Dominic.Chan
Veteran Member
As long as you stick with OEM cartridges and paper, my opinion is that you can get very good quality prints without having to worry about "calibration".
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Comparison - Epson vs Canon vs HP
- Thread starter Dominic.Chan
- Start date
Joe Wilson
Senior Member
I only have experience on the Canon S9000...but a custom profile made a huge difference with OEM paper and inks.
http://www.joesimages.com
--
http://www.joesimages.com
fotografer
Veteran Member
Hi dgrogers,
Happy?
--
fotografer
...the great paper chase! (see http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1003&message=5683956 )
Yes. By itself this statement is true. But you seem to think when I said "some printer struggle with some shades" as to suggest that there are printers that don't suffer from it. That is NOT what I meant. I simply means that different printers struggle with different shades.
Okay, I know it's small, but it's at the bottom the 'continuous tone' color palette that approximates that.
You missed the point here completely. This test is not about color accuracies of a printer. Or at least that's what I think Dominic was thinking. It was to see how in general case, when you have a printer, an average user, without custom profiles, would see if they print images on the 'best' papers they can get in the shops. It's not an absolute ultimate comparison apple-to-apple, but it gives some clues to show what quirks some printers are more prone to, such as BANDING.
And I AM doing that. Finally received from Chris (WmAx), a i950 user, who will send me one done with Canon OEM and one custom profiled by Cathy to do the work. I will attempt to compare them side by side, the 'HP OEM profile' (never seems to be possible to locate where this profile might be, just assume from default that's what's used when driver was installed into my computer), and I will attempt to get my printer profiled by Cathy as well to compare Chris' custom profiled prints. We have been discussing how to go about doing this privately for the past, like, two months already.
Happy?
--
fotografer
...the great paper chase! (see http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1003&message=5683956 )
fotografer
Veteran Member
Hi dorogers,
--
fotografer
...the great paper chase! (see http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1003&message=5683956 )
This may reduce the banding artifact, but the inherent design (flaw) will still show the the s900x and the s8xx series are more prone to banding than other off the shelf low-end printers from the new HPs and Epsons. I think this is an established fact. i950, not that's a different matter altogether. I will report back once the prints reached me, which will be around a week's time... Stay tuned...
--
fotografer
...the great paper chase! (see http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1003&message=5683956 )
fotografer
Veteran Member
I mean Canon, i950 now (the above 'not' is a typo) that's a different matter altogether...
--
fotografer
...the great paper chase! (see http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1003&message=5683956 )
Armat
New member
Hold it right now!Somebody must tell you the stinking cost of the Epson cartriges.I got sick of paying lot of money for color and black inks and the Epson end up costing me a fortune moreover Epson does put a chip in their cartriges which prohibits ink refills ( I know I tried it...) so I went and bought a i950 not a great printer specially the skin tones (sucks in this area) but neverdless lot less costly to operate.The bottom line is cost verses quality! you judge! If you can afford it buy a top line Epson, slow but well define tone and sharpness if you care not play photoshop guru.Take care
Dominic.Chan
Veteran Member
The Canon cartridges are more expensive than the Epson (at least in Canada). Each one costs C$20, so one set of six cartridges cost C$120 (about US $85), plus tax!
Bothe Canon and Epson cartridges can be easily refilled, although the new Epsons require a chip resetter (about $20).
I have been refilling my Epson SP820 with excellent results. The costs are a tiny fraction of the OEMs.
Bothe Canon and Epson cartridges can be easily refilled, although the new Epsons require a chip resetter (about $20).
I have been refilling my Epson SP820 with excellent results. The costs are a tiny fraction of the OEMs.
Dominic.Chan
Veteran Member
Depends on what you mean by "huge" difference. Here's a scan of fotografer's test image, printed on the S9000 PPP with the generic "canned" Canon profile that came with the printer:
http://www.pbase.com/image/19866303
I think most people would be quite happy with that.
Dominic Chan
http://www.pbase.com/image/19866303
I think most people would be quite happy with that.
Dominic Chan
The Epson individual cartirdges are cheaper in the States too (retail price, anyway), but they don't hold as much ink.
dgrogers
http://www.pbase.com/drog
--
dgrogers
http://www.pbase.com/drog
fotografer
Veteran Member
Dominic,
Next, the colors seem to visibly shift towards magenta. Did you notice that? This may give more 'pleasing' skin tones, but the 'overall' slight (but detectable) pinkish shift may not be flattering when you are printing b/w for instance...
When you scan the image, did you take off auto sharpening? Did you select the black point and white point before scanning, or did you do similar to I did at PS to adjust the 'highlights' and 'shadows'? I ask, because the banding seems very obvious at this magnification.
--
fotografer
...the great paper chase! (see http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1003&message=5683956 )
Some comments with your scanned image from s9000 with third party inks. First of all, is this the same saturation you get to see or is the scanner you use boosting the colors even more? For my methodology, I scanned at 90% saturation to approximate more closely how the color intensity look like when I see them physically. Normally consumer scanners 'adds' saturations to the originals.
