Digital BW, The Print

I posted the message below on another list. 

I have made three B&W prints using Qimage, Epson's Enhanced Matte Paper with Matte Black ink and each print was made with exactly the same image. Two of the prints were made using Epson's RIP for the 2200 printer. The only difference in the settings to make these prints with the RIP was in one the color button was chosen and in the other the B&W button was chosen. The third print was made using Carl Schofield's method. 

A quick "jury" was assembled :-) to judge which of the prints was the better one. The clear consensus was that the one printed using the RIP, with the color button selected, was marginally better than the one with printed with the RIP with the B&W button chosen. The difference was in the greater degree of contrast with the print made with the color button turned on. The one printed with Mr. Schofield's method was good but had a light cast to it. The cast is hard to describe but maybe bluish might be descriptive. I am talking very, very slight cast to this very acceptable black and white print. All three were good. I see no dots or lines in any of the prints. I am still looking for metamerism and see no signs of it with these prints.

The major criticism of the RIP print made with the color button chosen is that is extraordinarily slow, slow, slow.

I don't understand yet what is causing the printing to be slow when choosing to print in color. The instructions from Epson, which are buried in the disk, are of minimal help. Very minimal help!

I will be showing these prints to a person who has spent many years in a chemical darkroom printing B&W's. I am looking forward to his critique.

Peter Palmieri

  From: chipcarterdc < 

  Several people last week commented on their experience thus far with 
  Epson's new RIP for the 2200.  Any additional info you (or others) 
  would like to share re: how it's going now that you've worked with it 
  for a bit?

  I'm really interested because I have ImagePrint, but I'm not in love 
  with it (user interface isn't great, no soft proofing with grayscale 
  profiles, images look washed out when imported into ImagePrint from 
  Photoshop, etc.).  While the guys at Colorbyte have been helpful, and 
  the results from ImagePrint are indeed neutral w. no metamerism, the 
  program's just too difficult for my taste. I have the Epson RIP on 
  order (should arrive tomorrow).  If I can get good results with it, 
  I'd really like to return ImagePrint.  Yes, I'll do comparison 
  testing myself; however, I'd like to hear more real world results 
  from users of Epson's RIP before I open the package (can't return it 
  to Epson once the software is opened).

  Thanks!


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       

  Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

  If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.

  Please follow these basic guidelines:
  - Include your full name with your message.
  - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
  - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
  - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
  - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
  - Complete your Yahoo profile.
  - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 




  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

"The clear consensus was that the one printed using the RIP, with the 
color button selected, was marginally better than the one with 
printed with the RIP with the B&W button chosen."

Where's the "color button"?  In the 2200 RIP program?  The only thing 
I have to go on so far is the article in Camera Arts.  It has a 
screenshot of a "Print Setting" dialog from the RIP, but I don't see 
a button marked "color" or "black and white" in that screenshot.  Are 
you talking about the dropdown where you can select "color" for the 
type of ink?

Also, I'd be interested in a link to the other list where people are 
discussing the new RIP.

Thanks.

Yes, the color button is in the RIP program. The dialogue box in the Camera Arts article shows only one of four principal dialogue boxes. De Wolfe, the author, unfortunately gave the RIP only the most cursory comment. I am not referring to the drop down where color is selected in the 2200 print driver. The RIP does not use that print driver--it replaces it. 

It would be most helpful is others who are using the 2200 RIP would post their experiences with it. I am especially interested to learn why it is so slow when choosing "color" in liew of Black and White.  The other list is the Epson 2000 list at Yahoo. There are no other posts there that I can recall.

I have screen snaps of the dialogue boxes which unfortunately do not show all the "pull-down" lists, but still will give you an idea what I am talking about. 

Peter Palmieri

  From: chipcarterdc <chipcarterdc@...> 


  "The clear consensus was that the one printed using the RIP, with the 
  color button selected, was marginally better than the one with 
  printed with the RIP with the B&W button chosen."

  Where's the "color button"?  In the 2200 RIP program?  The only thing 
  I have to go on so far is the article in Camera Arts.  It has a 
  screenshot of a "Print Setting" dialog from the RIP, but I don't see 
  a button marked "color" or "black and white" in that screenshot.  Are 
  you talking about the dropdown where you can select "color" for the 
  type of ink?

  Also, I'd be interested in a link to the other list where people are 
  discussing the new RIP.

  Thanks.


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       

  Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

  If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.

  Please follow these basic guidelines:
  - Include your full name with your message.
  - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
  - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
  - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
  - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
  - Complete your Yahoo profile.
  - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 




  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter Palmieri 
<pcpalmieri@c...> wrote:

> It would be most helpful is others who are using the 
>2200 RIP would post their experiences with it. I am 
>especially interested to learn why it is so slow when
>choosing "color" in liew of Black and White.  The other
>list is the Epson 2000 list at Yahoo. There are no 
>other posts there that I can recall.

I don't care if it takes overnight - I care about
metamerism!   I have yet to hear anyone talk in
detail about this - how they tested the Epson RIP for
metamerism, what lighting conditions they tested it
under, etc.

As I mentioned in a recent post, I have recently discovered
a need to print color photos that present the printer (and
eye) with the same challenges as a black and white print
in terms of greyscale tonality, metamerism, etc.  In other
words color prints where the predominant color is black and
various shades of "gray".

I played around with the Epson RIP a week or so ago.  I also tried DeWolfe's
recommended settings from the Camera Arts article, and using Paul Roark's
step wedge, the 10-20% patches look purple, 25-30% look brown, and 35-60%
look purple as well under tungsten light.

I too wonder how extensive DeWolfe's testing was.

I also evaluated the prints for metamerism by turning the print back and
forth between window light and my office flourescent light.  I saw the print
shift from green in the daylight to magenta under flourescent (same as I see
when I print B&W with the Epson driver).  To my eye, the Epson RIP makes
absolutely no improvement to metamerism over the Epson driver.

The only method I have seen to date for eliminating metamerism with the 2200
on B&W prints is to use ImagePrint.  It does a beautiful job of it and
creates very neutral B&W prints over the entire range of tones.

Epson's PDF manual is not very helpful.  I was surprised to see that it is
63 pages long!  It's full of bits of wisdom such as the following about
print speed:

"Change to a faster CPU or add more RAM.  Complex jobs
that use a large number of fonts will process faster on a faster
CPU with more RAM.  We recommends [sic] that you change
to a faster CPU first, then add more RAM, if necessary."

I've also noticed a peculiarity.  I had an image with extra white space
around it.  When I printed it using the Epson RIP, it actually "printed" the
white parts!  I mean the print head travelled across the paper and the paper
advanced at the same rate as if it was actually putting down ink.  I looked
at it under a loupe and confirmed that it didn't put down any ink.  It must
just be a bug or "feature" of the RIP.

--Tom


----- Original Message -----

From: "Peter Palmieri" <pcpalmieri@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 6:17 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Epson 2200 RIP: further results?


