Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: ESP 7900 Profiling Problems  (Read 26713 times)
Ryan Grayley
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 217



WWW
« Reply #20 on: January 27, 2009, 03:35:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Wayne Fox
I was printing to an Epson 3800, which is my default printer, and the ColorSync default profile is PLPP.  I was printing on Epson Premium Luster paper with PK ink.

Thanks for checking your ColorSync Utility. As you are printing on Luster you won't notice any differences with Mac CS4 as the default ColorSync Utility profile is Luster and therefore correct for the paper you are testing. However, if you were to exactly recreate my test methodology then you might see what I am seeing. In order to do this you will need to use your Epson SP 9900, matte black ink, Enhanced Matte paper and use the same strip from the i1Match 918 test chart. Your 3800 may be a valid alternative for the tests but I think it would be better to eliminate as many variables as possible. In case you don't have any Enhanced Matte, I will run a few test strips on ordinary copy paper to see if the differences can still be observed.

My theory is that regardless of the chosen media type, PLPP is always being used to determine the ink densities when disabling colour management in Mac CS4. If I am correct then this could imply that the Epson canned profiles contain information on ink density and therefore must be set correctly even when printing test charts with Colour Management disabled. This would explain correct results if I manually change the default profile in ColorSync Utility to the chosen media setting.

Could a few more colour experts offer some comment please? Eric?

Thanks again Wayne,

Ryan
« Last Edit: January 27, 2009, 03:38:24 AM by Ionaca » Logged

Ryan Grayley BA IEng MIET ARPS
RGB Arts Ltd, London, UK
Chas
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10


« Reply #21 on: January 27, 2009, 09:00:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: madmanchan
Two questions:

1. Were you printing using the RGB color mode for the Epson driver (a.k.a. AccuPhoto HD) or the ABW driver?

2. Did you try the latest Mac Intel driver from the Epson USA support site?

Sorry for late reply.

1.  RGB mode.

2.  Yes, it is version 6.11.

FWIW, I was using Epson Premium Semigloss in a 7800. Test charts were inspected not only visually, but also compared statistically in Profiler Pro Measure Tool.
Logged
Chas
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10


« Reply #22 on: January 27, 2009, 09:15:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Ionaca
The ColorSync Utility workaround as follows.
- Open ColorSync Utility and click on the Devices tab.
.......snip......
- Click on the 'Current Profile' drop down menu and select 'Other...'
- A foreground window will then open and here a different profile can be selected.
Sorry for the delay in replying.

My Current Profile drop down arrow was grayed out and didn't work, so I couldn't go any further at the time.  I just now tried logging in as Admin and now it works; Apple didn't seem to provide any authentication dialog for this utility!  I will try your workaround when I get a chance.  Your theory about the Premium Luster default seems plausible.  As I mentioned in reply to Eric, I am using Premium Semigloss in a 7800, and comparing the test chart statistics in Profiler Pro.
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2886



WWW
« Reply #23 on: January 27, 2009, 04:53:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Ionaca
Thanks for checking your ColorSync Utility. As you are printing on Luster you won't notice any differences with Mac CS4 as the default ColorSync Utility profile is Luster and therefore correct for the paper you are testing. However, if you were to exactly recreate my test methodology then you might see what I am seeing. In order to do this you will need to use your Epson SP 9900, matte black ink, Enhanced Matte paper and use the same strip from the i1Match 918 test chart. Your 3800 may be a valid alternative for the tests but I think it would be better to eliminate as many variables as possible. In case you don't have any Enhanced Matte, I will run a few test strips on ordinary copy paper to see if the differences can still be observed.

My theory is that regardless of the chosen media type, PLPP is always being used to determine the ink densities when disabling colour management in Mac CS4. If I am correct then this could imply that the Epson canned profiles contain information on ink density and therefore must be set correctly even when printing test charts with Colour Management disabled. This would explain correct results if I manually change the default profile in ColorSync Utility to the chosen media setting.

Could a few more colour experts offer some comment please? Eric?

Thanks again Wayne,

Ryan

OK ... I think I see where you are coming from.  What you are saying is that unless the default colorsync profile is set to a proflie built with the paper type you are choosing in the print settings dialog, the ColorSync default profile will override some setting when printing the target.  The only way around that is to reset the ColorSync default Profile to one that was built using the same media type you are going to choose in the Print Settings .. in this case choosing Enhanced matte MK as both the paper type and having ColorSync default set to Enhanced Matte_MK.

In theory, a color profile shouldn't be involved in the ink load.  It should be set and controlled by the media type in the print settings dialog, and possibly modified using the Advance media control. In fact, typically with 3rd party papers you have to print test prints using various Epson Media choices to find one that will deliver an appropriate ink load.  Perhaps there is something in a profile which modifies this however.

Anyway, I did have a roll of Enhanced Matt laying around.  I loaded up Enhanced Matte on my 7900.  I printed the EyeOne Match target using CS4/10.5.6 with all settings like I would normally do.  The target appeared pretty normal, but admittedly a little "flat" ... to the point that if this were a 3rd party paper I was profiling I would probably have punched up the ink load a little.  I then loaded the target into CS1, and using the method I described yesterday printed the target, and sure enough it didn't match.  It appeared, as you described, to have more "ink".  Most of the darker colors were a little darker, most of the lighter colors were about the same.  But visually it was obvious they weren't identical.

I then changed the default ColorSync profile to Epson Enhanced Matte _MK, and printed the target from CS4.  It did not match the first CS4 target, as you stated, and it did match the CS1 target.

So at this point I agree there appears to be a problem ... at least with the 79/9900 driver.  I may test this with my 11880.  Despite all of the correct settings in CS4 and the print driver, if you are trying to print a target with no color management involved at all, it appears to only work if the media type you are choosing in print settings is the same as the media type used for the profile that is the Default ColorSync profile for that printer as set in ColorSync utility.  Of course this is assuming the the work around for CS1/10.5 is actually accurate as well.

This doesn't appear to affect actual output ... if allowing Photoshop to manage colors and printing using the correct printing profile, it did not matter which profile was set as the default in ColorSync.  It only appears to be a problem when trying to print a target (or anything that is trying to eliminate all color management).

Current work arounds for me appear to be 4 ...

1. Reset the colorSync default profile to one that was built using the media type you are using for the paper you are building the profile for.  The question is what if you want to change the inkloads ... does the default in ColorSync over ride this as well?  May have to test that.

2. Print from CS1 (and perhaps 2?), making sure the ColorMatching dialog is set to Epson Color Controls (this may not work if these are not set to a default.  I don't know enough about them to know where and when Epson Color controls may actually affect the data.)

3.  Print from 10.4.11 - it seems to work with CS1, I'm guessing it will also work with CS4 (will test that tonight). It appears all of this is related to Apples change in the printer mechanics introduced with Leopard.

4.  Print from XP.

Again, this appears only necessary if trying to print with no color management involved.

Perhaps we should move this over to the Adobe Forums?
« Last Edit: January 27, 2009, 10:39:20 PM by Wayne Fox » Logged

hjscm
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 33


« Reply #24 on: January 27, 2009, 10:28:47 PM »
ReplyReply

I would say this seems to make sense.  When i printed targets on glossy paper they were fine and matched out of cs4 and eye 1.  but when i tried with matte paper known of them matched.  i will try and change the colr sync profile if i can figure it out.

thanks for all the work.

chris
Logged
Chas
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10


« Reply #25 on: January 28, 2009, 12:00:10 PM »
ReplyReply

OK, its seems we are closing in on the problem.

Right now, I am getting correct image printouts on any paper, as long as I select my custom profile under Photoshop Manages Colors, even though the Colorsync Utility has remained set to the default Premium Luster setting.  That is, everything works fine as long as I'm not trying to print an unmanaged target.

The thing I am not clear on in the suggested workaround is this:

Suppose I want to print an unmanaged target.  I go ahead and set the Colorsync Utility default profile to the same paper that I plan to use, and then print the target and make a profile.  The consensus is that this works.

But it is also true that Photoshop prints images correctly via Photoshop Manages Colors using my custom profiles for *any* paper even though the utility is left set to its Premium Luster default.

My question is, does the Colorsync Utility profile setting have any effect on normal printing through a profile, or only on unmanaged target printing?  Put another way, is there any harm in just setting the Colorsync Utility default profile to the paper in use, and leaving there even when not printing unmanaged targets?  Or does it need to be restored to its Premium Luster setting to print normally through Photoshop Manages Colors?

Probably would have been easier to try it than type all this.
Logged
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9191



WWW
« Reply #26 on: January 28, 2009, 12:29:29 PM »
ReplyReply

Don't touch the ColorSync utility, that's my first suggestion!
Logged

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

Posts: 2886



WWW
« Reply #27 on: January 28, 2009, 02:08:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: digitaldog
Don't touch the ColorSync utility, that's my first suggestion!

If you don't touch the colorsync utility and need to print a target with all color management off to a matt paper, such as enhanced matt, the target is not printed correctly.

I don't understand why if you turn management off in both Photoshop and the Epson Print Settings dialog, how the default profile in ColorSync would have any affect at all ... but it does.

What do you suggest?

Logged

Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2886



WWW
« Reply #28 on: January 28, 2009, 02:15:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Chas
My question is, does the Colorsync Utility profile setting have any effect on normal printing through a profile, or only on unmanaged target printing?  Put another way, is there any harm in just setting the Colorsync Utility default profile to the paper in use, and leaving there even when not printing unmanaged targets?  Or does it need to be restored to its Premium Luster setting to print normally through Photoshop Manages Colors?

Probably would have been easier to try it than type all this.


No.  I've tested this and as long as Photoshop is managing colors, the default profile in ColorSync doesn't matter ... prints are identical.  This is only a problem if you are trying to print a target with no color management to a paper other than the paper used to build the profile that is the default in colorSync.  

In the test Ryan did and I confirmed, if you try and print a target in the normal fashion on Epson Enhanced Matt with MK inks, that target will be incorrect unless you also change the default profile in ColorSync utility to Epson Enhance Matt_MK.  When installing the driver it appears the default profile is always set to Luster.
Logged

digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9191



WWW
« Reply #29 on: January 28, 2009, 02:28:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
If you print using Same As Source, and instead of using ColorSync (which asks you to select an actual output profile, which defaults to the printers ColorSync default) you set the printer to use Epson Color Controls, for the most part the chart actually matches the CS4 chart. In fact, visually everything matches perfectly except column 1.

If memory serves me, you'd want Same as Source (untagged RGB) and in the Epson driver, No Color Adjustment.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Chas
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10


« Reply #30 on: January 28, 2009, 05:45:22 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: digitaldog
If memory serves me, you'd want Same as Source (untagged RGB) and in the Epson driver, No Color Adjustment.
I tried that.  IIRC it didn't give me a correct profiling target print on OSX 10.5.6 with CS4.

Though I think it used to on all previous OSX and XP with all previous PS for the last 6 years.  Something is different with either CS4 or 10.5 or both.
Logged
Ryan Grayley
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 217



WWW
« Reply #31 on: January 28, 2009, 05:58:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Chas
I tried that.  IIRC it didn't give me a correct profiling target print on OSX 10.5.6 with CS4.

Though I think it used to on all previous OSX and XP with all previous PS for the last 6 years.  Something is different with either CS4 or 10.5 or both.

Indeed, Eric Chan has mentioned such changes with 10.5 and CS4 several times on the Adobe Forums in the context of problems with ABW.

I regard the behavior of CS4 discussed in this thread as another bug. In case this issue hasn't been reported to Adobe, I have submitted a bug report at the link below.

http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform

In the meantime I am going to use CS1 to print my test charts.

Ryan
« Last Edit: January 28, 2009, 05:59:04 PM by Ionaca » Logged

Ryan Grayley BA IEng MIET ARPS
RGB Arts Ltd, London, UK
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2886



WWW
« Reply #32 on: January 28, 2009, 11:22:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Ionaca
Indeed, Eric Chan has mentioned such changes with 10.5 and CS4 several times on the Adobe Forums in the context of problems with ABW.

I regard the behavior of CS4 discussed in this thread as another bug. In case this issue hasn't been reported to Adobe, I have submitted a bug report at the link below.

http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform

In the meantime I am going to use CS1 to print my test charts.

Ryan

Unclear if this is actually an Adobe issue.   Could be Epson or Apple as well ... could be the 3 are just not interacting correctly.

Thought I would update for those interested.  It also appears you cannot get an accurate target for Enhanced Matt Papers using an 11880 and system 10.5.6 as well.  Not only is my target inaccurate, but I have not found a work around yet ... changing the default ColorSync profile doesn't affect the target.

To try and make sure I wasn't doing something wrong I printed Bill Atkinsons 918 patch target to my 11880 from one Mac using system 10.5.6 and CS4, another Mac using system 10.4.11 and CS1. (Looking for my  installer disks for CS2 and CS3).  The two are visibly different, but not as obvious as the 7900. The CS4 target looks "milky".  At first I thought perhaps somehow I messed up and used PK ink instead .. that's kind of what it look like.  So I added a large black patch, and printed the target twice more, once with MK and once with PK just to be sure there was a diffirence.  As expected it was easy to verify from the black patch that the MK target did indeed use MK ink.

So I repeated the printing with the black patch from CS1 using both MK and PK, just to make sure I had what I wanted.  Again, the C1 target looked better ... cleaner colors, more saturation.

I then went ahead and read and proflied the two targets, and I compared the results in ColorThink against the 11880 default Enhanced Matt _MK profile  From this it was obvious the target printed with CS4 had a major problem ... gamut volume was only 347,000 as compared to Epson's profile of 472,000 and the CS1 profile I made of 494,000.  Attached is a color think graph comparing the CS1 profile (wireframe) against the CS4 profile.

At this point I cannot find a work around ... I cannot find a way to print an accurate target on matt paper to an 11880 using CS4 and 10.5.6.  It may be possible you can only print an accurate target for an 11880 from CS4 if you are using Epson Premium Luster(260) as your media type.

just to make sure there is no user error here I may duplicate this test tomorrow.
[attachment=11233:CS1_CS4.jpg]
Logged

Ryan Grayley
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 217



WWW
« Reply #33 on: January 29, 2009, 03:01:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Wayne Fox
I then went ahead and read and proflied the two targets, and I compared the results in ColorThink against the 11880 default Enhanced Matt _MK profile  From this it was obvious the target printed with CS4 had a major problem ... gamut volume was only 347,000 as compared to Epson's profile of 472,000 and the CS1 profile I made of 494,000.  Attached is a color think graph comparing the CS1 profile (wireframe) against the CS4 profile.

This is interesting as I also noticed that the 3d gamuts in the ColorSync Utility were unusually small when I initially used CS4. Now that I have re-profiled the same (matte) papers using CS1 the gamuts are now a similar size to the nearest equivalent canned profiles such as VFA.

Cheers,

Ryan
Logged

Ryan Grayley BA IEng MIET ARPS
RGB Arts Ltd, London, UK
TylerB
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 361


WWW
« Reply #34 on: January 30, 2009, 11:45:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Wayne Fox
Unclear if this is actually an Adobe issue.   Could be Epson or Apple as well ... could be the 3 are just not interacting correctly....

Wayne, this is an ongoing issue, and I appreciate you reporting your experiences here and the work you are putting into it. I brought this up on the colorsync list some weeks back, and someone from Adobe, after some confusing posts from others, simply said they changed things to comply with Apple's requirements to work with changes in the OS, and the ball is now in Epson's court.
The bottom line is that the "color managed" data path has been changed in ways few of us seem to be able to get a handle on, and the "expert" community seems remarkably silent about it, while the rest of us have yet to feel confident of a way to print an unmangled chart, and use the resulting profile with confidence as well.
I wish I had more to offer, but am watching other relevant forums for as much input as possible...
But for now I wonder, how are profiles being made at the highly visible color management shops like Chromix, to name just one?

I don't personally have to deal with this, using a RIP on a PC avoids any OS level, application level, or OEM driver level problems, but I do need to get a handle on it to help others and provide profiles to them when necessary...
The whole thing feels like a mess right now.
Tyler
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2886



WWW
« Reply #35 on: January 30, 2009, 09:22:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: TylerB
Wayne, this is an ongoing issue, and I appreciate you reporting your experiences here and the work you are putting into it. I brought this up on the colorsync list some weeks back, and someone from Adobe, after some confusing posts from others, simply said they changed things to comply with Apple's requirements to work with changes in the OS, and the ball is now in Epson's court.
The bottom line is that the "color managed" data path has been changed in ways few of us seem to be able to get a handle on, and the "expert" community seems remarkably silent about it, while the rest of us have yet to feel confident of a way to print an unmangled chart, and use the resulting profile with confidence as well.
I wish I had more to offer, but am watching other relevant forums for as much input as possible...
But for now I wonder, how are profiles being made at the highly visible color management shops like Chromix, to name just one?

I don't personally have to deal with this, using a RIP on a PC avoids any OS level, application level, or OEM driver level problems, but I do need to get a handle on it to help others and provide profiles to them when necessary...
The whole thing feels like a mess right now.
Tyler

Thanks for the info.  I'm glad Ryan started this thread and was persistent until I understood exactly where the problem was, because I was pretty skeptical. I was having a heck of a time trying to build a profile for Museum Etching for my 7900.  Pretty sure this is the reason .I'm curious how many out there are making profiles that aren't even aware of this problem.  

I've decided to have one hard drive on the machine where I print and read targets using a clean install  system 10.4.11.  My i1i0 table is less flakey under this system, and using CS1 (or CS3, testing that now), I can print targets without having to use one of my 2 CS4 copies, saving them for my Laptop and workstation.

BTW, I just tested CS3 and 10.5.5, which prints a target virtually identical to CS1/10.4.11 according the MeasureTools compare mode. function.
« Last Edit: January 30, 2009, 09:25:10 PM by Wayne Fox » Logged

TylerB
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 361


WWW
« Reply #36 on: January 30, 2009, 10:09:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Wayne, let us know if the resulting profile, from the "correctly" printed chart from previous versions, will then work well when using it from CS4... if you get to that point.
Obviously this could be problematic as well since it was differently handled for the chart. What a can of worms.
I suspect, also, that printing right out of EyeOne Match, or similar, would result in chart measurements like those you just made from Adobe pre V4. I was also informed, but have not tried it, that tagging the chart with GenericRGB may allow it to pass through unaltered. But then we may get Epson driver updates soon that change everything!
T
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2886



WWW
« Reply #37 on: January 31, 2009, 12:21:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: TylerB
Wayne, let us know if the resulting profile, from the "correctly" printed chart from previous versions, will then work well when using it from CS4... if you get to that point.

As long as photoshop is managing colors, there seems to be no problems with output.  The profiles work very well ... output as expected.  The real challenge is finding a method that sends your target data to the printer without any color management interfering ... once you find that the profiles from those targets work fine from CS4/10.5.x.

Logged

Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1631


WWW
« Reply #38 on: March 19, 2009, 03:54:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Regarding the problem with Epson ABW and CS4, I've been advised to expect driver updates in April/May to address this issue.
Logged

Ryan Grayley
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 217



WWW
« Reply #39 on: March 19, 2009, 05:55:38 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Farmer
Regarding the problem with Epson ABW and CS4, I've been advised to expect driver updates in April/May to address this issue.

Thanks for the info on this. Hopefully the update will also fix the profiling issues discussed in this thread.

Cheers,

Ryan
Logged

Ryan Grayley BA IEng MIET ARPS
RGB Arts Ltd, London, UK
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad