Annie
Newbie
Posts: 14
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: July 28, 2016, 04:50:46 PM » |
|
Thank you for including me in your Skype time Fred and Terry! I've done as you suggested. The print appears the same as before with ICM and OFF on Color Adjustment. The image below is the print next to the artwork. I've include another print that is almost true to the artwork, which is good enough. It shows a full range of colors. Does that indicate all the colors flow good?  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Fred A
|
|
« Reply #16 on: July 28, 2016, 06:55:53 PM » |
|
Thank you for including me in your Skype time Fred and Terry! I've done as you suggested. The print appears the same as before with ICM and OFF on Color Adjustment.
The image below is the print next to the artwork. I've include another print that is almost true to the artwork, which is good enough. It shows a full range of colors. Does that indicate all the colors flow good? Annie, Somehow I just cannot pull out the meaning from the above. Please clarify! 1) The print appeared the same as before, with ICM and No Color Adjustment. (This sounds like it was not good.) 2) I've include another print that is almost true to the artwork, which is good enough. It shows a full range of colors. (This sounds much better) Which one reflects the results of using ICM and Let Printer Driver Manage Color? Any close match to your screen? Forgive me for being dense. Fred |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Annie
Newbie
Posts: 14
|
|
« Reply #17 on: July 28, 2016, 07:59:34 PM » |
|
Sorry Fred. If you can't understand something it must be me. I skip words.
The image that shows the 3 items, the left one is the original artwork. The middle is the new print with the settings as you advised (ICM on but No Color Adjustment). The one on the right is a print I included to show you that the printer seems to have all it's colors/nozzles working.
In QU screen the colors look right and closely match the artwork. Once printed, it's always a more green/blue cast and lacking the mauve in the tree trunks and the russet of the fur. Even with the latest adjustment.
The print of the girl was done with a different photo editing program (ACDSee). It prints with a more balanced color range although it varies with different drawings.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: July 28, 2016, 08:01:29 PM by Annie »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Fred A
|
|
« Reply #18 on: July 28, 2016, 08:34:25 PM » |
|
The print of the girl was done with a different photo editing program (ACDSee). It prints with a more balanced color range although it varies with different drawings.
We will get to the bottom of this.... Please print and show the animal shot with the trees printed with ACDC If you put your cursor (hover) over teh thumbnail of that image, what doe the hotbar say> See screen snap. With or without asterisks. If possible, could I have a copy of the image to test here? I don't know the file size, but under 20 MB can be emailed.... or you can use Goggle Drive, or WE TRANSFER (free file transfer on line usage) my email is wathree.ssz@verizon.netThanks, Fred |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Annie
Newbie
Posts: 14
|
|
« Reply #19 on: July 28, 2016, 10:35:35 PM » |
|
The image on the left is printed using ACDSee photo editing program. Although it's missing mauve/rust it's a lot less green the the one on the right which is printed with QU (ICM on but No Color Adjustment). If you put your cursor (hover) over teh thumbnail of that image, what doe the hotbar say> See screen snap.
With or without asterisks. Do you mean the hotbar info with the fox thumbnail in QU?  I have emailed you a link of the artwork image in Dropbox. Please let me know if it's not accessible. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Fred A
|
|
« Reply #20 on: July 29, 2016, 08:56:23 AM » |
|
I have emailed you a link of the artwork image in Dropbox. Please let me know if it's not accessible. Hi Annie. First of all the screen snaps look pretty decent, and since neither ACDC nor Qimage is using a paper specific profile, we are closing in. I cannot get the file from DROP BOX. I am sorry but I refuse to sign up AGAIN and join in order to receive a file. They pestered me three times a day for months with their nonsense. The file is 2 megabytes. Just email it. It appears to be a scan in sRGB locked. That's good. Waiting....... Fred |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Fred A
|
|
« Reply #21 on: July 29, 2016, 10:07:41 AM » |
|
I sent the drop box to Terry and he just sent me the enclosed images. (he still had an active account)
No need to email.
Fred
PS Just had large power outage. So I am running late
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Fred A
|
|
« Reply #22 on: July 29, 2016, 11:34:05 AM » |
|
I sent the drop box to Terry and he just sent me the enclosed images. (he still had an active account)
No need to email. OK Annie, I did some checking and compared with Terry and his checking, including printing, we skyped and compared, and reached the same results and conclusions?? Results are the same and conclusions seem to be the same. We get very decent matched prints; matched to each other and matched to calibrated monitors. We definitely have a hint of red in the tree trunks (obvious) as well as the rest of the image hue. I made 4 prints. I used Let printer driver manage color. I used the correct profile for my Epson Ultra presentation Matte. Both produced the same hint of pink in the tree trunks and the rest. I also printed a set, side by side using Perceptual and Colorimetric intents. Slight difference in saturation, but no difference in tint/hue. I also printed one using the Epson 1430 profile HW Matte that you used... Hardly tell which is which to my profile for my Printer an R 2000. That was just for my comfort that the profile isn't a bad one. Terry and I seem to agree that we would start by running a few cleaning cycles on your printer and print out a nozzle check. Look carefully at red or magenta for any broken lines. Bear in mind that my screen snap is a screen snap of my scan of the print of your scan. Hope some of this helps Also want to mention that the color space of your two samples is slightly different in that the one Named UNSPECIFIED 1 added Black Scaled in the colorspace attached to it, so the contrast might show a skinch different. Fred and Terry He had to run some errands |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: July 29, 2016, 11:36:47 AM by Fred A »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Annie
Newbie
Posts: 14
|
|
« Reply #23 on: July 29, 2016, 04:19:54 PM » |
|
Sorry about Dropbox making you sign up to access file. I hate signing up for anything on demand too. It didn't use to that. Glad I know that so I wont use it with people who don't have it. Your prints came out with the full range of colors. I also printed a set, side by side using Perceptual and Colorimetric intents. Slight difference in saturation, but no difference in tint/hue. The saturation difference, was it more intense or less? Also want to mention that the color space of your two samples is slightly different in that the one Named UNSPECIFIED 1 added Black Scaled in the colorspace attached to it, so the contrast might show a skinch different. The 2 files are different only in that one was sized down to 4x6. Now that you mentioned it I looked at them side by side on the same monitor and see a difference. It's interesting to know that a (any) maneuver can change other aspects of a file. I will run the cleaning cycles ad nozzle check. Thanks for the tip on looking careful at the lines. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Fred A
|
|
« Reply #24 on: July 29, 2016, 04:25:33 PM » |
|
I mentioned the issue to Mike Chaney this morning, and he added that we should ask you is you use Epson ink or third party ink.
Otherwise we are on the ball.
Fred
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
admin
|
|
« Reply #25 on: July 29, 2016, 08:24:42 PM » |
|
Annie,
I finally had the time to read this whole thread to see what the problem might be. There's one other thing we can do that might give us a clue. In looking at your output, it appears colors that should be near white are still greenish. That tells me that it's possible that the white point in the printer profile you are using might be bad, causing the printer to lay down some ink where it shouldn't. Although I'm not a big fan of soft proofing to actually "proof" colors, a soft proof might give us a clue here. Set up QU as you were at first: with your ICC profile for the printer/paper showing in QU's "Prtr ICC" on the lower right of the main window. Then hold the mouse cursor over that image and press Ctrl-Spacebar to show a soft proof. Does the soft proof look green? If so, the error is in the ICC profile you are using. If not, the error is with the printer itself.
It's relatively rare, but I have seen corrupted manufacturer profiles before. In several cases, I've found that the defined black point in the profile didn't match the actual black point as specified by the color tables in the profile: thereby throwing off dark colors when black point compensation is checked. But there's nothing preventing the same thing from happening if the white point is corrupted, so the above is meant to rule out (or in) a bad ICC profile.
Edit: just as some background, the screen views in QU including the print preview are based only on your monitor profile. The printer profile is not considered for screen views. By using soft proof, the image is sent to the printer profile first and then back to the monitor: in order to show you what the print should look like when printed (think of soft proofing as a way to see what your printer profile is doing... but view that on the monitor). So a soft proof view, even though it is on screen, does take into account the printer profile so if a soft proof looks green, it's due to a bad printer profile.
Regards,
Mike
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: July 29, 2016, 08:29:51 PM by admin »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Annie
Newbie
Posts: 14
|
|
« Reply #26 on: July 31, 2016, 08:31:06 PM » |
|
Thank you Fred and Mike! Nozzle check shows no broken lines. I have third party CIS ink. The image below shows the range of colors from this ink. The drawing on the right is the original while the left one is printed on a premium luster paper with setting on Color Control, Epson Vivid, using ACDSee editing program. So far this is the only artwork that prints up in an acceptable way. And this is only so on this luster paper. No other artwork printed on any paper/setting come close to the original. The soft proof looks exactly like the scan, which is very acceptable. Does this mean the error is with my printer? If so, does this printer issue affect all prints? As you can see, the image below, although not a perfect match, seems balanced in colors. just as some background, the screen views in QU including the print preview are based only on your monitor profile. The printer profile is not considered for screen views. By using soft proof, the image is sent to the printer profile first and then back to the monitor: in order to show you what the print should look like when printed (think of soft proofing as a way to see what your printer profile is doing... but view that on the monitor). So a soft proof view, even though it is on screen, does take into account the printer profile so if a soft proof looks green, it's due to a bad printer profile. Thank you for the information. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: July 31, 2016, 08:45:51 PM by Annie »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Terry-M
|
|
« Reply #27 on: July 31, 2016, 10:03:47 PM » |
|
Hi Annie, I have third party CIS ink From experience and what others say, third party inks will not usually print colours correctly unless a custom profile is made for the ink-paper combination in use. This is why when using the Epson profile or Let driver manage colour in Qimage, the colours are not correct. The drawing on the right is the original while the left one is printed on a premium luster paper with setting on Color Control, Epson Vivid, using ACDSee editing program. . I can see what normally would be unacceptable differences in the colours. The magenta "sky" behind and above the head is more blue in the print and there is a definite green tinge to the the lighter parts of the face. The almost pure yellow in the background is tending to orange, the pink cheeks in the print are tending to magenta. I checked these with a colour dropper tool on my calibrated monitor. This may sound "picky" but on a real person photo print for example, poor flesh tones are a no-no. Does this mean the error is with my printer? No, it's the ink. does this printer "ink" issue affect all prints? Yes it will without using a custom profile. Fred and Mike may want to add or revise my comments but in general I believe they are correct. Terry |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
admin
|
|
« Reply #28 on: July 31, 2016, 10:44:29 PM » |
|
From the info so far, I agree with Terry in that I don't think you will be able to get a good match unless you get (or make) custom profiles for the ink you are using. It doesn't mean your inks are "bad", only that the profile you are using was designed for Epson inks and it doesn't respond properly to the third party inks you are using. The reason that some prints look more acceptable than others is only the colors you are focusing on or the predominance of certain colors that tend to be more noticeable. As Terry said, if that magenta sky next to the top left of the face was important in your most recent example, it would be deemed unacceptable because the original shows a pretty pure magenta whereas the print (assuming the print is on the left) is showing almost a primary blue. So long story short, you'll need to make a custom profile for those inks (and the paper). You could see if the ink manufacturer supplies any profiles but in my experience, profiles supplied by ink manufacturers are not great because they tend to cut corners sometimes and supply the same profile for different printer models. But they may be better than the Epson profiles.
Also, I should mention that it's not uncommon for third party inks to work better (using OEM profiles) on some papers than others. For example, glossy, semi-gloss, or luster may work better than matte just due to the fact that the ink density is more "forgiving" on the less porous papers. Insert matte paper that has a higher ink load, and the differences are amplified.
Mike
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: July 31, 2016, 10:49:37 PM by admin »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Fred A
|
|
« Reply #29 on: July 31, 2016, 11:45:30 PM » |
|
Fred and Mike may want to add or revise my comments but in general I believe they are correct.
Annie, I have no personal experience with CIS feeding my printer, but I do have plenty of experience with third party inks in replacement cartridges. Burned out a head in a Canon printer, and ruined heads in my R 1800. The colors just leaked into each other. Also every time I would reorder, it was a lottery if I would get the same color results or off color. Profiling is OK, but will that profile work for the next reorder? My thoughts,,, Fred |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Qimage registration expired? New lifetime licenses are only $59.99!
