QTR-Quadtone RIP

Comparison was made using "Qimage Ultimate" (Not a RIP. Same image, computer, paper, and printer.) and sharpness was much sharper off the Qimage print and looked more like what appeared on the screen if not sharper. Text and hair strands are now visible. QTR, at least in the Windows version, is too soft for some reason?

Any ideas as to why?

Thanks.

Mack

One possible reason is that default settings in Qimage Ultimate do 
sharpen the image before printing (and resize the image to its guess at 
the optimum ppi for the printer). Try printing to file from Qimage 
Ultimate at 240 or 360 ppi for the final print size, and then printing 
that image using QTR. That's what I do (on Windows 7) with no complaints.

On 28/05/2014 01:57, c-s-p@... [QuadtoneRIP] wrote:
>
> Is there a setting in QTR for Windows 8.1 someplace that allows for 
> sharpening?  Images are very soft at 2880 dpi and much worse at 1440.  
> Small text is almost unreadable at 1440.  Hair strands are absent too.
>
> Comparison was made using "Qimage Ultimate" (Not a RIP.  Same image, 
> computer, paper, and printer.) ...
>
> .
>
> 

-- 
mike finley photography
http://www.mikefinley.co.uk
http://words.mikefinley.co.uk

Just to make absolutely sure, what I meant was:
set up in Qimage as if you are going to print (size, print settings and 
image) and then instead of printing to printer,
Go to
File -> Print to -> File
File -> Printer/Page Setup
   - set page width and height to desired IMAGE size, and set resolution
   - set sharpening to what you want (I don't know what it defaults to)
then 'print' and select where to put the file, and finally open the 
print file in  qtrgui - DON'T LET QTRGUI RESIZE - and print!

works for me!

On 28/05/2014 15:14, c-s-p@... [QuadtoneRIP] wrote:
>
> Thanks Mike, but that's pretty much what I've done (printing at 360 in 
> Qimage).  QTR is not sharp, but a soft blur from same image.  Items 
> like concrete detail, hair strands, small text (I watermark small 
> white print in PS and it's very obvious there.) are razor sharp with 
> clean edges from Qimage.
>
> I took the original and printed it in another 3880 in color and it is 
> tack sharp, hair strands and text are razor sharp out of Qimage from 
> it.  The B&W is sharp as well out of Qimage into the K7 3880, other 
> than the tonal range being different due to the K7 inks and QTR's ink 
> management.  I possibly could get a 21-step tonal range match if I 
> apply a curve adjustment in the Qimage editor, and get a sharper image 
> too in the process.
>
> However, when I use QTR, the same image which is sharp through QImage 
> becomes soft which is troublesome.  Haven't tried printing it from PS 
> CS6 yet, but might be worth a shot to see if it matches the unsharp 
> image made from QTR.  If it does, might prove Qimage is the better 
> platform for printing - although it's not a RIP and unknown as to how 
> the K7 inks would be used doing so.
>
> My suspicion, for now, is the sharpening engine or whatever it is in 
> Qimage, or the Epson driver (Probably not that.), following is 
> superior for sharpness over QTR and maybe even Adobe as well if I try 
> it in PS.  Don't know if the Mac version of QTR is sharper over the 
> Windows version, but getting soft prints sort of defeats using K7 inks 
> with the Windows QTR version.
>
> I'm turning the same job over to a lab with a different RIP and see 
> what they do with the same image too.  Their tech did call me on size 
> and said the image is very sharp on his monitor.  Should be interesting.
>
> Mack
>
> 

-- 
mike finley photography
http://www.mikefinley.co.uk
http://words.mikefinley.co.uk

Mike,

Ah, so you use Qimage's sharpening system, save the image it alters, and then send to QTR?  I'll try it!

Fwiw, I did try same image in PS.  It might be a bit more contrasty than QTR and slightly sharper than QTR for that fact, but I suspect some of that is due to it not utilizing all the K7 inks as would QTR as a RIP.

However, Qimage is still very apparent for sharpness over either PS CS6 or QTR - so far - even though it may be using the same K7 inks as PS does.  QTR's "unsharpness" that I'm seeing may be the lower density inks coming into play too.


I'll try the "File Save" in Qimage and print one via QTR and see what happens...


Mack





On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 8:46 AM, "Mike Finley mike.finley@... [QuadtoneRIP]" <QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
 


  
Just to make absolutely sure, what I meant was:
set up in Qimage as if you are going to print (size, print settings
    and image) and then instead of printing to printer,
Go to 
File -> Print to -> File
File -> Printer/Page Setup 
  - set page width and height to desired IMAGE size, and set
    resolution
  - set sharpening to what you want (I don't know what it defaults
    to)
then 'print' and select where to put the file, and finally open the
    print file in  qtrgui - DON'T LET QTRGUI RESIZE - and print!

works for me!


On 28/05/2014 15:14, c-s-p@... [QuadtoneRIP] wrote:

  
>Thanks Mike, but that's pretty much what I've done (printing at 360 in Qimage).  QTR is not sharp, but a soft blur from same image.  Items like concrete detail, hair strands, small text (I watermark small white print in PS and it's very obvious there.) are razor sharp with clean edges from Qimage.
>
>I took the original and printed it in another 3880 in
              color and it is tack sharp, hair strands and text are
              razor sharp out of Qimage from it.  The B&W is sharp
              as well out of Qimage into the K7 3880, other than the
              tonal range being different due to the K7 inks and QTR's
              ink management.  I possibly could get a 21-step tonal
              range match if I apply a curve adjustment in the Qimage
              editor, and get a sharper image too in the process.
>
>However, when I use QTR, the same image which is sharp
              through QImage becomes soft which is troublesome.  Haven't
              tried printing it from PS CS6 yet, but might be worth a
              shot to see if it matches the unsharp image made from
              QTR.  If it does, might prove Qimage is the better
              platform for printing - although it's not a RIP and
              unknown as to how the K7 inks would be used doing so.
>
>My suspicion, for now, is the sharpening engine or
              whatever it is in Qimage, or the Epson driver (Probably
              not that.), following is superior for sharpness over QTR
              and maybe even Adobe as well if I try it in PS.  Don't
              know if the Mac version of QTR is sharper over the Windows
              version, but getting soft prints sort of defeats using K7
              inks with the Windows QTR version.
>
>I'm turning the same job over to a lab with a different
              RIP and see what they do with the same image too.  Their
              tech did call me on size and said the image is very sharp
              on his monitor.  Should be interesting.
>
>Mack

-- 
mike finley photography http://www.mikefinley.co.uk http://words.mikefinley.co.uk

you should be able to find out where it saved the file in the automated 
job log (via the recall button at the left hand end of the taskbar).
I've used versions of Qimage for all printout (whether at home or 
externally), since Photoshop 5.5 (not CS!). Photoshop 5.5 did an 
appalling job of resizing and can't do layout at all, and Qimage is 
still ahead. I can't get my head round the Qimage image editor though, 
so I just ignore it.

On 28/05/2014 17:46, 'G. McCurdy' c-s-p@... [QuadtoneRIP] wrote:
> Mike,
>
> Ah, so you use Qimage's sharpening system, save the image it alters, 
> and then send to QTR?  I'll try it!
>
> Fwiw, I did try same image in PS.  It might be a bit more contrasty 
> than QTR and slightly sharper than QTR for that fact, but I suspect 
> some of that is due to it not utilizing all the K7 inks as would QTR 
> as a RIP.
>
> However, Qimage is still very apparent for sharpness over either PS 
> CS6 or QTR - so far - even though it may be using the same K7 inks as 
> PS does.  QTR's "unsharpness" that I'm seeing may be the lower density 
> inks coming into play too.
>
> I'll try the "File Save" in Qimage and print one via QTR and see what 
> happens...
>
> Mack
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, May 28, 2014 8:46 AM, "Mike Finley 
> mike.finley@... [QuadtoneRIP]" <QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com> 
> wrote:
>
>
> Just to make absolutely sure, what I meant was:
> set up in Qimage as if you are going to print (size, print settings 
> and image) and then instead of printing to printer,
> Go to
> File -> Print to -> File
> File -> Printer/Page Setup
>   - set page width and height to desired IMAGE size, and set resolution
>   - set sharpening to what you want (I don't know what it defaults to)
> then 'print' and select where to put the file, and finally open the 
> print file in  qtrgui - DON'T LET QTRGUI RESIZE - and print!
>
> works for me!
>
> On 28/05/2014 15:14, c-s-p@... <mailto:c-s-p@...> 
> [QuadtoneRIP] wrote:
>> Thanks Mike, but that's pretty much what I've done (printing at 360 
>> in Qimage). QTR is not sharp, but a soft blur from same image.  Items 
>> like concrete detail, hair strands, small text (I watermark small 
>> white print in PS and it's very obvious there.) are razor sharp with 
>> clean edges from Qimage.
>>
>> I took the original and printed it in another 3880 in color and it is 
>> tack sharp, hair strands and text are razor sharp out of Qimage from 
>> it.  The B&W is sharp as well out of Qimage into the K7 3880, other 
>> than the tonal range being different due to the K7 inks and QTR's ink 
>> management.  I possibly could get a 21-step tonal range match if I 
>> apply a curve adjustment in the Qimage editor, and get a sharper 
>> image too in the process.
>>
>> However, when I use QTR, the same image which is sharp through QImage 
>> becomes soft which is troublesome.  Haven't tried printing it from PS 
>> CS6 yet, but might be worth a shot to see if it matches the unsharp 
>> image made from QTR.  If it does, might prove Qimage is the better 
>> platform for printing - although it's not a RIP and unknown as to how 
>> the K7 inks would be used doing so.
>>
>> My suspicion, for now, is the sharpening engine or whatever it is in 
>> Qimage, or the Epson driver (Probably not that.), following is 
>> superior for sharpness over QTR and maybe even Adobe as well if I try 
>> it in PS.  Don't know if the Mac version of QTR is sharper over the 
>> Windows version, but getting soft prints sort of defeats using K7 
>> inks with the Windows QTR version.
>>
>> I'm turning the same job over to a lab with a different RIP and see 
>> what they do with the same image too.  Their tech did call me on size 
>> and said the image is very sharp on his monitor. Should be interesting.
>>
>> Mack
>
> -- 
> mike finley photography
> http://www.mikefinley.co.uk  <http://www.mikefinley.co.uk/>
> http://words.mikefinley.co.uk  <http://words.mikefinley.co.uk/>
>
>
> 

-- 
mike finley photography
http://www.mikefinley.co.uk
http://words.mikefinley.co.uk