Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: RIP for the 2200  (Read 6592 times)
TZombek
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« on: September 27, 2005, 03:11:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Does anyone have coments about the need for a RIP for the 2200?

Thanks,
Ted
Logged
Geoff Wittig
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1017


« Reply #1 on: October 01, 2005, 02:10:49 PM »
ReplyReply

From everything I read, some sort of RIP is necessary to get decent black & white output with the 2200. However, it's definitely worth trying Roy Harrington's $50 shareware Quadtone RIP before shelling out serious bucks for something like ImagePrint. Quadtone RIP has worked very well on my 7600 for black & white.
Logged
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7963



WWW
« Reply #2 on: October 01, 2005, 05:18:31 PM »
ReplyReply

For black and white I actually prefer the Quadtone RIP to Imageprint (which I use for color). It's easier to use, seems more flexible, and gets better results. Imageprint does better color than I can get using either the Epson printer profiles or ones I have made using Monaco EZColor. But B&W still goes better with Quadtone.

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
eyedoc
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #3 on: November 12, 2005, 11:29:21 AM »
ReplyReply

A good rip make a world of difference with the 2200, esp. black and white.
Logged
blowery
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 34



WWW
« Reply #4 on: November 15, 2005, 08:22:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
A good rip make a world of difference with the 2200, esp. black and white.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=51090\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Do folks see better results with ImagePrint 6 vs. a custom profile on the same paper for color work?  I know ImagePrint is supposed to rock for B&W on the 2200, but I'm curious how it does for color vs. a custom profile.  Primarily how does it do with deep shadows?  I'm having a bunch of problems with shadows plugging using the stock profiles from the Epson web site for Archival Matte.

Thanks!
Logged
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #5 on: November 15, 2005, 08:28:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Do folks see better results with ImagePrint 6 vs. a custom profile on the same paper for color work?

A well-made custom profile will get you about 90% of the way to what you can get with a RIP + custom profile. The main advantage of a RIP is being able to control the ink linearization for best results, something the standard driver doesn't allow, which forces the profile to correct linearization problems to some extent.
Logged

blowery
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 34



WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 16, 2005, 06:05:10 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
A well-made custom profile will get you about 90% of the way to what you can get with a RIP + custom profile. The main advantage of a RIP is being able to control the ink linearization for best results, something the standard driver doesn't allow, which forces the profile to correct linearization problems to some extent.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=51384\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ah, gotcha, that makes sense.  Thanks Jonathan!
Logged
gmitchel
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 151


WWW
« Reply #7 on: November 16, 2005, 09:24:20 AM »
ReplyReply

I use ImagePrint Lite.

I found it took a lot of time tweaking output curve layers in PS to get neutral grayscale prints on the 2200 without a RIP.

I had no desire to go to a quadtone system. I was not going to buy a second printer for B&W or flush lines just to get a neutral grayscale  print.

I use ImagePrint for all of my fine art prints -- grayscale  and color. The UI is dreadful. Something MR has commented on his reviews and I certainly discussed in my review. They really should hire an app developer who understands UI usability.

I get neutral grayscale  prints with IP Lite and their profiles. I have found their profiles to be excellent for the Epson 2200. Their grayscale profiles are rather unique, and I have always appreciated how metamerism can be reduced by using one of their grayscale profiles for an intended lighting situation.

One feature of IP Lite I really appreciate is the ability to precisely place images on a page. Without IP Lite, using PS to print meant getting uneven borders sometimes. IP Lite nails the placement everytime, even when you manually feed fine art paper from the rear.

IP Lite is expensive. You can probably buy an Epson 2200 on eBay for less than a copy of IP Lite. The UI is a frustration. But it does work as advertised.

Cheers,

Mitch
Logged
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #8 on: November 17, 2005, 04:17:23 PM »
ReplyReply

You don't need a RIP to get neutral B&W; a good custom profile will do that. If you're not getting neutral grays in the lighting the profile was made for, then the profile is bad. The primary benefit of a RIP is the better ink linearization and reduction in the amount of tweaking the profile must do.
Logged

budjames
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 690


WWW
« Reply #9 on: November 18, 2005, 05:49:39 AM »
ReplyReply

I've been using Image Print for about 2 years. I started with IP v5.6 and just received the upgrade to v 6.0 about 3 months ago. Their profiles produce excellent results on my Epson 2200 using Epson Matte, Hahnemuhler German Etching, William Turner and Photo Rag papers. The biggest difference that I found between IP and the Epson drivers is that the IP prints have much better shadow details.

It is very expensive for a hobbist like me, but I was willing to pay for the quality difference after seeing it for the first time at the first Fine Art Photography Summit in Phoenix 11/03.

I agree that the interface is a bit clunky and I wished it operated from within PS CS2 instead of as a standalone app.  However, as a standalone app, one really nice feature is the ability to make reprints easly from within IP without have to find the image or load PS. IP also has a cool step and repeat feature that allows you to place the same or different images at different print settings on the same page to save paper.

I was thinking about upgrading my printer to the new Epson R2400, but I'm holding off until Image Print is available for this model.

My 2 cents.

Bud James
Logged

Bud James
North Wales, PA
www.budjamesphotography.com
gmitchel
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 151


WWW
« Reply #10 on: November 18, 2005, 08:58:07 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
You don't need a RIP to get neutral B&W; a good custom profile will do that. If you're not getting neutral grays in the lighting the profile was made for, then the profile is bad. The primary benefit of a RIP is the better ink linearization and reduction in the amount of tweaking the profile must do.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=51548\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes. For one combination of ink and paper. Under one lighting condition. Grayscale images with the Epson 2200 do evidence metamerism. The profiles that are available for IP Lite compensate for different lighting conditions.

By the time you buy a half dozen custom profiles, you have pretty much paid for IP Lite.  And you do not have the hassle of printing test targets, mailing them, etc.

IP also gives you other print management features that may or may not be important to you. It prints in the background, releasing the PC much faster. You can precisely place images, even multiple images, on the page and have tem print correctly. PS is not a print management program and its print management capabilities are very limited. IP has a lot more to offer in that regard.

I don't beta test for Colorbyte or have any financial or professional interest in them or IP Lite. I am just a customer who fusses about the UI but loves the result I get with my Epson 2200. Before I used IP Lite, I used to spend a lot of time tweaking my output to get neutral grayscale images. Now I do not.

Cheers,

Mitch
Logged
budjames
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 690


WWW
« Reply #11 on: November 19, 2005, 03:52:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Here's another point, by the time you buy a couple of custom profiles, you might as well buy the new R2400 and sell you 2200 on eBay. You'll probably save money too.

Now that I said that, does anyone want to buy a pristine 2200? I'll even consider selling my Image Print v5.6 and v6.0 too.

Bud James
North Wales, PA
Logged

Bud James
North Wales, PA
www.budjamesphotography.com
madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2108


« Reply #12 on: November 20, 2005, 10:42:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Here's another point, by the time you buy a couple of custom profiles, you might as well buy the new R2400 and sell you 2200 on eBay. You'll probably save money too.

Now that I said that, does anyone want to buy a pristine 2200? I'll even consider selling my Image Print v5.6 and v6.0 too.

Bud James
North Wales, PA
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=51715\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Hi Bud,  I'm actually thinking about buying ImagePrint 6 for the Epson 2200.  If you'd like to sell yours (CD, dongle, etc.) please let me know.  You can reach me at madmanchan2000@yahoo.com.  Thanks.  

Eric
Logged

budjames
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 690


WWW
« Reply #13 on: November 27, 2005, 04:13:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hi Bud, I'm actually thinking about buying ImagePrint 6 for the Epson 2200. If you'd like to sell yours (CD, dongle, etc.) please let me know. You can reach me at madmanchan2000@yahoo.com. Thanks.

Eric
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=51768\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I did order the R-2400. It should arrive this week. $759 + free shipping from Amazon.com.

That said, I also e-mailed Colorbyte Software, makers of Image Print, last week about when they plan on releasing IP for the R-2400. They are coming out with an Image Print upgrade for the R-2400 very soon. The cost will be $150 for existing IP owners, therefore, I'll be keeping my copy of IP6.

Bud James
« Last Edit: November 27, 2005, 04:15:43 AM by budjames » Logged

Bud James
North Wales, PA
www.budjamesphotography.com
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad