Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Dark gamut on iPF5000/8000/9000  (Read 2839 times)
mike_botelho
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


WWW
« on: December 05, 2006, 09:32:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Now that a number of people have the Canon 12-ink printers, I'd like to ask a question regarding dark gamut.  I've been soft proofing some of my art with profiles for both Epson K3 printers and Canon Lucia printers as a prelude to making a buying decision and I'm seeing the Epson profiles showing some considerably more saturated dark gamut colors vs the Canon.  Dark saturated reds, crimsons, spring particularly to mind.

I was wondering what Canon users were seeing?  Are you having any trouble getting good color saturation in some darker tones, or is this possibly a deficiency with the profiles I've been playing with?  Any opinions welcome.  (And I'm not trying to suggest any flaws with the Canons, just trying to figure out what would be my best bet in regard to printing my art, which contains a lot of darker, saturated tones.)

Thanks and Kind Regards,

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

Posts: 766


« Reply #1 on: December 05, 2006, 09:55:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Couple of questions:

1) Are the Canon profiles made for the 8 bit operating system level print driver or the 16 bit plugin?  The reason I ask is that Michael stated the gamut is increased on profiles made through the 16 bit driver.  

2) Are the profiles you are comparing made for the exact same paper?  

3) Do you know for sure that the profiles for the Canon were made with the optimal Media Type (a setting in the print plugin or OS driver)?  It has been reported that different Media Types lay down different amounts of ink, and that using the wrong Media Type can affect the gamut considerably.

I haven't made any profiles yet, so can't comment beyond these questions.

--John
Logged
mike_botelho
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 05, 2006, 10:37:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Couple of questions:

1) Are the Canon profiles made for the 8 bit operating system level print driver or the 16 bit plugin?  The reason I ask is that Michael stated the gamut is increased on profiles made through the 16 bit driver. 

2) Are the profiles you are comparing made for the exact same paper? 

3) Do you know for sure that the profiles for the Canon were made with the optimal Media Type (a setting in the print plugin or OS driver)?  It has been reported that different Media Types lay down different amounts of ink, and that using the wrong Media Type can affect the gamut considerably.

I haven't made any profiles yet, so can't comment beyond these questions.

--John
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=88925\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Hi John,

Actually, I was using the generic profiles listed in the profiles links section of your Wiki, such as the Crane and Inkjetart profiles.  I only compared profiles from the same source and the same substrate, Epson vs Canon.  For example, the Crane Museo Silver Rag profiles show a much more saturated crimson for the Epson K3 printers than for the Canon iPF5000.  There is no amount of tweaking that can get crimsons using the Canon profile to look like the Epson.

Beyond that, I can't answer your other questions, since I don't know exactly how the profiles were produced.  I have noticed, though, that the Inkjetart profiles show far less of this problem.  Which makes it hard to know which is a better preview of what I'd be dealing with if I got an iPF5000.

I started investigating this after I read a comment of Neil Snape's where he mentioned that Epson maintains an advantage in areas of dark gamut.  I'm in no way affiliated or loyal to any company as yet, since I'm yet to purchase a pigment ink printer, but, as I mentioned, my art contains a lot of saturated dark tones, so I figured I should try to get a handle on this before making a purchase.

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

Posts: 766


« Reply #3 on: December 05, 2006, 10:47:26 PM »
ReplyReply

All of the generic profiles are for the 8 bit OS level driver.  So, this could be one problem.   Don't know why using the 16 bit plugin would increase the gamut, which should be a property of the inkset on a particular paper.  Just relaying what Michael said in this regard.  Come to think of it, that is a good question for the FAQ--but I don't know the answer.

I would assume that third party paper manufacturers would be careful about the Media Type they select to make a profile, but on the other hand they may not have the information either.

--John
Logged
David White
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272



WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 05, 2006, 11:44:31 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't think it was stated which InkJetArt paper was used, but here are a couple views comparing an ipf5000  profile I made for the InkJetArt Micropore Luster with the 16-bit driver vs. the generic profile for that paper from InkJetArt.

The wireframe is the profile I made and the solid is the InkJetArt generic profile.


