Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Mark D Segal's review of Epson 4900  (Read 16087 times)
rodsncones
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #40 on: January 05, 2011, 01:18:41 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Mark or anyone else willing to help,

I enjoyed reading your review of the new 4900.  I am an amatuer and new to this forum.  I have had an epson 4800 since 2005 and have recently moved to the new 4900.

I would like to give the Illford Gold Fiber Silk paper you like so much a try with my new 4900.  I used Epson's Premium Luster almost exclusively in the past with the 4800.  

Ilford has not yet made IGFS ICC profiles available for the 4900.  I do not have the capability or no how needed to create my own profile, as you have done.  Can I use Ilford's Gold Fiber Silk ICC profiles for the 7900 and 9900 printers in the 4900?  If not, they claim Epson's own built in Epson glossy paper ICC profiles may work. Have any of you found that they work?
« Last Edit: January 05, 2011, 01:21:21 PM by rodsncones » Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #41 on: January 05, 2011, 01:27:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Please send me a private message through the messaging facility of this Forum giving me your own direct email address and I shall help you with this.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1631


WWW
« Reply #42 on: January 13, 2011, 02:59:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Right, I am now getting close to being up to date enough to run these tests.  I'm going to use Epson Luster and Epson Archival Matte across a 7890, a 9900 and a 4900.  Hope to have it completed Monday and will then report back.
Logged

remko
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 44


« Reply #43 on: January 15, 2011, 09:07:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Right, I am now getting close to being up to date enough to run these tests.  I'm going to use Epson Luster and Epson Archival Matte across a 7890, a 9900 and a 4900.  Hope to have it completed Monday and will then report back.

I am curious to your findings, Phil.

I was the one reporting here my observations after having printed some of my images at an Epson event on both a 4900 and the 7890. Prints done on the same paper with the very same settings in the driver.  What we saw with prints coming from the 4900 was color inconsistency under changing light conditions (I then called that metarism, I now know that that is not correct) . This effect was quite noticeable. That surprised me a lot and something I had not expected at all.

The prints from the 7890 also looked more photographic, something hard to put in words. In the thread that was mistakenly deleted by the OP, I suggested that anybody interested in these printers have a look for themselves by printing a couple of their images to find out whether they got the same result as we had.

So I am looking forward to your results !

Might be that this exemplar of the 4900 was out of spec.

Cheers,
Remko  
Logged
Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1631


WWW
« Reply #44 on: January 18, 2011, 08:08:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, I've completed my tests.  4900, 7890 and 9900.  I'm not seeing any issue or any significant differences between the machines.  There are some differences between the 10 and 8 colour machines, but you have to look for it and really it's helped by having them side by side. 

Mark - if you want to PM me an address, I'd be happy to send a set of samples through as I think it would be useful to have you review and comment - you likely will have a more discerning eye than me and on top of your review of the 4900 it may be useful.
Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #45 on: January 18, 2011, 08:40:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, I've completed my tests.  4900, 7890 and 9900.  I'm not seeing any issue or any significant differences between the machines.  There are some differences between the 10 and 8 colour machines, but you have to look for it and really it's helped by having them side by side. 

Mark - if you want to PM me an address, I'd be happy to send a set of samples through as I think it would be useful to have you review and comment - you likely will have a more discerning eye than me and on top of your review of the 4900 it may be useful.


Hi Phil, that's really good of you to offer and thank you very much. I'll be in touch. I expect to see what you saw, nonetheless it is often good for at least two pairs of eyes to look at stuff like this, especially when the differences don't hit you in the face.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Colortrails
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 15


WWW
« Reply #46 on: January 18, 2011, 10:19:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Fantastic review, Mark. Thanks for putting in the time and detail on that. Just seeing the size alone of this beast gives me some pause, given my small office. 100+ lbs nothing to sneeze at either. OTOH, the improved color reproduction and other improvements over prior models are tempting so I'll have to mull this investment over a bit longer, but as usual LL reviews trump all others. Great job.
Logged

