Re: filmscanners: Epson proofing
"Tony Sleep" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > spectrophotometer. You send him a print from his calibration file off > the website + $140 and he sends you a custom profile. I may try this as an > alternative to throwing the 1200 down the stairs. Jon Cone's company www.inkjetmall.com and www.profilecity.com do a similar thing. The profilecity profiles are US$100 and the inkjetmall ones are $120 for a custom profile or only $49 for a set one eg Epson Photo Paper with OEM ink for the 1200. I was considering one of those as a possible improvement over OEM for my 1160 and EPP. Unfortunately they don't have off-the-shelf profiles for heavyweight matte or archival matte. :( Rob
Re: filmscanners: Epson proofing
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001 12:46:48 +1000 Rob Geraghty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Have you tried a 3rd party profile? I am tempted to get > one of Jon Cone's profiles for the 1160 http://www.pixl.dk/ is apparently the man - he has a very good rep for producing custom Epson profiles for your choice of ink/paper, using a spectrophotometer. You send him a print from his calibration file off the website + $140 and he sends you a custom profile. I may try this as an alternative to throwing the 1200 down the stairs. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Epson proofing
Not to prolong this OT discussion which our much respected moderator started ;-)... But I wanted to correct one thing. The Stylus 5000 with RIP is now selling in the US for $6500-7500. Of course, my car, which I've used for 13 years now, cost 1/3rd of that, and the "ink" it uses is a lot cheaper too ;-) Art Tony Sleep wrote: > On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 23:28:48 -0800 Arthur Entlich ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > >> Epson does make a few professional printers which are designed with >> pre-press in mind. I'm not sure it's fair to expect color profiling >> built into a printer that sells for a few hundred dollars. It isn't the >> market they are targeting. I think they do an amazing job with these >> $50-$300 US printers. > > > Yes, I know, I know ... :) You are right, really - it does appear that > expectations are too high WRT to these printers, although it has taken me a lot > of pain and consumables to be sure about that. However, VISA/Mastercard would > take a dim view of an Epson 3/5/9000, even if they could find my body after Mrs > Halftone had made her feelings clear. > > >> PS: As any printman will tell you, ink and paper make a system. Change >> one or the other, and control goes down the tubes. Profiles have to >> consider all these elements. > > > Yes, I know. Which makes it even more of a shame that the canned profile for > the OE ink and paper is not accurate. > > Regards > > Tony Sleep > http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & > comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Epson proofing
Tony wrote: > Yes, I know. Which makes it even more of a shame that the > canned profile for the OE ink and paper is not accurate. They have improved considerably. Last night I printed the same photo using the same program on the same paper using a Stylus 600 and a Stylus 1160. The output from the 600 looked like an inkjet print - oversaturated with banding. The output from the 1160 looked as good as the photographic print from the same neg. That was at 720dpi on Epson Photo Quality Inkjet paper. Have you tried a 3rd party profile? I am tempted to get one of Jon Cone's profiles for the 1160. Obscanning: Grain on the screen of scanned negs doesn't necessarily lead to horribly grainy prints. I'm still convinced that the best result I can get out of my LS30 comes with Provia 100F and a tripod. :) (a better prime lens would probably help too ;) Rob Rob Geraghty [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wordweb.com
Re: filmscanners: Epson proofing
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 23:28:48 -0800 Arthur Entlich ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Epson does make a few professional printers which are designed with > pre-press in mind. I'm not sure it's fair to expect color profiling > built into a printer that sells for a few hundred dollars. It isn't the > market they are targeting. I think they do an amazing job with these > $50-$300 US printers. Yes, I know, I know ... :) You are right, really - it does appear that expectations are too high WRT to these printers, although it has taken me a lot of pain and consumables to be sure about that. However, VISA/Mastercard would take a dim view of an Epson 3/5/9000, even if they could find my body after Mrs Halftone had made her feelings clear. > PS: As any printman will tell you, ink and paper make a system. Change > one or the other, and control goes down the tubes. Profiles have to > consider all these elements. Yes, I know. Which makes it even more of a shame that the canned profile for the OE ink and paper is not accurate. Regards Tony Sleep http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info & comparisons
Re: filmscanners: Epson proofing
From: "Arthur Entlich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > PS: As any printman will tell you, ink and paper make a system. Change > one or the other, and control goes down the tubes. Profiles have to > consider all these elements. i totally agree. I wrote a front end for a CMS system about 3 years ago and worked closely with the colour scientists. One of the first things they told me. Ned
Re: filmscanners: Epson proofing
Tony Sleep wrote: > > TBH I have not often needed terribly accurate colour from the Epson previously, > so was content to struggle whenever I did. But the occasional problems with > repro from scans suggest I'm going to have to produce reference prints > which match the screen image precisely. > > Also I am fed up with the truly vast waste of ink and paper, and especially > time. In all my years of darkroom printing I have never come across such an > unruly, infuriating and wasteful process with the exception of lith > printing - my record there is 4 days to produce a single print I was happy > with. Later, I decided it still wasn't quite right. At the risk of this reply being considered OT Epson does make a few professional printers which are designed with pre-press in mind. I'm not sure it's fair to expect color profiling built into a printer that sells for a few hundred dollars. It isn't the market they are targeting. I think they do an amazing job with these $50-$300 US printers. Epson does serve another market, if you are willing to pay for it. They make a Postscript version of the 3000, but its still a comping device. But, they make the Epson Stylus Pro 5000 printer and RS-5000 Fiery LX RIP, and it is a 13" x 19" pre-press proofer. Cost (in 1998 was) $10,000 US list. It uses Dupont's color profiling, and like any professional product, simple things like a second paper cassette adds $700 US list to the base price. They also make the wide carriage models with RIPS and software designed to control color, which also cost many thousands of dollars. I'll admit my info is about 2 years old, and there might be other products that have filled this gap since, and possibly prices on the Stylus 5000 and RIP have also been lowered. What is amazing is that Epson (or any other printer company) can produce a few hundred dollar printer that can reproduce a photographic result for under a buck of expendables. Control is always expensive. Getting that last 10% of control is always much more expensive then the other 90%. Getting that last 1% is beyond most people's budget. You paid several thousand dollars (or UK pounds) for your scanner to get better control than those costing 15% the cost or less, why not the same for your printer? Am I going to buy a Stylus 5000? No way. I don't need that extra 10%. Sure, I'd like to get that quality in a $200-300 US printer, but that might be some time in coming, if ever. But, really, an under $10,000 for a proofer with a RIP is a bargin, or at least it has been. Art PS: As any printman will tell you, ink and paper make a system. Change one or the other, and control goes down the tubes. Profiles have to consider all these elements. > > This is the case with Epson: in a year or so with the 1200, I have not once > produced a print I was all that satisfied with. Even CIBA wasn't as > bloody-minded, so long as you didn't tax its contrast range. > > What is so galling is that having spent ages getting a scan 'just right' on > screen, and all the ICM stuff sussed, this final stage is really broken. >
