Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality

Started Jul 20, 2012 | Discussions
Andrea Crema
Contributing MemberPosts: 708Gear list
Like?
Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
Jul 20, 2012

Purely based on Print quality.

Is there a noticeable difference ? (I suppose it's down to the Hybrid vs Fusion interpolation)

 Andrea Crema's gear list:Andrea Crema's gear list
Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8 ED-IF +8 more
boyinthecity
Junior MemberPosts: 31
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to Andrea Crema, Jul 20, 2012

indeed. i have had the same question.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
digital ed
Senior MemberPosts: 2,692Gear list
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to Andrea Crema, Jul 20, 2012

If you want continued updates you have no choice, although now with a yearly charge. Qimage is still my primary choice for printing. Therefore for me, it makes no difference whether it is better or not.

I base my choice upon prints made from the same file using Qimage Ultimate, PSCS6 and LR4.

 digital ed's gear list:digital ed's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-3 Nikon D800 Nikon 1 V2 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED +13 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
CaptnWil
Regular MemberPosts: 270
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to digital ed, Jul 20, 2012

I have used Qimage almost from the time it came out. Its strength was, as is, page amd multiple page layout, and easier printing than possible with Photoshop.

Over time, the application started shifting to RAW conversion and photo editing. The layout routines and printing routnes have what many consider to be only cosmetic improvements. I am included in that group.

The main thrust of QU (Ultimate) is raw conversion and editing. When compared to apps like Lightroom and Capture One, I feel that QU is in the minor leagues in every respect except some aspects of photo layout, and it is loosing its advantage in photo layout when compared to Lightroom.

It is a myth that is circulated by the QU fans that it does better resampleing and sharpening than LR. I have made prints of the same images with Lightroom and QU and asked a nymber of unbiased observers to judge the best in a blind test. All that the test proved is that both applications make very fine prints. A slight majority selected the LR print, and that was before Lightroom 4.1 which has improved the Lightroom results in great measure. The results of the test was not conclusive enouth to say that one makes better prints than the other.

I doubt that you can see a difference in print quality with the last Qimage (Studio I think) before the current version, Qimage Ultimate. Almost all of the QU "improvements" have to do with things other than "printing."

If you're going to keep your work flow in good shape, you're going to either do the whole thing in Qimage, download, convert raw, edit, print, etc., or just use Qimage for layout and printing only. If you use other software for conversion and editing, nothning you do in Qimage can be returned to your original software. That means that you finish your files in your chosen software, convert them to TIFF or JPEG, and let Qimage find it. Then make NO adjustments in Q. Print it and be done.

Since Lightroom, I have only used Qimage Ultimate when I need to to make a series of 4 x 6 prints on 8.5 x 11 paper. Qimage will put three of them on a single sheet. That's hard to do with anything else.

I keep supporting Qimage by buying their update package becasue of all the past value it has been to me. I doubt I'll update again.

Qimage is the product of a one man programming shop. I've been there. I'm sorry to say that a one man shop can't keep up with the many very talented programmers at places like Adobe and Phase One. I'm not happy to see the future of Qimage.

Good Luck,
Wil

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Andrea Crema
Contributing MemberPosts: 708Gear list
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to CaptnWil, Jul 21, 2012

Thanks for the detailed and Informative reply.

I use LR4 like you, so wouldnt benefit from the added features in QU.

Maybe the comparison up to a certain size wouldn't be noticeable, but I am puzzled that there is no difference in view of the screen grabs on the qimage site.

 Andrea Crema's gear list:Andrea Crema's gear list
Nikon D800 Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8 ED-IF +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
E Dinkla
Contributing MemberPosts: 516
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to Andrea Crema, Jul 21, 2012

The differences in image print quality have diminished in time between applications including Qimage and Lightroom. So did printer driver upsampling compared to applications upsampling. On downsampling Qimage will still be superior in my opinion and the transparency of the tools like smart print sharpening and extrapolation choices is not found in Lightroom. If you print single images on one sheet you do not need the nesting facilties or the different ICC profiling/rendering possible per image for more images on one sheet and more features like that. Qimage offers easy control on borders, colored or not and much more. True I do not use the RAW import much but for snapshots but there is still a wealth of features in that program.

-- hide signature --

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

340+ paper white spectral plots:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
update april 2012: Harman by Hahnemühle, Innova IFA45 and more

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
CaptnWil
Regular MemberPosts: 270
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to E Dinkla, Jul 21, 2012

If you're working with LR, the only way to get your LR edits into Q is to export as TIF or JPG because Q doesn't understand the RAW edit parameters of LR.

Any edits you make in Q can't be returned to the RAW file in LR. That makes it very hard to use LR and do anything in Q except to layout and print without any edits if you want your LR file to be up to date with your latest edit -- I do, and make no editing of any kind in Q.

Each new update in LR makes using Q less desirable. Learning the new LR 4.1 develop controls will amaze you. There is nothing available in other software that can do what LR 4.1 highlight recovery does. Try it you will be amazed.

Q has been a great application, ahead of its time in many respects. But now its time is running out -- kinda like when the DC-3 airplane was replaced with the jets.

Good Luck!
Wil

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
E Dinkla
Contributing MemberPosts: 516
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to CaptnWil, Jul 21, 2012

Q has been a great application, ahead of its time in many respects. But now its time is running out -- kinda like when the DC-3 airplane was replaced with the jets.

Good Luck!
Wil

With two 44" wide format printers here and working mainly as an art print shop I would never use Lightroom for its printing features. It simply does not have the right tools for that. I use ACR + Photoshop or DPP for my own Canon RAW processing, The rest is done with Qimage based on processed Tiffs or JPEGs. The interactive log for repeat jobs, templates etc, the nesting functions, the border functions, the cut marks, the proof print settings, the print filter function, the temporary image crops, the smart print sharpening that collects the right information from driver settings and image resolution automatically. I hardly ever touch the Qimage image editing tools but the crop function, they are not at PS level. Horses for courses and Qimage does the printing here.

Qimage Ultimate is still many miles ahead of Lightroom if the printing features are considered. For the price of Lightroom you can buy it and get updates for the next five years. And yes, I have an expensive RIP too that is not used because Qimage Ultimate does the jobs faster and better.

-- hide signature --

Met vriendelijke groet, Ernst

340+ paper white spectral plots:
http://www.pigment-print.com/spectralplots/spectrumviz_1.htm
update april 2012: Harman by Hahnemühle, Innova IFA45 and more

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
digital ed
Senior MemberPosts: 2,692Gear list
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to CaptnWil, Jul 21, 2012

CaptnWil wrote:

Each new update in LR makes using Q less desirable. Learning the new LR 4.1 develop controls will amaze you. There is nothing available in other software that can do what LR 4.1 highlight recovery does. Try it you will be amazed.

Q has been a great application, ahead of its time in many respects. But now its time is running out -- kinda like when the DC-3 airplane was replaced with the jets.

Good Luck!
Wil

Obviously, this is your opinion and may be valid for your workflow, not necessarily for others.
By the way, the raw developer in LR4 and CS6 are the same.

 digital ed's gear list:digital ed's gear list
Olympus E-1 Olympus E-3 Nikon D800 Nikon 1 V2 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED +13 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vernon D Rainwater
Forum ProPosts: 11,864
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to Andrea Crema, Jul 21, 2012

Andrea Crema wrote:

Purely based on Print quality.

Is there a noticeable difference ? (I suppose it's down to the Hybrid vs Fusion interpolation)

You have a very legitimate question.

I thought I had previous correspondence (with Mike Chaney) regarding this but evidently I dropped that information during my year end purge of the Non Active/Deleted Emails.

Perhaps you have slready contacted Mike Chaney (developer of Qimage) but if not -- suggest you send an email inquiry to him. Google for proper contact information.

Mike has always been good to respond with factual information and without a lot of "salesmanship Jargon"

Edit to add: Mike's Email   mchaney@ddisoftware.com

-- hide signature --

Vernon...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ronzie
Senior MemberPosts: 1,283
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to Andrea Crema, Jul 21, 2012

http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage-u/support.htm check out the difference FAQ.

http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage-u/features.htm features comparison.

Note that QImage though listed as retired is still available. Critical updates (as in failure problems) have been released but no feature upgrades.

I use the Pro version for its soft proofing features. Also on a side-by side hard copy comparison I get get better detail on near 1:1 down scaling of complex detailed nature subjects without added noise as compared to PSE 10 output. I first used Q since my original "color managed" editor offered soft proofing and used the monitor profile but did not drive the printer with its own CM. PSE 10 will only soft proof with an inexpensive add-on suite of plug-ins which I have. However Q-Pro still gives the better print detail and acutance.

My images for printing are 8 bit tif as my editors don't handle 16 bit tif.

Try the trial length limited version to see if it meets your needs. Be sure you setup the CM preferences.

Check out the support forum here for the non ultimate versions:
http://ddisoftware.com/tech/qimage/?PHPSESSID=rcnureo08nut8ag8m2h66k0eo1

Note the links to download the help and .pdf versions of the manual.

-- hide signature --

Ron Ginsberg
Minneapolis, MN
Land of 10,000 Puddles

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bobjoek
New MemberPosts: 21
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to ronzie, Jul 21, 2012

One other feature of Qimage Ultimate is the ability to print longer than the length limit of the printer driver. My Epson driver limits the print length to 37 inches. Using Qimage, I have been making prints much longer than the driver limit. This is a feature that is usually only available with an expensive RIP.

Bob

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vernon D Rainwater
Forum ProPosts: 11,864
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to Bobjoek, Jul 21, 2012

Bobjoek wrote:

One other feature of Qimage Ultimate is the ability to print longer than the length limit of the printer driver. My Epson driver limits the print length to 37 inches. Using Qimage, I have been making prints much longer than the driver limit. This is a feature that is usually only available with an expensive RIP.

Bob

Bob, perhaps you are aware that this feature is not exclusive with only the Ultimate Version. I have the Studio version and it has the feature. I now have three different Models of Epson Printers and (for Example) the 2200 can be used to print beyond the Epson identified length limit but the Two Model R800 printers can not do this. I have not tried with the Epson 3880 but (as far as I know) Qimage is limited to the Epson defined length unless using some type of RIP or other aide to print with longer paper.

However, this Qimage feature is dependent on the printer having the feature in the Print Driver in order for any Qimage issue (that supports this feature) to be able to exceed the print paper length as published by Epson (in my case for printers).

The best I remember, the print driver needs to support Banner and/or Roll option for selection for Qimage to "do it's magic". Qimage gets it information from the print Driver and NOT from other support such as a RIP.

I have been using Qimage as my ONLY Photo Printing software for over 10 years and it is beyond excellent.
--
Vernon...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vernon D Rainwater
Forum ProPosts: 11,864
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to Andrea Crema, Jul 22, 2012

Andrea Crema wrote:

Purely based on Print quality.

Is there a noticeable difference ? (I suppose it's down to the Hybrid vs Fusion interpolation)

Andrea, should you get any feedback from Mike Chaney or the Qimage Staff regarding your inquiry, hopefully you will post it here so to help renew our memory (especially for me).

Normally I keep a reference regarding anything of this nature but I obviously "goofed" and didn't retain my previous correspondence. I checked back in the Qimage Support forum in case the information was there but didn't find anything regarding the subject
--
Vernon...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
LarryM.
Regular MemberPosts: 153Gear list
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to Andrea Crema, Jul 22, 2012

This was discussed in depth about 5 months ago.

Go here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1003&thread=40548637&page=3

This should answer the original question.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vernon D Rainwater
Forum ProPosts: 11,864
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to LarryM., Jul 22, 2012

LarryM. wrote:

This was discussed in depth about 5 months ago.

Go here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1003&thread=40548637&page=3

This should answer the original question.

Thanks for the link. I will now go and view posts in that thread.
My search did not find this link

Edited to add: That was the exact information I have been looking for but obviously I thought I had saved the contents of some of the posts but (some how) deleted the information. I also had some communications with Mike Chaney during that time but that may have been on the Qimage Forum.

Anyway, thanks for the link and I will (again) select the proper parts for my information data folder.
--
Vernon...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vernon D Rainwater
Forum ProPosts: 11,864
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to LarryM., Jul 22, 2012

LarryM. wrote:

This was discussed in depth about 5 months ago.

Go here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1003&thread=40548637&page=3

This should answer the original question.

Larry, I have NO idea why my searches did not locate this Thread. I have now read and copied ALL applicable posts to a document file for my records.
Thank You again....
--
Vernon...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
LarryM.
Regular MemberPosts: 153Gear list
Like?
Re: Qimage original vs Qimage Ultimate print quality
In reply to Vernon D Rainwater, Jul 23, 2012

I don't know why you couldn't find it either. Your posts were about half the thread.

I just hope it satisfies the OP's concerns about the different versions of Qimage. I'm happily printing right now with the older Studio version.

"If it ain't broke - don't fix it".

Vernon D Rainwater wrote:

LarryM. wrote:

This was discussed in depth about 5 months ago.

Go here: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1003&thread=40548637&page=3

This should answer the original question.

Larry, I have NO idea why my searches did not locate this Thread. I have now read and copied ALL applicable posts to a document file for my records.
Thank You again....
--
Vernon...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads