Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: DO NOT BUY HP APS  (Read 9566 times)
Christopher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 944


WWW
« Reply #20 on: March 19, 2007, 06:44:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Doesn't this boil down to a case for buying the printer with the cheaper profiling option, & getting profiles for one's favorite papers & best prints from another profiling system that uses more patches - as suggested before?   

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....showtopic=15469
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=107562\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes that is exactly what I do  
Logged

marty m
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 335


WWW
« Reply #21 on: March 19, 2007, 08:00:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Doesn't this boil down to a case for buying the printer with the cheaper profiling option, & getting profiles for one's favorite papers & best prints from another profiling system that uses more patches - as suggested before?   

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index....showtopic=15469
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=107562\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

But why pay for the spectrophotometer in that case?  That certainly adds hundreds of dollars to the purchase price.

TheZ3100 plus APS would be a good alternative, albeit an expensive one.  If the software worked as advertised and like any other profiling software.  Unfortunately, that is not the case.
Logged
Panascape
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


« Reply #22 on: March 20, 2007, 12:42:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
None of us realized, though, that is only works with 24" paper.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=107535\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You can add HP to this group as well. Some at HP were surprised that APS would not automatically optomise its test chart size for the media being used. There is a work around whereby you print the tiff files APS uses manually and then use APS to read them.
Logged
denis_
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12


WWW
« Reply #23 on: March 20, 2007, 05:42:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
An oversight is something that is not that serious -- like including the white plastic for ambient readings but not including it in the software.  That is qualifies as a dumb oversight.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=107479\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have no problems using the APS to do ambient light readings.
My software is in french so I'm not sure what the english terms are but at the first screen if you select the middle button (validation?) then you get a choice to take ambient light mesures which gives you the color temperature and luminosity.

Denis
Logged
neil snape
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1432


WWW
« Reply #24 on: March 20, 2007, 06:12:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I have no problems using the APS to do ambient light readings.
My software is in french so I'm not sure what the english terms are but at the first screen if you select the middle button (validation?) then you get a choice to take ambient light measures which gives you the color temperature and luminosity.

Denis
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=107666\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


The ambient light readings are only for your knowledge and are not incorporated in the color matching of the monitor. I just checked and it does indeed take readings on both LCD or CRT (not that that would make any difference as it is the light falling on the sensor) .
Some monitor programs have a selection if you wish the ambient light color taken into account for calibrations.
It is a seldom used function at best, so not sure if it is important or not. I don't have the shipping box, so I cannot say what is written on the packaging. In the help it is correctly stated that it is just a measure and check against an ISO standard. You can check to see if you fall into this control standard or not.
Personally the ISO monitor spec , is not bright enough for a working environment. If your work space was this dim , when you went outside you'd be blinded each time by natural light.
Yet many retouchers in Paris continue to work in dark holes.....not me!
Logged
neil snape
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1432


WWW
« Reply #25 on: March 20, 2007, 06:18:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Oh I forgot to say, the ambient light measurement is in the Validation/Ambient Light panel, not in the profiling monitor panels for those who don't find it.
Logged
marty m
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 335


WWW
« Reply #26 on: March 20, 2007, 04:11:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You can add HP to this group as well. Some at HP were surprised that APS would not automatically optomise its test chart size for the media being used. There is a work around whereby you print the tiff files APS uses manually and then use APS to read them.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=107638\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That is what I was hoping for -- that HP would learn about this through these postings.  Or from you, as the case may be.

Did HP say whether they will UPDATE AND PATCH THE SOFTWARE so it will work as intended?

As for the work-around, could you provide a few details on how that would be done?  

Which folder is the largest target in?

If that is a single tiff, how do you break it up into separate sections, to spread it out over two smaller pieces of paper?  (That is the way the Xrite software works)

And HP is saying that the onboard spectro can read these multiple pages, with the tiff broken up?

ROBERT -- Can you suggest to HP that they provide one of their tech bulletins with precise instructions on how to do the work-around -- and presumbably they would say in that tech bulletin that this is only a temporary fix until this is fixed in patch to the APS software?

Because my bottom line remains the same -- DO NOT BUY THE APS until HP says that they will issue a patch to fix the software.
Logged
neil snape
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1432


WWW
« Reply #27 on: March 20, 2007, 04:33:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Marty,

Did you look in the APS folder?
The images and txt reference files are in there.
What version do you have?
Is it a boxed version?
I'd like to see if everyone has the same version and or where we can find a common ground.

If you look above a few posts back , printing the charts on another printer aren't going to make the charts smaller, nor did I succeed to even read the chart from another printer. They are not multipage , merely the same targets that are in the APS UI.
What is not working as intended,  what exactly is  to be asked?
So far most of the things I've tried have worked, profiling monitors, and media. The size of the charts though is /are too large for common sheets.
What help or documentation are in the box? What does it say on the box?
Logged
marty m
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 335


WWW
« Reply #28 on: March 20, 2007, 05:11:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You can add HP to this group as well. Some at HP were surprised that APS would not automatically optomise its test chart size for the media being used. There is a work around whereby you print the tiff files APS uses manually and then use APS to read them.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=107638\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


NEIL -- I am actually responding to your questions.  My comments were prompted by the above report from Robert (Panascape) that according to HP "there is a work around whereby you print the tiff files APS uses manually and then use APS to read them."

Neil, I agree with you.  There is no work-around.  The tiff files come in one standard size, and can't be printed any smaller.  That seems logical to me.  I was only responding to the report from Robert that HP claims there is a work-around.  But I agree with Neil, I doubt that there is any effective work-around.  The HP staff who told Robert that there is a work-around probably haven't actually tried it. If they had done so, they would have hit a brick wall the same way Neil did.

As for the future of the software, HP needs to provide a patch/update that would work in one of two ways:

(1)  That would resize the tiffs on the fly to match the size of the media.  That is how most profiling packages work.

(2)  Alternatively supply different tiffs for different sized media -- 11" wide, 13" wide, 17" wide and 24" wide.  And then have options in the software to pick one or the other.

Hopefully Robert can let us know if HP plans on patching this software to fix this problem.

This is a very significant flaw that undermines the central purpose of the software.

IF HP doesn't intend to fix it, they should be prepared to deal with requests for refunds.  (At least in my case.)  Since the software won't function without the colorimeter plugged in, once the device is returned, the software is of no use in any case.

P.S.  I reported this problem to two different tech guys at HP.  One of them said that "any profiling package that only works with 24" paper is useless."  

I couldn't have said it better myself!  

I begged both of these guys to report the problem to their superiors, so it would move up the chain of command for a resolution.  I had the distinct impression they both would drop it as soon as they hung up.  But I tried.

So I am hoping that Robert can pass this along and provide us with an update.
Logged
neil snape
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1432


WWW
« Reply #29 on: March 20, 2007, 05:37:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Adaptive sizes are definitely coming. Multipage is possible but no commitment there yet.
I was sure I had profiled before on smaller sheets (A3+) but with so many changes, I don't know anymore.
Essentially I've always profiled sheets at A3+ with the 918.
A profile package that can't do that , I can't recommend.
I don't expect that it be a full Profile Maker neither, but a few more options would be really really nice.
Some of the options I have requested were put in a long time ago. What I have said all along this thread is I think the size thing is just a bug/oversight. Since that was confirmed today, I still have hopes for this otherwise quite good application. Again, (broken record) most of the features are working, it's simple to use, and globally is well suited to the printer and automations. I'll give them the chance, and some time as HP are busy making good on the reds, and 2 the APS is a collaboration with Gretag oops XRite. Everytime I see app dev between parties it moves through slower. Since all the media I have on rolls are at least 24" APS still does what it can and does it well. For sheets I just do it by hand in Profile Maker, or use the built in profiler. I will be very happy when I can print external sheets on other printers and read with the Z.
Logged
marty m
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 335


WWW
« Reply #30 on: March 24, 2007, 12:29:24 PM »
ReplyReply

An update.  HP tech support called back and confirmed that they are aware of the problem of the 988 patch target not printing on paper smaller than 24" width.  I was speaking with tech support that specifically supports this product, and the tech staffer had spoken with the engineering team before he called me back.  (The tech support staffer was very courteous, very helpful, understood the problem and how profiling packages work, and called me back twice with updated reports.  I give him high marks for tech support.  But he also could only report what he was told by the engineering team.)

