Datacolor User to User Support Group.

>1c. Re: Profiling 9800 problems
>     Posted by: "sinar001" jnolly@... sinar001
>     Date: Wed Jun 7, 2006 9:03 am (PDT)
>
>Bill:
>To figure out your problem, let's start at the beginning!
>
>How do prints on Epson Media using Epson profiles look out of your 
>9800? If they look
>fine, then the problem is either in your workflow for creating and 
>applying 3rd party
>profiles, OR, maybe you have a defective roll of paper. I think it's 
>highly unlikely (but
>possible) that you have a defective printer.
>
>John Nollendorfs





Thanks, John.

I followed your advice.

1.  Printing out targets "Same as Source" using Epson Double Weight 
Matte paper, the Epson 10000 yielded better differentiation between 
patches than the Epson 9800.

This was particularly true on the lower left portion of the 225 target.

The troublesome near blacks (K-6, L-6, M-6, N-6, O-6, K-7, L-7, M-7, 
N-7, O-7, K-8, L-8, M-8) were slightly better on the Epson 10000 
(i.e. more differentiation whereas they are hard to distinguish on 
the 9800).

The problem we are having on the Epson 9800 is getting good detail in 
the midtones.  The problem is subtle but I can see it myself when the 
artist points it out.  And significant detail does disappear with art 
printed out from the same files on the 9800 as compared to the 10000 
-- and no amount of reworking the files has been able to reproduce 
that detail.  

That is why I suspect something being wrong with the 9800.

2.  To continue the exploration, I ALSO tried printing out the target 
images using the canned Epson profiles for the media.  (I realize 
now, we are no longer talking about profiling but about testing the 
parameters of the printer to see how it interprets and prints out the 
colors from the canned profiles.)

I printed using Epson Double Weight Matte paper and the canned Double 
Weight Matte profiles (for matte black for the 9800) on both the 
Epson 10000 and the Epson 9800.

This time the difference between results yielded by the two printers 
was even more pronounced.

The Epson 10000 yielded much better differentiation and in the case 
of the patches on the lower left of the 225 target, must nicer 
colors.  

Overall, on both the targets and the printed images with profiles, 
the 9800 produced more visible saturation on darker colors but the 
differentiation and subtlies were gone.  In the lower left of the 225 
target image, the 10000 gave very pleasant colors while the 9800 were 
more "washed."  


AGAIN, the question and problem is getting good detail in the 
midtones.  And if the 9800 is not capable of producing them on the 
targets then the profiles we produce are not going to fix the problem.


Bill