Yahoo Groups archive

QTR-Quadtone RIP

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:12 UTC

Thread

Digital Negatives for Platinum Prints - QuadtoneRIP and Canon Pro-4000 (vs. Epson 9000)?

Digital Negatives for Platinum Prints - QuadtoneRIP and Canon Pro-4000 (vs. Epson 9000)?

2016-11-28 by Chris Ogden

Given big discounts through Wednesday, looking to purchase either...


Canon Pro-4000   ($3500 https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1259008-REG/ <https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1259008-REG/>)
   or
Epson SureColor 9000  ($4000 https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1189030-REG/ <https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1189030-REG/>)




The Canon seems to edge out the Epson in features such as non-clogging (even with occasional use only or in low humidity), greater gamut (barely), replaceable printhead, ink usage (esp. with no matte/photo black wasting), clear coat “ink”, built-in hard drive, WiFi, print accounting/reporting, etc.


BUT Canon does not offer a straight-through path (eg, metal print panels) nor does it seem to be supported by QuadtoneRIP.




QuadtoneRIP seems critical to enable me to dip my toe into Digital Negatives for Platinum Prints (?)




Any wisdom? (much appreciated)
-c

Re: [QuadtoneRIP] Digital Negatives for Platinum Prints - QuadtoneRIP and Canon Pro-4000 (vs. Epson 9000)?

2016-11-29 by Simone Simoncini

Hi. I have been working with epson printers for many years. Yes, quadtonerip is a great tool for dosing inks individually (like any rip does, but at a much higher cost) thus enabling you to search for your own curves in your own setup by setting ink limits and so on.

That said, I later discovered that once you get hold of the process, you can get perfect results with the epson driver as well by playing with the parameters ,like Christina Anderson suggests in her gum printing books.

So, the truth is that all those oversophisticated "methods" , patented or not, are only marketing. Any printer which uses inks dense enough to let you reach pure white in your process is good, that is, inks that block UV radiation to a suitable extent. Qtr is beautiful because you can choose to use only those inks that actually block UV, but it does not really matter in practice, because you just orint out your step wedge, read the results (densitometer or scanner), plot your curve, play around a little to adjust it.. and you're done.

The only question that really matters is if Canon inks block enough UV, and that is to be tested. Epson inks are ok.

Hope this helps
Regards

Show quoted textHide quoted text
Il 29 nov 2016 2:31 AM, "Chris Ogden yahoo@... [QuadtoneRIP]" <QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com> ha scritto:

Given big discounts through Wednesday, looking to purchase either...


or


The Canon seems to edge out the Epson in features such as non-clogging (even with occasional use only or in low humidity), greater gamut (barely), replaceable printhead, ink usage (esp. with no matte/photo black wasting), clear coat “ink”, built-in hard drive, WiFi, print accounting/reporting, etc.

BUT Canon does not offer a straight-through path (eg, metal print panels) nor does it seem to be supported by QuadtoneRIP.


QuadtoneRIP seems critical to enable me to dip my toe into Digital Negatives for Platinum Prints (?)


Any wisdom? (much appreciated)
-c




Re: Digital Negatives for Platinum Prints - QuadtoneRIP and Canon Pro-4000 (vs. Epson 9000)?

2016-11-30 by sanking@...

I have been making digital negatives for printing with alternative processes for about 15 years, and during that time have used several methods, beginning with Dan Burkholder's colorized negative system, Mark Nelson's PDN, and for the past 5-7 years QTR. For me making digital negatives is far more important than regular inkjet printing so not being able to use QuadtoneRIP with my printer would be a total deal killer. Yes, I could make digital negatives with Canon and HP printers, and have, but there is considerable loss of control using the native printer drivers of these printers compared to using QTR with an Epson.

Another issue one needs to consider is the community of support for digital negatives that exists with Epson printers, both using the native Epson driver and QTR, compared to Canon and HP. I would roughly estimate that more than 95% of photographers making digital negatives are using Epson photo printers so the knowledge base about these printers for this application is great. If you need a QTR profile for albumen or carbon or pt/pd someone will probably be able to give you a good one. If you are using a Canon or HP printer you are going to be pretty much on your own.

So there you have my opinion, such as it is.

Sandy


The Canon seems to edge out the Epson in features such as non-clogging (even with occasional use only or in low humidity), greater gamut (barely), replaceable printhead, ink usage (esp. with no matte/photo black wasting), clear coat “ink”, built-in hard drive, WiFi, print accounting/reporting, etc.

BUT Canon does not offer a straight-through path (eg, metal print panels) nor does it seem to be supported by QuadtoneRIP.

QuadtoneRIP seems critical to enable me to dip my toe into Digital Negatives for Platinum Prints (?)


Any wisdom? (much appreciated)
-c

Re: [QuadtoneRIP] Re: Digital Negatives for Platinum Prints - QuadtoneRIP and Canon Pro-4000 (vs. Epson 9000)?

2016-11-30 by Don Nelson

I second Sandy's assessment. I've followed a similar path but will add one more advantage- Epson printers (until p600/p800) can use Cones excellent inks for making digital negatives with QTR
Don


Sent from my iPhone
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> On Nov 29, 2016, at 8:07 PM, sanking@... [QuadtoneRIP] <QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
> I have been making digital negatives for printing with alternative processes for about 15 years, and during that time have used several methods, beginning with Dan Burkholder's colorized negative system, Mark Nelson's PDN, and for the past 5-7 years QTR. For me making digital negatives is far more important than regular inkjet printing so not being able to use QuadtoneRIP with my printer would be a total deal killer. Yes, I could make digital negatives with Canon and HP printers, and have, but there is considerable loss of control using the native printer drivers of these printers compared to using QTR with an Epson.
>
> Another issue one needs to consider is the community of support for digital negatives that exists with Epson printers, both using the native Epson driver and QTR, compared to Canon and HP. I would roughly estimate that more than 95% of photographers making digital negatives are using Epson photo printers so the knowledge base about these printers for this application is great. If you need a QTR profile for albumen or carbon or pt/pd someone will probably be able to give you a good one. If you are using a Canon or HP printer you are going to be pretty much on your own.
>
> So there you have my opinion, such as it is.
>
> Sandy
>
>
> The Canon seems to edge out the Epson in features such as non-clogging (even with occasional use only or in low humidity), greater gamut (barely), replaceable printhead, ink usage (esp. with no matte/photo black wasting), clear coat “ink”, built-in hard drive, WiFi, print accounting/reporting, etc.
>
>
> BUT Canon does not offer a straight-through path (eg, metal print panels) nor does it seem to be supported by QuadtoneRIP.
>
> QuadtoneRIP seems critical to enable me to dip my toe into Digital Negatives for Platinum Prints (?)
>
>
> Any wisdom? (much appreciated)
> -c
>

Re: [QuadtoneRIP] Digital Negatives for Platinum Prints - QuadtoneRIP and Canon Pro-4000 (vs. Epson 9000)?

2016-11-30 by forums@walkerblackwell.com

I agree with Sandy.

I see a huge difference in quality (observable) between a properly calibrated qtr dig neg and one that was hacked together with 16 8bit control points on a Photoshop curve. 

Epson print-heads allow different liquids where thermal heads don’t. This is another reason to use them for alt-proc negs because you can switch between dye, pigment, etc, and experiment to find the ink that works for you.

best,
-Walker
Show quoted textHide quoted text
> On Nov 29, 2016, at 11:07 PM, sanking@... [QuadtoneRIP] <QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
> 
> I have been making digital negatives for printing with alternative processes for about 15 years, and during that time have used several methods, beginning with Dan Burkholder's colorized negative system, Mark Nelson's PDN, and for the past 5-7 years QTR. For me making digital negatives is far more important than regular inkjet printing so not being able to use QuadtoneRIP with my printer would be a total deal killer. Yes, I could make digital negatives with Canon and HP printers, and have, but there is considerable loss of control using the native printer drivers of these printers compared to using QTR with an Epson.
> 
> Another issue one needs to consider is the community of support for digital negatives that exists with Epson printers, both using the native Epson driver and QTR, compared to Canon and HP. I would roughly estimate that more than 95% of photographers making digital negatives are using Epson photo printers so the knowledge base about these printers for this application is great. If you need a QTR profile for albumen or carbon or pt/pd someone will probably be able to give you a good one. If you are using a Canon or HP printer you are going to be pretty much on your own. 
> 
> So there you have my opinion, such as it is.
> 
> Sandy
>

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.