Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Report Back on the visit by the Hp engineers  (Read 9376 times)
Panascape
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


« on: May 04, 2007, 12:02:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Ok I can't say too much but I did promise you all a report.

Firstly, HP is very committed to this machine and to getting it working the way we would like it to.  

They are aware of our concerns and problems posted here and are looking into each issue as it arises.

The time spent with the engineers was quite intense and we covered a lot of issues including colour. What I can tell you is that there are various paths forward that have been identified and will be investigated and tested as soon as they get back to Barcelona but it seems that there is a very big bright light at the end of the tunnel.

What I maybe should not say but will is that while the HP has colour issues at the moment, it has the potential to produce the most unbelievable colour and while maybe for some it canít get there right now you will not believe what I am pretty sure you will see at the end. I am hard to impress and I am impressed.

I know itís frustrating and I donít have an idea on timing but itís going to be worth waiting for.

As soon as I can say more I will but I promised HP that I would not say too much and I will keep that promise.

Robert
« Last Edit: May 04, 2007, 01:47:51 PM by Panascape » Logged
SeanPuckett
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 245


WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 04, 2007, 12:38:53 PM »
ReplyReply

I showed the HP guys at the Contact HP Gallery in Toronto yesterdays this print (only without the bad web colour), and they didn't believe it came off the z3100.  I think this is because they all use the z3100PS's built in RIP (which doesn't know how to speak ProPhoto), and so they've never seen it print any colours that are out of the sRGB gamut.

Sometimes I despair.  

N.B. this is ALSO why HP has never heard of the windows driver custom page size issue -- they never use the windows driver; they just feed the files to the PS version's built in RIP via web browser.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2007, 12:40:25 PM by SeanPuckett » Logged

Panascape
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


« Reply #2 on: May 04, 2007, 12:48:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I showed the HP guys at the Contact HP Gallery in Toronto yesterdays this print (only without the bad web colour), and they didn't believe it came off the z3100.  I think this is because they all use the z3100PS's built in RIP (which doesn't know how to speak ProPhoto), and so they've never seen it print any colours that are out of the sRGB gamut.

Sometimes I despair. 

N.B. this is ALSO why HP has never heard of the windows driver custom page size issue -- they never use the windows driver; they just feed the files to the PS version's built in RIP via web browser.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115707\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi Sean, don't worry the normal 3100 team use non postscript 3100's. I have the same machine as you and all I can say is just have patience, I know itís not easy.
Logged
BlasR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 760



WWW
« Reply #3 on: May 04, 2007, 01:40:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Robert,

Thank You for your report.

BlasR
Logged

Recked
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 128


« Reply #4 on: May 04, 2007, 02:07:59 PM »
ReplyReply

At the risk of asking a question I am sure you have already answered Sean what exactly are you using to drive your 3100?

thanks
Logged
Panascape
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


« Reply #5 on: May 04, 2007, 02:10:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
At the risk of asking a question I am sure you have already answered Sean what exactly are you using to drive your 3100?

thanks
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115720\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Windows RGB driver but the driver is not the problem...
« Last Edit: May 04, 2007, 02:27:47 PM by Panascape » Logged
dkeyes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 259


WWW
« Reply #6 on: May 04, 2007, 02:52:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Robert,
Are you using APS? I just updated to 1.2 version, no improvement other than paper size issue.
- Doug
Logged

Panascape
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


« Reply #7 on: May 04, 2007, 02:59:46 PM »
ReplyReply

I use APS 2.0 which is not released yet. This solves some APS issues but will not solve the problems with the colour.

All I can say is the problem seems to be a combination of factors that have a knock on effect.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2007, 03:00:14 PM by Panascape » Logged
alan a
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 91


« Reply #8 on: May 05, 2007, 02:45:23 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I use APS 2.0 which is not released yet. This solves some APS issues but will not solve the problems with the colour.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115728\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I didn't see an answer in the other thread.  Does the beta APS 2.0  work with the largest patch set on one 17x22 sheet or not?  Does the largest patch set reconfigure itself so that it can fit on one sheet since that should be possible?

Are the engineers working on the problem that the Z3100 stops printing and cuts off a print in the middle when a cartridge runs out of ink. instead of waiting for us to insert a new cartridge?

And what about the many complaints about the sound of the fan or hard drive?  Is a really silent mode possible when the 3100 is not used, with no noise at all, and the unit would still periodically turn itself on and do the auto head checks to prevent ink clogging?

Thanks in advance for your responses.
Logged
Panascape
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


« Reply #9 on: May 05, 2007, 05:32:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Alan

ďDoes the beta APS 2.0  work with the largest patch set on one 17x22 sheet or not?  Does the largest patch set reconfigure itself so that it can fit on one sheet since that should be possible?Ē

No the TC9.18 will not work on a 17x22 sheet as you cannot resize the patches. This was raised with them as well as the possibility to print it over multiple sheets.

Patches will reconfigure themselves to fit sheet size if possible.

ďAre the engineers working on the problem that the Z3100 stops printing and cuts off a print in the middle when a cartridge runs out of ink. Instead of waiting for us to insert a new cartridge?Ē

Yes this seems to be a bug that was missed.

ďAnd what about the many complaints about the sound of the fan or hard drive?  Is a really silent mode possible when the 3100 is not used, with no noise at all, and the unit would still periodically turn itself on and do the auto head checks to prevent ink clogging?Ē

This was not covered by I will ask them on Monday.
Logged
adiallo
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 87


« Reply #10 on: May 05, 2007, 05:51:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Re the fan/HD noise, not everyone is experiencing this issue. In my case, the only sound I can hear from the printer is when it periodically wakes itself up to do head maintenance. Maybe the issue is related to heat or ventilation in users' physical environments. Or maybe it's a tech issue present on some units but not others.
Logged

Ernst
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 24


« Reply #11 on: May 05, 2007, 09:44:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Sean,
If I understand you correctly the HP guys were surprised by the quality of your prints. What driver do you use ?
Regards
Ernst
Logged
marty m
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 335


WWW
« Reply #12 on: May 05, 2007, 09:57:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Robert -- following up on the question posted by alan, if the patches can be reconfigured to fit on different sized sheets, then the TC 9.18 patch set should fit on a 17x22 sheet.  Based on measuring the size of the patch set.  Have you tried it?  If it doesn't work, can you ask why it doesn't, since in theory the 9.18 patch set should fit on a single 17x22 sheet once the patches are reconfigured.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2007, 10:03:46 AM by marty m » Logged
Panascape
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


« Reply #13 on: May 05, 2007, 10:08:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Marty, the TC 9.18 is currently 18"wide. There needs to be a certain amout of white space around the target so even re-configured it will be fractionally too big for a 17 x 22" sheet.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2007, 10:10:09 AM by Panascape » Logged
marty m
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 335


WWW
« Reply #14 on: May 05, 2007, 10:20:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Marty, the TC 9.18 is currently 18"wide. There needs to be a certain amout of white space around the target so even re-configured it will be fractionally too big for a 17 x 22" sheet.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115814\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
With a white margin, the patch is about 17 5/8" by 18 5/8" so I assumed it would be possible if it filled the 22" dimension, as there would be room to spare.  

Even if the patch reduced down to 16" in one dimension (17" width of the paper), you still an extra 3 3/8" inches total to fill on the long dimension (22" length of the paper), and that should be ample room for reconfiguring on a sheet that is 22" long.

As a rough approximation, and including white margins, if the patch reconfigured to be 16" wide, it would be no longer than 20 1/4".  If the patch is 15" wide, it would be about 21 1/4" long.  

So under any logical variation of reconfiguring to fit different media, it should EASILY fit on a 17x22 sheet.

Since 17x22 sheets are a widely used standard size, it is unfortunate that the reconfiguring doesn't at least include the ability to fit on that size.

As a practical matter, the APS 1.20 is still only able to function with rolls.  Because for most of us the largest sheet we use is 17x22.  Unless you use24x36 sheets!

It is still a step in right direction that it works with 17" rolls.

But if it can be reconfigured to fit different size media, it should be fixed to work with 17x22 sheets, and that would be an important improvement for many users of the APS who buy paper in 17x22 sheets and not in rolls.

That would be an important improvement in version 1.20 or 1.21.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2007, 10:46:05 AM by marty m » Logged
Panascape
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


« Reply #15 on: May 05, 2007, 10:49:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Mart, there is a non printable margin that the printer requires for sheets that you are not taking into account.
Logged
marty m
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 335


WWW
« Reply #16 on: May 05, 2007, 11:03:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Mart, there is a non printable margin that the printer requires for sheets that you are not taking into account.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115821\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The new APS 1.20 is limited only to rolls when using the largest 9.18 target, and that is unfortunate.  And not necessary.

Your response on margins doesn't correspond to how the APS actually prints with the largest TC 9.18 target  (17 5/8" by 18 5/8" in size).

With the current APS, it leaves a 3/8" margin on the edge of the paper when it prints on 24" rolls.  

I based my posting on the actual margin now left by the APS -- 3/8".  

My calculations demonstrate that there is more than enough room for any non printable or printable margins.  There is simply lots of room left on the 22" dimension for a 17x22 sheet.

And that is true even if the margin has to be greater than 3/8".  

With a 1/2" margin, if the target is 16" wide on a 17" wide paper -- the 9.18 target would be about 20 1/4" long, leaving ample room for margins on the long dimension.  

That means that the margins can even be slightly larger than 1/2" and the target would still fit on a 17x22 sheet.  (Again, the actual margin is 3/8" with the current version of the APS)

* Again, the new APS 1.20 is limited only to rolls when using the largest target, and that is the reason that most owners of the Z3100 would buy it.  Let's just be honest in how we all describe it.

* It is a major improvement that it works with 17" rolls.

* But it is a significant limitation that it doesn't work with 17x22 sheets -- since that is a widely used sheet size for those who may not buy rolls.

And that limitation is not explained by the actual margins utilized by the current version of APS 1.0.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2007, 11:35:53 AM by marty m » Logged
Panascape
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


« Reply #17 on: May 05, 2007, 12:01:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Lose 2 rows on the right which fits the width which = 68 pathes = three rows at the bottom which adds about 2", taking the height to 22"
Logged
marty m
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 335


WWW
« Reply #18 on: May 05, 2007, 12:02:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Lose 2 rows on the right which fits the width which = 68 pathes = three rows at the bottom which adds about 2", taking the height to 22"
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=115830\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not the way I calculate it.  I'm not trying to argue for the sake of argument, but I just don't understand your calculations.

Three rows are about 1 5/8"

That takes you down to 16" with ample margins (17 5/8 - 1 5/8 = 16")

Adding three rows on the other dimension means 18 5/8" + 1 5/8" = 20 2/8.  Add 3/8 margin on both sides, and you are at 21.  (And I am adding shorter rows to the longer dimension, so I am being conservative.)

That leaves one full inch unaccounted for on a 22" sheet!

I still don't see how it wouldn't work with one 17x22 sheet

But even if it won't the answer is to ask HP to fix APS to work with multiple sheets, similar to all other profiling packages.

It is a significant limitation that it only works with rolls with the largest target
« Last Edit: May 05, 2007, 12:28:42 PM by marty m » Logged
Panascape
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 215


« Reply #19 on: May 05, 2007, 12:17:13 PM »
ReplyReply

The answer is to ask HP to fix APS to work with multiple sheets, similar to all other profiling packages.  

Already done and taken one step further in requesting the separate sheets need not all be the same size so that we can use off cuts.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad