|
inhaliburton
|
 |
« on: March 17, 2014, 03:50:20 AM » |
|
Hi there. I am printing this Printer Evaluation Image file: http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsights/pi048/essay.htmlAn explanation of what to look for on the print is here: http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsights/pi049/essay.htmlMy printer is Canon iPF 6400. I've been printing using the 6400 for the past 3 months using Qimage 2014.202. Paper is Canon Photo Paper Plus Semi Gloss SG-201. For fun I thought I would print from PS CS5.1. I was stunned at the difference. In particular, the B&W image in the centre has much more detail. The strawberry "pops" whereas in Qimage it looks lifeless as described in the description above. Also some banding in the gray scale between 20 and 24. The skintones on the left side are flat looking. Especially noticeable in the image at top right, there is no detail in the mat underneath the PC board whereas the print from PS show considerably more detail. I know it sounds like the I'm not using the proper profile, or the printer is doing the colour management, that that is not the case. I'm using the stock Canon paper profile and have selected that paper type in the printer paper menu. Hopefully, I've goofed along the way somewhere. I sure don't want to use PS for printing. Btw, I'm not using the Canon ipf Photoshop plugin that is supplied with this printer. Regards, Paul. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Terry-M
|
|
« Reply #1 on: March 17, 2014, 09:26:38 AM » |
|
Hi Paul, I've had that test image for some time and down loaded it again just to be sure it's the same as yours. I printed it with an Epson R2000, Ilford smooth Gloss with a custom profile and as expected no surprises. A perfect match to my calibrated monitor, no dull reds and the B&W image has full detail and range of tones. This image is in ProPhoto colour space  and the fact you have dull reds is an indication that there's a colour management problem. What does QU say the colour space is on your PC? Check the Exif Hotbar below the thumbs, you should see *ProPhoto RGB* at the right hand end of the data. Note particularly the asterisks. Terry |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Fred A
|
|
« Reply #2 on: March 17, 2014, 09:58:49 AM » |
|
Hopefully, I've goofed along the way somewhere. I sure don't want to use PS for printing. Hi Paul, I actually made an 8 x 10 using Photo Shop and another using Qimage Ultimate. I have them side by side under a large OTT light! I used Epson Ultra Premium Glossy 5 star. Using Epson's profile for that paper. Printing at Original Size which is 10 x 7.5 at 360 ppi. The strawberries jump off the page in both. The colors are identical, You can see a difference, but not in colors. Looking with a magnifier to be sure, the green leaves ar the top of the strawberries have a lot of detail in the QU print. Also the reddish brown rock formation is noticeably more detailed without the loupe. I have to concur 100% with Terry. Recheck your driver settings and the as Terry said, the color space... also check to see if you have color management set to OFF in the printer. Let is know please what you find. Fred |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
efikim
|
|
« Reply #3 on: March 17, 2014, 10:54:09 AM » |
|
I've checked using Qimage Ultimate 2014.202 and Photoshop CC 14.2.1, Epson 3880 and Innova IFA12 paper (a soft textured matt paper). There are slight differences in the tones between some of the photos but not to say one is definitely better than the other. There is a distinct difference in both the colour charts in the second column from the right - the qimage print looks as if its missing a signicant amount of cyan in this column.
I do see some unevenness in the greyscale gradient in the qimage print that is not there in the photoshop print. A nozzle check doesn't show any problems.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
efikim
|
|
« Reply #5 on: March 17, 2014, 11:30:21 AM » |
|
quick photo by daylight - the top is printed by qimage, the bottom by photoshop
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Terry-M
|
|
« Reply #6 on: March 17, 2014, 11:43:25 AM » |
|
Hi Paul,
Yes I can see a difference, we don't doubt that, the question is why?
Please refer to my previous post and reply to the questions, we may be able to help then.
Check that article too, Mike lists 4 potential potholes that can cause your problem.
Terry
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
admin
|
|
« Reply #7 on: March 17, 2014, 01:12:45 PM » |
|
The article you should reference is this one: http://ddisoftware.com/tech/articles/may-2011-printing-the-same-colors-in-qimage-ultimate-and-photoshop/Pay close attention to potential pothole #3 in that article. There are a lot of malformed printer profiles out there, even from manufacturers. That can account for 99.99% of problems where the colors differ slightly: it's a difference in how LCMS (in Qimage Ultimate) and Adobe (in PhotoShop) interprets the bad data in the profile. When there is a major difference as in the original post here, it is usually the cause of a bad setting somewhere. Mike |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
efikim
|
|
« Reply #8 on: March 17, 2014, 02:24:38 PM » |
|
I'm not Paul, I was just confirming the problem.
the correct profiles are set in both photoshop and qimage and the epson driver set to Host ICM
I can't do the check that Mike suggests as I have no more of that paper left - I was just using up the remnants to check Paul's findings. Since I mostly print monochrome using the QTR print driver nowadays I'll bow out of this (but add that I've been using Qimage since it was just 'Qimage' and do know how to set up the colour management options in both Qiomage and Photoshop)
mike (another one)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Fred A
|
|
« Reply #9 on: March 17, 2014, 02:43:30 PM » |
|
the correct profiles are set in both photoshop and qimage and the epson driver set to Host ICM Just got back from another doctor.... sheesh. The driver has to be set to NO COLOR MANAGEMENT Also Quality need to have a check in Finest Detail, and slider to the right! Icm wont work. Fred |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
efikim
|
|
« Reply #10 on: March 17, 2014, 03:22:27 PM » |
|
I've had another look - settings are consistent with yours, except for the paper ...
looking at photoshop's print settings dialog, and ticking the gamut warning box shows a large part of the image is out of gamut, particularly in the areas of concern (I'm using a matt cotton rag paper, rather than a lustre paper) so it may simply be a difference in how the out of gamut colours are handled by the respective colour management systems.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
inhaliburton
|
|
« Reply #11 on: March 17, 2014, 04:24:50 PM » |
|
Hi Paul, This image is in ProPhoto colour space and the fact you have dull reds is an indication that there's a colour management problem. What does QU say the colour space is on your PC? Check the Exif Hotbar below the thumbs, you should see *ProPhoto RGB* at the right hand end of the data. Note particularly the asterisks. Terry Hi Terry. Yes, the colour space is "ProPhoto." My Monitor is profiled with "Photo" and the grayscale pic looks good on the monitor, but not on the print. Regards, Paul. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
inhaliburton
|
|
« Reply #12 on: March 17, 2014, 04:36:14 PM » |
|
Sorry, I should have said the monitor profiling software is Colormunki "Photo." Btw, using the Colormunki "printer" profile for the Canon semi gloss paper is worse than Canon's profile for the same paper. But one thing at a time. I'm certainly not faulting Qimage. It's a marvellous program that take some "getting to know." I'm convinced it's some setting in Qimage that I've goofed. I've been through them all so far, but it's hiding from me somewhere...  I'm working my way through the posts. Thanks to all! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Terry-M
|
|
« Reply #13 on: March 17, 2014, 04:36:25 PM » |
|
Hi Paul, My Monitor is profiled with "Photo" and the grayscale pic looks good on the monitor, but not on the print. I'm not clear what that means, are you using a calibration device like Eye1 Display, ColorMunki or a Spyder that produce a monitor icc profile? If not then there is likely to be a problem with differences between monitor & print. The monitor profile should be set in QU along with the printer/paper profile. As I said in my reply #1, monitor and prints match very closely. I find some allowance has to be made for matte papers that have a much smaller gamut than gloss or semi-gloss but neutrals are good too - with a good profile! Terry |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Terry-M
|
|
« Reply #14 on: March 17, 2014, 04:37:15 PM » |
|
Sorry, I should have said the monitor profiling software is Colormunki "Photo." Ah! That's better  Terry |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Qimage registration expired? New lifetime licenses are only $59.99!
