QTR-Quadtone RIP

I missed your post until I saw you mention on Lula that you didn't get a response. Are you saying that this micro-banding occurs in the first and last inch of the page, in terms of the direction it is fed into the printer, i.e. not on the sides? If so, this is a known issue. If you search this forum you'll find plenty of discussion of it. None of the Lula responses so far have realised what the problem is.

In short, special secret, proprietary algorithms are needed to print in the first and last inch of the page on these printers. For the larger (3880 and above) printers, this code is built into the firmware of the printer, and so any software that drives the printer automatically has access to it. However for smaller Stylus Photo printers, the code is in the driver, and so only software that prints via the Epson driver can access it. This does not include QTR. Hence you get micro-banding on the first and last inch. How much will depend on the image. This post from Roy is a succinct summary:

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/QuadtoneRIP/conversations/messages/12758

There are two solutions, other than buying a Pro printer:

1. Use larger leading and trailing margins.

2. Use some low-tack painters masking tape to tape on a "lead sheet". This requires you to define custom page sizes and position the image carefully, but it works a treat for me. I'm currently using a 140mm long lead sheet for an A4 page. The lead sheet probably needs to be white on the leading edge, i.e. not previously printed on

One odd thing about this approach is that I define a page size that tells QTR and the printer that I have also attached a matching trailing strip, so that I can centre the image on the "page". But I don't actually attach the trailing sheet, because they become detached and jam too easily. Despite this, I don't get banding in the last inch either. Simpling specifying a trailing strip but not attaching one is enough to fool either QTR or the printer into printing normally. Why this works puzzles me, but it does. I'll was about to post a question on this, and will do so shortly.

I'm not familiar with the 1440, and don't know whether any of this applies to it.

I use Epson Hot Press Natural and there are no "specs" I can find relative to its suitably for printing either at 2800 dpi or 1440 dpi. What "specs" am I specifically looking for? (Sorry if I'm being a mite obtuse.)

I didn't comment on the 1440 vs 2880 issue, because while it might make the leading and trailing micro-banding less obvious, I don't think it will solve it. I've often read that anything more than 1440 is pointless on matte whereas 2880 may be useful on gloss. However I think that applies to the OEM driver. It's less clear that it applies to QTR. Because I use piezography K7 inks I always print at 2880, because that's what those curves are designed for. At 1440 I think you'll find those K7 QTR curves too light. I'm not sure about the shipped K3 curves, because I almost never use them, but perhaps they have been designed for 1440 on matte and 2880 on gloss.

Brian: You and others who have responded to my concern on this forum have provided considerable enlightenment to me. I think I need to rephrase more succinctly my situation. I have been printing for years on my Epson 1400 at 2880 dpi. (I print in black-and-white with MIS-based dilutions I mix myself, per Paul Roark). It's only now with my new Epson 1430 that I'm having the banding problems with the 2880 dpi setting. Your earlier explanation (reasoning) for this is likely correct. I guess it means that the relevant technology between the two printers is sufficiently different to cause this disparity of results between my use of the 2880 dpi and the 1440 dpi.
I have ordered from MIS additional cartridges which I will load with the same ink dilutions I currently have in the 1430, and load them into my 1440, and try printing with the 1440 at the 2880 dpi setting. If there continues to be no banding with the 1400, this will show me if there's any difference in print output quality between the two settings (and printers). To the extent anyone's still interested, I will report back. Again, many thanks. Jim

I have now set up something of a two printer test. (I print black-and-white using MIS Eboni-6 inks with my own dilutions currently using a five-ink profile.)

Printing at an approximate 13-inch by 17-inch size, I programmed QTR to print at 440 dpi on my new Epson 1430 and at (my previously used) 2880 dpi setting on my old Epson 1400.

The print quality on my matte paper (Epson Hot Press Natural) slightly favors (but only slightly) the 2880 setting. (Longer printing time but slightly subtler gradations of tone.)

I now notice the edge micro banding occurring in both, slightly less noticeable with the 440 dpi setting. When printing on the Epson 1400 over past years, I used a three-ink dilution profile, and with NO micro banding. Go figure.

So, I guess I will have to follow Brian's solution if I want to continue using QTR with the five-dilution profile, and set at 2880 dpi. However, I'm not quite certain, Brian, I fully understand your QTR settings to achieve this. Do I, for example, "tell" QTR I'm printing at 13 by 19 inches, but scaling the actual photo to 13 by 17 inches to eliminate the one-inch of micro banding at each leading edge?

All a bit of a nuisance, what!

Yes, it is a bit of a nuisance! But I find my lead sheet approach less of a nuisance than 1" margins, or keeping a 3880 or larger pro printer working well without any ink sedimentation in the carts, ink lines and dampers.

I am more interested in avoiding micro-banding than burning ink and paper trying to work out when you can notice it and when you can't. That said, my limited experiments suggest that it varies a lot from image to image, which makes testing difficult.

I haven't often used a lead sheet on larger paper sizes like 13"x19". When I print that large, I usually use a 1" margin for framing, so it's not a problem. But on an A4 page, which I print on a lot, a 1" margin only uses 63% of the page, and the image is just too small with too large a margin IHMO. I'm currently printing with a 7.5mm margin.

So for A4 what I do precisely is I use a 140mm long lead sheet (297mm wide). I create a custom page size which is 297+140+140 = 577mm long, but as I said before, I don't actually attach the trailing 140mm sheet. Custom page sizes are easy on a Mac, or so I'm told. On Windows QTRGui only allows one custom page size, so to make it easy to switch between multiple custom page sizes I hacked the PPD file for the printer to add more custom page sizes. To print on this page I simply centre the image, although you could set margins manually if you like, taking account of the 140mm lead.

A couple of points to watch.

1. Use a good quality low-tack painter's masking tape. This is less critical for gloss, as getting tape of the back of gloss is not hard, but it's critical for most matte papers, if you want to avoid tearing the paper. The good low-tack tapes come off pretty easily if you're careful. I use this: http://www.bunnings.com.au/bear-24mm-x-50m-low-tack-delicate-masking-tape_p1661595 and I guess something similar is available in most countries.

2. Don't skimp on the tape. You'll need it most of the way across the join. If you just use a short section at either end, there's a good chance that sooner or later the middle of the join will separate slightly and some of the paper feeding mechanism will catch on it and the paper will get stuck in there and perhaps the lead sheet will come off. This is bad, but it's easy to avoid simply by using enough tape most of the width of the paper. Tape is cheap. Good paper is not.

3. Don't use too short a lead sheet. Strictly you only need 1", but short lead sheets are harder to extract if they do separate. I think 140mm is fine for the sheet feeder, but if I was using the rear feed on any of these printers, then I think I'd use a full page. I.e. an A4 page taped to an A4 page and a custom page length of 297 + 297 + 297 mm. The rear feed may seem gentle, since there's no paper feed roller, but I've found it to be a long and complex path, and a very long lead sheet seems the safest approach.

Good luck. If anyone tries this I'd really appreciate feedback on the lack of micro-banding at the end of the page without attaching a trailing sheet.

In my long reply I didn't actually address this point. That's the other way. If the page is 19" long and you size the image so that it's only 17" long, and you position the image on the page so that there is 1" margin either end, then you should be fine. This is by far the easiest way, and suits large page sizes, but IMHO not smaller ones like A4/Letter.

Brian: While your very welcome (and well detailed) run-down would on the surface tend to simplify matters for me, there are certain aspects to my own work flow that might introduce additional complications (or certainly considerations).

My final prints have been until recently on standard 13- by 19-inch paper. However, I have recently switched to cutting 13- by 17-inch sheets from 17-inch-wide (by 50-foot) roll paper. (This saves a great deal of money.) Hence my current pictures can be no wider (in landscape mode) than a little less than 17-inches. If I wanted this size, but still used the 13- by 19-inch sheets, it would be a simple matter as you suggest to allow a one-inch margin at both ends to eliminate the micro-banding. However, to maximize the landscape width on the 17-inch paper, I would need to attach, as you suggest, a lead-in sheet, which I am prepared to try out. (My test prints are 4.25 by 5.5 inches, and my file prints are the A4 size. Hence, any micro-banding on those is of no real consequence.)

What I still, however, can't logically account for is the fact that over the years (and more recently also with the 17-inch sheets) I see no evidence of micro-banding when I use the three-ink set-up. It's only with my recent experimenting with a five-ink set-up -- on both printers (the 1400 less so) -- that I've come across the micro-banding.

Anyway, once again many thanks for sharing your thoughts, procedures and recommendations with me. Regards, Jim

Astute readers will have realised that when I said "So for A4 what I do precisely is I use a 140mm long lead sheet (297mm wide)" I actually meant 210mm wide.

Brian: Through further testing and considerations, I think I have fairly well decided how best to handle my particular "conundrum." Based upon my preference for making my final prints on approximately 17 by 13 inch sheets I've cut from my 17-inch-wide roll, and the fact that further testing has in fact revealed that there is little if any micro banding when I use my Epson 1400 printer, I will continue to use that printer when my cropping aspect ratio results in photos where the length exceeds the width by an extent where there would be insufficient border to prevent micro banding on the new Epson 1430. Then use the new printer where the length and width ratios are closer together, with the 13-inch border being the determinant. Still a real nuisance. Regards, Jim

I had reasons to dig out some older prints made using QTR on my R1410. This was the same as the R1400, but branded differently in certain countries outside the US. These prints would be around 5-6 years old. I couldn't find any micro-banding either, initially. I looked and looked and used a loupe, and eventually I found what appeared to be the slightest hint of it. Further searching found one print where it was almost visible to the naked eye. I think it's there on the 1400/1410, but at a level where it doesn't really matter.

I've never had an R1430, but I know from those who do that it has quite visible micro-banding in the first and last inch. I don't understand the difference either. It's about now I regret getting rid of the R1410, even though the build was cheap and the paper feed unreliable and wouldn't ever feed the paper quite straight.