>
> It would be most helpful is others who are using the 2200 RIP would
> post their experiences with it. I am especially interested to learn why
> it is so slow when choosing "color" in liew of Black and White.  The
> other list is the Epson 2000 list at Yahoo. There are no other posts
> there that I can recall.
>

There are many more settings than the ones in the DeWolfe article. Problem is there is no explanation what each of the settings has on the final print. Some are not a challenge to understand but a couple are.  Perhaps you had not changed any of the settings other than the one to which DeWolfe referred, and that may be the reason you are getting results that I don't see in the prints I have made. Too bad that the manual is a bad joke. 

I haven't seen any metamerism but I will take a closer look tomorrow. Unfortunately there are no flourescent lights in our house to do a more complete trial--only lots of sunlight and incandescant lights. :-)

I see a major improvement in quality using the RIP versus the basic 2200 driver whether using color or black only in the latter driver. 

Did you choose black and white or color in the RIP's driver? Any comment on the printing time?

Peter Palmieri

  From: Thomas Fors 


  I played around with the Epson RIP a week or so ago.  I also tried DeWolfe's
  recommended settings from the Camera Arts article, and using Paul Roark's
  step wedge, the 10-20% patches look purple, 25-30% look brown, and 35-60%
  look purple as well under tungsten light.

  I too wonder how extensive DeWolfe's testing was.

  I also evaluated the prints for metamerism by turning the print back and
  forth between window light and my office flourescent light.  I saw the print
  shift from green in the daylight to magenta under flourescent (same as I see
  when I print B&W with the Epson driver).  To my eye, the Epson RIP makes
  absolutely no improvement to metamerism over the Epson driver.

  The only method I have seen to date for eliminating metamerism with the 2200
  on B&W prints is to use ImagePrint.  It does a beautiful job of it and
  creates very neutral B&W prints over the entire range of tones.

  Epson's PDF manual is not very helpful.  I was surprised to see that it is
  63 pages long!  It's full of bits of wisdom such as the following about
  print speed:

  "Change to a faster CPU or add more RAM.  Complex jobs
  that use a large number of fonts will process faster on a faster
  CPU with more RAM.  We recommends [sic] that you change
  to a faster CPU first, then add more RAM, if necessary."

  I've also noticed a peculiarity.  I had an image with extra white space
  around it.  When I printed it using the Epson RIP, it actually "printed" the
  white parts!  I mean the print head travelled across the paper and the paper
  advanced at the same rate as if it was actually putting down ink.  I looked
  at it under a loupe and confirmed that it didn't put down any ink.  It must
  just be a bug or "feature" of the RIP.

  --Tom




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Thomas Fors" 
<tom@f...> wrote:
> I saw the print shift from green in the daylight to magenta
> under flourescent (same as I see when I print B&W with 
> the Epson driver).  To my eye, the Epson RIP makes
> absolutely no improvement to metamerism over the Epson 
> driver.
> 
> The only method I have seen to date for eliminating metamerism
> with the 2200 on B&W prints is to use ImagePrint.  It does
> a beautiful job of it and creates very neutral B&W prints
> over the entire range of tones.

Any idea how well the IP RIP does with color prints that are 
predominantly black and white and shades of gray, as far as
controlling metamerism on the 2200?

They do let you download a demo and try it.  Having both results in front of
you seems to be valuable for what you are doing.

Seth

=
=Any idea how well the IP RIP does with color prints that are 
=predominantly black and white and shades of gray, as far as 
=controlling metamerism on the 2200?
= 
=
=

"They do let you download a demo and try it."

Actually, I can't find a demo.  When you go to the downloads section 
of the Epson website, then click the link for the RIP software, the 
only downloads present are for the documentation, not the software.  
I called Epson and they said there is no download or demo of the 
program available.  Am I missing something?

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Seth Rossman" 
<seth@m...> wrote:
> They do let you download a demo and try it.  Having both
> results in front of you seems to be valuable for what you
> are doing.

IP has a demo version?  I thought it was the other RIP (that Dan 
Staver was talking about that I ferget the name of) that has the demo 
version and prints a watermark on your prints that has the demo.   I 
though the deal with IP was that you can get your money back.  

Anyway, the problem with downloading and installing a whole RIP is 
that to get the best results with a RIP you should also install a 
profiler.  The cost and learning curve on those two tools (especially 
th IP RIP, which allegedly has a lousy UI) means you could end up 
spending a HUGE anount of time just learning the tool before you can 
do a fair evaluation of it.   What if I invest a lot of time and 
money and then find out it doesn't deliver the results?  It could be 
the tool's fault, or it could be my fault but I would have no way to 
tell.  It makes more sense to get a couple of sample prints - one 
grayscale, one color but predominantly black-and-white subject 
matter -  so I can tell what the tool can do in competent hands.

> =Any idea how well the IP RIP does with color prints that are 
> =predominantly black and white and shades of gray, as far as 
> =controlling metamerism on the 2200?

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "chipcarterdc 
<chipcarterdc@h...>" <chipcarterdc@h...> wrote:
> "They do let you download a demo and try it."
> 
> Actually, I can't find a demo.  When you go to the downloads 
section 
> of the Epson website, then click the link for the RIP software, the 
> only downloads present are for the documentation, not the 
software.  
> I called Epson and they said there is no download or demo of the 
> program available.  Am I missing something?

Yes - he was talking about the IP RIP.  This was the exchange:

> They do let you download a demo and try it. Having both
> results in front of you seems to be valuable for what you are doing.
>
>Seth
>
>=
>=Any idea how well the IP RIP does with color prints that are 
>=predominantly black and white and shades of gray, as far as 
>=controlling metamerism on the 2200?

Whoops -- conversation shifted on me.

I don't know about ImagePrint, but PowerRIP you just install, press
print, and select paper type and dpi... It's about as difficult to use
 as the standard epson driver. I haven't heard about the use of any
special profiler either, I just use the profiles that come with the
software.

I print the grayscale images as regular RGB, there are no special
settings for black and white.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "plnelson2003
<peter@s...>" <peter@s...> wrote:

> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Seth Rossman" 
> <seth@m...> wrote:
> > They do let you download a demo and try it.  Having both
> > results in front of you seems to be valuable for what you
> > are doing.
> 
> IP has a demo version?  I thought it was the other RIP (that Dan 
> Staver was talking about that I ferget the name of) that has the demo 
> version and prints a watermark on your prints that has the demo.   I 
> though the deal with IP was that you can get your money back.  
> 
> Anyway, the problem with downloading and installing a whole RIP is 
> that to get the best results with a RIP you should also install a 
> profiler.  The cost and learning curve on those two tools (especially 
> th IP RIP, which allegedly has a lousy UI) means you could end up 
> spending a HUGE anount of time just learning the tool before you can 
> do a fair evaluation of it.   What if I invest a lot of time and 
> money and then find out it doesn't deliver the results?  It could be 
> the tool's fault, or it could be my fault but I would have no way to 
> tell.  It makes more sense to get a couple of sample prints - one 
> grayscale, one color but predominantly black-and-white subject 
> matter -  so I can tell what the tool can do in competent hands.
>   
> > =Any idea how well the IP RIP does with color prints that are 
> > =predominantly black and white and shades of gray, as far as 
> > =controlling metamerism on the 2200?

----- Original Message -----

From: "Peter Palmieri" <pcpalmieri@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, February 17, 2003 10:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Epson 2200 RIP: further results?


> There are many more settings than the ones in the DeWolfe article.
> Problem is there is no explanation what each of the settings has on
> the final print. Some are not a challenge to understand but a couple
> are.  Perhaps you had not changed any of the settings other than the
> one to which DeWolfe referred, and that may be the reason you are
> getting results that I don't see in the prints I have made. Too bad
> that the manual is a bad joke.
>

I agree.  That could be part of the problem.  I certainly did not try all
possible settings.  I did try the following beyond DeWolfe's settings.

In the Color Manager dialog:
CMYK: Custom, Icc Profile: -, Color Adjust: -
RGB: Adobe RGB, Icc Profile: EW-Adobe RGB
Media: Enhanced Matte Paper_1440x720, Icc Profile: CPS SP2200 MCMP,
Calibration: -, Paper Configuration: Color density: 100%.

In Print Setting dialog:
Media Quality: Enhanced Matte Paper_1440x720
RGB Simulation: Adobe RGB
CMYK Simulation: Off
Grayscale Control: Image (I also tried Text)
Ink: Color (I also tried Grayscale).
High Speed: unchecked.

Results with ink set to Grayscale were horrible.  The shadows were blocked
up from about 85-100%  I had much better luck with the ink set to Color,
although it still did not give a smooth neutral gray ramp.


> Any comment on the printing time?

Yes, the Epson RIP was much slower than printing with the Epson driver.

I am not using the PServer. 

When using PS7 and Win XP after editing an image, this is the workflow I have been trying : 

Print>Name: Stylus RIP>Properties>Paper/Quality Tab>Paper Source: Automatically Select>Color: B&W button chosen>Advanced>Paper Size: A3>ICM Disabled>ICM Intent: Pictures>Scaling 100%>True Type Font: Substitute with Device Font>Advanced Printing Features--Enabled>PostScript Output Option: Archive Format>True Type Font Download Option: Automatic>PostScript Language Level: 1>Send PostScript Error Handler: Yes>Mirrored Output: No> Media Type: Enhanced Matte Paper>Quality: 1440X720>Ink: Greyscale>High Speed: Off>RGB Simulation: Adobe RGB>Greyscale Control: Image>Auto Cut: Off>Borderless: Off>OK

Layout Tab>Orientation>Landscape>Page Order: Front to Back>Pages per Sheet: 1>Advanced>(The same settings as Paper/Quality above)>OK

Then>Control Panel>Printers and Faxes>Device Settings>All Settings are left alone except>Installable Options--Black Ink Combinaton: MatteBK+Light Black>Apply>OK

In addition to myself, a friend who has many years in B&W chemical darkroom and a well-known professional landscape photographer who works in only B&W viewed several of the test prints and found these to very acceptable. These prints were compared to several printed with the "color" button chosen,  black only (with the 2200's driver) and Mr. Schofield's photorealistic method. The ones printed with the Epson RIP with the workflow described above were the unanymous choice.  I looked at the prints with a magnifying glass which did not reveal any dots or lines. The prints were viewed in bright sunlight, natural light indoors and under incandescant light indoors. We could not see any metamerism not matter how we held the pictures in the light. 

When the color button is chosen, the printer is extremely slow. If this weren't the case I would use more trials in this mode.

Viewing pictures with a magnifying glass and every which way under different lighting conditions seem like a strange way to enjoy a photograph. The most difficult challenge after producing a decent picture for me is finding a framing glass that doesn't dull the picture and create too much reflection. :-)

Let me know if you have any questions. I would appreciate your trying the workflow above and having your critique of it. Too, any suggestions for any setting recommendations would be most welcome.

Peter Palmieri

I agree.  That could be part of the problem.  I certainly did not try all
possible settings.  I did try the following beyond DeWolfe's settings.

In the Color Manager dialog:
CMYK: Custom, Icc Profile: -, Color Adjust: -
RGB: Adobe RGB, Icc Profile: EW-Adobe RGB
Media: Enhanced Matte Paper_1440x720, Icc Profile: CPS SP2200 MCMP,
Calibration: -, Paper Configuration: Color density: 100%.

In Print Setting dialog:
Media Quality: Enhanced Matte Paper_1440x720
RGB Simulation: Adobe RGB
CMYK Simulation: Off
Grayscale Control: Image (I also tried Text)
Ink: Color (I also tried Grayscale).
High Speed: unchecked.

Results with ink set to Grayscale were horrible.  The shadows were blocked
up from about 85-100%  I had much better luck with the ink set to Color,
although it still did not give a smooth neutral gray ramp.


> Any comment on the printing time?

Yes, the Epson RIP was much slower than printing with the Epson driver.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks.  I will try your workflow and see how it compares.

Would you be interested in exchanging a print made with the Epson RIP on
your printer with one made from ImagePrint on mine?  It might be an
interesting experiment.  I have a standard test image I've been using for
evaluating grayscale printing that you're welcome to.  We could both post
our evaluations to the list so others might benefit.

Email me off-list if you're interested.

--Tom

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Palmieri" <pcpalmieri@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 8:03 AM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Epson 2200 RIP: further results?


> I am not using the PServer.
>
> When using PS7 and Win XP after editing an image, this is the workflow I
have been trying :
>
> Print>Name: Stylus RIP>Properties>Paper/Quality Tab>Paper Source:
Automatically Select>Color: B&W button chosen>Advanced>Paper Size: A3>ICM
Disabled>ICM Intent: Pictures>Scaling 100%>True Type Font: Substitute with
Device Font>Advanced Printing Features--Enabled>PostScript Output Option:
Archive Format>True Type Font Download Option: Automatic>PostScript Language
Level: 1>Send PostScript Error Handler: Yes>Mirrored Output: No> Media Type:
Enhanced Matte Paper>Quality: 1440X720>Ink: Greyscale>High Speed: Off>RGB
Simulation: Adobe RGB>Greyscale Control: Image>Auto Cut: Off>Borderless:
Off>OK
>
> Layout Tab>Orientation>Landscape>Page Order: Front to Back>Pages per
Sheet: 1>Advanced>(The same settings as Paper/Quality above)>OK
>
> Then>Control Panel>Printers and Faxes>Device Settings>All Settings are
left alone except>Installable Options--Black Ink Combinaton: MatteBK+Light
Black>Apply>OK
>
> In addition to myself, a friend who has many years in B&W chemical
darkroom and a well-known professional landscape photographer who works in
only B&W viewed several of the test prints and found these to very
acceptable. These prints were compared to several printed with the "color"
button chosen,  black only (with the 2200's driver) and Mr. Schofield's
photorealistic method. The ones printed with the Epson RIP with the workflow
described above were the unanymous choice.  I looked at the prints with a
magnifying glass which did not reveal any dots or lines. The prints were
viewed in bright sunlight, natural light indoors and under incandescant
light indoors. We could not see any metamerism not matter how we held the
pictures in the light.
>
> When the color button is chosen, the printer is extremely slow. If this
weren't the case I would use more trials in this mode.
>
> Viewing pictures with a magnifying glass and every which way under
different lighting conditions seem like a strange way to enjoy a photograph.
The most difficult challenge after producing a decent picture for me is
finding a framing glass that doesn't dull the picture and create too much
reflection. :-)
>
> Let me know if you have any questions. I would appreciate your trying the
workflow above and having your critique of it. Too, any suggestions for any
setting recommendations would be most welcome.
>
> Peter Palmieri
>
> I agree.  That could be part of the problem.  I certainly did not try all
> possible settings.  I did try the following beyond DeWolfe's settings.
>
> In the Color Manager dialog:
> CMYK: Custom, Icc Profile: -, Color Adjust: -
> RGB: Adobe RGB, Icc Profile: EW-Adobe RGB
> Media: Enhanced Matte Paper_1440x720, Icc Profile: CPS SP2200 MCMP,
> Calibration: -, Paper Configuration: Color density: 100%.
>
> In Print Setting dialog:
> Media Quality: Enhanced Matte Paper_1440x720
> RGB Simulation: Adobe RGB
> CMYK Simulation: Off
> Grayscale Control: Image (I also tried Text)
> Ink: Color (I also tried Grayscale).
> High Speed: unchecked.
>
> Results with ink set to Grayscale were horrible.  The shadows were blocked
> up from about 85-100%  I had much better luck with the ink set to Color,
> although it still did not give a smooth neutral gray ramp.
>
>
> > Any comment on the printing time?
>
> Yes, the Epson RIP was much slower than printing with the Epson driver.
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter Palmieri 
<pcpalmieri@c...> wrote:

> The ones printed with the Epson RIP with the workflow
> described above were the unanymous choice.  I looked
> at the prints with a magnifying glass which did not 
> reveal any dots or lines. The prints were viewed in
> bright sunlight, natural light indoors and under 
>incandescant light indoors. We could not see any 
> metamerism not matter how we held the pictures in the
> light. 

and then below that he wrote . . . 

> Results with ink set to Grayscale were horrible.  
> The shadows were blocked up from about 85-100%  I had 
> much better luck with the ink set to Color,
> although it still did not give a smooth neutral gray ramp.

Were both of these from the same message or was one a 
quote from an earlier message that wasn't properly marked
as a quote?  They sound contradictory.

> Would you be interested in exchanging a print made with
> the Epson RIP on your printer with one made from ImagePrint
> on mine?  It might be an interesting experiment.  I have 
> a standard test image I've been using for evaluating 
> grayscale printing that you're welcome to.  We could both
> post our evaluations to the list so others might benefit.

Please do this.   I'm looking for a good black and
white printing solution for the 2200 that allows me to 
also print in color since I have quite a few color photos
whose predominant color scheme is black and white, so the
printer needs to be able to make good, neutral, 
non-metameristic grayscales but with some splashes of color,
so I can't print them using something like quadtones or 
Black Only.

If the two of you want you can arrange to send me sample
prints and I'll report my evaluation.   I'll be happy to
pay for your paper+ink and shipping costs.

Different messages not properly marked by me, even though I thought I did so.

Peter Palmieri

  From: plnelson2003 <peter@...> 


  --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter Palmieri 
  <pcpalmieri@c...> wrote:

  > The ones printed with the Epson RIP with the workflow
  > described above were the unanymous choice.  I looked
  > at the prints with a magnifying glass which did not 
  > reveal any dots or lines. The prints were viewed in
  > bright sunlight, natural light indoors and under 
  >incandescant light indoors. We could not see any 
  > metamerism not matter how we held the pictures in the
  > light. 

  and then below that he wrote . . . 

  > Results with ink set to Grayscale were horrible.  
  > The shadows were blocked up from about 85-100%  I had 
  > much better luck with the ink set to Color,
  > although it still did not give a smooth neutral gray ramp.

  Were both of these from the same message or was one a 
  quote from an earlier message that wasn't properly marked
  as a quote?  They sound contradictory. 




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi, all-

I was in Roberts today and they have the Light magent and Cyan inks, and the
Matte Black.  No price scalping.

You can contact Phil Gibson directly: camerasales@....

Their 800 number is 800-726-5544.

Seth

Getting very nice results with grayscale using ERIP conventionally on 
EEM with negligible metamerism. And I mean really good results -- 
vitually as good as dedicated black/grey inksets. Downside is I can't 
get an acceptable toned print yet (see below).

Tricked the RIP into printing Matte Black UC at 2880x1440 dpi on EEM 
and got unsatisfactory results (grayscale gradient not linear). Need 
to figure out why.

Tried printing a duotone image in an attempt to get a toned print and 
preliminary results were unacceptable. It might be how I'm inputting 
my profile into the RIP, but who knows since the documentation is so 
lacking. Epson needs to put a decent manual on their site for 
download -- sure would save a lot of trial and error time (and money).

I have a feeling metamerism will rear its ugly head when printing a 
toned image since metamerism is a function of the ink. The IP5 
tintpicker avoids this, evidently, by not using certain inks -- I 
don't think the ERIP does that, but we'll see.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sanfo2003 
<SandyCornelius@c...>" <SandyCornelius@c...> wrote:
> Getting very nice results with grayscale using ERIP conventionally 
on 
> EEM with negligible metamerism. And I mean really good results -- 
> vitually as good as dedicated black/grey inksets. 

What tests did you run for metamerism?

 
> Tricked the RIP into printing Matte Black UC at 2880x1440 dpi on 
EEM 
> and got unsatisfactory results (grayscale gradient not linear). 
Need 
> to figure out why.

What's "UC"?   How did you trick it?

> I have a feeling metamerism will rear its ugly head when printing a 
> toned image since metamerism is a function of the ink.

Didn't it use all the inks on your grayscale image, above?

I too am getting excellent B&W results with the Epson RIP for the 2200. I have made many tests with photographs and the grey scale. 

The grey scale shows very distinct separation from 0% to 100%. Also there is good separation from 0% to 5% but none from 95% to 100%. I see no lines, dots or metamerism either under bright sunlight (it is bright virturally every day here in Southwest Florida) or under incandescant lighting. I used a magnifying glass for the viewing even though I never think of looking at a photograph of mine with a lupe or a magnifying glass. My observations were corroborated by two friends, one of whom has had many years of printing B&W's in a wet darkroom and the other has been printing B&W using an Epson 3000 with Cone inks.

The lines (lp/mm) of 1.8, 2.4 and 3.6 are distinct, clear and sharp. But, this is not true at 7.2 lp/mm.

I have settle on the color settings, density of 108% and with no profile. My guess is that with a proper profile chosen that the results could get better. I am using matte black ink, Epson's Enhanced Matte paper, Win XP and have made prints using both Qimage and PS7. Qimage may produce a touch better print but of that I am not sure yet.

I have not messed with color printing with the RIP since the regular 2200 driver does such a nice job.

Peter Palmieri

  SandyCornelius wrote:

  Getting very nice results with grayscale using ERIP conventionally on 
  EEM with negligible metamerism. And I mean really good results -- 
  vitually as good as dedicated black/grey inksets. Downside is I can't 
  get an acceptable toned print yet (see below).

  Tricked the RIP into printing Matte Black UC at 2880x1440 dpi on EEM 
  and got unsatisfactory results (grayscale gradient not linear). Need 
  to figure out why.

  Tried printing a duotone image in an attempt to get a toned print and 
  preliminary results were unacceptable. It might be how I'm inputting 
  my profile into the RIP, but who knows since the documentation is so 
  lacking. Epson needs to put a decent manual on their site for 
  download -- sure would save a lot of trial and error time (and money).

  I have a feeling metamerism will rear its ugly head when printing a 
  toned image since metamerism is a function of the ink. The IP5 
  tintpicker avoids this, evidently, by not using certain inks -- I 
  don't think the ERIP does that, but we'll see.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Would those of you getting great B&W results with the RIP be willing 
to post your exact settings in the RIP?  From what I understand, the 
documentation is almost non-existent.  Perhaps we could all judge 
whether those who are getting poor results are getting them because 
they have the wrong settings, or whether it's a subjective 
difference, or something else.

Besides, I have the RIP but haven't opened it yet.  Since the 
documentation is so poor, I'd like to get as much help as I can in 
setting it up.

Finnaly, could you indicate whether the settings you post are for 
Windows or Mac (sometimes, the same settings are in different places 
in Epson software depending on what system you're using).

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter Palmieri 
<pcpalmieri@c...> wrote:
> I too am getting excellent B&W results with the Epson RIP for the 
2200. I have made many tests with photographs and the grey scale. 
> 
> The grey scale shows very distinct separation from 0% to
> 100%. Also there is good separation from 0% to 5% but none
> from 95% to 100%. I see no lines, dots or metamerism 
>either under bright sunlight (it is bright virturally 
>every day here in Southwest Florida) or under incandescant
> lighting. 

I find the biggest metameristic delta with the Epson inks is
between "daylight" fluorescent and actual daylight.  Could you 
compare your prints between daylight and fluorescent please?

Also, how noticable was the metamerism to you BEFORE you
used the Epson RIP? (I just want to make sure you're not
one of those people like my wife who hardly sees it in
the first place).

Peter, how can you be happy with something that compresses the shadow
detail? Can this be corrected with a softproof or curves move?

Julian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Palmieri" <pcpalmieri@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 6:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Epson 2200 RIP: further results?


> I too am getting excellent B&W results with the Epson RIP for the 2200. I
have made many tests with photographs and the grey scale.
>
> The grey scale shows very distinct separation from 0% to 100%. Also there
is good separation from 0% to 5% but none from 95% to 100%. I see no lines,
dots or metamerism either under bright sunlight (it is bright virturally
every day here in Southwest Florida) or under incandescant lighting. I used
a magnifying glass for the viewing even though I never think of looking at a
photograph of mine with a lupe or a magnifying glass. My observations were
corroborated by two friends, one of whom has had many years of printing
B&W's in a wet darkroom and the other has been printing B&W using an Epson
3000 with Cone inks.
>
> The lines (lp/mm) of 1.8, 2.4 and 3.6 are distinct, clear and sharp. But,
this is not true at 7.2 lp/mm.
>
> I have settle on the color settings, density of 108% and with no profile.
My guess is that with a proper profile chosen that the results could get
better. I am using matte black ink, Epson's Enhanced Matte paper, Win XP and
have made prints using both Qimage and PS7. Qimage may produce a touch
better print but of that I am not sure yet.
>
> I have not messed with color printing with the RIP since the regular 2200
driver does such a nice job.
>
> Peter Palmieri
>
>   SandyCornelius wrote:
>
>   Getting very nice results with grayscale using ERIP conventionally on
>   EEM with negligible metamerism. And I mean really good results --
>   vitually as good as dedicated black/grey inksets. Downside is I can't
>   get an acceptable toned print yet (see below).
>
>   Tricked the RIP into printing Matte Black UC at 2880x1440 dpi on EEM
>   and got unsatisfactory results (grayscale gradient not linear). Need
>   to figure out why.
>
>   Tried printing a duotone image in an attempt to get a toned print and
>   preliminary results were unacceptable. It might be how I'm inputting
>   my profile into the RIP, but who knows since the documentation is so
>   lacking. Epson needs to put a decent manual on their site for
>   download -- sure would save a lot of trial and error time (and money).
>
>   I have a feeling metamerism will rear its ugly head when printing a
>   toned image since metamerism is a function of the ink. The IP5
>   tintpicker avoids this, evidently, by not using certain inks -- I
>   don't think the ERIP does that, but we'll see.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

No, because my prints will not be shown under flourescent light. Further, I have no fluorescent lights in my home here in Florida or in my home in New Jersey. I don't recall a gallery anywhere--were it for paintings etc. or photographs, that has flourescent lighting. 

I have observed meterism (and bronzing) with color prints from the 2200 when using Epson's glossy papers but not with Pictorico's Photo Gallery Glossy. But in order to see it, the print had to held every which way. 

Peter Palmieri

  From: plnelson
  I find the biggest metameristic delta with the Epson inks is
  between "daylight" fluorescent and actual daylight.  Could you 
  compare your prints between daylight and fluorescent please?

  Also, how noticable was the metamerism to you BEFORE you
  used the Epson RIP? (I just want to make sure you're not
  one of those people like my wife who hardly sees it in
  the first place).   




        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       

  Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

  If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.

  Please follow these basic guidelines:
  - Include your full name with your message.
  - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
  - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
  - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
  - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or "flames."
  - Complete your Yahoo profile.
  - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 




  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I have posted the settings that I have been using on this list. This was a post on 2/19. Rather then my reposting it, take a look at it and ask questions about the settings and I will be pleased to respond as best I can. The settings are for Win XP.

Peter Palmieri

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: chipcarterdc <chipcarterdc@...> 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 12:54 PM
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Epson 2200 RIP: further results?


  Would those of you getting great B&W results with the RIP be willing 
  to post your exact settings in the RIP?  From what I understand, the 
  documentation is almost non-existent.  Perhaps we could all judge 
  whether those who are getting poor results are getting them because 
  they have the wrong settings, or whether it's a subjective 
  difference, or something else.

  Besides, I have the RIP but haven't opened it yet.  Since the 
  documentation is so poor, I'd like to get as much help as I can in 
  setting it up.

  Finnaly, could you indicate whether the settings you post are for 
  Windows or Mac (sometimes, the same settings are in different places 
  in Epson software depending on what system you're using).


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
              ADVERTISEMENT
             
       
       

  Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

  If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same page.

  Please follow these basic guidelines:
  - Include your full name with your message.
  - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
  - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep them short.
  - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
  - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or &amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
  - Complete your Yahoo profile.
  - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various resources on the homepage. 




  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I am willing to make a big bet that in a wet darkroom it would take a plethora of trials to produce the 95-100% clearly, sharply and distinctly. So I am happy to live with the results that I have had so far. With some more experience with the RIP I may be able to improve the shadow detail issue. Right now I am printing some very nice B&W's. I think that I have mentioned this before. My big problem is finding a framing glass that doesn't reduce the light transfer without increasing the reflection quotient.

I don't know the answer to your other question.

Peter

  From: Julian Thomas 

  Peter, how can you be happy with something that compresses the shadow
  detail? Can this be corrected with a softproof or curves move?

  Julian


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

one of the advantages of the dig darkroom is the long scale - and one of the
problems of the epson driver is compression. Whenever I test a new BW
workflow I print off paul's step wedge and then rescan it and measure
exactly what is happening. using softproof and or a curves move with the
resulting data you can get the best range of tones possible. you'll be
surprised just how much that quick task tells you.

Julian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Palmieri" <pcpalmieri@...>
To: <DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 7:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Epson 2200 RIP: further results?


> I am willing to make a big bet that in a wet darkroom it would take a
plethora of trials to produce the 95-100% clearly, sharply and distinctly.
So I am happy to live with the results that I have had so far. With some
more experience with the RIP I may be able to improve the shadow detail
issue. Right now I am printing some very nice B&W's. I think that I have
mentioned this before. My big problem is finding a framing glass that
doesn't reduce the light transfer without increasing the reflection
quotient.
>
> I don't know the answer to your other question.
>
> Peter
>
>   From: Julian Thomas
>
>   Peter, how can you be happy with something that compresses the shadow
>   detail? Can this be corrected with a softproof or curves move?
>
>   Julian
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
>
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.
>
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.

>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter Palmieri 
<pcpalmieri@c...> wrote:
> No, because my prints will not be shown under flourescent light.
> Further, I have no fluorescent lights in my home here in 
>Florida or in my home in New Jersey. I don't recall a gallery
> anywhere--were it for paintings etc. or photographs, that has
> flourescent lighting.

I've seen plenty here in New England - Boston, Lowell, etc!!
But even if YOU don't have fluorescents plenty of people
do so you need to be concerned about the light people who buy
your prints will see them under if you want them to look
good when they get them home.

> I have observed meterism (and bronzing) with color prints
> from the 2200 when using Epson's glossy papers but not with
> Pictorico's Photo Gallery Glossy. But in order to see it,
> the print had to held every which way. 

The visibility of metamerism should not be affected by
angle. (although bronzing certainly would be) - are you sure
what you saw was metamerism?

Anyway the bottom line is that because fluorescent lighting
tends to be peakier than most other forms of light (see: 
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~mpeterso/classes/phys301/projects2001/awgach
or/image2.gif)

. . . it aggravates metamerism, so we can't conclude 
anything about how well the Epson RIP fixes the problem
without looking at it under fluorescents.

Could someone please view a BW print under fluorescent lights. I don't
plan for my images to be viewed under fluorescent lights ether, but on
the off chance that they are, I don't wont them to look 10 points magenta.

Thanks

Steve

Peter Palmieri wrote:

> 
> No, because my prints will not be shown under flourescent light.
> Further, I have no fluorescent lights in my home here in Florida or in
> my home in New Jersey. I don't recall a gallery anywhere--were it for
> paintings etc. or photographs, that has flourescent lighting.
> 
> I have observed meterism (and bronzing) with color prints from the
> 2200 when using Epson's glossy papers but not with Pictorico's Photo
> Gallery Glossy. But in order to see it, the print had to held every
> which way.
> 
> Peter Palmieri
> 
>   From: plnelson
>   I find the biggest metameristic delta with the Epson inks is
>   between "daylight" fluorescent and actual daylight.  Could you
>   compare your prints between daylight and fluorescent please?
> 
>   Also, how noticable was the metamerism to you BEFORE you
>   used the Epson RIP? (I just want to make sure you're not
>   one of those people like my wife who hardly sees it in
>   the first place).
> 
>         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>               ADVERTISEMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
>   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
>   If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
> this same page.
> 
>   Please follow these basic guidelines:
>   - Include your full name with your message.
>   - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
>   - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages
> to keep them short.
>   - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
> header.
>   - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> "flames."
>   - Complete your Yahoo profile.
>   - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the
> various resources on the homepage.
> 
>   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 
>                    Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>                        ADVERTISEMENT
> 
> 
> 
> Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls
> and other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint
> 
> If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish
> to unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting
> this same page.
> 
> Please follow these basic guidelines:
> - Include your full name with your message.
> - Include the address of your website, if you have one.
> - As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to
> keep them short.
> - As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
> header.
> - Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
> "flames."
> - Complete your Yahoo profile.
> - Before posting a question, search the message archives and the
> various resources on the homepage.
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

I'm trying to keep track of the Epson RIP metamerism
score here:

Thomas Fors says the Epson 2200 is as bad as the default
drivers.

Peter Palmieri hasn't done a complete test for metamerism
with the Epson RIP - he's only used daylight and
incandescent.

Chip Carter hasn't installed/run his yet.

Sandy Cornelius says he/she is getting "nice results"
"with negligible metamerism" but I didn't see the answer,
if any, to my question of what tests he/she had run. (Also,
anyone commenting on metamerism should indicate whether 
they could see it before because some people (like my 
wife) just can't see metamerism in the first place)

Please chime in if I've left anyone out.  So far,
we don't seem to have any definitive answer to this
vexing question.

My first question is why is Epson charging $200.00 for this 
software to correct inadequate b&w performance of the printer in 
the first place.  Everyone outside of North America gets b&w 
support in the box.

I want to have Epson give us the damned program (a patch to 
their poorly designed drivers) before we start evaluating its 
properties and capabilities.

Stop paying them for something that should be included with the 
printer.  We get held up buying the tiny ink and now this.

My rant...but $180.00 net for this software has me upset.

Steven Alexander

> My rant...but $180.00 net for this software has me upset

 

You should be happy for that price ;-)

In Sweden we have to pay over $400.00… 

 

Soren

 

-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: slylealex <alexpix@worldnet.att.net>
[mailto:alexpix@...] 
Skickat: den 20 februari 2003 20:50
Till: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Ämne: [Digital BW] Re: Epson 2200 RIPIs it a RIP OFF

 

My first question is why is Epson charging $200.00 for this 
software to correct inadequate b&w performance of the printer in 
the first place.  Everyone outside of North America gets b&w 
support in the box.

I want to have Epson give us the damned program (a patch to 
their poorly designed drivers) before we start evaluating its 
properties and capabilities.

Stop paying them for something that should be included with the 
printer.  We get held up buying the tiny ink and now this.

My rant...but $180.00 net for this software has me upset.

Steven Alexander 






Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



ADVERTISEMENT
 
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245454.2994396.4323964.2848452/D=egroupweb/S=1705
019182:HM/A=1457554/R=0/*http:/ipunda.com/clk/beibunmaisuiyuiwabei> 


 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245454.2994396.4323964.2848452/D=egrou
pmail/S=:HM/A=1457554/rand=950529095> 


Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this
same page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- Include your full name with your message.
- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to
keep them short.
- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
header.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
- Complete your Yahoo profile.
- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage. 




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  of Service. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "slylealex 
<alexpix@w...>" <alexpix@w...> wrote:
> My first question is why is Epson charging $200.00 for this 
> software to correct inadequate b&w performance of the printer in 
> the first place.  Everyone outside of North America gets b&w 
> support in the box.

No they don't.  You're confusing the RIP with the grayscale tool,
which you can download for free from lots of places.   The
black and white printing performance of the 2200 is no different
in France than in the UK than in the US, etc.

Second, a RIP is a lot more than a black and white printing
tool.  In fact so far we haven't even established whether 
this RIP has any affect at ALL on black and white printing!
We're still discussing that here in this forum.

Third, most users don't need a RIP or even have a clue
what one is so why should Epson give it away?  You can buy 
a base 4 cylinder Honda Accord DX with manual transmission 
at a bargain price.   But if you want to tow a boat you
better get the 6 cylinder with automatic or you'll have
a burnt-out clutch and engine.  Should Honda give away 
the 6 cylinder automatic for free because a FEW people 
want to tow a boat?

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Sören Lindqvist 
<soren.lindqvist@t...> wrote:
> > My rant...but $180.00 net for this software has me upset
> 
>  
> 
> You should be happy for that price ;-)
> 
> In Sweden we have to pay over $400.00… 
>

One of us could buy you a copy here and sell it to you
for $250.  8-)

Thursday, February 20, 2003, 12:22:58 PM, plnelson2003 <peter@...> wrote:

ppsnc> Should Honda give away 
ppsnc> the 6 cylinder automatic for free because a FEW people 
ppsnc> want to tow a boat?


If they told everyone that it could tow a boat when they marketed it,
then yes, they should.

Best regards,
 Richard  

mailto:richard@...

L i n k s  t o  m y  g a l l e r i e s:
http://fujirangefinder.com/document.php?id=246

Sorry not interrested, we have the GrayBalancer software for free ;-)

 

Soren

 

-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
Från: plnelson2003 <peter@studio-nelson.com>
[mailto:peter@...] 
Skickat: den 20 februari 2003 21:25
Till: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Ämne: SV: [Digital BW] Re: Epson 2200 RIPIs it a RIP OFF

 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Sören Lindqvist 
<soren.lindqvist@t...> wrote:
> > My rant...but $180.00 net for this software has me upset
> 
>  
> 
> You should be happy for that price ;-)
> 
> In Sweden we have to pay over $400.00… 
>

One of us could buy you a copy here and sell it to you
for $250.  8-)









Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



ADVERTISEMENT
 
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=245454.2994396.4323964.2848452/D=egroupweb/S=1705
019182:HM/A=1457554/R=0/*http:/ipunda.com/clk/beibunmaisuiyuiwabei> 


 
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=245454.2994396.4323964.2848452/D=egrou
pmail/S=:HM/A=1457554/rand=711373250> 


Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this
same page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- Include your full name with your message.
- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to
keep them short.
- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject
header.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or
&amp;amp;quot;flames.&amp;amp;quot;
- Complete your Yahoo profile.
- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage. 




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Terms of Service. 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I don't sell my photographs--it is all for fun. I never said anything about whether the RIP fixes the mystery of metamerism. Just that I don't see it and neither to many others who I know. And that's it!

Peter Palmieri

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: plnelson2003 <peter@...> 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 2:10 PM
  Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Epson 2200 RIP: further results?


  --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter Palmieri 
  <pcpalmieri@c...> wrote:
  > No, because my prints will not be shown under flourescent light.
  > Further, I have no fluorescent lights in my home here in 
  >Florida or in my home in New Jersey. I don't recall a gallery
  > anywhere--were it for paintings etc. or photographs, that has
  > flourescent lighting.

  I've seen plenty here in New England - Boston, Lowell, etc!!
  But even if YOU don't have fluorescents plenty of people
  do so you need to be concerned about the light people who buy
  your prints will see them under if you want them to look
  good when they get them home.

  > I have observed meterism (and bronzing) with color prints
  > from the 2200 when using Epson's glossy papers but not with
  > Pictorico's Photo Gallery Glossy. But in order to see it,
  > the print had to held every which way. 

  The visibility of metamerism should not be affected by
  angle. (although bronzing certainly would be) - are you sure
  what you saw was metamerism?

  Anyway the bottom line is that because fluorescent lighting
  tends to be peakier than most other forms of light (see: 
  http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~mpeterso/classes/phys301/projects2001/awgach
  or/image2.gif)

  .


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

If you don't like epson RIP software you can try other vendors
ImagePrintRIP from ColorByte if poopular, so is PowerRIP from Birmy. 

Rip is Raster Image Prossing software that also gives your printer 
the ability to speak Postscript3 among other things.

The PowerRIP has a downloadable full function demo version that 
prints the word PowerRIP across all your images until you pay for it.
Lets you see what it can do.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter Palmieri 
<pcpalmieri@c...> wrote:
> I don't sell my photographs--it is all for fun.

Then why were you talking about galleries?

> What tests did you run for metamerism?

Did an eyeball test. Looked at a print under daylight, tungsten and 
Ott Light fluorescent (daylight fluorescent) and observered 
negligible metamerism. Viewed the same image printed with standard 
driver under same lighting and observed unacceptable green-to-magenta 
color shifts due to metamerism. I don't know of another test you can 
do for metamerism since spectrophotometers don't see it. There may be 
some specialized tool that can measure it but I bet I couldn't 
afford it.
 
> What's "UC"?
  
Sorry, I guess I got lazy. UC stands for UltraChrome, Epson's pigment 
based ink used in the 2200.

> How did you trick it?

Good news on this. I tricked the RIP into printing at 2880x1440 dpi 
with Matte Black ink and the results now are improved over the 
default 1440x720 dpi on EEM -- I figured out what I was doing wrong 
that was resulting in a nonlinear grayscale gradient and the results 
are now super -- better resolution and smooth shadow transitions. 
Printing at 2880x1440 on EEM with stock inks through this RIP on the 
2200 yields results that are indistinguishable from Pieziography 
printed images using quadtones. I'll make a separate post on how I 
did it. 

> Didn't it use all the inks on your grayscale image, above?

Judging from a look at the dot patterns with a loupe and from how the 
ink levels are moving when printing using the RIP it seems that the 
RIP is mainly using black, then light black, then a small amount of 
cyan and not much, if any, of the other inks. This is a very 
unscientific observation and should be taken with a grain of salt. 
I'll leave it to folks smarter than me to figure out exactly what its 
doing.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sanfo2003 
<SandyCornelius@c...>" <SandyCornelius@c...> wrote:
> > What tests did you run for metamerism?
> 
> Did an eyeball test. Looked at a print under daylight, tungsten and 
> Ott Light fluorescent (daylight fluorescent) and observered 
> negligible metamerism. Viewed the same image printed with standard 
> driver under same lighting and observed unacceptable green-to-
magenta 
> color shifts due to metamerism. I don't know of another test you 
can 
> do for metamerism since spectrophotometers don't see it. There may 
be 
> some specialized tool that can measure it but I bet I couldn't 
> afford it.

Good info!  Thanks.  One last question:  Could you see the 
metamerism before, i.e., in the default drivers?    Before
I count you as "Epson RIP/No metamerism" on the scorecard I
just want to make sure you aren't like my wife who just doesn't
see metamerism in the first place.

> Before I count you as "Epson RIP/No metamerism" on the scorecard I
> just want to make sure you aren't like my wife who just doesn't
> see metamerism in the first place.

Yeah, I definitly saw the metamerism before with the standard driver, 
to the point of being tempted to throw the printer thru the window 
(of CompUSA, where I bought it). Glad I didn't now.

BTW, it can be a very good thing to be married to a woman who has 
difficulty noticing flaws. :)

Sandy--I started to make a 13X19 print today using the RIP with the 2200 and Hahnemuhle Photo Rag paper. After all the good trial prints that I have been getting with the RIP, I was looking forward with great anticipation making a print with the HPR paper. However, the printer was going so slow--I mean very, very slow--that I stopped the printing. The printer is connected to the USB port for "normal" printing and to the LPT port for the RIP. It doesn't run slow with the "normal" printer. 

I am using WIN XP with 2GB of RAM, an 80GB Hard Drive and P4 2.8 chip, so I don't think it is the computer is causing it to run so slow. As soon as I can find a 10' Firewire cord I will disconnect the RIP printer and reinstall it with the Firewire connection. In the meantime, any suggestions you have that I could implement to improve the RIP's printing speed would be much appreciated. 

Thanks in advance

Peter Palmieri




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

It's probably not the RIP's fault, it's your cable. I've tried all
three connection types on my 2100 and LPT was the slowest by far. And
by that I mean _much_ slower than with USB or Firewire.

Can't the RIP and the driver coexist on the same port?

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Peter Palmieri
<pcpalmieri@c...> wrote:
> Sandy--I started to make a 13X19 print today using the RIP with the
2200 and Hahnemuhle Photo Rag paper. After all the good trial prints
that I have been getting with the RIP, I was looking forward with
great anticipation making a print with the HPR paper. However, the
printer was going so slow--I mean very, very slow--that I stopped the
printing. The printer is connected to the USB port for "normal"
printing and to the LPT port for the RIP. It doesn't run slow with the
"normal" printer. 
> 
> I am using WIN XP with 2GB of RAM, an 80GB Hard Drive and P4 2.8
chip, so I don't think it is the computer is causing it to run so
slow. As soon as I can find a 10' Firewire cord I will disconnect the
RIP printer and reinstall it with the Firewire connection. In the
meantime, any suggestions you have that I could implement to improve
the RIP's printing speed would be much appreciated. 

> 
> Thanks in advance
> 
> Peter Palmieri
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>In the meantime, any suggestions you have that I could implement to 
>improve the RIP's printing speed would be much appreciated. 

Well, my computer has WIN98SE on it with 512 meg ram and 850 MHz, 
much slower and less capable than yours. I'm not that familiar with 
XP. I have five printers hooked up to my computer. The Epson RIP 
(treated as a separate printer) going thru a USB port labelled "EPSON 
StylusRIP", an Epson 2200 going thru EPUSB2 (a USB port), an Epson 
960 going thru EPUSB3 (a USB port), an Epson 1280 going thru EPUSB1 
(a USB port), and an HP LaserJet (for printing text) going thru LPT1. 
My USB ports are the old 1.1 types and the printing times are the 
same whether thru the standard driver or the RIP. Don't know what to 
say, doggonit -- wish I could help.

I've called Epson America tech support before for issues and they 
were very helpful (but the long distance call is on your nickel since 
they don't have an 800 number). Hope you can get it fixed soon.

Dan and Sandy--thanks for you suggestions. The USB is 2.0 in my computer but I don't know whether two printers with different names can work from the same port. I will see two of my buddies tomorrow who are computer whizes so they might have an answer for that question. 

Hopefully, it is the LPT port that is the culprit.  I was so disppointed with the slowness that I uninstalled the RIP so I could start over from scratch.

Peter Palmieri


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "sanfo2003 
<SandyCornelius@c...>" <SandyCornelius@c...> wrote:

[...]

> I tricked the RIP into printing at 2880x1440 dpi with Matte
> Black ink and the results now are improved over the default
> 1440x720 dpi on EEM -- I figured out what I was doing wrong

[...]

> 2200 yields results that are indistinguishable from Pieziography 
> printed images using quadtones. I'll make a separate post on 
> how I did it. 

Please do!  I'm excited to hear some positive news on this RIP.  At 
less than half the cost of IP5, if it can deliver neutral grays 
without metamerism, I'm in.

Looking forward to reading your technique (and wondering why Epson 
limited the matte output to 1440 dpi to begin with),

Dan

> 
> > I tricked the RIP into printing at 2880x1440 dpi with Matte
> > Black ink and the results now are improved over the default
> > 1440x720 dpi on EEM -- I figured out what I was doing wrong

Did we get a reply as to how this poster (sorry, I lost track of the 
names) "tricked" the driver into using 2880dpi?

Also, there's some discussion above about needing to have 2 
connections to the printer (one for the regular Epson driver and one 
for the RIP).  Is this correct?  So, say I currently have the 2200 
connected via USB, I should now also connect it to the computer with, 
e.g., a firewire cable in order for the RIP to work?

Finally, let me repeat my earlier desperate plea for those using the 
RIP successfully to post their exact installation and workflow (I 
think Sandy said he will do so -- thanks!).  I know it's a pain, but 
it would be really helpful. Also, could we try to consolidate this 
discussion into one thread, perhaps titled "Epson 2200 RIP: 
installation, workflow and opinions"?  It's getting hard to track 
what's going on where.

Hate to bring this up yet again, but I just set up a brand new 1280, MIS
CFS with MIS VM inks, and I've got clogged nozzles. Everything was
beautiful for the first week, then I didn't print for a week, now I can't
get it unclogged. I've done  4-5 iterations of the three-nozzle-
cleanings-then-print-purge-pattern routine, with no luck.

So, what's the current wisdom on 1) fixing and 2) preventing this? I'm
reluctant to start the whole windex routine; I did that for two years
with my 1200 and ended up replacing the printhead, twice.

PS: the prints with this system (pre-clog) (using Roark curves) are
beautiful. I JUST WANT TO START PRINTING!!

Harry