[attachment=1290:attachment]    [attachment=1291:attachment]
Logged

David White
David White
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272



WWW
« Reply #5 on: December 06, 2006, 12:14:22 AM »
ReplyReply

This would probably be more meaningful.  Here's a couple views of the ipf5000 16-bit profile I made vs the InkJetArt generic profile for the epson 4800.  Same paper as before - Micropore Luster.  The wireframe is my profile and the solid is the generic InkJetArt profile.

My profile was made with ProfileMaker 5.07 with a 1492 patch chart using the ipf5000 16-bit driver with the paper type set to Photo Paper Plus Semi-Gloss.  Not sure how they made theirs.

[attachment=1292:attachment]    [attachment=1293:attachment]
Logged

David White
mike_botelho
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


WWW
« Reply #6 on: December 06, 2006, 03:31:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
This would probably be more meaningful.  Here's a couple views of the ipf5000 16-bit profile I made vs the InkJetArt generic profile for the epson 4800.  Same paper as before - Micropore Luster.  The wireframe is my profile and the solid is the generic InkJetArt profile.

My profile was made with ProfileMaker 5.07 with a 1492 patch chart using the ipf5000 16-bit driver with the paper type set to Photo Paper Plus Semi-Gloss.  Not sure how they made theirs.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=88940\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Thanks very much for the gamut charts.  From what I can see, the iPF5000 seems to actually have an extended dark gamut vs the Epson, at least in regard to the generic Epson profile used to compare.  I realized that the problem could have been with the generic profiles I was experimenting with.  I knew my method of comparison was imperfect, but it was the best I had at my disposal.

Looks like I will be definitely using the 16-bit driver if I get the iPF5000.  Of course, having the best possible profile would be essential as well.  I believe the number of patches on the chart you used may have been greater than what was used for the generic profiles I was experimenting with.  (I've seen the charts that Inkjetart use and Breathing Color use, and they seem to have 30-40% less patches if memory serves.)  I'm really only looking to print on one substrate (canvas), so it probably wouldn't make sense for me to try to obtain the highest quality profiling system.  Better, I would think, to pay the $ for one really top profile.  I'll have to figure out what's out there.  I definitely want my profile to have the dark gamut capacity that your gamut charts display.

Anyway, I assume, judging by the charts, that you are not seeing any real-world problems in regard to crimsons or other dark gamut saturated colors on your iPF5000, correct?

Thanks again,

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

Posts: 766


« Reply #7 on: December 06, 2006, 04:23:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Nice to have these comparison gamut plots for another paper.  I have added them to the Wiki--hope you don't mind.

--John
Logged
David White
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 272



WWW
« Reply #8 on: December 06, 2006, 06:44:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Mike,

I've been very satisfied with what I have been getting with dark saturated colors with the ipf5000.

As far as generic profiles, IMHO you get what you pay for.  Most of the profiles I see generated are in the 900-1000 patch range.  I usually use from 1400-1700 when I generate test charts for profiling my papers and I use the large profile option.  Mine seem to be about 1K bigger than the generic profiles on the InkJetArt site.  Not sure if it makes a big difference having more patches, but I feel more comfortable.    I suppose that if I were so inclined and felt like using a lot of paper and ink I could find the point where diminishing returns sets in based on the number of patches.

John,

No problem adding them to the wiki.
Logged

David White
tonywh
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


« Reply #9 on: December 07, 2006, 08:37:22 AM »
ReplyReply

Using canon printer settings the details in the shadows have been excelent, but with generic, custom and home made profiles (printfix pro) we have not been able to maintain the same quality. The printers definetly got it but how best to exploit it?
This is in both 16 & 8 bit.


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

Posts: 766


« Reply #10 on: December 07, 2006, 09:11:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Using canon printer settings the details in the shadows have been excelent, but with generic, custom and home made profiles (printfix pro) we have not been able to maintain the same quality. The printers definetly got it but how best to exploit it?
This is in both 16 & 8 bit.

I assume by Canon printer settings you mean with one of the supplied Canon profiles for the 8 bit driver?  Or are you talking about "Auto Color"?  On what paper?  Need more details to see if I have any information on this.

--John
Logged
serf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 42


« Reply #11 on: December 07, 2006, 08:35:13 PM »
ReplyReply

FWIW, the tone curve on the 16 bit dialogue lets me lighten up otherwise dark shadows, pending redoing the profiles the right way.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad