Roy thank you for the restore suggestion however I tried that when the problem fisrt became apperant and every time Windows report it could not restore due antivirus software being present. I use AVG and turned it of but unfortunately with the same result. I have asked AVG for suggestions but had no reply yet.

Fred, If you read my replies to your much appreciated suggestions I never said I would not upgrade or that it was pointless to do so.
what I said was "And I can't update Qimage, it is a version no longer supported and I see no need to spend money on a later version that offers me nothing more than I already have, or should I  more correctly say, want."

My understanding from the qimage website was the version I have is not up-gradable and I would have to purchase a complete new version. If that is in fact not correct then i would happily upgrade for a couple of quid.

However given that the problem is present in CS5 , element8, lr 3 nad 4 as well a s Qimage I do not believe updating to a newer version of qimage will either fix the problem or lead us to the cause.

 I suspect a complete format of the HDD and a  restore of windows and then a full install from scratch of all the software will probably be the only solution.

Hello

Since I recently bought a new Epson 3000 I have been having problems similar to ADWB.  I too use Fotospeed Papers here in UK.  Fotospeed supplied generic profiles for all their papers with their inkflow system.  Using LR4 now 5 the problem showed immediately when I used the new printer.  Previously used R1800 Epson and the problem never manisfested itself with that, using inkflow and Fotospeed papers and profiles made for my machine.  Fotospeed tried to sort the problem out via online PCtoPC and suggested that one should softproof in LR or go to softproof in CS5.  I have produced perfectly acceptable prints from CS5 but it is more problematic from LR.  Having spent a day trying numerous combinations, googling last Friday (28/06) threw up QI.   I immediately downloaded and printed a couple and they matched exactly monitor so was sold and bought immediately.  As I played around with QI, I realised that the settings in QI had been set for Printer Managed (using the correct ICC profile).  The Epson preview window (which I accept is not accurate) did match the monitor and prints were perfect (almost) but when I let QI manage the paper profile, with printer driver Colour Mgt off, I get exactly the same results as ADWB.  The preview window enhances any tone that it is remotely red and the resulting print is more saturated, than allowing Printer to manage. 

Using a RAW image direct from a Sony A99 I get exactly the same results with QI as I do in LR5.  That is in terms of oversatuaration of reds in particular.   It makes no difference if I softproof or not in LR.  The printer managed profile is as per monitor (calibrated) whilst the LR5 managed paper profile is slightly more saturated.  This is particularly noticeable with skin tones.  Where the original looks 'normal, the software managed paper profile shows a distinct rosy complexion.  Preview windows for the Epson 3000 reflect what comes out, i.e. prints match preview window (which is slightly more saturated than prints).

By and large the prints allowing QI or LR to manage and not the printer are acceptable but I would rather the tones are not as saturated, and find it frustrating that the paper profiles used by either software are not wholly reliable.

As ADWB has exactly the same problem (and my screen shots would look similar) this suggests that it may be down to the Fotospeed paper profiles, although I do not understand why if the printer seems to interpolate these correctly with less inbuilt 'accuracy' compared to QI, it can be the paper profiles.

If I get acceptable prints using the printer driver rather than or LR then one side of me say I should not be bothered, but the other says that the software, especially QI, should do a better job and hence i want to get it right.  To that end i did wonder about using Prism but at another $80 that seems a bit too far when Fotospeed will produce custom profiles.  But again if the printer produces reasonably accurate prints with the generic profiles it suggests to me that it is the software?

What suggestions does the team have?

Chris M

Wow Fred - rapid response team!  Thanks.

We do have an answer if not a solution.  I had meant to try Epson's papers as I had some etc and forgot.  So loading the Epson Paper profile and comparing printer managed with software mgd, the results are the same both in LR and QI.  Both provide accurate prints using paper profile from within software or by printer.  I have used two different Epson papers and similar results.  Prints are identical from within printer or via software.  As we have noted already the preview window when software controls the profile does show up much redder, than if printer mags profile.  I should also add the same results are achieved if the image is exported from within LR to QI and then printed.

Thus it is the Fotospeed profiles that must be at fault.  I will ask them to do machine matched profiles for me and see what happens.   or change to Epson papers!!  once I have used my rather large stock of Fotospeed paper!!

Chris M