Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / June 2006
Anyone here use an Epson 4800 printer?
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Mark Conrad - 07 May 2006 16:36 GMT If so, are you 100% happy with that Epson printer, model 4800?
(...or more realistically, 90% happy) ;-)
I am seriously contemplating buying the $2,500 "Pro" version of that high-end Epson printer, however I have several questions before I shell out that extreme amount of cash.
I am looking for final printer output that can't be distinguished from a regular photographic print, both viewed close up.
Is that of quality from a printer an unreasonable expectation?
If unrealistic, then how close can printer output come to duplicating real photographic prints?
Appreciate any advice, either positive or negative.
Mark-
-- Really naive and clueless digital newbie here, with my very first digital "outfit", a Canon 5D body with a fair assortment of lenses.
JimKramer - 07 May 2006 17:48 GMT > If so, are you 100% happy with that Epson printer, model 4800? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > high-end Epson printer, however I have several questions before I shell > out that extreme amount of cash. Why do you want the "pro" version, I doubt that you really want or need the RIP software that you pay extra for?
I would not call it a high-end printer, more like the bottom of the commercial tier.
> I am looking for final printer output that can't be distinguished from > a regular photographic print, both viewed close up. Most people could not tell the difference. I think the Epson K3 color gamut is a bit wider than a Noritsu or Fuji Frontier printer. Certainly better looking shadow details.
> Is that of quality from a printer an unreasonable expectation? > > If unrealistic, then how close can printer output come to duplicating > real photographic prints? > > Appreciate any advice, either positive or negative. The ink is expensive, especially when you are worrying about 8 or 9 different inks.
The cleaning tank is a rip off. $40 for a cotton/poly sponge and an Epson chip.
Are you really planning on printing much over 13"? If not consider the R1800 or R2400.
Like any other Epson after you buy it you need to keep using it or you will have clogged head problems.
FYI - the first set of ink cartridges will be half emptied, just doing the initial ink charging.
True borderless prints are limited to using roll paper. Margins are 0.5" at the top, 0.55" at the bottom and 0" on the sides for sheet paper.
If you are just looking at a few big prints, take them to a local shop and have them printed there and buy a smaller printer for "general use".
The printer is heavy, 110 lbs without the ink and physically large, make sure you have someplace to put it that is both strong enough and large enough to hold it, and you have someone to help you move it. It comes strapped to a pallet.
If using roll paper you will want to be able to get at the back side.
It is a great printer; just make sure it is too much of a printer for what you will be using it to print.
Jim
> Mark- > > -- > Really naive and clueless digital newbie here, with > my very first digital "outfit", a Canon 5D body > with a fair assortment of lenses. C Wright - 07 May 2006 23:14 GMT On 5/7/06 11:48 AM, in article 1147020495.653580.228880@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com, "JimKramer" <jimG@jlkramer.net> wrote:
>> If so, are you 100% happy with that Epson printer, model 4800? >> [quoted text clipped - 65 lines] >> my very first digital "outfit", a Canon 5D body >> with a fair assortment of lenses. I agree with most of what Jim said; I will add these additional comments. Regarding shelling out the extra money for the RIP that Epson supplies, if you want/need a RIP take a look other RIPs available, like Colorbyte's ImagePrint. If you plan on doing a lot of switching back and forth between photo black and matte black ink this may not be the printer for you. Making the switch wastes a lot of ink each time. There are some solutions for this, but that is another subject. Unless you already have sufficient table space for a printer of this size and weight, you may want to look at the custom cart that Epson sells. This cart is such a perfect fit that when the printer is on it the whole thing looks like one unit. The quality of work produced by this printer is tops as is the mechanical build quality. Chuck
Mark Conrad - 09 May 2006 03:41 GMT > It is a great printer; just make sure it is too much of a printer for > what you will be using it to print. Thanks for the great replies.
Perhaps I had better elaborate somewhat on my requirements.
Initially, I thrashed around, considering a drum Iris printer, but the cost, maintenance, fading inks, and other problems turned me off.
Absolutely no banding with an Iris, and excellent ink selection if you do not mind fading.<g>
Then I considered turning my photo' files over to an offset lithographer, but the cost for short runs of say 200 was high, and the color was not all that great. Excellent absence of all traces of banding, however, which is hard to achieve on an ink jet printer.
None of the above rambling is first hand experience, just going by what I read, which may or may not be accurate.
My expected audience will be"seminars" of hard core PC users, who I hope to "dazzle" with Mac video and still presentations, "slick" brochures, pamphlets, of as high a quality as I can afford - - - without informing them of the cost of my gear, naturally.
The aim is a volunteer effort on my part to "sway" a small number of them into trying a Mac as a 2nd computer, to add to their existing productivity. A public service, as it were.
Years ago, there was a two-store chain here called "Connecting Point", that sold new Macs and Mac software, had free seminars in-store to help new Mac users - - - they were doing a landslide business, I bought several Macs there myself.
Apple, in their infinite wisdom, took the small chain to court and shut them down. A 200 square mile area of northern california reverted to 100% PCs and Windows shops, who now have a vested interest in keeping Macs out. Lots of money to be made here servicing PCs which become clogged up with malware of all kinds.
Anyhow, that is my "audience", I will be lucky if I do not get stoned by them.
Don't get me wrong, I use PCs myself when the situation warrants, but I personally find Macs easier to use and maintain.
Back To Business *************
Question -
Is there a noticable difference in the results produced by lower end consumer printers in the $100/300 range, as contrasted to higher cost printers around $2,000
I have so far bought lower priced printers of all makes, and have been disappointed by the noticable "banding" in clear areas like the blue sky. (i.e. the thin overlap stripe that gets sprayed twice with ink)
This thin stripe is especially noticable in off-white areas that do not receive much ink, noticable banding even when high grade photo stock is used.
At least to me it is noticable, others may not be bothered by it.
Iris printers are not afflicted by this "overlap" banding, because they spray the entire page edge-to-edge instead of printing in half inch wide swaths like ordinary ink jet printers do.
...but Iris printers are lousy in many other respects, so I hear.
There also seems to be noticable "clumping" of ink dots in areas of the print that should be even and clear of any sorts of "clumps".
As Regards Clogged Nozzles ******************* I assume there is no technical way of preventing ink nozzles from partially clogging, other than operating the printer continuously.
Mark-
G.T. - 09 May 2006 04:11 GMT > Question - > > Is there a noticable difference in the results produced by lower end > consumer printers in the $100/300 range, as contrasted to higher cost > printers around $2,000 I have an Epson P2200.
> I have so far bought lower priced printers of all makes, and have been > disappointed by the noticable "banding" in clear areas like the blue [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > receive much ink, noticable banding even when high grade photo stock is > used. I keep looking at my photos given your concern for "banding" and I cannot detect anything. I have a feeling an Epson R1800 or R2400 should suit your needs fine.
My Mom has printed brochures herself for years for her gallery and the ones from her last two printers have looked completely professional.
> At least to me it is noticable, others may not be bothered by it. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I assume there is no technical way of preventing ink nozzles from > partially clogging, other than operating the printer continuously. That has been a problem with my P2200. And I don't think there is any improvement with the R1800 and R2400.
Greg
Mark Conrad - 13 May 2006 03:40 GMT > > I have so far bought lower priced printers of all makes, and have been > > disappointed by the noticable "banding" in clear areas like the blue [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > detect anything. I have a feeling an Epson R1800 or R2400 should suit your > needs fine. Well, my last Epson 1270 was a piece of crap as regards banding.
Guess Epson fixed it when they made your Epson P2200.
The marketing hype for high end Epson models, like the 4800, 7800, 9600 claim automatic alignment of print heads, after a test pattern is analyzed..
That implies the print heads might get _out_ of alignment.
> > As Regards Clogged Nozzles > > ******************* [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > That has been a problem with my P2200. And I don't think there is any > improvement with the R1800 and R2400. John posted that Epson puts the ink nozzles on the printer, not on the ink cartridges. (high end Epson printers only?)
The Epson high end printers, $2,000 and up, claim they can automatically detect and clean partially clogged nozzles.
I don't know if that actually works. Seems to me if a nozzle gets partially clogged with _dried_ ink, that there is not much that can be done to unclog it, other than to remove the nozzle assembly from the printer and clean it in a strong solvent.
> > It all started because I am now not much over 3 feet tall. I used to > > be taller, 5' 10'' to be precise, but life has worn me down over the > > years, I kept shrinking due to old age. > > Wow, what a great "Mark Conrad" tangent! Well, I am too busy chasing my tail to properly respond to all the great helpful posts here, so I threw in a few, er, exaggerations, to liven up the thread.
Trying to whip together an "outfit" for my Canon 5D, among many other chores and projects.
Gave up trying to find a clamp-on tripod that will allow me to attach the camera to limbs, ladders, etc., guess I will have to jury rig one from stuff I find at a hardware store.
Whoops, UPS pounding on my door, appears to be a 200 pound muscle-bound Russian woman.
Looks like she has the interval timer for the Canon, a device that will repeatedly click the shutter at timed intervals, anywhere from one second to 99 hours.
Wait a second...
Asked her how UPS handles heavy 100 pound items - - - she said with both hands. (???) Finally got across to her that I wanted to know the UPS limit, she grunted they will deliver up to 150 pounds.
Mark-
J. Clarke - 13 May 2006 13:45 GMT >> > I have so far bought lower priced printers of all makes, and have been >> > disappointed by the noticable "banding" in clear areas like the blue [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > the camera to limbs, ladders, etc., guess I will have to jury rig one > from stuff I find at a hardware store. You might want to go to the B&H site and search on "Manfrotto Magic Arm" "Manfrotto Double Arm", and "Manfrotto Super Clamp". The Super Clamp won't clamp on _big_ limbs but does fine on anything up to 2-1/2 inches or so. For up to 9 inch or so diameter get a 12" handscrew <http://www.woodcraft.com/family.aspx?familyid=4386> and clamp the super clamp onto that. For bigger than that you're on your own. Make sure you get a 2907 or 2908 stud so you can put standard accessories on the Super Clamp without the arm.
> Whoops, UPS pounding on my door, appears to be a 200 pound muscle-bound > Russian woman. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Mark-
 Signature --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Mark Conrad - 14 May 2006 17:59 GMT > You might want to go to the B&H site and search on "Manfrotto Magic Arm" > "Manfrotto Double Arm", and "Manfrotto Super Clamp". The Super Clamp won't [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > get a 2907 or 2908 stud so you can put standard accessories on the Super > Clamp without the arm. Great idea, that carpenter's site has a lot of woodworking clamps which can supplement dinky camera clamps - - - and of course every photographer worth his salt knows to carry, or have immediate access to, a highly extensionable and compact aluminum ladder.
Below is the site for the "Manfrotto Super Clamp" only:
<http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details &Q=&sku=375297&is=REG&addedTroughType=categoryNavigation>
Below is the site for a combo product, e.g. the "Manfrotto Magic Arm" plus the "Manfrotto Super Clamp":
<http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details &Q=&sku=325440&is=REG>
Below are the sites for the 2907 and 2908 studs to allow a photographer to use camera accessories that fit these studs, when using the Super-Clamp only, e.g. without the Magic Arm device. (I hope I interpreted the _purpose_ of those studs correctly, if I did not, correct me)
<http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details &Q=&sku=5160&is=REG&addedTroughType=search>
<http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details &Q=&sku=5159&is=REG&addedTroughType=search>
...and a lot of prowling around the "bhphotovideo.com" main website will turn up a lot of other accessories that could be useful.
Mark-
--
Rest of post is just whining about nasty chores, don't read ***************************************** Time for me to do some more belly-aching and complaining, it relieves stress y'know.
Trying to wear out this 7 year old Mac Lombard powerbook, running its OS-8.6 - - - in order to save wear-and-tear on my modern Macs.
Darn Lombard just keeps running without any major problems.
I use "image" backups here, and every couple of years my backups become corrupted because of what I like to call "creeping corruption".
(Like for example "Soft" RAM failures and highly intermittant hardware problems, plus the rare tendency of some of the old utilities to throw "zingers" into my backups, due to bugs in those old utilities)
So every few years I gotta reload the Lombard with all the original CDs, and configure those old app's, and make "fresh" image backups.
That takes a lot of time, mainly because I have essentially forgotten the "gotchas" associated with those old app's.
Been _days_ trying to get everything loaded and running, gadd how I hate to do this sort of work.
Anyhow, after I got everything loaded and running for another couple of years, I smelled a big fat rat here.
Seems to me the old OS 8.6 is taking an inordinate time to boot up, grr.
Most likely cause is my habit of striping out parts of the OS that I figure I will not use. I probably striped out one thing too many.
So I am going to start re-loading everything from scratch, ugh.
...right after I re-partition the original partitions, and triple-check all the hardware again with an old version of TechTool Pro. ******************************************* End of griping -
There, I feel a lot better now, after all that belly-aching.
J. Clarke - 14 May 2006 20:56 GMT >> You might want to go to the B&H site and search on "Manfrotto Magic Arm" >> "Manfrotto Double Arm", and "Manfrotto Super Clamp". The Super Clamp [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > <http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details > &Q=&sku=5159&is=REG&addedTroughType=search> The studs mainly put a standard screw on the Super Clamp--it comes with a hole into with the Manfrotto studs (including the one on either end of the Magic Arm) or equivalents from other vendors can be inserted, but doesn't have a standard screw--the 2907 has a 1/4" screw at one end and 3/8 at the other, the 2908 just has the 1/4" but it's longer, effectively a double-stud, so other devices can be clamped to it--there's another long one with the 3/8" and one that has the female 1/4" and 3/8" as well but I forget the numbers on those.
> ...and a lot of prowling around the "bhphotovideo.com" main website > will turn up a lot of other accessories that could be useful. [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] > > There, I feel a lot better now, after all that belly-aching.
 Signature --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Mark Conrad - 15 May 2006 06:08 GMT > > Below are the sites for the 2907 and 2908 studs to allow a photographer > > to use camera accessories that fit these studs, when using the [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > one with the 3/8" and one that has the female 1/4" and 3/8" as well but I > forget the numbers on those. Thanks for the explanation of the purpose of those studs. It certainly would be nice if everyone used standard sizes.
Getting back to the thread topic, which I shamefully drifted away from - - - I have decided that "banding" on at least the high end printers from Epson is no longer a valid concern of mine, so I will not worry about it.
Clogging of ink nozzles however seems to be a lot more commonplace.
Someone here, I think it was you, mentioned that the ink nozzles of the Epson 4800 were attached to the printer itself, _not_ part of the ink cartridge.
Do you know if it is possible to remove the nozzle assembly from the printer, for cleaning purposes?
Would that even be advisable, given that if a user might make a mistake in re-installing the nozzle assembly.
Time for me to make another phone call to Epson, I guess.<g>
To my unpracticed eye, the overall "quality" of output from the Epson-4800 printer seems to be comparable to high end offset lithography, which is all I personally expect from an Epson.
I _could_ get a lower cost 8-cartridge Epson, but I suspect that I might regret it later, because of the added features on the 4800.
Besides, I have been stung by the low quality output of "inexpensive" printers, so I prefer to err on the high cost side.
heh heh, not _too_ high cost though. I had enough sense to not even ask how much the Epson 9600 costs. ;-) ;-) ;-)
Mark-
J. Clarke - 15 May 2006 10:11 GMT >> > Below are the sites for the 2907 and 2908 studs to allow a photographer >> > to use camera accessories that fit these studs, when using the >> > Super-Clamp only, e.g. without the Magic Arm device. >> > (I hope I interpreted the _purpose_ of those studs correctly, if I >> > did not, correct me) <http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details
>> > &Q=&sku=5160&is=REG&addedTroughType=search> <http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details
>> > &Q=&sku=5159&is=REG&addedTroughType=search> >> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Do you know if it is possible to remove the nozzle assembly from the > printer, for cleaning purposes? Probably can be done, but I wouldn't try it myself unless the printer was already pretty emphatically dead. I don't think you'll find it documented anywhere unless Epson has a training course for printer techs that you could take.
Simplest solution is to just print something every few days.
> Would that even be advisable, given that if a user might make a mistake > in re-installing the nozzle assembly. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Mark-
 Signature --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Mark Conrad - 15 May 2006 15:12 GMT > > Clogging of ink nozzles however seems to be a lot more commonplace. > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Simplest solution is to just print something every few days. Well, if _you_ would not attempt it, that is reason enough for me to avoid trying it.<g>
Excuse me for 2nd guessing Epson, but it seems to me that if I was designing a high end printer, that I would install a special ink cartridge containing solvent, to be used at the end of every print job for the sole purpose of flushing the nozzle assembly.
Mark-
Greg - 09 May 2006 04:50 GMT > As Regards Clogged Nozzles > ******************* > I assume there is no technical way of preventing ink nozzles from > partially clogging, other than operating the printer continuously. > > Mark- Just turn it on once a day.
 Signature The sometimes insomniac.
www.gregblankphoto.com
elcoggins@bee.net - 09 May 2006 14:06 GMT You will not get banding from the 4800 or the 2400 printers providing they are properly set up. My 2200 printer has never clogged. Before I print on any large sheet of paper, I always run a nozzle check. The 4800 also has never clogged. However, I have had bubbles form in the ink transfer tubes which waisted two 17 X 22' sheets of Luster $ paper.
Prior to my 4800, I was very happy with my 2200. It does make exceptional prints. The newer version, the 2400, is even better. The main problem on 2200 was the 13" wide limitation. I needed a wider paper.
What paper stock do you plan to run? Both the 4800 and the 2200 printer open a world of choices. In some cases, due to size, you can only print on one sheet at a time, even from the paper tray. Thus roll paper becomes an option.
The paper stock becomes the main issue. For it determines what black ink you need to run. If you are goning to print on fine art papers, then you will need to load matte black ink in order to get the highest Dmax.
I usually print 8 x 10 proofs on the 2200 and if I like what I see, I then print to the 4800. If the 13" wide stock is not an issue, I think you would be very happy with the new 2400 and its ease of changing black inks. For large runs, I would be cheeper to use a 4800 as far as ink consumption is concerned. However, the cost of changing out the black inks on the 4800 is outragous! 28 cycles would pay for another 4800.
Regarding the computer driving the printers, the Mac is much superior in it's color management. I have used both the PC and Mac and the Mac is "plug and play." However, both platforms have their strengths. I don't want to start a stupid platform argument!
Gene
Randy Howard - 09 May 2006 17:39 GMT elcoggins@bee.net wrote (in article <1147179971.278413.322560@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>):
> You will not get banding from the 4800 or the 2400 printers providing > they are properly set up. My 2200 printer has never clogged. Before I > print on any large sheet of paper, I always run a nozzle check. My 2200 *will* clog, if you leave it sitting for a while (a couple weeks) without printing anything. A nozzle check is sometimes good enough, other times the ink-eating clean-fest is required.
> Regarding the computer driving the printers, the Mac is much superior > in it's color management. I have used both the PC and Mac and the Mac > is "plug and play." However, both platforms have their strengths. I > don't want to start a stupid platform argument! I agree that matching monitor and printer calibrations is a breeze on the mac. However, the Epson software to control and monitor ink levels and such sucks on the Mac compared to the PC. Overall, it's worth it though to have what you see on screen match what you see on the printer.
I've yet to figure out how to get it 100% dialed in for a dual monitor setup though. I have two identical monitors, but a) Apple will apparently not allow you to copy one calibration setting to the other b) That's okay, since they aren't quite the same anyway 'as is'. c) Problem is I can't ever quite get the two to look exactly the same with the manual monitor calibration sequence (no, I don't have one of those colorimeters). So, I wind up using a color setup for one of the two monitors and do all the color tweaking work on that one and then print.
 Signature Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR) "The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
elcoggins@bee.net - 09 May 2006 23:52 GMT Randy Howard said:
>I've yet to figure out how to get it 100% dialed in for a dual monitor setup though. I have two identical monitors, but a) Apple will apparently not allow you to copy one calibration setting to the other>
You never will get 100% agreement between the monitor and the printer.
<b) That's okay, since they aren't quite the same anyway 'as is'. c) Problem is I can't ever quite get the two to look exactly the same with the manual monitor calibration sequence (no, I don't have one of those colorimeters). So, I wind up using a color setup for one of the two monitors and do all the color tweaking work on that one and then print. >
Not having a colorimeter is your problem. I do know that when I give a presentation with a projector, I run a separate ICC profile for the Ti-Book LCD and the projector. In fact, it is automatic. Each device will seek out the latest ICC profile.
Colorimeters are not that expensive. I cannot afford a GM Eye One at $1700. To me, that's the cost of a 4800! I have purcheased a Pantone Spyder2Pro and it works very well on both my CRTs, LCDs and Projector. The Apple color calibration technique leaves alot to be desired. But do keep in mind that you will never have 100% agreement between monitor and printer. You can, however, get very close. In my case, the CRT is always slightly more magenta than the print. Knowing this, I adjust accordingly.
Gene
Randy Howard - 10 May 2006 01:24 GMT elcoggins@bee.net wrote (in article <1147215142.340950.271570@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>):
> Randy Howard said: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > You never will get 100% agreement between the monitor and the printer. That's not what I was talking about. I can't get 100% agreement between monitor A and monitor B. both are the same brand, model and purchased at the same time, with equivalent backlight time. I just can't get them both to match exactly, which means that I have one that is a bit better at matching my printer than the other, so I use it for color proofing prior to printing.
As far as it matching the print output, I'm relatively happy with it as is.
> <b) That's okay, since they aren't quite the same anyway 'as is'. > c) Problem is I can't ever quite get the two to look exactly the [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > keep in mind that you will never have 100% agreement between monitor > and printer. You can, however, get very close. I'd like to be able to control the monitor to monitor aspect right now, as it's hard to have two versions of an image open in PS, one on the left monitor, one on the right and compare them visually when the colors are slightly different on each.
I'll look into the Pantone Spyder2Pro option. Thanks.
 Signature Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR) "The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
Randy Howard - 10 May 2006 16:06 GMT elcoggins@bee.net wrote (in article <1147215142.340950.271570@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>):
> Colorimeters are not that expensive. I cannot afford a GM Eye One at > $1700. To me, that's the cost of a 4800! I have purcheased a Pantone > Spyder2Pro and it works very well on both my CRTs, LCDs and Projector. > The Apple color calibration technique leaves alot to be desired. But do > keep in mind that you will never have 100% agreement between monitor > and printer. You can, however, get very close. I have a question about using the Spyder2Pro product. When you do that, do you delete the OS X specific monitor calibration information, or leave it in place? Along the same lines, do you reset the flat panel to it's factory settings, or adjust them at all? Or, is that all in the manual? I'm ordering one right now, just curious for information from someone that has used it successfully...
 Signature Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR) "The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
C Wright - 10 May 2006 17:43 GMT On 5/10/06 10:06 AM, in article 0001HW.C0876B8E00739756F0386530@news.verizon.net, "Randy Howard" <randyhoward@FOOverizonBAR.net> wrote:
> elcoggins@bee.net wrote (in article > <1147215142.340950.271570@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>): [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > now, just curious for information from someone that has used it > successfully... You don't delete any of the existing monitor calibration information. The Spyder2 software will write a new replacement profile and you can accept the name it suggests or rename it with another name if you like. As far as display settings are concerned, you do adjust the settings and they are not always the factory settings. However, there are way too many monitors with different combinations of manual hardware settings and software settings to get into any specifics. The Spyder software will tell you what to adjust.
elcoggins@bee.net - 10 May 2006 18:24 GMT >I have a question about using the Spyder2Pro product. When you do that, do you delete the OS X specific monitor calibration information, or leave it in place? Along the same lines, do you reset the flat panel to it's factory settings, or adjust them at all? >
C. Wright answered most of your questions. However, some monitors have a reset button. So I wouuld reset the monitor before starting calibration. The better ones also allow you to set your white balance and have individual color gun controls. If yours does not, no big deal. You will still get good calabration. The software prompts you for the monitor setting parameters before proceding with the new calibration.
>Or, is that all in the manual? > What manual? I would have liked Pantone to include one as they did on the older model; at least a PDF file. But they figure the new program is made for idiots where you just follow the on screen prompts. There is on screen help.
>I'm ordering one right now, just curious for information from someone that has used it successfully..>
Great! I think you will be very pleased. Your homework prior to receiving it will be to decide what color temperature you want to work in. In the past some photographers choose 6500* K. A little on the cool side. The new feeling is that one should match the color temp of the sun. That's 5200* K. Since 5000* is closer to 5200* K, I opted for the 5000*K. At first is seems a little red. But you quickly get used to it.
Remember, you can calibrate as many time as you want. Just give the monitor ICC (ColorSync) file a new name after each calibration and they will all be there for your choosing.
As a suggestion, I calibrate my CRT monitor every two months. If the monitor was on all day every day, then I would consider weekly calibrations. For LCDs, three times a year for they never seem to change with age.
Gene
Randy Howard - 10 May 2006 20:40 GMT elcoggins@bee.net wrote (in article <1147281888.881295.202090@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>):
> C. Wright answered most of your questions. However, some monitors have > a reset button. So I wouuld reset the monitor before starting > calibration. The better ones also allow you to set your white balance > and have individual color gun controls. If yours does not, no big deal. > You will still get good calabration. The software prompts you for the > monitor setting parameters before proceding with the new calibration. I'm fairly sure that the Dell 2405 panels I'm running side by side support a reasonably good set of controls. The "visual" calibration by the naked eye routine just hasn't been doing it for me though.
>> Or, is that all in the manual? > > > What manual? I would have liked Pantone to include one as they did on > the older model; at least a PDF file. But they figure the new program > is made for idiots where you just follow the on screen prompts. There > is on screen help. Sigh. Anyone else actually remember when "Technical Reference Manual" was something useful, and available?
>> I'm ordering one right now, just curious for information from someone >> that has used it successfully.. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > sun. That's 5200* K. Since 5000* is closer to 5200* K, I opted for the > 5000*K. At first is seems a little red. But you quickly get used to it. Yes, well the Dell settings are a bit strange here, you get a choice between sRGB default, or manually adjusting rgb settings, but no numeric color temperature readings. Strange, as other Dell monitors I've had in the past had the numeric values. I suppose they think they're doing people a more "user friendly" product. Whatever. If the program works properly, it should be able to figure it out anyway.
> Remember, you can calibrate as many time as you want. Just give the > monitor ICC (ColorSync) file a new name after each calibration and they [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > calibrations. For LCDs, three times a year for they never seem to > change with age. Strange, I've seen LCD backlights fade noticeably over time.
 Signature Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR) "The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
elcoggins@bee.net - 10 May 2006 18:41 GMT I forgot one more issue that should have been in my last post.
Most people seem to forget the color temperature of the lights in the room where they proof their photographs. If you are viewing your prints under cool white fluorescent light, the colors on the print will also seem cool. Conversely, prints under incandescent lights will seem wam.
The first thing I did in my work area was to replace alll the lights with 5000* K lights. Now I am better able to judge the colors on the prints. Home Depot sells tubes under what they call "Full Spectrum" lights. They cost about twice as much, but is is worth it. Also even though gallries tend to use halogen lamps, I would also avoid them since they give off a yellow cast.
I don't mean to imply that you are not aware of this. Just some additional suggestions.
Gene
Randy Howard - 10 May 2006 20:48 GMT elcoggins@bee.net wrote (in article <1147282868.269776.82120@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>):
> I forgot one more issue that should have been in my last post. > > Most people seem to forget the color temperature of the lights in the > room where they proof their photographs. If you are viewing your prints > under cool white fluorescent light, the colors on the print will also > seem cool. Conversely, prints under incandescent lights will seem wam. I can't stand conventional fluorescent lights, and won't have them in any room under my control. My primary work area is north facing, with ample window lighting, meaning that during the day the monitors and natural light are what I use. It's probably not as ideal of a closed room with constantly controlled lighting, but I don't like working in a closet any more than the animals at the zoo like being in a cage.
> The first thing I did in my work area was to replace alll the lights > with 5000* K lights. Now I am better able to judge the colors on the > prints. Home Depot sells tubes under what they call "Full Spectrum" > lights. They cost about twice as much, but is is worth it. Also even > though gallries tend to use halogen lamps, I would also avoid them > since they give off a yellow cast. Agreed. I get mine at HD at well, although I only use them normally at night.
> I don't mean to imply that you are not aware of this. Just some > additional suggestions. Thanks for your replies, much appreciated.
 Signature Randy Howard (2reply remove FOOBAR) "The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw
Mark Conrad - 09 May 2006 17:42 GMT > Thanks for the great replies. Hang on guys, I want to respond to all the great posts, at the risk of flooding the thread. I just consider the excellent posts here well worth responding to.
Gimme little while longer fighting this #^%**# computer, problems explained in off-topic rant later in this post.
Rebuilding everything here, including myself. Tomorrow I am ganna waste getting my 2nd cataract operation. The perceived white-balance color temp' viewed with my rebuilt right eye changed from 3400k to 5400k, all my photographs will now have to be re-done "warmer" to favor my rebuilt eyes.<g>
Eye operation is fun, doc' lets me scream in terror as he comes down on my eye with his handy-dandy exacto knife.
Screaming in terror is good for one's constitution, y'know.
Beware, Off Topic Rant - ********************* A temporary minor emergency popped up, eating up all my time.
My Thoth newsreader has blown up. (I think) - - - anyhow Thoth is useless because it is acting screwy, for the first time in several years
I did all the usual things that us self-reliant Mac users do.
1) Restored my entire partition from an "image" backup. That has always saved my bacon over the years.
No joy, Thoth was still bad.
2) Did hour long RAM check, checked all hardware, did low-level scan of disk surface, did _all_ the TechTool checks.
No joy.
I did not want to re-install Thoth for several reasons, the most important reason is that I suspected that something else was taking Thoth down, and I wanted to find out what in the heck it was.
Phooey, I did some more flailing and thrashing around, finally gave up in disgust.
Fairly certain sure I know what the root problem is.
I am addicted to "image" style backups, done on my OS X Macs with Terminal based voodoo involving "dd", "dc", "pdisk", "hexdump", "split", and a few other Unix utilities that I can't think of at this moment.
An old app' named "ShrinkWrap" is used to create image backups on my older OS 8.6 Mac, like this old Lombard powerbook that is giving me grief right now.
Image style backups are fine, they allow me to frolic around doing great things such as creating a customized partition map sector, instead of being limited by OSX's "Disk Utility".
But image backups _do_ have several drawbacks compared to conventional backups.
"Creeping Corruption" tends to work its way into my backups over the years, corruption caused by offbeat stuff like cosmic radiation.
Cosmic and other radiation sometimes causes "soft RAM failures", which can be minimized by using ECC types of RAM.
ANYHOW, all my time has been wasted recently, loading up a completely fresh OS 8.6 into this old Mac, and completely fresh app's from their CDs. Needless to say, all my problems with Thoth disappeared.
Doing fresh installs every 3 or 4 years is good for one's constitution, y'know.
Back to work, I have many more app's to load and configure, and tomorrow will be wasted with the operation on my left eye.
Grr, grrr, I will never get to use my new Canon 5D outfit, nor get to buy my dream printer which is a combination of the best features from Iris and Epson printers, with automated switching of black ink cartridges, and a seperate tank of solvent that automatically gets sprayed through all nozzle holes at printer startup. ;-) ;-) ;-)
grr, grr. grrr. *************************** End of Rant-
Mark-
J. Clarke - 11 May 2006 11:56 GMT >> It is a great printer; just make sure it is too much of a printer for >> what you will be using it to print. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > brochures, pamphlets, of as high a quality as I can afford - - - > without informing them of the cost of my gear, naturally. Why not just hit yourself on the head with a hammer?
> The aim is a volunteer effort on my part to "sway" a small number of > them into trying a Mac as a 2nd computer, to add to their existing [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > consumer printers in the $100/300 range, as contrasted to higher cost > printers around $2,000 Once you're into a photo quality printer, if they use the same ink family then the results are pretty much the same across the product line--what you get for more money is generally a wider transport, roll-paper support, and other features unrelated to print quality. Note that Epson right now has at least three families going, the 6 color series, the Ultrachrome High Gloss series, and the Ultrachrome K3 series. They recommend High Gloss over K3 for color and K3 for monochrome. Starting price on High Gloss is a bit above your $100-300.
> I have so far bought lower priced printers of all makes, and have been > disappointed by the noticable "banding" in clear areas like the blue > sky. (i.e. the thin overlap stripe that gets sprayed twice with ink) I'm looking at a photo of a contrail right now--it's almost all blue sky. I see no banding in the output from a $200 HP (I use HP because I print rarely and ran into clogging problems with Epsons, not due to any issues of print quality). I see some color variation which might be dither artifacts or might be thin clouds that don't show up on screen, but no banding such as you describe.
> This thin stripe is especially noticable in off-white areas that do not > receive much ink, noticable banding even when high grade photo stock is > used. Definitely no artifacts such as you describe, not even under a 3x magnifier.
> At least to me it is noticable, others may not be bothered by it. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > There also seems to be noticable "clumping" of ink dots in areas of the > print that should be even and clear of any sorts of "clumps". You will get dither artifacts from any process that isn't true continuous-tone. If this is a real concern for you you might want to consider a dye-sublimation printer--you'll pay a good deal more per print than for inkjet though. For what you are describing this might be worthwhile. You might want to pick up an inexpensive 4x6 Kodak and look at the output quality and see if you like it before you spend for something larger--dye-sub is not a panacea--it's continuous tone but can be lacking in fine detail.
> As Regards Clogged Nozzles > ******************* > I assume there is no technical way of preventing ink nozzles from > partially clogging, other than operating the printer continuously. This is an ongoing problem with Epson, which puts the nozzles on the printer rather than in the cartridge. It also happens with HP but you toss the cartridge and get on with life.
> Mark-
 Signature --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
Mark Conrad - 12 May 2006 04:23 GMT > Why not just hit yourself on the head with a hammer? I tried, but I keep missing.
Great series of 3 posts there John, lots of help for this newbie.
Sorry for not responding here in detail, but I have just 'nuff time to snap off a quick post, then gotta get back to chasing my tail.
Wanna explain why I steal all your tax dollars.
It has nothing to do with you personally. It all has to do with my own bitter attitude, from the raw hand that life has dealt me.
Hopefully, when I explain the circumstances, you will forgive me and we can get on with discussing Digital Single Lens cameras, and printers sometimes used with those DSL cameras.
It all started because I am now not much over 3 feet tall. I used to be taller, 5' 10'' to be precise, but life has worn me down over the years, I kept shrinking due to old age.
As you can imagine, my short stature gave me a complex. People sneered at me from on high, especially big guys. Those same big guys did not realize that all their vital parts were inches away from my teeth, but I always restrained myself and did not emasculate them.
Just picture me as being "Yosemite Sam" in the Bugs Bunny cartoons, and you will get a good idea of what I look like, mean disposition and all.
To make things worse, my complex made me gain weight, so I was not too much over 3 feet tall and weighed well over 200 pounds, a terrible sight.
Craving respect, I went into the Army. (er, well I was actually drafted)
Once in, they lined us all up, and said anyone who wants to be a medic, to take one step forward.
Well, I never claimed to be smart, plus the sound of the sergeants voice went over my head, because I was shielded by all those tall bodies around me.
Anyhow, everyone else took one step _backwards_ , so I was inadvertantly "volunteered" to become a medic.
Fortunately, there was no actual "War" in Korea, everyone told me it was a police action, like in Iraq today.
I could be a policeman. I asked them where was my police badge. They gave me a big round badge with a red cross painted on it.
I was happy, about to get the respect I so richly deserved, as a policeman.
Would not work in a M.A.S.H. or anything like that, they said policemen were needed much closer to where the action was, in battalion or company first-responder aid stations.
Anyhow, what happened next, I don't want to talk about, ya'hear.
Got plenty of respect, but I don't want to talk about it, all that is in the distant past.
RUNNING SCREAMING out of the Army after my 2 year hitch, I got a job at the Hughes Research Lab near Los Angeles. Hot shot engineers there were always bragging about what engineering "societies" they belonged to, like the Association for Computing Machinery, (ACM), or the American Association for Artificial Intelligence, (AAAI), or the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, (IEEE).
I said to one of those engineers that I could get probably into those societies if I really put my mind to it - - - that brought down the house with loud guffaws from all the en-gin-eers, they really hurt my feelings. I was little more than an un-educated janitor there, a person who did not even complete high school. I had to leave school to support my family.
I saw red, SOMEONE WAS GOING TO PAY DEARLY !!!
I got into the ACM and the AAAI fairly easily, my background of working with the in-flight computers inside the F14, F15, F18 aircraft helped, plus my hobby of working with the Lisp language. Getting into IEEE was a bit rough, but I made it.
All that was back in the days when it was tough getting into those societies, not like today when anyone can get in, if they are willing to lie about their background.
But I _still_ got no respect, probably because I was a runt, and getting shorter with each passing year.
Even the government gave me no respect, collecting 30% of my paltry wages for state and federal tax. The yearly tax "bite" was $25,000.
(janitors make lotsa money at Hughes)
34 years went by, I became more bitter and shorter with each passing year. Craving respect, I got an old leather jacket with a eagle painted on the back, grew a bunch of mean looking facial hair.
Bought a large motorcycle 3 times heavier than any sane person would buy, it weighed over 1,000 pounds compared to usual 300 pound motorcycles.
One tiny problem, my feet would not reach the ground when I was sitting on my motorcycle.
Had the seat customized so it was 2 inches lower, but my feet still could not reach.
Customized my boots with thick soles and heels, feet could then reach the ground, just barely.
Could not work the shift lever with my large left boot, so bolted a aluminum extending piece into my left boot near the toe, to allow me to shift.
Got lotsa respect riding that big mean motorcycle, looking like Yosemite Sam pearched atop a very large elephant.
Figured out a way to get some of my tax money back. I got the standard $100,000 low cost old man tuneup, insertion of two stents in my ticker, replacement of both of my biological eye lenses with plastic lenses.
Getting greedy now. I on a year long waiting list for a cornea transplant for my left eye.
So ya see, you are paying for my rebuild with your tax dollars, just like I was paying for all those Vietnam era military guys to go to college after their service hitch, and become the latest generation of snooty aloof engineers.
Not enough time to even read the posts here, what with making the 80 mile round trip to my physical therapist. He sez there is only a 10% chance of an extensive exercise routine killing me, which are good enough odds for me.
Gotta figure out a way of getting Medicare to pay for all this, because it is financially breaking me, that physical therapist costs $40 an hour.
End of apologies and bitching. If I ever get the time, I will try to get you guys to talk me out of buying the Epson printer model 4800.
Epson sent me a sample packet of prints made by the 4800, and they look GREAT.
No banding whatever, even viewed through a 10x magnifier.
I could not believe that, but I saw it with my own rebuilt eyes.
Blacks in the color prints are dead black, just like they should be.
I could not find _any_ dither artifacts in areas I knew to be "plain", like the photo' of the 4800 itself. (viewing with 10x glass)
There are _plenty_ of dither artifacts in the consumer grade Epsons that I have been using up to now, so I know what to look for.
Whatever Epson is doing with the 4800 seems to be working.
I am weakening, weakening, weakening...
Gotta run, hafta Google for "RIP printers" to find out if it is worth getting the "Pro" model 4800 or not.
After all, they do _include_ Ethernet capability with the Pro model, and I know that I will need Ethernet.
Gonna spend a long time looking, I will see if HP will mail me a sample packet of prints done on _their_ high end printers - - - and I will look closely at the $600 Epson with its 8 ink cartridges.
What I am really worried about is whether or not printer technology will make another big advance the day after i buy a $2,000 printer.<g>
Mark-
G.T. - 12 May 2006 07:39 GMT >>Why not just hit yourself on the head with a hammer? > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > be taller, 5' 10'' to be precise, but life has worn me down over the > years, I kept shrinking due to old age. Wow, what a great "Mark Conrad" tangent!
Greg
 Signature "All my time I spent in heaven Revelries of dance and wine Waking to the sound of laughter Up I'd rise and kiss the sky" - The Mekons
Hoo Flung Poo - 12 May 2006 12:55 GMT > What I am really worried about is whether or not printer technology > will make another big advance the day after i buy a $2,000 printer.<g> Time marches on. You may as well not even factor that.
J. Clarke - 11 May 2006 12:04 GMT >> It is a great printer; just make sure it is too much of a printer for >> what you will be using it to print. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > brochures, pamphlets, of as high a quality as I can afford - - - > without informing them of the cost of my gear, naturally. Rather than agonizing over the printer, you might want to look to your projector--if you can afford an Iris printer then you can afford an HD projector, and I suspect that that will do more for "wow" factor than fancy printing, especially if you back it up with a 3CCD HD camcorder to record your content. I mean, face it, everybody's seen National Geographic and unless you're _real_ good what you're doing isn't going to impress next to that, but most of us haven't seen 1920x1080 on a big screen.
Nice thing about the projector is that when you're not using it for presentations it's one Hell of a TV set <g>.
> The aim is a volunteer effort on my part to "sway" a small number of > them into trying a Mac as a 2nd computer, to add to their existing [quoted text clipped - 51 lines] > > Mark-
 Signature --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
C J Southern - 10 May 2006 08:57 GMT > > I am seriously contemplating buying the $2,500 "Pro" version of that > > high-end Epson printer, however I have several questions before I shell > > out that extreme amount of cash. > > > Why do you want the "pro" version, I doubt that you really want or > need the RIP software that you pay extra for? I bought it's big brother (the 7800), and pondered the same question. Short answer is, for most, the RIP just isn't necessary.
> > I am looking for final printer output that can't be distinguished from > > a regular photographic print, both viewed close up. > > Most people could not tell the difference. I think the Epson K3 color > gamut is a bit wider than a Noritsu or Fuji Frontier printer. > Certainly better looking shadow details. Output is exceptional, but prints are easily damaged if they're going to be handled a lot - so fantastic for framed prints, "OK" for things going into an album, and "hopeless" for printing postcard prints that'll be passed around (same goes for most inkjets I would think).
> > Is that of quality from a printer an unreasonable expectation? > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > The ink is expensive, especially when you are worrying about 8 or 9 > different inks. The ink IS expensive, but then again, there is a LOT of it. When I did the maths it worked out that it was costing me around 1/4 the cost of having my stuff done at the "lab" (and I got better results).
> The cleaning tank is a rip off. $40 for a cotton/poly sponge and an > Epson chip. Having said that, it lasts practically forever, unless you're doing frequent cartridge changes or power cleaning (both are unnecessary in my experience). I think the idea of the "chip" is to make sure the maintenance tank is changed before it overflows - I can imagine that if it wasn't chipped then some would forget to check it, and have one hell of a mess. By the way, it's not just the tank and carts that are chipped/lifed - so is the line-feed and head motors and the cutting blade.
As for the price of the tank - I'm sure Epson don't get the $40 for it - they probably sell it for $10 and it ends up at $40 by the time everyone has added their margins. It's really insignificant either way though - mine has dropped 30% in (available) volume over a period of about 10 x 220ml carts.
> Like any other Epson after you buy it you need to keep using it or you > will have clogged head problems. I've had mine sit idle for up to a couple of weeks at a time, and never EVER had to run a power cleaning cycle - I suspect that this is an issue solved a long time ago?
> FYI - the first set of ink cartridges will be half emptied, just doing > the initial ink charging. I was told that, but in reality it wasn't quite that dramatic - and that was with the 'uneconomic' 110ml variety (assuming that the 4800 uses the same as the 7800?). I was able to use the "remaining" ink to print many many large prints.
prasanthsr@gmail.com - 02 Jun 2006 10:05 GMT Hi Friends!!! Here is an amazing Software PS RIP with Level 3 Features specially designed for Inkjet based Printers like HPDesignJet5000, 800, 500, 1050C/1055CM, 2X00CP/3X00CP, 450C, 488CA, 750C,and ENCAD NovaJet500 / 505 / 630 / 700, Epson Pro 4x00/7x00/9x00/10x00, Roland HiFi-JET, Kodak, Mimaki, Calcom, Canon etc
Support complex font curves that enable the users to use Professional Chinese typesetting can design advertisements and posters of Chinese Simplified and Traditional, Japanese, Korean, West languages and so on. With 54 kinds of curve fonts.
Professional vector plotting can set transmogrification, fill, gradual change and shadow to graph and words. Can design all kinds of complicated graphs and artistic works without other plot softwares.
Support PostScript, TIFF, JPG, EPS. Image details are delicate and real, color revert is true, arrangements are rich. So it is close to the original copy farthest.
Use dot arithmetic of high precision, dots of frequency adjustment are fine. Export photo-like effect. Support multicolors print. Support 4 colors (CMYK) and 6 colors (C,M,Y,K,Lc,Lm or C,M,Y,K,Or,Og). Support large picture printer export with 6colors.
RIP of high-speed subsection will realize "printout continuously when pressing Enter". The export speed is faster, and it has nothing to do with file's size. Can export files in advance, then export several copies. Special to "Posthaste Print Technology" of HP2X00CP/3X00CP. 4 square meters/hour under the 600dpi photo mode.
Can export TIFF, JPG, EPS, PS through networking of MAC and PC. Can support printout of PCX, BMP, GIF, PLT(GL2), TIFF, JPG, AI, EPS, PS and so on.
Software supports from Windows 95/98/Me,Windows NT4.0/2000 or above with minimal hardware requirement of P II 300, 64M and above.
Can export CMYK of large silk screen and set frequency and angle, also can export registration to instead of traditional edition (width>1.3 meters, length>4 meters). Adopt special printing control technology so as to make the black color dense and the dots smooth. It needn't dark room or too much investment or much floor space. Design, typesetting, preprint and exporting can be accomplished just in one time. The exporting cost is much lower than traditional laser typesetter's. Fit for small-size silk-screen factory to develop large silk screen printing business. It is an effective back up system of traditional silk screen printing equipment.
Can print CAD graph with super length, the longest is 50 meters, without limitation of grasph plotter's RAM and harddisk's size. Can print large map with remote sensing and auto-separate, it is permited to go beyond the print length limitation of graph plotter without the support of printer RAM and harddisk.
DTP features
The largest export breadth is 50x50m2 ;Zoom or auto-zoom print files ; Auto-separate according to pinter sheet, custom overlap section to splice
Professional vector plotting can design different kinds of complicated graphs and artistic works. Graphs and words can be set transmutation, fill, gradual change, shadow and so on; Professional typesetting can design books, newpapers, magazines of Chinese Simplied, Chinese Traditional, Japanese, Hangul, West Words etc. 24 kinds of codes can auto copying jump.
Provide lots of templates of business cards, post cards, books, posters and all kinds of cards. New file can be set according to the templates directly.
Provide manifold typeset hot keys, custom font keys of common use, all-keyboard operation ; Auto check fonts and graphs to ensure content's correctness ; Frame and words keep to grid points, frame's corners can be pulled freely ; Auto-Creat Title Frame
Auto-separate colorful files; Custom registration and printout, registration can be changed into CMYK; Custom dot shape, frequency and angle
Can export the formats of TIFF, JPG, EPS, PS which are common used by Apple through the networking of MAC and PC ; Support printout of PCX, BMP, GIF, PLT(GL2), TIFF, JPG, AI, EPS, PS ; Can read WordDOC, HTML, RTF and composition language of BD etc.
Vivid picture's detail, real color revert and rich gradation are farthest close to the original copy;Use dot arithmetic with high precision, frequency modulation dots are exquisite and delicate. Can export effect of photo quality.
New Functions
(I)Create New File
(II)Add "New from Template", offers lots of templates of poster, card, post card, book, envelope, letter paper. At the same time add "New and Open".
(III)Add the function of pulling frame's corner to make it easy to typeset newpaper. Frame can be splitted into columns.
(IV) Add the function of "Bottom Auto-justify" to text frame.Add more text file formats such as MS-Word6/7/8(*.DOC) and HTML, words in frame string can be exported to HTML.
(V)Add function of Path Operation and some special functions of path disposal.
(VI)Add a menu of "Object".
(VII)Add new menu of mouse's right button.
(VIII)Use "Bar Code" to produce 24 kinds of codes.
(IX)Table 1.Eliminate the difference between cell and grid. 2.Combine original tools of select cell, select line and edit table into just one tool, system will auto-judge and choose the optimum one. 3.Add "Select Split Table Line". 4.Add "Auto Retracting of Cell".
(X)Add "Reverse Vertical" in typesetting of frame or table's cell.
(XI)Filter 1.Reverse filter can make part or whole of other object inverse. 2.Magnifier filter can produce the effect of magnifying object's part or the whole object. 3.Copy filter will reduce much graph space when copying a lot, and it is easy to modify. Can set copy numbers and parameters of two directions independently. Copy parameter should contain all items of "Transform and Copy".
(XII)Change "Shift,Scale,Rotate" into the panel of "Transform and Copy", and add "Absolute Scale" and mirror function. Delete original "Copy Parameter" of "Set", and these parameters will be controlled by "Transform and Copy".
(XIII)Add "Create Title Frame", which can turn focus words into title frame.
(XIV)Add "Photograph Reticulate Pattern Fill", offers 241 kinds of common patterns to choose.
(XV)Two colors of black & white picture can be set transparent or changed to another color; those of grey chart can be just changed, but not transparent.
(XVI)Offers menus of different sorts when importing formula, provides menu items to all kinds of formulas.
(XVII)Can import multirow artistic text.
(XVIII)Print 1.Print position can be adjusted in nine directions. 2.Page can auto-fit sheet when printing. 3.Can custom registration and printout,and registration can be changed into CMYKautomatically.
All these features are available at an attractive offer!! Interested to try with please feel free to contact me any time.
> > > I am seriously contemplating buying the $2,500 "Pro" version of that > > > high-end Epson printer, however I have several questions before I shell [quoted text clipped - 62 lines] > the 7800?). I was able to use the "remaining" ink to print many many large > prints. Greg - 07 May 2006 19:11 GMT > If so, are you 100% happy with that Epson printer, model 4800? > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > my very first digital "outfit", a Canon 5D body > with a fair assortment of lenses. I agree a lot with Jim Kramer, I bought the R1800 last weekend deciding not to buy the 4800 for several reasons. Basically I got tired of running to photo labs and redoing digital files to get the prints correct. The issue that ultimately made up my mind is: I would rather rarely need 16x20 for customer work. I also have a darkroom and can print 16x20 color cheaper. I needed the printer for occasional use of retouching and composition. Realistically the 4800 &K3 ink is good if you need B&W-but supposedly the R1800 is better for color work. I would never need B&W as I never intend to print B&W other than on Silver paper.
The top end resolution of the R1800 is higher, but beyond a point I think its hype. Like Jim I question the need for the Rip-thats useful if you intend to batch imagery- intending to drop and print all images from a single shoot -like a wedding. That was one reason I might have liked the 4800- because i do shoot weddings-ultimately it was the cost that decided for me, and I am really happy so far with this printer- I am sure which ever you decide you will be like wise happy and somewhat astounded by the results.
 Signature The sometimes insomniac.
www.gregblankphoto.com
elcoggins@bee.net - 08 May 2006 05:22 GMT I own a 2200 and a 4800. One is a professional printer and the other is not. If you want to print on photo papers and fine art papers, you really need two printers. The cost of changing between photo black ink and matte black ink is $50. However, the 4800, 7800 and 9800 are the most ecconomical printers as far as ink usage or cost per square inch is concerned.
The output of the 4800 is exceptional. I do not us any RIP. However, I did opt for an Ethernet card so I could place the printer any at distance from the CPU.
I am extremely happy with the price and service I received from IT Supplies. I plan to purchase another 4800 from them this summer.
Gene
bmoag - 08 May 2006 17:44 GMT If you do not understand the issues involved it would be unwise to spend that much money on a printer of this type. I would suggest you obtain, if you do not already have them, a monitor calibrating device (Spyder, Moncaco), CS2/Elements and a less expensive printer (Espson 1280/1800 or smaller carriage variant) and master color management before attempting large size printing. You will save a great deal of money in the long run.
Andrew Haley - 08 May 2006 19:52 GMT > If so, are you 100% happy with that Epson printer, model 4800?
> (...or more realistically, 90% happy) ;-)
> I am seriously contemplating buying the $2,500 "Pro" version of that > high-end Epson printer, however I have several questions before I shell > out that extreme amount of cash.
> I am looking for final printer output that can't be distinguished from > a regular photographic print, both viewed close up.
> Is that of quality from a printer an unreasonable expectation? That depends on how much of an expert the viewer is. I know exactly what to look for, but without an experienced eye most people probably wouldn't notice.
I don't consider a "regular photographic print" as something I want to aim for.
> If unrealistic, then how close can printer output come to > duplicating real photographic prints? It's hard to answer that. They're different, that's all. I like high-end inkjet output. You'll probably get a wider gamut, particularly in the reds, and you'll definitely get higher resolution. With custom printer profiles you'll get really accurate colour, too. You'll also be able to print on a wide range of substrates, which will sometimes be useful.
Andrew.
J. Clarke - 11 May 2006 11:11 GMT > If so, are you 100% happy with that Epson printer, model 4800? > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I am looking for final printer output that can't be distinguished from > a regular photographic print, both viewed close up. Not gonna happen. The processes are different so the fine structure is different.
> Is that of quality from a printer an unreasonable expectation? A good inkjet can do a very nice job of printing photos. The result will be subtly different from a print produced by a conventional photographic printing process--not "worse" and not "better", but different. This will be beneficial for some subjects and detrimental to others and usually not noticeable unless you deliberately set out to look for it.
> If unrealistic, then how close can printer output come to duplicating > real photographic prints? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > my very first digital "outfit", a Canon 5D body > with a fair assortment of lenses.
 Signature --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)
|
|
|