Author of Adobe Digital Imaging How-Tos: 100 Essential Techniques for Photoshop CS5, Lightroom 3 and ACR 6

Follow me on Twitter @Colortrails
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #47 on: January 18, 2011, 11:09:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks Dan, glad you found it useful. And yes, the beast kind of crowds my office too!
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
remko
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 44


« Reply #48 on: January 20, 2011, 01:46:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, I've completed my tests.  4900, 7890 and 9900.  I'm not seeing any issue or any significant differences between the machines.  There are some differences between the 10 and 8 colour machines, but you have to look for it and really it's helped by having them side by side. 


That is very interesting, Phil, especially since you ran your test on the same paper as I printed my photos on: Epson's Premium Luster.

How did you find the consistency of the Luster 260 icc profile among the 4900 and the 7890 ? We found the print coming from the 4900 to be a bit too redish and having more contrast. The latter gave the impression of a bit sharper print, but on close inspection that was due to the difference in contrast.

Cheers,
Remko
Logged
Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1631


WWW
« Reply #49 on: January 20, 2011, 03:28:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Remko,

I found them to be very similar and I didn't notice a particular cast from one to the other.  There are differences, particularly when compared side by side or under a loupe looking at a solid colour.

Susnset orange is, not surprisingly, improved with the 10 colour ink set, but you do need to be looking closely.  There's a similar advantage when looking at greens.  Again, not surprising.

Interestingly, on my prints here I see slightly more magenta in the skin tones from the 7890 than the 4900.  Neither are bad and the difference is very small.  I've sent a set of prints to Mark for him to review and comment, so it will be interesting to see what he sees, too.

B&W (desaturated RGB) I'm seeing slightly darker and more contrast on the 4900 in the aforemention skin tones.

The match from the 9900 to the 4900 is extremely close (as you'd expect).

I'm keen to hear Mark's report once he receives them and has some spare time.
Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #50 on: January 20, 2011, 04:11:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Remko,

I found them to be very similar and I didn't notice a particular cast from one to the other.  There are differences, particularly when compared side by side or under a loupe looking at a solid colour.

Susnset orange is, not surprisingly, improved with the 10 colour ink set, but you do need to be looking closely.  There's a similar advantage when looking at greens.  Again, not surprising.

Interestingly, on my prints here I see slightly more magenta in the skin tones from the 7890 than the 4900.  Neither are bad and the difference is very small.  I've sent a set of prints to Mark for him to review and comment, so it will be interesting to see what he sees, too.

B&W (desaturated RGB) I'm seeing slightly darker and more contrast on the 4900 in the aforemention skin tones.

The match from the 9900 to the 4900 is extremely close (as you'd expect).

I'm keen to hear Mark's report once he receives them and has some spare time.

Looking forward to seeing them Phil. They've got a good distance to travel, so it will likely be a while.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1631


WWW
« Reply #51 on: January 20, 2011, 04:15:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Courier picked them up yesterday, so with any luck you'll have them early next week.
Logged

remko
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 44


« Reply #52 on: January 20, 2011, 04:33:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Remko,

I found them to be very similar and I didn't notice a particular cast from one to the other.  There are differences, particularly when compared side by side or under a loupe looking at a solid colour.

Susnset orange is, not surprisingly, improved with the 10 colour ink set, but you do need to be looking closely.  There's a similar advantage when looking at greens.  Again, not surprising.

Interestingly, on my prints here I see slightly more magenta in the skin tones from the 7890 than the 4900.  Neither are bad and the difference is very small.  I've sent a set of prints to Mark for him to review and comment, so it will be interesting to see what he sees, too.

B&W (desaturated RGB) I'm seeing slightly darker and more contrast on the 4900 in the aforemention skin tones.

The match from the 9900 to the 4900 is extremely close (as you'd expect).

I'm keen to hear Mark's report once he receives them and has some spare time.

Hi Phil,

Thank you for the test and the feedback, I appreciate it  Smiley

I now do think that the 4900 on that event was a bit out of spec, as we found that the greens on a forest landscape print were better (more differentiated) on the 7890 print - which was a surprise of course. That is when comparing them side by side.

The skin tones on the 7890 print looked fine, if anything than maybe slighty a bit too yellow on very close inspection. Go figure.
On the 4900 the skin tones were definitely a bit too redish.

cheers,
Remko
Logged
Ernst Dinkla
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2855


« Reply #53 on: January 21, 2011, 02:31:41 AM »
ReplyReply

One may wonder though what caused the different ink lay down of the first Imageprint 8 4900 driver. Did they simply copy a 7900 configuration that didn't behave the same on the 4900 or was it something else? Colorbyte's comment was "minor differences between the 4900 and 7900/9900 printers which causes slight overinking in the dark areas." Epson will enhance image quality and other aspects if they get a chance and there has been quite some time since the 7900/9900 were introduced.

That said >>>"metamerism"<<< seems to be at the same low level compared to the 9900, something we did expect. Thank you Phil.


met vriendelijke groeten, Ernst Dinkla

New: Spectral plots of +230 inkjet papers:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
« Last Edit: January 21, 2011, 02:40:30 AM by Ernst Dinkla » Logged
AFairley
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1165



« Reply #54 on: January 21, 2011, 04:31:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Thank you for the long review, Mark.  I feel much better about being "stuck" with my 3800 for the foreseeable future....   Smiley
Logged

catchall
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 21


« Reply #55 on: January 21, 2011, 10:09:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Sorry to say it, but I tried a 4900 and the pizza wheel marks are unacceptable (to me) on Museo Silver Rag and H Photo Rag Baryta. Scratches are clearly discernible when viewed with strong light at an angle to the paper.  The pizza wheels come down six inches from the end of the paper (to eject it) and create columns of marks. The only printers that don't have this problem are the 7xxx and 9xxx Epsons (they have other sheet feeder problems though) and the 4xxx series if you retract the pizza wheel plate manually. Canons are unacceptable also.

It appears that the 4880 may be the best printer out there for sheet feeding these thicker glossy papers (if you retract the pizza wheels manually).

The 4900 would make a great matte printer though and perhaps it would work fine for thinner weight glossy papers.

Logged
Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1631


WWW
« Reply #56 on: January 21, 2011, 10:13:55 PM »
ReplyReply

Different papers will see different issues.  260gsm isn't light, but it's not super heavy - the Epson Luster doesn't suffer from pizza-marks.

What issues are you seeing with 7900/9900 sheet feeding (other than it being only 1 sheet at a time)?

Also, how are you feeding the 4900?  Rear or front?
Logged

catchall
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 21


« Reply #57 on: January 21, 2011, 11:54:09 PM »
ReplyReply

The 4900 ejects the paper using the pizza wheels if the sheets are loaded from the top or from the cassette. 7xxx and 9xxx printers have a difficult time (often misfeeding) when trying to load the above mentioned papers if they are in sheet form. Other thinner papers should be fine.
Logged
Farmer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1631


WWW
« Reply #58 on: January 22, 2011, 04:14:55 AM »
ReplyReply

The 4900 doesn't drive the paper with the pizza wheels.  I was trying to obtain information from you to see if the issue was more or less prevelant based on the paper feed method with those papers.

As for the 7900/9900 - I have to say, I love the sheet feed compared to previous models - I certainly don't see how you can have paper feed issues during load.  Can you detail the problem?
Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6945


WWW
« Reply #59 on: January 22, 2011, 06:58:58 AM »
ReplyReply

"Catchall" - I haven't seen this problem withthe top feed, the roll feed, or the cassette feed, using papers with caliper up to 315 micron. I have not tried much heavier papers. For those the manual specifies to use the front feed. Have you tried adjusting the platen gap and the paper thickness settings in the Epson driver? For thicker papers you may need a paper setting of 4 and a "wide platen gap, or depending on thickness and weight of paper a bit more of each.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad