Hi, I bought the R1800 because I do mostly, if not all, color. I went after the b&W as part of the profiling process because it was something I could measure easily and from a consistent patch on a test print. I assumed that making the B&W good it would improve the shadow and light colors. This may not be a good assumption. BTW,I think the B&W is quite acceptable at this point. If you don't mind I think I will post my experience in the DPReview forum. I think it is a positive experience. Who knows, I may be able to tweak David Miller and Andrew Rodney again. :-) Thanks again, Bob Schoner --- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, CDTobie@... wrote: > > > In a message dated 5/12/08 2:18:00 PM, rschoner@... writes: > > > > Thanks again for the follow up. > > > > First, the easy question: What Printer? This is an Epson R1800 with > > an InkRepublic Continuous Ink System and Image Specialists inks. > > Although it has two black inks, Photo Black and Matte Black, I think > > it only uses one ink at a time depending on the paper/media setting. > > So, I guess that makes it a "one black" printer. It has Cyan, Yellow, > > Magenta, Red and Blue for the colors. No more Photo Cyan or Photo > > Magenta. > > > Okay, the R1800 is a great color printer, but absolutely not a black and > white printer. It has no gray inks at all, and all of its grays are generated from > color inks... and not evey light tone inks, full density color inks. That > would explain your issues... > > > > > > > > One observation from this process--the measurements change with time > > and location. The largest variations come just after the chart is > > printed; a drying effect I guess. > > > Yes, there are drying effects, but even with great patience and great care, > the R1800 is just not going to print great black and white images; any change > in the light source will cause significant changes is the percieved tone of > grays formed from color inks; so your B&W images will be green in one light and > pink in another. > > > But, I do notice a change > > overnight. One example: 47.57, 4.39, 0.54 went to 48.77, 3.69, 1.60. > > Do you have a feel for what acceptable measurement variation is? > > > While its still changing whole numbers, its not dry yet; but as I note above, > the R1800 is not going to produce gallery quality B&W no matter how exacting > you are. > > > Your suggestion to back up the measurement charts with extra paper is > > very good. I notice a variation if I do not back up the paper. I also > > notice some variation within the measurement patch, I guess that's > > the printer/ink. > > > > I tried the PhotoShop ACV curve correction process but did not have > > good luck. I used the R channel since the image had a pinkish cast > > but the error was so slight a small adjustment fixes the SoftProof > > but the print is not correct. I tried assigning the printer profile > > to the test image and then "auto correct" with the curves layer but > > that's disastrous. I guess that's why I asked about a LAB correction > > option in Spyder. BTW, I find the SpyderProof "exagerates" the > > errors/correction compared to PhotoShop or QImage soft Proof. > > > Probably because it factors in ink black and paper white. If you check those > boxes in Photoshop, results should be equivalent. > > > > Sorry for the long post but, in spite of the effort involved, it is > > still fun. Just wish I knew more. > > > > Well, you may know something now that you didn't previously. An R2400 would > produce gallery quality, visually stable B&W prints (as would a 3800, a Canon > iPF5000 or a Pro9500) but the R1800 is aimed very much in the other direction: > glossy color prints. Which is not to say you can't improve your B&W results, > just that they won't ever be stable enough to do gallery quality B&W. > > Sorry to be the bearer of bad news... > > C. David Tobie > WW Product Technology Manager > Digital Imaging & Home Theater > Datacolor > CDTobie@... > www.datacolor.com/Spyder3 > > > > > > ************** > Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family > favorites at AOL Food. > > (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001) >
Message
Not bad news at all
2008-05-12 by rschoner
Attachments
- No local attachments were found for this message.