thanks Fred

Hi Fred

thanks for your reply

canon pro-4000
Qimage ultimate 2019

the print location tool was not something I was familiar with. I only updated software very recently and was running an early version of 2018 previously.
I am guessing something changed that the change I am noticing is due to the 2019 update.

I can see how I can fix it by centring the print in Qimage as you suggested but previously I used "optimal print placement" in Qimage (which is my preferred placement method) and then selected "centre the print" in the print driver and the print was always centred on the roll,

 it now seems that Qimage overrides the instruction to "centre the print" in the print driver and places the print on the roll according to "optimal placement".

I can see that I just need to make sure it is centred in both Qimage and the print driver and all will be good

Thanks

Greetings

I am accustomed to printing a certain print size that is centred on a 24" roll

In the past, I have always specified that the print is centred in the print driver and this worked, it was perfectly centred on the roll.

now, it is about 3mm off centre (while still being centred in the print driver) and I "think" this may have started happening after I upgraded to Qimage ultimate 2018

I noticed under the Qimage prints tab, there is a section called "print position"  which is set to Left 3.0 and Top 3.0

I could correct the problem by adjusting the "Left" position but I don't want to have to keep doing that when having it centred in the print driver always worked perfectly before.

Can anyone explain why this "3mm offset" has occurred and the easiest way to get back to my previous workflow of just centring in the print driver only?

Hi Mike,

you are correct, the icc is sRGB when hovering over the thumbnail in Qimage. In Photoshop and Adobe bridge the icc is Prophoto RGB.

I will email you the image.

Thanks
Phil

I have been using Qimage to print for years, I only use it for batch printing, no editing.
today I saved an image in photoshop and the thumbnail looked muted in colour when viewed in Qimage compared to photoshop or bridge.
I printed it from Qimage and the colours were wrong (unsaturated and generally a bit off)  then I printed the same file from Photoshop and it looked correct. The image was in prophoto RGB colour space as are many others I have. I have never had a problem with this colour space in Qimage before
I changed the colour space of the image to Adobe1998 and the colours suddenly appeared correctly in the Qimage thumbnail i.e they looked the same as they do in photoshop and bridge.

It doesn't make any sense to me why a random image would suddenly behave differently, hundreds of other images appear just fine in Qimage and many are in prophoto.

Can anyone shed any light on what may be going on?  there are no alpha channels saved in the file.

I have attached a file that shows the thumbnails in Qimage, the top one was converted to Adobe RGB and looks correct and the bottom one is prophoto and the colours are a bit off

cheers
Phil

because i dont use other adobe products, i have chosen not to save with max compatibility because it seriously bloats file size with layers. i am only using it to save print copies now, just to get qimage to read them.

Cheers
Phil

after doing some testing, i have found that CS3 "Maximise file compatibility mode" turned ON seems best,  and that the image is flattened to the background layer. So far this is giving me PSD files that are readable in Qimage and not overly bloated in size. Strangely, if the only layer in the file was called something other than "background" then the file size (when saving with "Maximise file compatibility mode" turned ON) was about double the size.

Regards
Phil

Greetings all

I noticed that Qimage has trouble reading PSD files at times.
I save them flattened, without alpha channels and some that are less than 200mb will not read (and not print) and others that are over 700mb will read and print.  Saving as tiff will solve the problem but can sometimes produce very large files. When photoshop "maximise file compatibility" option is turned on, qimage seems to be able to read the files again after re-saving them, unfortunately this option also increases file size considerably.
Does anyone have any light to shine on the issue of getting PSD files to behave nicely in qimage?

Regards
Phil

Greetings

would any users like to post any settings for  image sharpening and print (smart sharpening)
that they have found to work well for high detailed landscape images.

would a detailed landscape image typically require a smart sharpening setting higher than default (5)?

if i use qimage to sharpen the image at 100% view, can i then save it, and if so, does it overwrite the original
image file or create a copy ?

Regards
Phil

Greetings

I am seeking some sharpening workflow feedback from users

This is a quote from Mike Chaney that I read in a forum:
“The bottom line is that you want to sharpen the image itself (the original, before any resampling) so that it looks as sharp as it "should" look at 100% zoom. At that point, sharpness is correct on screen so all you have to do is set the final print sharpening in Qimage so that you get a print that looks as sharp as its screen counterpart.”

This advice is a little different to what I have followed in the past. I thought you should not resample a sharpened file as it would magnify sharpening artifacts.
(although I don’t know if sharpening resampling artifacts is really any better!!)

1. I take Mike’s comment above to mean that I could use a product like nik sharpener to sharpen the image at its native size, and then save a flattened version as my sharpened (but not resampled) print original.

2. I can then print this file in qimage which will perform resampling and print sharpening using the smartsharpen function. This would prevent me from having to save multiple (resampled and sharpened) print versions of the same image for different sizes as I currently do.

I understand that qimage can also handle step 1 but I am leaving my options open at this stage. Also,I am not sure how to save a 100% screen sharpened file in qimage.

So, have I understood the workflow properly?

Regards
Phil

You say
"A printer icc profile should not be prepared in that way. By doing that, the printer driver is "managing" the colour when printing the target which is definitely a no-no.
Printer targets should be printed with colour management set to "off" in whatever program is being used and the driver set so colours are not adjusted in any way, ie. "no colour adjustment".


Thanks for replies, i figured it wasnt possible, regarding the above comment.......

The target image was printed with epson standard gamma 1.8 mode because the epson 7600 profiles better in that mode, rather than NCA (according to my profile provider, who has a lot of experience), the models after 7600 profile best in NCA. This also proved to be true in practice (the nca profile was too dark in shadows). So, if you print your target image in epson standard mode then you must also be in that mode when you use the resulting icc profile , not NCA.

Regards
Phil

Greetings

I understand that I can assign different icc profiles and rendering intents to different images when I print multiple images in a single job from qimage.

Is it possible to apply different printer driver settings as well?

for example, i would like to print an image with an icc profile prepared for "epson standard (srgb) gamma 1.8"  and another image
with an icc profile prepared with "no color adjustment" . If I am printing both images in the same job this would require different settings for color management to be applied within the printer driver for each image in addition to applying a seperate icc profile.

Regards
Phil

Greetings all

from reading material about qimage, it appears that the native resolution of canon printer is 600dpi versus 720dpi for an epson printer. Would this mean that a canon printer has an advantage over epson printers
for large prints because they need less pixels from the camera to achieve the same size print at native resolution?

Regards
Phil

btw..how was 720dpi arived at ?...up till now i have usually been told that epson wide format printers were 360dpi