Why does the Espon 2200 use colored inks to produce muddy ..

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

For my father's 70th birthday I prepared an exhibit of photos from his
life. This project involved scanning hundreds of old photos from
albums, cleaning them up and reprinting them as 8x10 prints. For the
b/w photos I scanned them as 8 bit grayscale images, then when I
cleaned them up in photoshop I verified that they were still grayscale.
Since the image had NO "color" information, I'm really baffled as to
why the Epson 2200 thinks it needs to eat up colored ink printing these
images.

If this process produced great images I wouldn't complain, but it
doesn't.

The resulting images are muddy, the color cast is clearly obvious. In
the end I resorted to checking the "use black ink only" option in the
printer preferences, and ignoring Epson's warning that this was
"unsuitable for b/w photos" as it was the ONLY way I could get the
Epson to stop using colored inks and producing *very* unsuitable muddy
prints. I spent an hour on the phone with Epson technical support and
the technician had me trying other settings including "monochrome" - I
thought this had fixed the problem until I printed the 21 step
grayscale image and found pink in the lighter gray fields and blue in
the darker gray fields.

My main gripe is why should I have to go fiddle with these different
printer preference settings *at all* when the image file has NO color
data? Why does the printer think that it should be using colored ink
when the file data says "all of these pixels are a mix of black and
white only"?

I've asked this question before and never received an answer that makes
sense.

I'm about ready to send this printer back to Epson for "service" (or
replacement if it comes to that), as I find this behavior unacceptable.


TIA

jc

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

In article <1110473918.524581.5570@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
"JC Dill" <jcdill@gmail.com> wrote:

> [...]
> Since the [B&W] image had NO "color" information, I'm really baffled as to
> why the Epson 2200 thinks it needs to eat up colored ink printing these
> images.

Because the colour inks give the print engine greater range and
flexibility in simulating greyscale. Combinations of the colour and
black inks can obviously produce a decent range of greys, and -- at
least for me -- do so, with enough care.

> If this process produced great images I wouldn't complain, but it
> doesn't.

Well, *your* process doesn't seem to be producing great images, but that
doesn't mean the 2200 can't produce some pretty damn good B&W images
with a suitable colour-managed workflow. I do B&W with the 2200 (and now
the 4000) and while the results aren't always as good as I used to get
in a darkroom, they're pretty damn good (the 2200 seems to be better
than the 4000 at the moment, but I think that's due to the 4000's
profiles being a little out). B&W is definitely iffier than colour with
inkjets, but it's getting pretty close.

The real problem is that the 2200 needs good colour management and
attention to things like profiles -- as you discovered, you can't just
throw a greyscale image at it and have it work every time. I actually do
all my B&W editing in a decent colour space (rather than greyscale), and
the results are cast-free and not "muddy". But that's my own
idiosyncracy.

If you're using an accurate colour-managed workflow (using all the
correct profiles, etc.) and you're still getting casts, there may in
fact be something wrong with the printer. But the fact that it's using
colour ink as well as B&W while printing greyscale isn't a problem, it's
a feature. One that no doubt helps sell ink cartridges, but still an
understandable feature.

> The resulting images are muddy, the color cast is clearly obvious.

[...]

> My main gripe is why should I have to go fiddle with these different
> printer preference settings *at all* when the image file has NO color
> data? Why does the printer think that it should be using colored ink
> when the file data says "all of these pixels are a mix of black and
> white only"?
>
> I've asked this question before and never received an answer that makes
> sense.
>
> I'm about ready to send this printer back to Epson for "service" (or
> replacement if it comes to that), as I find this behavior unacceptable.

I'd stop listening to the Epson people -- some of whom *do* know a lot
about this, but you'll probably never get to talk to them -- and
keep bashing away at this printer (erm, not literally). In my
experience, the top end Epsons are worth it, especially the 2200, which
I've used for literally thousands of B&W prints, for clients or for
myself. It's a nice printer -- and and the prints lining my studio or on
clients' walls, etc., suggest it's capable of at least decent work.

Hamish

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

JC Dill wrote:
> For my father's 70th birthday I prepared an exhibit of photos from his
> life. This project involved scanning hundreds of old photos from
> albums, cleaning them up and reprinting them as 8x10 prints. For the
> b/w photos I scanned them as 8 bit grayscale images, then when I
> cleaned them up in photoshop I verified that they were still grayscale.
> Since the image had NO "color" information, I'm really baffled as to
> why the Epson 2200 thinks it needs to eat up colored ink printing these
> images.
>
> If this process produced great images I wouldn't complain, but it
> doesn't.
>
> The resulting images are muddy, the color cast is clearly obvious. In
> the end I resorted to checking the "use black ink only" option in the
> printer preferences, and ignoring Epson's warning that this was
> "unsuitable for b/w photos" as it was the ONLY way I could get the
> Epson to stop using colored inks and producing *very* unsuitable muddy
> prints. I spent an hour on the phone with Epson technical support and
> the technician had me trying other settings including "monochrome" - I
> thought this had fixed the problem until I printed the 21 step
> grayscale image and found pink in the lighter gray fields and blue in
> the darker gray fields.
>
> My main gripe is why should I have to go fiddle with these different
> printer preference settings *at all* when the image file has NO color
> data? Why does the printer think that it should be using colored ink
> when the file data says "all of these pixels are a mix of black and
> white only"?
>
> I've asked this question before and never received an answer that makes
> sense.
>
> I'm about ready to send this printer back to Epson for "service" (or
> replacement if it comes to that), as I find this behavior unacceptable.
>
>
> TIA
>
> jc
>

This is a driver issue. If your driver doesn't have a B&W mode, that
uses only the black ink, then you will get a mixture of the other
colors, and if you look closely, will notice a distinct green tinge to
the picture. Don't blame Epson, it is quite common among color printers.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"JC Dill" <jcdill@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1110473918.524581.5570@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...

> My main gripe is why should I have to go fiddle with these different
> printer preference settings *at all* when the image file has NO color
> data?

Most printers have just one black cart and have to use "tricks" to make
shades of grey. One way is to use a pattern of dots like a newspaper but
this reduces resolution. Most printers use a mixture of colours to "help"
make shades of grey without reducing resolution. Some printers do a good job
of this and produce neutral B/W prints, others have a warm or cold tone or
even a positive colour tint. You can eliminate the cast by selecting B/W
only but you loose resolution. Hence Epsons comment.

Epson added a light grey to the 2200/2100 to try and improve the B/W
capability but it can only do so much. To improve matters you need to
carefully tune the settings of your printer.

Try this site for tips on how to get the best B/W out of it...

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/2200-bw.shtml

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/2200-techniques.shtml

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/2200black.shtml

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On 10 Mar 2005 08:58:38 -0800, "JC Dill" <jcdill@gmail.com> wrote:

>For my father's 70th birthday I prepared an exhibit of photos from his
>life. This project involved scanning hundreds of old photos from
>albums, cleaning them up and reprinting them as 8x10 prints. For the
>b/w photos I scanned them as 8 bit grayscale images, then when I
>cleaned them up in photoshop I verified that they were still grayscale.
> Since the image had NO "color" information, I'm really baffled as to
>why the Epson 2200 thinks it needs to eat up colored ink printing these
>images.

If you force the printer to use just black ink it'll look even worse,
believe me. It does this for resolution/tonal depth reasons.

>If this process produced great images I wouldn't complain, but it
>doesn't.

I'm not going to waste your or my time telling you all the stuff you
can try to make it better because you may well never be satisfied
(many people aren't). Here's how you can get perfect 8x10 B&W's on
decent resin-coated professional photographic paper for $2.49 each.
200 Photos will cost about $500, but dad's worth it isn't he? And when
he pops off, you'll get to keep the collection.

http://www.mpix.com

>The resulting images are muddy, the color cast is clearly obvious. In
>the end I resorted to checking the "use black ink only" option in the
>printer preferences, and ignoring Epson's warning that this was
>"unsuitable for b/w photos" as it was the ONLY way I could get the
>Epson to stop using colored inks and producing *very* unsuitable muddy
>prints.

