Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Image Print for Epson 2400  (Read 6402 times)
Gary Ferguson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 522


WWW
« on: June 23, 2006, 06:39:05 AM »
ReplyReply

I've been told by Image Print today that after several delays they are now ready to ship Image Print for the Epson R2400.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9119



WWW
« Reply #1 on: June 23, 2006, 08:38:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I've been told by Image Print today that after several delays they are now ready to ship Image Print for the Epson R2400.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=68958\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yup, I had it running on my 2400 yesterday. There are only a few paper profiles (CB is building them as fast as they can). I built my own for Premium Glossy since they didn't have one; no issues. Great color.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
jedbest
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 350


« Reply #2 on: June 23, 2006, 09:54:17 AM »
ReplyReply

I also have been printing with IP 6.1 for the 2400 since lsst night. I've used several Hahnemuhle papers and the images look great. Printing speed seems faster than the standard Epson driver and the images are sharper. It was well worth the wait.
Logged
phlai
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #3 on: June 23, 2006, 08:45:05 PM »
ReplyReply

How much is the ImagePrint 6.1 for R2400 ?
Logged
nihil
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 52



WWW
« Reply #4 on: June 23, 2006, 09:07:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
How much is the ImagePrint 6.1 for R2400 ?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
see [a href=\"http://www.colorbytesoftware.com/PriceList.htm]http://www.colorbytesoftware.com/PriceList.htm[/url]
Logged

regards,
Erlend Mørk
scho37
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #5 on: June 27, 2006, 08:41:21 AM »
ReplyReply

The Mac trial version download is a corrupt Stuffit archive that will not open because of a format error.  I thought that .zip archives were now the cross-platform standard and I'm surprised that they still use the Stuffit engine for creating download archives.
Logged
scho37
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13


« Reply #6 on: June 27, 2006, 10:04:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The Mac trial version download is a corrupt Stuffit archive that will not open because of a format error.  I thought that .zip archives were now the cross-platform standard and I'm surprised that they still use the Stuffit engine for creating download archives.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69233\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Sorry, download archive is OK.  I had an older version of expander installed that would not handle the newer format.  I had to download a new version of Stuffit expander.
Logged
budjames
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 690


WWW
« Reply #7 on: June 27, 2006, 09:21:55 PM »
ReplyReply

I just upgraded my IP v6.0 to v6.1 for $150 directly from Colorbyte Software.
I just installed it this evening.

The standard Epson 2400 profiles for Epson papers are excellent out of the box, but the Image Print profiles are better, particulary by producing more details in the shadow areas.

I going to switch over the Matte Black in tomorrow and run some fine art prints on Hahnemuhle paper. I'm sure that they will be awesome.

v6.1 introduces a "Print Through" option, but for $300 more, I didn't think that it was worth it just to be able to print from within PS CS2. I'm a hobbiest and low volume printer so I'll save my money for ink and paper.

The quality is unbelievable.

Bud James
North Wales, PA
Logged

Bud James
North Wales, PA
www.budjamesphotography.com
rdonson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1420


WWW
« Reply #8 on: June 28, 2006, 08:17:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Q: IP Lite or Full?  

I've got an Epson 2200 and I'm considering purchasing IP.  When I add up the cost of quality profiles for various papers needed for printing without IP, the Lite version seems reasonably priced ($495).

I'm curious if other users of the 2200/2400 are using the Lite or Full version.
Logged

[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'][span style='font-family:Arial'][span style='font-family:Geneva'][span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']Regards,
Ron[/span][/span][/span][/span]
photographist
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 71


WWW
« Reply #9 on: June 28, 2006, 08:50:42 AM »
ReplyReply

I’m using the “lite” version for the 2200 currently.  I am thinking about moving up to the 2400/4800 or IPF5000 (when it’s avail).   My experience with ImagePrint has been great.  The staff (Daniel and Jonathon) have been very helpful and quite responsive.    

For the record… the quality of the prints I’m making has increased markedly.  Not to repeat what others have said, but the shadow details are great.  In my opinion, the price is well justified and well worth it!
Logged
Raw shooter
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 205


« Reply #10 on: June 28, 2006, 09:17:36 AM »
ReplyReply

I know this is not a smart question, but how exactly does this print driver differ in image quality from the Epson driver?
I have used the luster profiles (RPM quality) from Epson with my R2400 and the print quality is amazing - great color accuracy on skin tones- which is my subject matter.
Does Image Print specialize in optimizing shadow detail?  Reading this forum has shown me that outdoor photographers are much concerened about shadows -with the capture histogram being 'targeted to the right'.
Thanks in advance.

