QTR-Quadtone RIP

JH,

Oooops. The IJC curves download is in the FILES section of the 
Digital B&W Forum, not this forum.  Sorry about that.

Lou

--- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "Louis Dina" <lbdina@c...> wrote:
> JH....I have them both and wrote the tutorial on IJC/OPM.  I have 
> ImagePrint too.
> 
> QTR and IJC/OPM will yield pretty much identical output if they 
have 
> the same profiles.  They use the same gimp dither engine.  
> 
> The Windows version of IJC/OPM works great with the 2200.  I can't 
say 
> the same for the 4000 at present, but hopefully they will get that 
> straightened out.  
> 
> QTR has some nice features for curve building that IJC lacks.  QTR 
will 
> automatically partition the gray inks and get you to a baseline 
curve 
> more quickly.  In that regard, it is a bit more automated.  But, I 
find 
> it a little harder to tweak these curves to get them just right.  
IJC 
> has a pretty slick interface and the ability to edit curves 
manually 
> with nearly no limitations, which I wish QTR had.  Hopefully that 
will 
> come.  So, I find I have a bit more control with IJC, but it is 
> probably more work.  If you have good curves to start with, IJC is 
> pretty good, at least with the 2200.
> 
> Many people who use QTR with the Epson UC inkset seem to build a 
cool 
> and warm curve, then blend the two for a neutral result.  That 
works 
> quite well.  It is easy to get your pants in a wad about having a 
> perfectly neutral gray as measured by a spectrophotometer, but we 
view 
> prints, not numbers.  When I built curves for IJC, I built cool and 
> warm curves too, but decided to build a very neutral curve also.  
That 
> was just my preference.  If you use the Windows version of IJC with 
a 
> 2200 and the UC inkset, you can download the curves I built from 
the 
> Files section of this site.  There are quite a few, and they will 
serve 
> as an excellent starting point for future profiles.
> 
> QTR has a much larger following and more community support at this 
> time, plus there are a lot of people building profiles.  And it is 
only 
> $50, compared to $250 for IJC.  
> 
> So, each has pluses and minuses.  Hopefully, the above will help 
you 
> decide.  IMO, either one is a big step up from ImagePrint.  With 
> ImagePrint, you are tied to ColorByte's gray profiles, their ink 
> limits, their linearization (or lack thereof), etc.  I find IP 
gives 
> decent prints, but they seem harsh in comparison, have poor shadow 
> separation, and lack depth and presence.  
> 
> Lou
> 
> --- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "Mr_Misty_44" <jharvey@i...> 
wrote:
> > I've noticed the comments about QTR vs. Image Print. Has anyone 
done
> > a 
> > comparison between the Windows version of IJC and QTR? I presently
> > use 
> > the OSX version of QTR but will probably be switching over to the 
> > Windows version. Just curious. It seems that one of the things 
going 
> > for IJC is possibly an easier interface for those not inclined to 
get 
> > into the guts of linearization. You pay a bit more for IJC and
> > I'm not 
> > sure how currant they can be with adding printers. I'm not sure.
> > I'd 
> > like to hear. Are the profiles for IJC more " neutral" over
> > the tonal 
> > range? A complaint from someone about QTR and the 2200.
> > 
> > JH