Ah, so you did try that. Ugly eh?

> I spent an hour on the phone with Epson technical support and
>the technician had me trying other settings including "monochrome" - I
>thought this had fixed the problem until I printed the 21 step
>grayscale image and found pink in the lighter gray fields and blue in
>the darker gray fields.

Yep.

>My main gripe is why should I have to go fiddle with these different
>printer preference settings *at all* when the image file has NO color
>data? Why does the printer think that it should be using colored ink
>when the file data says "all of these pixels are a mix of black and
>white only"?

It can't dither the black as smoothly is it can by mixing colors to
give you the tonal range you need. If the printer was armed with a
black cartridge plus 3 levels of gray (instead of CYM) then it could
do a decent job.

HEY, SOMEONE SHOULD MAKE THIS CARTRIDGE! - Just make 3 or 5 pigment
inks that have the same tonal density as the Yellow, Magenta and Cyan,
(more in 6 color systems) but keep them neutral gray and you'll get
people buying a second printer just for B&W - no mods to the driver
required.

>I've asked this question before and never received an answer that makes
>sense.

Mine probably doesn't either. It doesn't matter, use mpix. Compare to
paper and color ink costs for 200 sheets, mpix starts to look mighty
good value, and the prints look infinitely better (full bleed too).

Okay, if you really want to know, here is an article on why they use
the color inks:

Profits.

(kidding)

here it is...

http://www.piezography.com/shutterbug1.html

>I'm about ready to send this printer back to Epson for "service" (or
>replacement if it comes to that), as I find this behavior unacceptable.

As do many.

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Owamanga wrote:

> HEY, SOMEONE SHOULD MAKE THIS CARTRIDGE! - Just make 3 or 5 pigment
> inks that have the same tonal density as the Yellow, Magenta and Cyan,
> (more in 6 color systems) but keep them neutral gray and you'll get
> people buying a second printer just for B&W - no mods to the driver
> required.


It's been done. Search for limited-gamut inksets.
Lyson has them, and I think maybe MIS. Mostly for
Epsons, though.


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

In rec.photo.digital JC Dill <jcdill@gmail.com> wrote:

> My main gripe is why should I have to go fiddle with these different
> printer preference settings *at all* when the image file has NO
> color data? Why does the printer think that it should be using
> colored ink when the file data says "all of these pixels are a mix
> of black and white only"?

Because to use only the black ink is much worse. The coloured inks
give you much better tonality.

> I've asked this question before and never received an answer that
> makes sense.

OK, here's an answer that makes sense: making perfectly neutral
greyscale prints on an inkjet is really hard.

> I'm about ready to send this printer back to Epson for "service" (or
> replacement if it comes to that), as I find this behavior
> unacceptable.

There are three ways to fix this:

1. Accurate colour profiles. With a good profile for your ink and
paper you can get a decent greyscale.

2. Print using a RIP. This is expensive, but gives much better
control of generation of greyscales.

3. Use small gamut inksets. See http://www.lyson.com/small-gamut.html

Andrew.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

In article <113140c4sv14939@news.supernews.com>,
<andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> wrote:
>In rec.photo.digital JC Dill <jcdill@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> My main gripe is why should I have to go fiddle with these different
>> printer preference settings *at all* when the image file has NO
>> color data? Why does the printer think that it should be using
>> colored ink when the file data says "all of these pixels are a mix
>> of black and white only"?
>
>Because to use only the black ink is much worse. The coloured inks
>give you much better tonality.
>
>> I've asked this question before and never received an answer that
>> makes sense.
>
>OK, here's an answer that makes sense: making perfectly neutral
>greyscale prints on an inkjet is really hard.
>
>> I'm about ready to send this printer back to Epson for "service" (or
>> replacement if it comes to that), as I find this behavior
>> unacceptable.
>
>There are three ways to fix this:
>
>1. Accurate colour profiles. With a good profile for your ink and
> paper you can get a decent greyscale.
>
>2. Print using a RIP. This is expensive, but gives much better
> control of generation of greyscales.
>
>3. Use small gamut inksets. See http://www.lyson.com/small-gamut.html
>
>Andrew.



Ink systems for B&W printing on Epson printers. www.piezography.com
--

a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m

Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid wrote:

> In rec.photo.digital JC Dill <jcdill@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> My main gripe is why should I have to go fiddle with these different
>> printer preference settings *at all* when the image file has NO
>> color data? Why does the printer think that it should be using
>> colored ink when the file data says "all of these pixels are a mix
>> of black and white only"?
>
> Because to use only the black ink is much worse. The coloured inks
> give you much better tonality.
>
>> I've asked this question before and never received an answer that
>> makes sense.
>
> OK, here's an answer that makes sense: making perfectly neutral
> greyscale prints on an inkjet is really hard.
>
>> I'm about ready to send this printer back to Epson for "service" (or
>> replacement if it comes to that), as I find this behavior
>> unacceptable.
>
> There are three ways to fix this:
>
> 1. Accurate colour profiles. With a good profile for your ink and
> paper you can get a decent greyscale.
>
> 2. Print using a RIP. This is expensive, but gives much better
> control of generation of greyscales.
>
> 3. Use small gamut inksets. See http://www.lyson.com/small-gamut.html
>
> Andrew.
>

Check out the QTR rip. A personally prefer to use monochrome inks (UT2
from MIS) in my 1280 but a lot of people are getting good results with
stock Epson color inks and the QTR rip in 2200 printers.

 

[stealth]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Where's the "QTR rip"????


"Bubbabob" <rnorton@_remove_this_thuntek.net> wrote in message
news:Xns96158120C63BDdilfjelfoiwepofujsdk@216.168.3.30...
> andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid wrote:
>
>> In rec.photo.digital JC Dill <jcdill@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> My main gripe is why should I have to go fiddle with these different
>>> printer preference settings *at all* when the image file has NO
>>> color data? Why does the printer think that it should be using
>>> colored ink when the file data says "all of these pixels are a mix
>>> of black and white only"?
>>
>> Because to use only the black ink is much worse. The coloured inks
>> give you much better tonality.
>>
>>> I've asked this question before and never received an answer that
>>> makes sense.
>>
>> OK, here's an answer that makes sense: making perfectly neutral
>> greyscale prints on an inkjet is really hard.
>>
>>> I'm about ready to send this printer back to Epson for "service" (or
>>> replacement if it comes to that), as I find this behavior
>>> unacceptable.
>>
>> There are three ways to fix this:
>>
>> 1. Accurate colour profiles. With a good profile for your ink and
>> paper you can get a decent greyscale.
>>
>> 2. Print using a RIP. This is expensive, but gives much better
>> control of generation of greyscales.
>>
>> 3. Use small gamut inksets. See http://www.lyson.com/small-gamut.html
>>
>> Andrew.
>>
>
> Check out the QTR rip. A personally prefer to use monochrome inks (UT2
> from MIS) in my 1280 but a lot of people are getting good results with
> stock Epson color inks and the QTR rip in 2200 printers.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

adykes@panix.com (Al Dykes) wrote:

>
> Ink systems for B&W printing on Epson printers. www.piezography.com

These people have overpriced printer clogging inks and poor customer
support. I blew hundreds on their stuff and ended up with several dead
printers and very few prints, most of which have changed noticeably over
the last 3 years. The MIS UT inks are cheaper and much, much better.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

I can't help you but I commend you for doing what you did for your father.

JC Dill wrote:

>For my father's 70th birthday I prepared an exhibit of photos from his
>life. This project involved scanning hundreds of old photos from
>albums, cleaning them up and reprinting them as 8x10 prints. For the
>b/w photos I scanned them as 8 bit grayscale images, then when I
>cleaned them up in photoshop I verified that they were still grayscale.
> Since the image had NO "color" information, I'm really baffled as to
>why the Epson 2200 thinks it needs to eat up colored ink printing these
>images.
>
>If this process produced great images I wouldn't complain, but it
>doesn't.
>
>The resulting images are muddy, the color cast is clearly obvious. In
>the end I resorted to checking the "use black ink only" option in the
>printer preferences, and ignoring Epson's warning that this was
>"unsuitable for b/w photos" as it was the ONLY way I could get the
>Epson to stop using colored inks and producing *very* unsuitable muddy
>prints. I spent an hour on the phone with Epson technical support and
>the technician had me trying other settings including "monochrome" - I
>thought this had fixed the problem until I printed the 21 step
>grayscale image and found pink in the lighter gray fields and blue in
>the darker gray fields.
>
>My main gripe is why should I have to go fiddle with these different
>printer preference settings *at all* when the image file has NO color
>data? Why does the printer think that it should be using colored ink
>when the file data says "all of these pixels are a mix of black and
>white only"?
>
>I've asked this question before and never received an answer that makes
>sense.
>
>I'm about ready to send this printer back to Epson for "service" (or
>replacement if it comes to that), as I find this behavior unacceptable.
>
>
>TIA
>
>jc
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

measekite wrote:
> I can't help you but I commend you for doing what you did for your father.
>
> JC Dill wrote:
>
>> For my father's 70th birthday I prepared an exhibit of photos from his
>> life. This project involved scanning hundreds of old photos from
>> albums, cleaning them up and reprinting them as 8x10 prints. For the
>> b/w photos I scanned them as 8 bit grayscale images, then when I
>> cleaned them up in photoshop I verified that they were still grayscale.
>> Since the image had NO "color" information, I'm really baffled as to
>> why the Epson 2200 thinks it needs to eat up colored ink printing these
>> images.
>>
>> If this process produced great images I wouldn't complain, but it
>> doesn't.
[...]

In the Canon's printer setup menu, one of the choices is "gray scale
only." IIRC, Epson has a similar choice. Did you use it?

I wouldn't scan 8bit gray scale, BTW, I would scan full colour, then
work on the photo, then convert to gray scale. But I would keep the full
colour scan. I've found that printing full colour in gray scale gives
somewhat better results (on my Canon i960) than printing a gray scale
picture in gray scale. IMO that's because a full colour pic has a wider
black-white range. I don't know if you'd get the same results wth an Epson.

Another factor in the appearance of b/w images is the paper used.
Overall, I prefer matte photo paper to glossy, mostly because the ink
dulls the shine of a glossy papaer, and os none has the same high gloss
as a real photograph.

HTH&GL

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 14:18:28 -0500, rafeb <rafe@nowhere.com> wrote:

>
>
>Owamanga wrote:
>
>> HEY, SOMEONE SHOULD MAKE THIS CARTRIDGE! - Just make 3 or 5 pigment
>> inks that have the same tonal density as the Yellow, Magenta and Cyan,
>> (more in 6 color systems) but keep them neutral gray and you'll get
>> people buying a second printer just for B&W - no mods to the driver
>> required.
>
>
>It's been done. Search for limited-gamut inksets.
>Lyson has them, and I think maybe MIS. Mostly for
>Epsons, though.
>
Yes. And Permajet.

--

Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:29:06 -0600, Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net>
wrote:


>This is a driver issue.

No it isn't. It's a profile and colour management issue.

--

Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Stealth" <stealth@youllneverfindme.com> wrote:

> Where's the "QTR rip"????
>

<http://harrington.com/index.shtml>

I just KNEW when I posted that that everyone would expect me to do their
Googling for them.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

"Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
news:104Yd.16876$R31.11315@fe07.lga...
> This is a driver issue. If your driver doesn't have a B&W mode, that
> uses only the black ink, then you will get a mixture of the other
> colors, and if you look closely, will notice a distinct green tinge to
> the picture. Don't blame Epson, it is quite common among color printers.

He does have a B/W mode but that reduces resolution slightly for well
understood reasons. The 2200 is capable of producing good B/W prints when
setup correctly. Experts need the greyscale balancer that comes with the UK
model but not the USA model for some reason. There is lots of info on the
web about how to get it.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

In rec.photo.digital CWatters <colin.watters@pandorabox.be> wrote:

> The 2200 is capable of producing good B/W prints when setup
> correctly. Experts need the greyscale balancer

Experts need colour management. The gray balancer is not really a
substitute. It's better than nothing.

> that comes with the UK model but not the USA model for some reason.

Here, from someone who knows: "I was (along with some others) asked by
Epson America to test it before release. I found it to be one of the
worst pieces of software in recent memory! This was a key reason why
the product was never released in the US."

Andrew.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Owamanga wrote:

>If you force the printer to use just black ink it'll look even worse,
>believe me. It does this for resolution/tonal depth reasons.

You claim "it'll look even worse" but I saw with my OWN eyes that it
looked much better. The muddy prints were outright embarassing, the
pure black/white ones were usable.

jc

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Hecate wrote:

>On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:29:06 -0600, Ron Hunter <rphun...@charter.net>
wrote:

>>This is a driver issue.

Um, Espon provides the driver for their printer, right? I don't care
what part of the package is causing the problem, it all comes from
Epson...

>No it isn't. It's a profile and colour management issue.

I don't understand how it's a "profile and colour management" issue
when the image has NO color information in it. As I understand it,
profile and color management is used to match what you see on your
monitor with what you see in the print. But I'm not trying to "match
with the monitor", I'm trying to just print what I scanned, a B/W image
that was scanned in 8 bit grayscale. The scanner scanned it as an
image with no color information, photoshop sees it as an image with no
color information so why does the printer think it's supposed to add
color AND produce an image with obvious color cast? Like I said, if it
was magically using the colored inks to create a color neutral image, I
wouldn't mind that it used the color inks to get there. But it's
creating muddy prints with an obvious color cast (like sepia tone, only
not as attractive). It even did this when I used the color management
settings in the printer properties and set it to monochrome.

Sigh.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

JC Dill wrote:

> I don't understand how it's a "profile and colour management" issue
> when the image has NO color information in it. As I understand it,
> profile and color management is used to match what you see on your
> monitor with what you see in the print. But I'm not trying to "match
> with the monitor", I'm trying to just print what I scanned, a B/W image
> that was scanned in 8 bit grayscale. The scanner scanned it as an
> image with no color information, photoshop sees it as an image with no
> color information so why does the printer think it's supposed to add
> color AND produce an image with obvious color cast? Like I said, if it
> was magically using the colored inks to create a color neutral image, I
> wouldn't mind that it used the color inks to get there. But it's
> creating muddy prints with an obvious color cast (like sepia tone, only
> not as attractive). It even did this when I used the color management
> settings in the printer properties and set it to monochrome.


It's like this. The printer has (let's say)
64 nozzles for each color. In the case of the
2200, there are six colors, so there are six
sets of 64 nozzles, one set per color.

The best image happens when all (6 * 64) nozzles
are contributing to the image, and that will be
the case when printing a true RGB image.

When you force the printer to print with black
only, you've now constricted the printer to use
1/6 the available ink nozzles.

In most cases, that produces an image with a
much coarser dither pattern than the printer
is capable of. But it will be neutral, since
only the Black ink is used.

Now... if instead you want to use all (6* 64)
nozzles, you introduce the possibility of a
non-neutral BW print, since you're trying to
get "pure" grays and blacks from wide-gamut
color inks.

In order for that to work, the contributions
of the five color primaries (CMY,lc,lm) have
to be perfectly balanced, all up and down the
tonal scale -- and that's where a good printer
profile comes in.

There are some RIPs that work around this, in
varying ways, though I really don't know how.
I've heard people say that the ImagePrint RIP
delivers perfectly neutral BW prints with the
standard Ultrachrome inks, but I haven't seen
it myself.

The best method for producing really neutral
BW prints (and using all nozzles) is with a
BW ink set, eg., the Piezo inkset from Cone
or the MIS inkset, along with a suitable RIP.
(Eg., Harrington's Quadtone RIP.) Of course,
this pretty much means "dedicating" a printer
to BW work, as it's really impractical to
switch inks on any inkjet printer.


rafe b.
http://www.terrapinphoto.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On 11 Mar 2005 11:14:26 -0800, "JC Dill" <jcdill@gmail.com> wrote:

>Owamanga wrote:
>
>>If you force the printer to use just black ink it'll look even worse,
>>believe me. It does this for resolution/tonal depth reasons.
>
>You claim "it'll look even worse" but I saw with my OWN eyes that it
>looked much better. The muddy prints were outright embarassing, the
>pure black/white ones were usable.

Okay, put it this way, a proper color calibrated BW print using color
inks will look *much* better than the black-only ones. Although
broadly 'acceptable' I've never been able to match the nutrality of a
true Black & White digital wet print such as the ones from mpix.

I don't actually have the 2200, I use a 1270 (it's a 13" wide
predecessor, using different ink), but the concept is the same.

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On 11 Mar 2005 11:27:32 -0800, "JC Dill" <jcdill@gmail.com> wrote:

>Hecate wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:29:06 -0600, Ron Hunter <rphun...@charter.net>
>wrote:
>
>>>This is a driver issue.
>
>Um, Espon provides the driver for their printer, right? I don't care
>what part of the package is causing the problem, it all comes from
>Epson...

You are claiming the following:
The printer comes from Epson. Agreed.
The driver comes from Epson. Agreed.
The ink comes from Epson. Agreed.
The paper comes from Epson. Does it?
The software comes from Epson. No. Probably Adobe.
The PC operating system comes from Epson. No - Microsoft.
The color management software comes from Epson. No - Adobe again.

>>No it isn't. It's a profile and colour management issue.
>
>I don't understand how it's a "profile and colour management" issue
>when the image has NO color information in it.

But the print *does*. That's how it gets nice tonal grays.

> As I understand it,
>profile and color management is used to match what you see on your
>monitor with what you see in the print.

Massive over simplification.

Calibrated systems need to match OS, screen, software, printer,
scanner, paper, inks. You can't just stop half way.

> But I'm not trying to "match
>with the monitor", I'm trying to just print what I scanned, a B/W image
>that was scanned in 8 bit grayscale. The scanner scanned it as an
>image with no color information, photoshop sees it as an image with no
>color information so why does the printer think it's supposed to add
>color AND produce an image with obvious color cast? Like I said, if it
>was magically using the colored inks to create a color neutral image, I
>wouldn't mind that it used the color inks to get there. But it's
>creating muddy prints with an obvious color cast (like sepia tone, only
>not as attractive).

Look, try and imagine what the driver is doing. It's got to decide the
ratios of each ink color it needs to dump on the paper to get gray. A
bad color profile, and it'll dump too much yellow, giving you sepia
prints. Mine tended to be green, count yourself lucky.

It's not just about the ink, but the resolution you are printing at
and most importantly, how does the ink react with *that paper* you
have loaded. If your profile doesn't mention the exact paper type, you
are *not* going to get gray even if the rest of your system is
perfect, and you absolutely critically need gray with no color cast at
all. This requires a good color profile.

> It even did this when I used the color management
>settings in the printer properties and set it to monochrome.

You *still* get a cast - even when forcing it to just use only black
ink? That bit I can't explain. Shitty paper maybe, tungsten lighting?

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 19:37:58 GMT, Owamanga
<owamanga(not-this-bit)@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> It even did this when I used the color management
>>settings in the printer properties and set it to monochrome.
>
>You *still* get a cast - even when forcing it to just use only black
>ink? That bit I can't explain. Shitty paper maybe, tungsten lighting?

...add another one: Cataracts?

--
Owamanga!
http://www.pbase.com/owamanga

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital,comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

On 11 Mar 2005 11:27:32 -0800, "JC Dill" <jcdill@gmail.com> wrote:

>Hecate wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:29:06 -0600, Ron Hunter <rphun...@charter.net>
>wrote:
>

>>No it isn't. It's a profile and colour management issue.
>
>I don't understand how it's a "profile and colour management" issue

If you've read all the posts above you should do now.

--

Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui