new QTR and Epson 1280 again
2003-12-14 by px3n120x
Yahoo Groups archive
Index last updated: 2026-04-28 22:56 UTC
Thread
2003-12-14 by px3n120x
Looks like my previous post got lost so here's my question again: are there any improvements in this new version regarding the 1280 Epson and UT's? Basically the beta 8 works fine for me and if there's no compelling reason to upgrade I don't want to do it just because there is a new version. Thanks, Andu
2003-12-14 by Roy Harrington
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "px3n120x" <px3n120x@y...> wrote: > Looks like my previous post got lost so here's my question again: are there any > improvements in this new version regarding the 1280 Epson and UT's? > Basically the beta 8 works fine for me and if there's no compelling reason to upgrade > I don't want to do it just because there is a new version. > > Thanks, Andu Andu, There were changes for the 1160/1270/1280 class printers. The effect should be slightly smoother highlights, but whether you will easily see it or what images you'd see it in is hard to say. Old curves should work pretty well but for optimum, identical densities you ought to re-linearize the curves. That said, if you already have good results and haven't enough time to try and compare the new version, stay with beta8. But I think anyone working on new curves and experimenting in general ought to download and use the newer version. It's also perfectly alright to go back from beta9 to beta8 if you really need to. Roy
2003-12-14 by Mark Stracke
> There were changes for the 1160/1270/1280 class printers.
> should be slightly smoother highlights, but whether you will easily see it
> Old curves should work pretty well but for optimum, identical densities you ought
>to re-linearize the curves.
> Roy
I have used QTR and like it very much! (thanks Roy!!!).
But, I tried to "re-linearize" once before and it gave very strange results. I printed a
21 step scale with based on one of the files that came with the software, read it with
my eye one and put in the data to the curve file and ran it. Then I did it the preceeding
again, substituting the new info for the "linearize" function at the end of the curve file,
and the result was just crazy. The curve was unusable (weird tone progressions all
over the place)
Since then I've always begun from a "clean" curve file (namely one of the files that
come with the software) and I linearize *only once*. If a curve gets weird (from
strange readings near the black end of the scale for instance) I start over(which is kind
of a pain, but not terrible).
Is this the right way to do things??? Can I get the new software (I have an 1160) run
a step scale with a curve I already use and then read and re-linearize that? Or am I
right to begin with a fresh curve file every time?
TIA
Mark Stracke
ps. Roy, thanks again. Your efforts have been a tremendous contribution to the Mac
-Quad printing community.2003-12-14 by Roy Harrington
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Mark Stracke" <markastracke@y...> wrote: > > There were changes for the 1160/1270/1280 class printers. > > should be slightly smoother highlights, but whether you will easily see it > > Old curves should work pretty well but for optimum, identical densities you ought > >to re-linearize the curves. > > Roy > > I have used QTR and like it very much! (thanks Roy!!!). > > But, I tried to "re-linearize" once before and it gave very strange results. I printed a > 21 step scale with based on one of the files that came with the software, read it with > my eye one and put in the data to the curve file and ran it. Then I did it the preceeding > again, substituting the new info for the "linearize" function at the end of the curve file, > and the result was just crazy. The curve was unusable (weird tone progressions all > over the place) > > Since then I've always begun from a "clean" curve file (namely one of the files that > come with the software) and I linearize *only once*. If a curve gets weird (from > strange readings near the black end of the scale for instance) I start over(which is kind > of a pain, but not terrible). > > Is this the right way to do things??? Can I get the new software (I have an 1160) run > a step scale with a curve I already use and then read and re-linearize that? Or am I > right to begin with a fresh curve file every time? > > TIA > Mark Stracke > > ps. Roy, thanks again. Your efforts have been a tremendous contribution to the Mac > -Quad printing community. Hi Mark, You bring up some good points and I should clarify how you "re-linearize". In a sense you're right that you can "linearize only once" -- in that you can only have one LINEARIZE line in the file. So what you need to do to relinearize is take out the LINEARIZE= line in the ink file, process through quad-profile, print a new stepwedge, read it, insert the new LINEARIZE= line, re-profile one more time and you are done. Your point about occasionally getting bogus readings from the eye-one is correct. The new version has some new stepwedges that are random order patches. The MeasureTool software (from ProfileMaker Pro) has some error checking with random patches and I've have better luck reading these. Also if you get an error you know it sooner. Roy
2003-12-14 by px3n120x
--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Roy Harrington" <roy@h...> wrote: > Andu, > > There were changes for the 1160/1270/1280 class printers. The effect > should be slightly smoother highlights, but whether you will easily see it > or what images you'd see it in is hard to say. Old curves should work pretty > well but for optimum, identical densities you ought to re-linearize the curves. > > That said, if you already have good results and haven't enough time to try > and compare the new version, stay with beta8. But I think anyone working > on new curves and experimenting in general ought to download and use > the newer version. It's also perfectly alright to go back from beta9 to beta8 > if you really need to. > > Roy Thanks Roy, I was perfectly happy with the results from beta8 but considering your reply I will upgrade. I have a good curve, but don't mind improving on it or come up with variations or something new, this is part of the game. Andu