Raw Shooter
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7970



WWW
« Reply #11 on: June 28, 2006, 09:51:33 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Q: IP Lite or Full? 

I've got an Epson 2200 and I'm considering purchasing IP.  When I add up the cost of quality profiles for various papers needed for printing without IP, the Lite version seems reasonably priced ($495).

I'm curious if other users of the 2200/2400 are using the Lite or Full version.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69327\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I use the lite version with my 2200. I shelled out in desperation after getting poor results with other approaches (including making my own profiles with Monaco Optix -- but I was pretty new at "color management" at the time). I have been very pleased with the color results from IP Lite (in spite of the annoyances of the user interface), but I prefer QTR for B&W. For me, the cost of the full version didn't seem justified.

One big annoyance with the Lite version is that features of the Full version appear in menus and are not grayed out. So if you forget that your Lite doesn't do such-and-such, it will print just fine, but with "DEMO" plastered all over it so you have just wasted ink and paper unnecessarily.

If and when I upgrade to a 2400 or its successor, I will try the Epson driver first, but if it doesn't give me results as good as IP on the 2200, I'll fork out for IP Lite again.

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

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

Posts: 766


« Reply #12 on: June 28, 2006, 03:37:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If and when I upgrade to a 2400 or its successor, I will try the Epson driver first, but if it doesn't give me results as good as IP on the 2200, I'll fork out for IP Lite again.

I have been very pleased with the Epson R2400, but since I have IP 5.6 for the 2200, I decided to spend the $150 to upgrade to IP 6.1 so I can try it out.  Will probably be a few weeks until I have an opinion, though.

--John
Logged
budjames
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 690


WWW
« Reply #13 on: June 28, 2006, 07:55:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Q: IP Lite or Full? 

I've got an Epson 2200 and I'm considering purchasing IP.  When I add up the cost of quality profiles for various papers needed for printing without IP, the Lite version seems reasonably priced ($495).

I'm curious if other users of the 2200/2400 are using the Lite or Full version.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69327\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I used IP 6.0 with my Epson 2200 before replacing the print with the 2400. The quality of the IP/2200 combination was awesome. Noticably better than the native Epson drivers and they are very good.

Bud
Logged

Bud James
North Wales, PA
www.budjamesphotography.com
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7970



WWW
« Reply #14 on: June 28, 2006, 08:02:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I have been very pleased with the Epson R2400, but since I have IP 5.6 for the 2200, I decided to spend the $150 to upgrade to IP 6.1 so I can try it out.  Will probably be a few weeks until I have an opinion, though.

--John
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69358\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'd love to hear your impressions once you've tried it.

-Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

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

Posts: 766


« Reply #15 on: June 29, 2006, 07:56:42 AM »
ReplyReply

One thing I was annoyed to discover is that Imageprint for the 2400 only supports Photo Quality (not Best Photo) currently.  I don't know if there are plans to support best photo, or whether it will be included in my upgrade price if it is supported.  I haven't tested yet to see if this will make a visible difference vs. Epson profiles printed at Best Photo.

--John
Logged
John Hollenberg
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 766


« Reply #16 on: June 29, 2006, 09:19:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Here is the answer I received John Pannozzo:

"When we get through the profiles back log for Photo we will do Best Photo on
select papers.  Our Photo mode is actually at a higher resolution than what
Epson uses for Photo mode.  You should be using Photo mode for 99% of
everything you print.  Best photo will do little more than slow down the
print speeds and switch the printer from variable drop mode to fixed drop
mode.  There are some papers where it makes sense like a Pictorico Film but
not many."

Sounds reasonable.  The proof will be in the photos.  More in the next few weeks.

--John
Logged
rdonson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1420


WWW
« Reply #17 on: June 29, 2006, 08:20:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks, all, for the great feedback.  If I don't upgrade to the Epson 4800 or Canon 5000 then I'm going to invest in IP lite for the 2200.  If I do upgrade then I'm going to have to factor in the cost of IP for the new printer.

Again, thanks so much for taking the time to respond.
Logged

[span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'][span style='font-family:Arial'][span style='font-family:Geneva'][span style='font-size:8pt;line-height:100%']Regards,
Ron[/span][/span][/span][/span]
budjames
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 690


WWW
« Reply #18 on: July 03, 2006, 12:01:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'd love to hear your impressions once you've tried it.

-Eric
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=69390\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I'm cranking out prints now with my R2400 and IP 6.1. Using Epson Premium Luster and MOAB Glossy, the images are much better than using the standard epson drivers.

Worth every penny.

Bud
Logged

Bud James
North Wales, PA
www.budjamesphotography.com
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad