QTR-Quadtone RIP

Hi all,

I managed to find myself a cheap (ok free...) R200 and have purchased 
MIS's UT2 inks for it.  I've experimented with Paul's workflow using 
the Epson driver and am so far impressed.  However...I'm still curious 
how QTR would compare.  Given this, I've got two questions:

1) Does a QTR curve for the R200 using UT2 exist?  If so, how could I 
get a copy of it?
2) In other people's experiences, how does QTR compare with Paul's 
workflow using the Epson driver in general?

Thanks all,

Cheers,

Mark

Hi Mark

I've been using QTR with the Epson R220 and UT-R2 inks for about a year now.
I really like the combination. With the later versions of QTR and a mix of
the warm and neutral inks you can play with any tone in between or split
tones to your hearts delight.

David

I've heard lots of good things about the R220, however, as of right 
now, I've got a lowly R200.  Any idea about curves for the R200?

Cheers,

Mark

--- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "David Whistance" 
<david.whistance@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Mark
> 
> I've been using QTR with the Epson R220 and UT-R2 inks for about a 
year now.
> I really like the combination. With the later versions of QTR and a 
mix of
> the warm and neutral inks you can play with any tone in between or 
split

> tones to your hearts delight.
> 
> David
>

Hi Mark

I don't think that there is much difference in quality between the R200 and
R220.  They do need different curves however.  I've made my own which, given
that you only have three variations of black/grey ink in each set, isn't too
onerous.

David

> 2) In other people's experiences, how does QTR compare
with Paul's > workflow using the Epson driver in general?

Mark,

I've been using Paul Roark's curves with UT7 on an Epson 2200
for a few years and have been very pleased with the results.
I've recently considered switching to QTR, so I've been trying to
figure this out for myself. I haven't yet managed to get QTR to
work reliably. Here's my summary so far of the advantages and
disadvantages of each approach:

Roark curves

+ simple to use
+ excellent results
+ easy to create soft proofing profiles
+ uses Epson driver
- not so easy to linearize (1)
- can't put MK and PK ink in same printer  (2)
- can't mix curves
- can only adjust default ink limit

QTR
+ can put inks in arbitrary slots, so easy to put MK and PK
inks in at once
+ can mix toning of different curves, separately for highlights,
shadow, etc
+ easier to create new curves yourself
+ ability to adjust ink limits might allow higher dmax
- minimal documentation and hard (at least for me) to get
going
- changing driver resolution settings changes tones, so need
to reprofile (3)
- more likely to produce banding effects (4)
- don't seem to be able to kill print job once started

Notes

1. QTR's CreateICC should allow you to linearize the Roark
curve and turn it into an ICC profile, but I've found that this
only worked on some of my curves.

2. But Paul says you can get good dmax with greys alone.

3. This and subsequent disadvantages all due to QTR's use of
gimp driver.

4. Seems that most users stick to the highest quality settings
(eg, unidirectional 2880) to avoid this problem, which on my
machine (Epson 2200) means that a 4x6 test print takes ten
minutes to print. With the standard Epson driver, the lower
resolution settings produce almost indistinguishable prints
much faster.

--Daniel

Thanks Daniels.  You've given me a very informative reply.

Cheers,

--- In QuadtoneRIP@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel Jackson" <dnj@...> wrote:

>
> > 2) In other people's experiences, how does QTR compare
> with Paul's > workflow using the Epson driver in general?
> 
> Mark,
> 
> I've been using Paul Roark's curves with UT7 on an Epson 2200
> for a few years and have been very pleased with the results.
> I've recently considered switching to QTR, so I've been trying to
> figure this out for myself. I haven't yet managed to get QTR to
> work reliably. Here's my summary so far of the advantages and
> disadvantages of each approach:
> 
> Roark curves
> 
> + simple to use
> + excellent results
> + easy to create soft proofing profiles
> + uses Epson driver
> - not so easy to linearize (1)
> - can't put MK and PK ink in same printer  (2)
> - can't mix curves
> - can only adjust default ink limit
> 
> QTR
> + can put inks in arbitrary slots, so easy to put MK and PK
> inks in at once
> + can mix toning of different curves, separately for highlights,
> shadow, etc
> + easier to create new curves yourself
> + ability to adjust ink limits might allow higher dmax
> - minimal documentation and hard (at least for me) to get
> going
> - changing driver resolution settings changes tones, so need
> to reprofile (3)
> - more likely to produce banding effects (4)
> - don't seem to be able to kill print job once started
> 
> Notes
> 
> 1. QTR's CreateICC should allow you to linearize the Roark
> curve and turn it into an ICC profile, but I've found that this
> only worked on some of my curves.
> 
> 2. But Paul says you can get good dmax with greys alone.
> 
> 3. This and subsequent disadvantages all due to QTR's use of
> gimp driver.
> 
> 4. Seems that most users stick to the highest quality settings
> (eg, unidirectional 2880) to avoid this problem, which on my
> machine (Epson 2200) means that a 4x6 test print takes ten
> minutes to print. With the standard Epson driver, the lower
> resolution settings produce almost indistinguishable prints
> much faster.
> 
> --Daniel
>