x11 I was using it meant that a full 10" length print was not possible (close of course). Print length was ~8.85".
Gary


Quote
John -
thank you! It works wonderfully. And the GlossyPaperHvywt profiles work just fine.
Canon CS - Donald - said he has printed ~500 8x10s so far from the 90ml carts, various levels of settings but all full color full size, and he still has roughly 1/2 full carts. This suggests good mileage from our ink.

Are you printing from the driver mostly? I have been mostly printing from the PS plug-in which I believe to be generally at least far superiour to the usual driver. I am shooting from the hip maybe, but the limited experiences I have had, this does described what I am noticing. Nevertheless, the images are looking so outstanding and I am so pleased to this point.
Gary
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68543\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
John Mason
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10


« Reply #43 on: June 19, 2006, 01:01:24 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm printing using QImage to the regular driver.  I did try a print for grins from DPP with the plug-in, but not having Canon paper the results where not color matched at all on the Epson paper.

Printing with Qimage, turning all ICC off on the printer driver, tell QImage to use the profile created with Eye-one for that paper and pass settings (in my case 16pass) works great.

I'll have to re-profile and try the 4 pass and 8 pass settings, though.  16 pass unidirectional does not make this a speed demon.  I don't know where the diminishing returns are for going bi-directional and 8 or 4 pass.  But the speed should be mathematically higher if I try those other settings.

I'm assuming, though I haven't tested it, that bi-directional vs unidirectional should have no impact on a color profile.  Just a safer alignment of dots.  It'd be a lot of work to profile for uni/bi/4/8/16 or 6 combinations per paper I'm using.  Ultimately, it'd be nice to print faster, and the type of paper may well have an effect on perceived quality at the different speed settings.

The 4 pass sample posted up looks pretty good.  4 pass,bi-directional should be about 8 times faster printing then what I'm doing now.
Logged
Gary Damaskos
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 125


« Reply #44 on: June 19, 2006, 03:53:32 PM »
ReplyReply

John -

When I talked with Donald this morning - he mentioned the Easy settings (I have always used advanced till now) in the driver - (printing preferences, choose paperplus, then easy settings) and mentioned using the digital camera setting instead of highest. I did, and my 8x10s are stunning with the profiles already made.

I think use the profiles and work downward with settings to see where the threshold is. So far the easysettings-digital camera is all I have experimented with.

Have you thought about joining posting at the CanonWideFormat (yahoo) list? We could be sharing this info more widely? Either way - I appreciate sharing, it is speeding me up!
Gary

Quote
I'm printing using QImage to the regular driver.  I did try a print for grins from DPP with the plug-in, but not having Canon paper the results where not color matched at all on the Epson paper.

Printing with Qimage, turning all ICC off on the printer driver, tell QImage to use the profile created with Eye-one for that paper and pass settings (in my case 16pass) works great.

I'll have to re-profile and try the 4 pass and 8 pass settings, though.  16 pass unidirectional does not make this a speed demon.  I don't know where the diminishing returns are for going bi-directional and 8 or 4 pass.  But the speed should be mathematically higher if I try those other settings.

I'm assuming, though I haven't tested it, that bi-directional vs unidirectional should have no impact on a color profile.  Just a safer alignment of dots.  It'd be a lot of work to profile for uni/bi/4/8/16 or 6 combinations per paper I'm using.  Ultimately, it'd be nice to print faster, and the type of paper may well have an effect on perceived quality at the different speed settings.

The 4 pass sample posted up looks pretty good.  4 pass,bi-directional should be about 8 times faster printing then what I'm doing now.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68562\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
John Mason
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10


« Reply #45 on: June 19, 2006, 09:40:12 PM »
ReplyReply

I'll try easy mode.  I don't see how that will get the colors as good as I'm getting with a custom profile matched to the paper.  But it's worth a sheet of 8.5x11 premium luster to try it.

Then I'll try a 4pass bidirectional and time it compared to my normal workflow with my existing profile.

Then I'll do my normal 16pass unidirectional and time it.

Not tonight - but tomorrow night I should have time.

Oh, I fixed my sample pic links in the earlier posting that showed the greens and blues that I printed much better on the Canon compared to my Epson.

I'll repeat them here for people that tried the links last time.

Here are the two specific pics where I noticed quite an improvement over what I had gotten from the Epson (and both printers are calibrated the same with Eye-one):

http://www.fototime.com/3E8A57AF6B5A338/orig.jpg

(that's the ones where the greens look very cartoony on my Epson R1800)

http://www.fototime.com/03E002F1A9A2CBC/orig.jpg

that's the one where the blues are outstanding on the Canon

Sorry - both pics are sRgb online.  Printing aRGB on the Canon look better.

(edited to add broken link to two sample pics that produced pics everyone instantely preferred the Canon prints to the Epson)
« Last Edit: June 19, 2006, 09:43:26 PM by John Mason » Logged
jclacherty
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 42


« Reply #46 on: June 21, 2006, 04:58:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Argh...it's been the 21st for sooo long here in Australia....  
Logged
aussiephil
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 15


« Reply #47 on: June 21, 2006, 06:17:01 AM »
ReplyReply

Agreed.... 21st here in good old Aus............  

Beg Plead Cry....  

Actually we should let Michael have a really nice sleep and post a nice review  

Looking forward to reading about the printer the Credit Card just bought..

Cheers
Phil
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4916



« Reply #48 on: June 21, 2006, 06:58:01 AM »
ReplyReply

I needed some additional information from Canon, which didn't arrive until yesterday afternoon. It's now morning of the 21st here in Toronto, and I expect to spend much of the day finalizing the report. It will be online late this afternoon (so still technically the 21st).

Michael
Logged
aussiephil
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 15


« Reply #49 on: June 21, 2006, 07:45:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I needed some additional information from Canon, which didn't arrive until yesterday afternoon. It's now morning of the 21st here in Toronto, and I expect to spend much of the day finalizing the report. It will be online late this afternoon (so still technically the 21st).

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68735\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Michael,

Myself and Justin are just keen to read the review and it's just so hard when we have about 18hrs lead time on you....

At least i have something to look forward to reading at morning tea time tomorrow.

I have ordered my printer anyway based on the sample prints from my own images, and to me that is the only real test... do you the buyer like what the printer does.

I no doubt say this for a lot of people, thanks for a quite prompt review of what should be a very interesting printer for many people.

Cheers and best wishes for the day.
Logged
Gemmtech
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 526


« Reply #50 on: June 21, 2006, 11:51:26 AM »
ReplyReply

It's like waiting for the next John Grisham novel  
I've been waiting and waiting and waiting, but now it's almost here.

G
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8216



WWW
« Reply #51 on: June 21, 2006, 12:18:18 PM »
ReplyReply

To while away the time as you wait for the End of the 21st to roll around, why don't you ipf5000 lusters go out and rent a copy of the movie Groundhog Day, and set it to play continuously until Michael can post his review.      
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
mcfoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 938


WWW
« Reply #52 on: June 21, 2006, 12:51:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi michael
It looks like I will be getting one of these printers soon. Do you know of any third party ink manufactures that will make inks for this printer such as Lyson. Just a thought.
Thanks Denis
Looking forward to your review!!!
Logged

Denis Montalbetti
Montalbetti+Campbell
www.montalbetticampbell.com
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4916



« Reply #53 on: June 21, 2006, 02:07:18 PM »
ReplyReply

The review is now up. (3pm EDT).

Enjoy.

Michael
Logged
skibum187
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 72


« Reply #54 on: June 21, 2006, 02:55:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Michael,
In your review you mentioned how the ipf5000 uses its print driver to process a 16-bit image and send it to the printer as a 12 bit file. How does this compare with how my ImagePrint RIP processes and sends files to my Epson 9800? Are they also 12 bit files or just 8 bit?
Logged
nihil
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 52



WWW
« Reply #55 on: June 21, 2006, 03:16:43 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you so much for an interesting read. I got the 4800 a few months ago, and will probably make the jump when or if Canon releases a 24" version with these inks.
Logged

Erlend Mørk
www.erlendmork.com
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8216



WWW
« Reply #56 on: June 21, 2006, 03:41:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the fine review. If I had the money and space, I'd get one. But I think I'll have to wait for my lowly Epson 2200 to die first.  

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
John Hollenberg
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 770


« Reply #57 on: June 21, 2006, 05:32:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Michael,

Nice review.  However, as far as ink costs go this sounds way too good to be true.  For Epson printers, ink coverage is around 2 ml/square foot from various estimates I have seen.  Using your figures, the Canon uses 0.17 ml/square foot (1560 ml for 9000 square feet per the article).  Either this is the most frugal printer around, or the coverage is only 10% of typical photographic prints--or the calculations are off by a factor of 10.  If it really is this low, it would beat the heck out of the Epsons for cost of ink.

--John
Logged
jclacherty
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 42


« Reply #58 on: June 21, 2006, 06:09:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Nice review.  However, as far as ink costs go this sounds way too good to be true.  For Epson printers, ink coverage is around 2 ml/square foot from various estimates I have seen.  Using your figures, the Canon uses 0.17 ml/square foot (1560 ml for 9000 square feet per the article).  Either this is the most frugal printer around, or the coverage is only 10% of typical photographic prints--or the calculations are off by a factor of 10.  If it really is this low, it would beat the heck out of the Epsons for cost of ink.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68796\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The A2 prints I saw at a dealer here in Australia used 1.9-2.1 ml.  That works out to roughly 8 ml/m^2 or about 0.74 ml/ft^2.  This was using the windows printer driver in 16 pass mode.  I guess it really depends on the prints you make.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2006, 06:11:47 PM by jclacherty » Logged
Brian Gilkes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 431


WWW
« Reply #59 on: June 21, 2006, 06:18:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks, Michael.
This has been a useful revue of what is obviously a very interesting product and sets the scene for the bigger versions, the 60" 9000 currently appearing in Europe and Japan.
We still equire further analyses from experts in specific fields.
Mark is the obvious person to give a tight cost analysis. So far this aspect appears promising.Less clogging is a major plus.In both production and domestic situations it is the time wasted , more than the inks which is a real pain.
It will take a colour management expert like Bruce Fraser to thoroughly investigate the inkset linearity which high end users require. This has been a Canon weak point in the past.
Speed advantages over Epson appear somewhat marginal, which is disappointing for commercial users.
The increase in PhotoBlack DMax is very welcome , but the more serious Matte Black issue has not improved. This may be an area in which Epson can hit back.
The slight deficiency in reds, which Epson greatly improved with the K3 inkset , may well be addressed with custom profiles. This too, remains to be seen.
What is clear is that Epson have a formidable challenger. There is little brand loyalty now and with influential people like Michael moving to the new machines , there will be a strong following.
Epson will be aware that their complacency is over and they must respond, and do so very quickly.
Flushes of glossy advertising and cash backs will not work.
It is becoming progressively harder to pull rabbits out of the hat. Lowering ink costs will help, but I think speed (especially) and that matte DMax problem must be on the agenda.
The high end of the market is hotting up too. With the finish of the Epson-Roland agreement that Epson not enter the over 44" area the gloves are off here . Canon has played the first big card with the 9000, and rumours of Epsons 60" are becoming sounder. Rolands very expensive and buggy 12 colour pigment printers will be severely challenged. Canon and Epson have their huge consumer base to finance R&D.Roland  may not survive in the fine art market. That could go for the others like Mimaki and Mutoh. Countering this is their concentration in the lucrative and cashed up signage area. Epson may well move in that direction to counter lost sales in the fine printing pigment area .
As I'm flowing with cliches this morning, I might as well do it again.
Interesting times.
Cheers,
Brian,
www.pharoseditions.com.au
Logged
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 17 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad