Anybody else unhappy with Red River's R3000 profiles?

Started Mar 23, 2013 | Discussions
just Tony
Contributing MemberPosts: 625
Like?
Anybody else unhappy with Red River's R3000 profiles?
Mar 23, 2013

When I print the famous standard printer test image found here

http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsights/pi048/essay.html

on my newly arrived Epson R3000, using Red River's papers and matching profiles, and following their additional instructions exactly, the results in some sections of the image are not so great. In particular:

* The gradients that run from green, blue, and cyan towards white are quite obviously banded.

* The baby on the right looks too yellow.

* The lava folds are too yellow or yellow-green.

I also printed the same test image on my Canon MG6220, a dye-ink all-in-one, on Arctic Polar Satin. The gradients are all beautifully smooth. The babies all look great. The lava matches what I see on my calibrated NEC PA241W monitor. I get the same excellent results from the Canon Premium Glossy using Canon's appropriate profile. I'm pretty sure I've been doing my part correctly throughout this exercise.

(Side note: in the square color swatches the Canon shows excellent separation between the saturated red, magenta, purple, and blue. In the Epson the red and magenta are too close, and the blue and purple are too close. However this may be due to a superior gamut of the Canon dyes vs the Epson pigments).

So I have a couple of questions:

- Is there a better source for profiles for RR papers on the Epson R3000? I'm not trusting RR's right now.

- Will I see the same banded gradients with Epson papers + Epson profiles?

So far I've used the Red River sampler pack and it's time for me to buy a good paper in quantity. But I don't want to throw my money away on a paper that had been hobbled by the profile.

jtoolman
Senior MemberPosts: 4,358
Like?
Re: Anybody else unhappy with Red River's R3000 profiles?
In reply to just Tony, Mar 23, 2013

just Tony wrote:

When I print the famous standard printer test image found here

http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsights/pi048/essay.html

on my newly arrived Epson R3000, using Red River's papers and matching profiles, and following their additional instructions exactly, the results in some sections of the image are not so great. In particular:

* The gradients that run from green, blue, and cyan towards white are quite obviously banded.

* The baby on the right looks too yellow.

* The lava folds are too yellow or yellow-green.

I also printed the same test image on my Canon MG6220, a dye-ink all-in-one, on Arctic Polar Satin. The gradients are all beautifully smooth. The babies all look great. The lava matches what I see on my calibrated NEC PA241W monitor. I get the same excellent results from the Canon Premium Glossy using Canon's appropriate profile. I'm pretty sure I've been doing my part correctly throughout this exercise.

(Side note: in the square color swatches the Canon shows excellent separation between the saturated red, magenta, purple, and blue. In the Epson the red and magenta are too close, and the blue and purple are too close. However this may be due to a superior gamut of the Canon dyes vs the Epson pigments).

So I have a couple of questions:

- Is there a better source for profiles for RR papers on the Epson R3000? I'm not trusting RR's right now.

- Will I see the same banded gradients with Epson papers + Epson profiles?

So far I've used the Red River sampler pack and it's time for me to buy a good paper in quantity. But I don't want to throw my money away on a paper that had been hobbled by the profile.

You are turning off color management in the R3000 driver right?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Petruska
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,681
Like?
Re: Anybody else unhappy with Red River's R3000 profiles?
In reply to just Tony, Mar 23, 2013

just Tony wrote:

When I print the famous standard printer test image found here

http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsights/pi048/essay.html

on my newly arrived Epson R3000, using Red River's papers and matching profiles, and following their additional instructions exactly, the results in some sections of the image are not so great. In particular:

* The gradients that run from green, blue, and cyan towards white are quite obviously banded.

* The baby on the right looks too yellow.

* The lava folds are too yellow or yellow-green.

I also printed the same test image on my Canon MG6220, a dye-ink all-in-one, on Arctic Polar Satin. The gradients are all beautifully smooth. The babies all look great. The lava matches what I see on my calibrated NEC PA241W monitor. I get the same excellent results from the Canon Premium Glossy using Canon's appropriate profile. I'm pretty sure I've been doing my part correctly throughout this exercise.

(Side note: in the square color swatches the Canon shows excellent separation between the saturated red, magenta, purple, and blue. In the Epson the red and magenta are too close, and the blue and purple are too close. However this may be due to a superior gamut of the Canon dyes vs the Epson pigments).

So I have a couple of questions:

- Is there a better source for profiles for RR papers on the Epson R3000? I'm not trusting RR's right now.

- Will I see the same banded gradients with Epson papers + Epson profiles?

So far I've used the Red River sampler pack and it's time for me to buy a good paper in quantity. But I don't want to throw my money away on a paper that had been hobbled by the profile.

I use Red River profiles with my R3000 and they print excellent, even with Cone 3rd party inks.

1.  What photo editing application do you use?

2.  What operating system (MAC or Win)?

3.  What does your nozzle check look like?

4.  Have your performed a print head alignment?

5.  Are you using OEM inks?

6.  Are you printing with the highest quality mode?

7.  What does the same RR paper print look like if you let the printer manage the colors and use the settings in the printer driver that RR supplies when you are not using RR profiles?

8. And most of all as Joe asked are you turning off color management properly in the printer driver when using ICC profiles?

Bob P.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MMS Photo
Contributing MemberPosts: 707Gear list
Like?
Re: Anybody else unhappy with Red River's R3000 profiles?
In reply to Petruska, Mar 23, 2013

Petruska wrote:<snip>

I use Red River profiles with my R3000 and they print excellent, even with Cone 3rd party inks.

1. What photo editing application do you use?

2. What operating system (MAC or Win)?

3. What does your nozzle check look like?

4. Have your performed a print head alignment?

5. Are you using OEM inks?

6. Are you printing with the highest quality mode?

7. What does the same RR paper print look like if you let the printer manage the colors and use the settings in the printer driver that RR supplies when you are not using RR profiles?

8. And most of all as Joe asked are you turning off color management properly in the printer driver when using ICC profiles?

Bob P.

Bob, you offer great questions, especially #8. I use RR Polar Satin and Polar Gloss, Polar Pearl Metallic and Aurora Art papers and they seem to do the job just fine.

-- hide signature --

Michael
Michael M. Shaw | Photography http://mmshaw.zenfolio.com/

 MMS Photo's gear list:MMS Photo's gear list
Nikon D750 Canon PowerShot G11 Nikon Coolpix P7700 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
just Tony
Contributing MemberPosts: 625
Like?
Re: Anybody else unhappy with Red River's R3000 profiles?
In reply to jtoolman, Mar 23, 2013

jtoolman wrote:

You are turning off color management in the R3000 driver right?

I believe so but let me know if you think I may have missed something:

Going through CS6's dialog box that I get when I select File/Print:

Printer Setup / Print Settings / Epson Stylus Photo R3000 Properties / Media Settings / Mode :(J) / Off (No Color Adjustment)

This seems to have done the trick because literally 95% of the test image looks great on the page. Also the other gradients look very good. It's nowhere near any resemblance to the super saturated and dark results I've seen when I accidentally had double profiling occurring with my Canon printer.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jtoolman
Senior MemberPosts: 4,358
Like?
Re: Anybody else unhappy with Red River's R3000 profiles?
In reply to just Tony, Mar 23, 2013

just Tony wrote:

jtoolman wrote:

You are turning off color management in the R3000 driver right?

I believe so but let me know if you think I may have missed something:

Going through CS6's dialog box that I get when I select File/Print:

Printer Setup / Print Settings / Epson Stylus Photo R3000 Properties / Media Settings / Mode :(J) / Off (No Color Adjustment)

This seems to have done the trick because literally 95% of the test image looks great on the page. Also the other gradients look very good. It's nowhere near any resemblance to the super saturated and dark results I've seen when I accidentally had double profiling occurring with my Canon printer.

99% of the time, bad color is attributed to user error and 99% of the time attributed to double profiling.

But now that you've got it all sorted out, now you can proceed to print your own images with confidence.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
just Tony
Contributing MemberPosts: 625
Like?
Re: Anybody else unhappy with Red River's R3000 profiles?
In reply to Petruska, Mar 23, 2013

Petruska wrote:

I use Red River profiles with my R3000 and they print excellent, even with Cone 3rd party inks.

1. What photo editing application do you use?

CS6 64-bit and pretty soon Lightroom 4 as well.

2. What operating system (MAC or Win)?

Windows 7 with very ample resources.

3. What does your nozzle check look like?

Haven't done one yet there isn't any indication of any missing lines or any other striped artifacts that run across the page. The only issue I've observed is the nonlinear gradient patterns, specifically in the cool hue gradient elements of the page. All the square color swatches are uniform so there are many indications that are convincing me of proper hardware performance.

4. Have your performed a print head alignment?

All I've done in terms of setup was to follow the quick start sheet (install the cartridges, then let the printer do it's automated thing).

What symptoms on the printed result would be diagnostic of a misaligned head? I'm nor seeing any geometric mismatches of the image details.

5. Are you using OEM inks?

Yes, these are the Epson inks that shipped with the printer. The printer is a refurb bought direct from Epson and of course I'm hoping that I didn't merely rediscover an unresolved problem that led to the original purchaser returning it.

6. Are you printing with the highest quality mode?

I will have to say no because I followed Red River's instructions. Under "Print Quality" there are four options in the drop-down menu:

Speed (uh, no but thanks for offering, Epson)

Quality (undefined and kind of a milk-toast option really, so no thanks yet again)

High Quality (also undefined but who would rationally refuse? This setting also warped the first pages of Zeppelin paper I ran through, leading to numerous head strikes. In other words, the Lowest Achievable Quality)

and finally, Quality Options, which is where I had to go to implement Red River's instruction to use 1440x1440dpi and switch off High Speed (disabling bidirectional printing I take it).

7. What does the same RR paper print look like if you let the printer manage the colors and use the settings in the printer driver that RR supplies when you are not using RR profiles?

I haven't tried letting the printer manage the colors. In spite of this going against the prevalent color management advice I've encountered so far, it does at least seem like a good thing to try for the sake of investigation.

This is the first I've heard about any printer drivers from Red River. Can you provide a link?

8. And most of all as Joe asked are you turning off color management properly in the printer driver when using ICC profiles?

"Pretty darn sure" I have but that's not always been 100% accurate. 

Thanks for your attention, Bob. I'm going to see if I can get some good scans of the problematic results.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
just Tony
Contributing MemberPosts: 625
Like?
SUCCESS with Epson Ultra Premium Photo Paper Glossy
In reply to just Tony, Mar 23, 2013

Using Epson's SPR3000 Premium Glossy profile, all of the gradients are textbook-perfect.

This too is vastly better then the results I've achieved with any Red River paper in the R3000: the hue separations between the red and magenta swatches, and the blue and the purple swatches, are very good indeed.

I no longer need to feel that the $800 msrp R3000 is inferior to my $100 Canon all in one.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Petruska
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,681
Like?
Re: Anybody else unhappy with Red River's R3000 profiles?
In reply to just Tony, Mar 24, 2013

just Tony wrote:

Petruska wrote:

I use Red River profiles with my R3000 and they print excellent, even with Cone 3rd party inks.

1. What photo editing application do you use?

CS6 64-bit and pretty soon Lightroom 4 as well.

2. What operating system (MAC or Win)?

Windows 7 with very ample resources.

3. What does your nozzle check look like?

Haven't done one yet there isn't any indication of any missing lines or any other striped artifacts that run across the page. The only issue I've observed is the nonlinear gradient patterns, specifically in the cool hue gradient elements of the page. All the square color swatches are uniform so there are many indications that are convincing me of proper hardware performance.

4. Have your performed a print head alignment?

All I've done in terms of setup was to follow the quick start sheet (install the cartridges, then let the printer do it's automated thing).

What symptoms on the printed result would be diagnostic of a misaligned head? I'm nor seeing any geometric mismatches of the image details.

5. Are you using OEM inks?

Yes, these are the Epson inks that shipped with the printer. The printer is a refurb bought direct from Epson and of course I'm hoping that I didn't merely rediscover an unresolved problem that led to the original purchaser returning it.

6. Are you printing with the highest quality mode?

I will have to say no because I followed Red River's instructions. Under "Print Quality" there are four options in the drop-down menu:

Speed (uh, no but thanks for offering, Epson)

Quality (undefined and kind of a milk-toast option really, so no thanks yet again)

High Quality (also undefined but who would rationally refuse? This setting also warped the first pages of Zeppelin paper I ran through, leading to numerous head strikes. In other words, the Lowest Achievable Quality)

and finally, Quality Options, which is where I had to go to implement Red River's instruction to use 1440x1440dpi and switch off High Speed (disabling bidirectional printing I take it).

7. What does the same RR paper print look like if you let the printer manage the colors and use the settings in the printer driver that RR supplies when you are not using RR profiles?

I haven't tried letting the printer manage the colors. In spite of this going against the prevalent color management advice I've encountered so far, it does at least seem like a good thing to try for the sake of investigation.

This is the first I've heard about any printer drivers from Red River. Can you provide a link?

8. And most of all as Joe asked are you turning off color management properly in the printer driver when using ICC profiles?

"Pretty darn sure" I have but that's not always been 100% accurate.

Thanks for your attention, Bob. I'm going to see if I can get some good scans of the problematic results.

The RR settings for the printer driver when using "allow printer to manage colors" in PS are...

http://www.redrivercatalog.com/infocenter/PDFpage.htm

Click on Arctic Polar Satin and use those settings.  Choose Photo.  You don't use the RR ICC profiles when doing this or you will get double profiling, the ICC profile list will be unavaialble to you in PS when in this mode.

I would say you have something not set correctly if you can get a good print with the Epson profile and not with the Red River.  I just printed with the RR ICC profile on Arctic Polar Satin and the greaients are excellent.

Also you should definitely run the nozzzle check as a lot of us reading the post will say I wonder if he has some blocked nozzles and it just leaves us hanging not knowing if you do or not.  It's simple to do and doesn't use hardly any ink at all.

Good luck!

Bob P.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
just Tony
Contributing MemberPosts: 625
Like?
My settings, plus an interesting discovery
In reply to just Tony, Mar 24, 2013

Here are representative settings from this investigation. I am very open to anyone pointing out any setup errors that I may have made. First, the initial page I see after clicking File/Print, but in this case I did NOT check the "Match Print Colors" box. This is a faithful rendition of the source image. Note the smooth gradients. And please take note of the solid color swatches, especially the blue, purple, magenta, and red patches at the upper left of the palette which are all distinct from one another. This will be important later.

Original colors of the image ("Match Print Colors" box is not checked)

Now let's preview the gamut of the print output. Notice the mottled gradients which look like they have a case of cellulite. Notice also that the blue and purple swatches have nearly converged into one hue, and the magenta and red are too close to each other as well:

"Match Print Colors" box is now checked

Now let's check which colors are out of gamut. Go back and forth between the image below and the one above. It seems like the biggest gradient defects occur at the border of the in-gamut space and the out-of-gamut space:

"Gamut Warning" box is checked

Here are the rest of the settings to show what I did for one representative image in my test:

Red River advised me to use 1440x1440dpi and to uncheck "High Speed".

Again, I am open to any and all comments about possible setup errors. In my next posting I will show scans of two of my test prints.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
just Tony
Contributing MemberPosts: 625
Like?
Scans of some test prints
In reply to just Tony, Mar 24, 2013

Remember the lumpy gradients that showed up already in the CS6 Print dialog box? Well the printer is faithfully printing them. My conclusion is that the printer is not at fault at all. The fault lies either with a defect in the profiles, or a defect in my use of Photoshop.

There is one cautionary thing to note about these scans. My scanner is a business-class all-in-one device. As far as I know I have no option to profile it, and no option to control the white balance, exposure, or contrast. I certainly exercised no such controls even if they are available. So we'll have to confine ourselves to observations about really prominent color defects, and let's stay away from dissecting anything regarding nuances of skin tones or how delicious (or not) the strawberries look.

So, let's get back to those lumpy, non-monotonic gradients. This image will look exactly familiar to anyone who read my prior post:

Poor gradients and inappropriate convergence of color swatches

Notice that the lumpy gradients are the only "lumpy" distorted colors. The direction of the print head movement is vertical in this view of the printed page, but the faces and the near-white of the wall behind the shevles are unaffected. All of the color swatches are uniform with no banding. I believe we can discard any notion of the print head being at fault because a) the banding defects are oriented in the wrong direction, b) no other part of the image is banded, and c) the printed page is a superb replica of the problematic preview page.

The distorted hues in the columns above the marks "252" through "248" are also close matches to the color defects seen in the print preview I showed in my prior post.

Now let's look at a decent print which has vanishingly small gradient defects, and pretty nice distinctions between the color swatches:

Epson all the way (printer, paper, profiles). Pretty decent gradients, good swatches too.

One more thing occurred to me that I haven't mentioned yet. The famous test image above is provided in the Pro Photo color space. I did not convert it to any other space before printing. I wondered if this could be a problem, maybe letting Photoshop manage any required conversion automatically could be a bad thing?

I next tried doing the color space conversion from Pro Photo to sRGB within Photoshop, and then printing it. The printed page looks exactly like what came out when I did not convert.  I suppose this was an unnecessary test because failure to properly manage a Pro Photo image in an sRGB environment would produce really gigantic color errors, far beyond anything I've been struggling with here.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Phil Hill
Senior MemberPosts: 2,603Gear list
Like?
Re: Anybody else unhappy with Red River's R3000 profiles?
In reply to just Tony, Mar 24, 2013

RR’s R3000 profiles have been spot-on for me.  Their 1430 profiles not so much, but that may have as much to do with my particular 1430 as with the profiles.  I'm still investigating that.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vernon D Rainwater
Forum ProPosts: 12,096
Like?
Re: My settings, plus an interesting discovery
In reply to just Tony, Mar 24, 2013

just Tony wrote:

Here are representative settings from this investigation. I am very open to anyone pointing out any setup errors that I may have made. First, the initial page I see after clicking File/Print, but in this case I did NOT check the "Match Print Colors" box. This is a faithful rendition of the source image. Note the smooth gradients. And please take note of the solid color swatches, especially the blue, purple, magenta, and red patches at the upper left of the palette which are all distinct from one another. This will be important later.

Original colors of the image ("Match Print Colors" box is not checked)

Now let's preview the gamut of the print output. Notice the mottled gradients which look like they have a case of cellulite. Notice also that the blue and purple swatches have nearly converged into one hue, and the magenta and red are too close to each other as well:

"Match Print Colors" box is now checked

Now let's check which colors are out of gamut. Go back and forth between the image below and the one above. It seems like the biggest gradient defects occur at the border of the in-gamut space and the out-of-gamut space:

"Gamut Warning" box is checked

Here are the rest of the settings to show what I did for one representative image in my test:

Red River advised me to use 1440x1440dpi and to uncheck "High Speed".

Again, I am open to any and all comments about possible setup errors. In my next posting I will show scans of two of my test prints.

I don't have the 3000 printer so I am comparing some of your listed settings to my Epson 3880. On your 5th image (from top) you have "Finest Detail" set to OFF. I prefer to have this setting set to ON for my 3880. I have no idea if this will make any difference with your 3000.

Edit to Add-- I use Red River profiles for the various Red River papers and have had excellent results with all I have tested.  I print promarily on Matte papers but have printed many of the different Red River Papers that are included in their Sample Pack with excellent results using their Printer Profiles.

-- hide signature --

Vernon...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Hugowolf
Forum ProPosts: 11,332
Like?
Re: My settings, plus an interesting discovery
In reply to Vernon D Rainwater, Mar 25, 2013

Vernon D Rainwater wrote:

I don't have the 3000 printer so I am comparing some of your listed settings to my Epson 3880. On your 5th image (from top) you have "Finest Detail" set to OFF. I prefer to have this setting set to ON for my 3880. I have no idea if this will make any difference with your 3000.

The Epson r3000 manual states “Finest Detail: For printing text, graphics, and line art with very sharp edges. Slows print speed and increases you system memory requirements.”

The 3880 manual (and the manuals for Epson's 17 inch and larger format printers) go further in stating “This setting does not affect photographs and is not recommended for large files”.

Brian A

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Petruska
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,681
Like?
RR ICC may be corrupt...
In reply to just Tony, Mar 25, 2013

just Tony wrote:

Remember the lumpy gradients that showed up already in the CS6 Print dialog box? Well the printer is faithfully printing them. My conclusion is that the printer is not at fault at all. The fault lies either with a defect in the profiles, or a defect in my use of Photoshop.

There is one cautionary thing to note about these scans. My scanner is a business-class all-in-one device. As far as I know I have no option to profile it, and no option to control the white balance, exposure, or contrast. I certainly exercised no such controls even if they are available. So we'll have to confine ourselves to observations about really prominent color defects, and let's stay away from dissecting anything regarding nuances of skin tones or how delicious (or not) the strawberries look.

So, let's get back to those lumpy, non-monotonic gradients. This image will look exactly familiar to anyone who read my prior post:

Poor gradients and inappropriate convergence of color swatches

Notice that the lumpy gradients are the only "lumpy" distorted colors. The direction of the print head movement is vertical in this view of the printed page, but the faces and the near-white of the wall behind the shevles are unaffected. All of the color swatches are uniform with no banding. I believe we can discard any notion of the print head being at fault because a) the banding defects are oriented in the wrong direction, b) no other part of the image is banded, and c) the printed page is a superb replica of the problematic preview page.

The distorted hues in the columns above the marks "252" through "248" are also close matches to the color defects seen in the print preview I showed in my prior post.

Now let's look at a decent print which has vanishingly small gradient defects, and pretty nice distinctions between the color swatches:

Epson all the way (printer, paper, profiles). Pretty decent gradients, good swatches too.

One more thing occurred to me that I haven't mentioned yet. The famous test image above is provided in the Pro Photo color space. I did not convert it to any other space before printing. I wondered if this could be a problem, maybe letting Photoshop manage any required conversion automatically could be a bad thing?

I next tried doing the color space conversion from Pro Photo to sRGB within Photoshop, and then printing it. The printed page looks exactly like what came out when I did not convert. I suppose this was an unnecessary test because failure to properly manage a Pro Photo image in an sRGB environment would produce really gigantic color errors, far beyond anything I've been struggling with here.

I printed with my R3000, RR Arctic Polar Luster paper using the RR APL ICC  profile and my results were similar to yours.  The blue patch at the top of the column 251(circled in yellow) should be mid purple.  Your print and mine with the RR profile prints it as mid blue!

I then printed again using my custom ICC profile for RR APL and that block printed the correct mid purple.

Based upon that blue block I'd say that there is something wrong averall with that particular RR profile.

Bob P.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Vernon D Rainwater
Forum ProPosts: 12,096
Like?
Re: My settings, plus an interesting discovery
In reply to Hugowolf, Mar 25, 2013

Hugowolf wrote:

Vernon D Rainwater wrote:

I don't have the 3000 printer so I am comparing some of your listed settings to my Epson 3880. On your 5th image (from top) you have "Finest Detail" set to OFF. I prefer to have this setting set to ON for my 3880. I have no idea if this will make any difference with your 3000.

The Epson r3000 manual states “Finest Detail: For printing text, graphics, and line art with very sharp edges. Slows print speed and increases you system memory requirements.”

The 3880 manual (and the manuals for Epson's 17 inch and larger format printers) go further in stating “This setting does not affect photographs and is not recommended for large files”.

Brian A

Brian, tanks for the comments.  I am aware of the information you point out, however; My preference is to use the BEST possible settings for overall best printed results and that is why I prefer the settings I use.

Certainly, it is the option of each user to use the settings they desire.  That obviously is why there are more than one choice.

-- hide signature --

Vernon...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Hugowolf
Forum ProPosts: 11,332
Like?
Re: My settings, plus an interesting discovery
In reply to Vernon D Rainwater, Mar 25, 2013

Vernon D Rainwater wrote:

Hugowolf wrote:

Vernon D Rainwater wrote:

I don't have the 3000 printer so I am comparing some of your listed settings to my Epson 3880. On your 5th image (from top) you have "Finest Detail" set to OFF. I prefer to have this setting set to ON for my 3880. I have no idea if this will make any difference with your 3000.

The Epson r3000 manual states “Finest Detail: For printing text, graphics, and line art with very sharp edges. Slows print speed and increases you system memory requirements.”

The 3880 manual (and the manuals for Epson's 17 inch and larger format printers) go further in stating “This setting does not affect photographs and is not recommended for large files”.

Brian A

Brian, tanks for the comments. I am aware of the information you point out, however; My preference is to use the BEST possible settings for overall best printed results and that is why I prefer the settings I use.

In the few thousand images I have printed, I have only noticed one where the Finest Detail setting made the image worse than having it unchecked, but it is very, very rare that I have it checked. It was an image with a saw toothed blade in the background that came out straight edged in the print. So 'best', is not always best.

Brian A

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
just Tony
Contributing MemberPosts: 625
Like?
Very nice custom profile
In reply to Petruska, Mar 25, 2013

Petruska wrote:

I printed with my R3000, RR Arctic Polar Luster paper using the RR APL ICC profile and my results were similar to yours. The blue patch at the top of the column 251(circled in yellow) should be mid purple. Your print and mine with the RR profile prints it as mid blue!

I then printed again using my custom ICC profile for RR APL and that block printed the correct mid purple.

Based upon that blue block I'd say that there is something wrong averall with that particular RR profile.

Bob P.

Thanks for the verification. So going forward, the existing corrupt profiiles seem to have their problems concentrated in areas that are out of gamut for the R3000. Those wrong colors might not appear in images especially frequently, and they will work just fine for many people. But I do feel that the ripply blue>white and cyan>white gradients with those intensity reversals may eventually show up in some sky areas with amorphous clouds. I'll have to watch for that.

I've addressed the issue in the short term by ordering some Epson Paper. Red River will end up waiting until after I've rented a Color Munki.

Here are my findings for several papers:

Red River Zeppelin Semi Gloss: gradients and purple are pretty good; the black point is rather light which makes it a non-starter for me.

Red River Ultrapro Satin and Gloss: rippled gradients and the purple printed blue.

Red River Polar Pearl Metallic: gradient ripples were present but not as bad as Ultrapro. The purple printed blue.

Red River Pecos Gloss Card: Very nice gradients except for one reversal in the green>black, and the purple really is purple. Pretty trustworthy.

Red River Arctic Polar Satin: Inconclusive due to probable pilot error on my part. I tried this paper twice and got different results. I probably used an incorrect profile on one of the tries. One print had a mild case of the problems, the other one had a strong case. I'm wary.

Red River Arctic Polar Luster: Slightly ripply gradients and a very blue purple.

Red River Arctic Polar Gloss: One reversal in the green>black gradient, and the purple is only slightly bluish. A pretty good result.

Epson Ultra Premium Glossy: Only a very slight "step" but no reversals in the green> black gradient, all others are good. The purple is purple. My favorite at this point.

Canon Photo Paper Plus Glossy II on Canon MG6220 printer: slightly "steppy" green>black gradient but no reversals. The blue is slightly purplish and too light. The red swatch is too light however the strawberries look good. It's very very good on the in-gamut colors and completes a good print 10X faster than the R3000 and has a slightly larger gamut. But it only goes up to 8.5x11".

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Hugowolf
Forum ProPosts: 11,332
Like?
Re: poor or corrupt profiles
In reply to just Tony, Mar 25, 2013

Have your tried using a perceptual rendering intent instead of relative colorimetric? ICC profiles allow for six lookup tables (LUTs), two for each intent. There should be an input to connection space table, and a connection space to output device table for each intent supported, and even an inexpensive profile builder should support tables for at least perceptual and relative colorimetric.

Brian A

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Petruska
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,681
Like?
Brian, you win!
In reply to Hugowolf, Mar 25, 2013

Hugowolf wrote:

Have your tried using a perceptual rendering intent instead of relative colorimetric? ICC profiles allow for six lookup tables (LUTs), two for each intent. There should be an input to connection space table, and a connection space to output device table for each intent supported, and even an inexpensive profile builder should support tables for at least perceptual and relative colorimetric.

Brian A

Yes, Perceptual intent produces the correct purple block.  There is still something wrong with a lot of the R3000 RR profiles as that purple block soft-proofs blue with Relative and soft-proofs as purple with Perceptual.  Other RR profiles, Ex: Paper Canvas, soft-proofs purple for both Relative and Perceptual.  All my custom Red River paper profiles made with the Xrite I1PRO or Xrite Pulse system soft-proof as purple with both Relative and Perceptual.

Most users use Relative intent, I don't, I use Perceptual 99.9% of the time as I print mostly portraits and find the out of gamut remapped lighter colors of Perceptual more pleasing.  This is why I have never noticed anything wrong with RR supplied profiles when I first got my R3000.  My custom profiles eliminate all issues. Relative intent gives more saturated colors, especially with BP Comp. turned off.  So I can see where some users may be upset with not being able to use it correctly with some prints.  The Epson profiles also soft-proof the purple correctly with Relative or Perceptual.  RR has a problem.

Bob P.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads