I must be an outlier. I might not use my PRO-100 for several weeks, and then print photos with no trouble (knocks on wood). I've never run a cleaning/purge cycle because I can't see any need.

I don't always blather, but when I do, it's about Qimage!

Fred, you know, there's this really great profile tool, Profile Prism, I think... Surprised you don't mention it.

I use it for all my papers on the PRO-100 and the results are just super. It lets me use the cheap lots of paper I get from the dollar store for throw-away stuff, and seems to do a better job than the profiles offered by Red River. FWIW, I like their Polar Gloss paper best.

I love my PRO-100 and, even though I've had it for quite a while, I learned something new just a few days ago. We do a lot of plain paper printing (wife's recipes and stuff) and I thought the ink consumption was very high. Lately I've been printing 8.5x11 photos for my wall at work. I just realized that my ink consumption for high quality prints is way less then for plain paper printing. It's so low for prints I don't even worry about it!

Thanks! I periodically spot a feature I haven't used and wonder what it might be for.

What sort of plug-ins get used in the editor in the Auto-correct group? And why might you want to override the ICC profile at that point?

Saving files confused me no end until these guys explained it a few times. If you right click and choose the convert option, you get a simple conversion. You can change the color space and location. OTOH, if you choose edit, you can then do a save as, under file. That takes you through two windows, one to choose the file name and location, the other to change the color space and resample, if you like. I almost always use the save as option now because I usually want to resample for some given purpose.

Wow, I had forgotten about Ventura Publisher. It was one of the original "classic" applications that made PCs useful.

On the same trail were some bikers. Not everything I shoot is sharp! Not quite sure what to do with this. I like it, but the green is a bit much and the streaked leaves could be more saturated.

As Mike says, printing is what Qimage is really all about. I was wandering some local trails over the weekend and shot some closeups of fall leaves. Medium ISO pictorial stuff. Going right from the Nikon raw, with some enhancements and minor editing, to the PRO-100, the prints rolled out of the printer looking just spectacular. They also matched the screen very closely. Paper profile was with Profile Prism. There's almost a 3D look because I selectively sharpened the leaf and softened everything else with the saturated RGB setting. Can't imagine a better tool for the job. (severely downsized and compressed image here is a far cry from the print!)

That's sort of what I was thinking, but I have to see how well text/fonts come out. I also don't know if the original image parameters get passed through Word, or if it does something strange. I wonder if there's some common file format that both Word and Qimage understand that would be better than jpg or tiff? Will investigate further.
Thanks!

I often do MS Word documents with a lot of embedded photos. Is there any path that lets me print those docs with Qimage and take advantage of the better color management and such? I assume any such method would work with Powerpoint and other programs?

Well Fred, we technical types don't do light banter well  and have learned that the blunt approach earns us few friends.  I love to discuss this stuff and am relieved that Mike doesn't think I'm completely nuts. I don't know 0.1% of all the things involved in image processing, and I've been doing it for a very long time. Maybe next year I'll hit 0.15%. It took me 13 years to save my pennies and upgrade my D200 to the Z6. It just amazes me what can be achieved with the current generation of lenses, plus image stabilization, in terms of sharpness. Metering is usually a non-issue as well. Most of what's left is lighting, tones and my limited artistic abilities. That's probably why I do less with the raws and am learning to take better advantage of Qimage's color and tonal features. IMO, those are not really intuitive and thank goodness for the excellent videos, or I'd be completely lost.

I hesitate to enter this discussion because I'd much rather talk about all the things Qimage can do, and do better than anything else out there. That said, I still use Paint Shop Pro for anything to do with cloning, which is how I fix all manner of things. I also use it for what they call Local Tone Mapping, which I think is just a USM with huge areas. They make it very easy and it helps a lot of images.

My feelings on raw images are conflicted. Qimage gets me where I want to go very quickly, but only for low ISO pictorial images. At least for Nikon, nobody can do noise reduction and corrections like the people that built the camera. Even in-camera jpeg images are hard (read impossible) to compete with if the settings are right, and the Nikon Capture NXD program is far better than anything else I've used for post processing the raws, because it uses the Nikon "special sauce". Now, I often find when I think Qimage falls short, it's because I've missed some critical detail about how to use it. Maybe that's the case for noise reduction, but AFAICT, the choices are limited and not really adjustable. I'd love to hear otherwise.

Where Paint Shop Pro falls flat on its face is color management. It's only useful for sRGB images. Qimage has that mastered, so my "highest quality" workflow is to do the raws in Nikon Capture NXD, exporting to a larger color space, followed by everything else in Qimage. FWIW, though DFS is extremely good, I do very little sharpening, in-camera or with NXD. It doesn't seem to be needed when the camera (Z6) is inherently very good and is doing vibration reduction. My most common settings might be 1-80 or nothing.

Great job with the birds, Marilyn's too!

Last thing I shot was Neowise. Not much color but did tweak it in Qimage.

You must be a mind reader! I did try the 3-number trick and concluded I needed to watch it a couple times to grasp it. Also, walking on uneven ground is the worst. I remember being young and my feet were my zoom, but today I choose my vantage points carefully. We have some really nice trails around here, ex-rail beds, that are flat and wonderful. We also have some trails that follow creeks where I can't get to some of the places that I used to. None of the photos are mine but I love this place and it's only a short distance away- https://ontariopathways.org/gallery