HP tech support stated that there are no firm plans to issue a software patch or revision to fix the problem.   So, on the record, HP is not committing to fix the problem.  I guess that doesn't rule out a future patch or revision, but HP should be taken at their word --

THERE IS NO COMMITMENT BY HP TO FIX THIS ISSUE AT THIS TIME OR IN THE FUTURE.

Therefore, the original title of this thread still applies.  If the ability to profile papers with the 988 patch on media that is less than 24" in width is important to you, then you should not purchase this software.

In my opinion, any profiling software that sells for $700 to $800 and doesn't include this feature is fatally flawed and is simply not worth such an extravagant price.  As I said in a previous posting, ALL other profiling packages in this price range by Xrite, Gretag or anyone else include the ability to profile papers smaller in size than 24".

I told HP tech support that HP was royally ripped off by Gretag and Xrite when this software was designed and sold to HP by those companies.  Gretag would NEVER release such FATALLY FLAWED software under the Gretag name, but Gretag was more than happy to rip off HP.

To repeat another point, if you buy a brand new paper and want to try it out, it is likely that it either won't be initially available in the 24" size, or you wouldn't want to risk buying that size until you try it out in a smaller size.  At that point you'll want to utilize the best profiling package available that works with the Z3100 so that you can find out what the new paper has to offer.

Except that you can't because the "best" APS profiling package is so crippled as to make that impossible.

I requested an RMA and refund in Thursday through a supervisor in the Small Business Section.  He understood that once the colorimeter is returned along with CD-Rom, the software won't function.  I have not received the RMA thus far.  

This is a straightforward case for a refund.  HP engaged in misleading advertising when they sold the software.   Any consumer would reasonably assume that the software can profile on paper smaller than 24".  And there is no risk to HP once the colorimeter is returned along with the software.  This is the equivalent of returning hardware  with no possibility of future use by the consumer.

I'll keep you posted as to whether HP stands behind their products and processes the RMA, but after 1 1/2 days I have heard nothing.  Most companies issue RMAs on the spot.

Not a good sign with regards to the HP and their customer service --

and their willingness to stand behind their products.

P.S.  I also reported the problem of the white plastic included with the colorimeter, and the fact that the ambient room measurement is not included in the construction of the profile.  I explained that this is not a big deal for me personally, and the 24" issue is far more important.  The HP tech support staffer said that based upon his own reading of the Gretag manuals, the Gretag software works the same way, and the ambient measurement is not actually included in building the profile.  It is an entirely separate reading of the ambient room light, for whatever good that will do you.  And that HP and Gretag work the same way in that regard.  That is contrary to other reports in this thread.  I don't know who's right, and simply pass along that report as well.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2007, 01:00:24 PM by marty m » Logged
Panascape
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


« Reply #31 on: March 24, 2007, 04:26:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Marty, contrary to what technical support has told you, there are new versions of APS being tested. At the moment one dept of HP doesn’t seem to know what the other is doing, the new firmware being a perfect example.

The Z3100 needs a patch of a certain size to work and apparently cannot use resized patches. Currently APS, unlike the machines internal profiling routine, simply prints one of the tiff files that come with the package. Apart from not fitting on a 17” roll, the largest test chart also wastes a lot of media.

I have been told that HP are investigating whether APS can operate the same way the internal profiling works by automatically generating patches to best fit the layout of the loaded media thus solving the 17”issue and eliminating media wastage.

Once I have the beta that is coming in a few days, I will report back if the changes have been implemented.

In the mean time I will also ask my contacts at HP about the possibility of modifying the existing target to fit as I think I may know how it can be done and if I am correct, the APS software will not need to be modified to make this work.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2007, 04:52:15 PM by Panascape » Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad