QTR-Quadtone RIP

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

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

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