Next, the colors seem to visibly shift towards magenta. Did you notice that? This may give more 'pleasing' skin tones, but the 'overall' slight (but detectable) pinkish shift may not be flattering when you are printing b/w for instance...
When you scan the image, did you take off auto sharpening? Did you select the black point and white point before scanning, or did you do similar to I did at PS to adjust the 'highlights' and 'shadows'? I ask, because the banding seems very obvious at this magnification.
--
fotografer
...the great paper chase! (see http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1003&message=5683956 )
Dominic.Chan
Veteran Member
fotografer,
I did notice the slightly reddish tint, but that could have been due to the scanner (I used the scanner default setting).
I did not change the saturation or the black point / white point. In any case, since you have a different scanner, it will not be possible to compare with scans to assess the print quality.
The banding is introduced by the colour profile, I believe. (I can try it without the profile to confirm).
As the scan was intended to show the colour saturation, etc., but not the sharpness, I did apply some USM.
Dominic
I did notice the slightly reddish tint, but that could have been due to the scanner (I used the scanner default setting).
I did not change the saturation or the black point / white point. In any case, since you have a different scanner, it will not be possible to compare with scans to assess the print quality.
The banding is introduced by the colour profile, I believe. (I can try it without the profile to confirm).
As the scan was intended to show the colour saturation, etc., but not the sharpness, I did apply some USM.
Dominic
Dominic.Chan
Veteran Member
As pointed out by fotografer, the sample printer is overly red. It appears that one of the cartridges was not working properly. I will reprint using OEM cartridges and repost.
fotografer
Veteran Member
Thanks for clarification.
I never imagine that third-party inks can look so good.
fotografer
...the great paper chase! (see http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1003&message=5683956 )
I never imagine that third-party inks can look so good.
--
fotografer
...the great paper chase! (see http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1003&message=5683956 )
Tricia
Veteran Member
I'm not so sure about that comment - Kui has done a lot of research about the cartridges:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1013&message=5677491
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1013&message=5681576
--
Tricia
Minolta Dimage D7(UG), Epson 2200, PS7, Qimage
Wm. Bates
Senior Member
Duff,
To make this decision you need to really decide just what you want from your printer and, I guess, what your main purpose/use will be.
If you want a printer for mostly work and text. a printer you are going to plug in and forget about, print the occasional photo to put in the album go with the hp. They are super user friendly but a little expensive to run. For printing invoices and contracts I use an older hp 932 and have been pretty happy with it. Ok the real downside, sorry but photo quility out of even the newest top of the line hps are not in the same league as the Canons and Epsons. Others out there will say they are but you have to ask yourself "if they are so good how come almost every photographer that makes their living selling photos uses Epsons as photo printers?" Also don't ever handle a print with even a little sweat on your hand the ink will come right off. I think hp makes great consumer grade all round printers but for dedicated photo printers there are much better choices.
If you are really interested in a high quality dedicated photo printer that you might use to do the very occasional text type work go for the Canon or Epson. The Canons are faster and cheaper to run but maybe a little pickier about paper. Oveall quality from the CAnons are excellent. If you want to print large the Epson 1280 I think gets the edge in print quality over all the others including the 2200.And that is right out of the box with no fiddling. But the 1280 clogs a bit more and make sure you are using papers that work with dye based inks. That goes for the Canons also.
My niece, nephew and I have a small photo business, with my niece working at it full time and my nephew and I putting a little time. I sell real estate to really pay the bills and my nephew also is the electronics manager at the local Staples. If your in the Western USA and you see a kind of over saturated color photo of some frogs as the sample print demo for hp printers at your local office supply store my nephew was the photographer. Ok, we have both an 1280 and 2200 as photo printers (the 2200 will be replaced by a 9600 within the year). Anything that goes out to the customers more than proofs are printed on the 2200. It is used totally as a dedicated photo printer. Not because it prints the best; the 1280 gets the edge fresh out of the printer. We use the 2200 because it will give far and away the best print life. From what we have seen it has little to no clogging problems. Gave good results right out of the box and with proper color management it is fantastic. And the prints should still look fantastic 20 years from now. I'm sure it would handle text and all but we have never used it for that purpose. Unless you really need great print life I would save my money and either go with the CAnon or a 1280. But all of this is just one mans thinking.
--
Bill
http://www.pbase.com/slowpokebill
'Sometime the majic works. Sometimes it doesn't'
Joe Wilson
Senior Member
how a scan of something can correctly identify how a printer is printing. If the scanner isn't profiled and the viewers monitors aren't profiled, how useful can this actually be? What am I missing?
http://www.joesimages.com
--
http://www.joesimages.com
Dominic.Chan
Veteran Member
I was responding to duffhale who has a Canon G3 and said "I think I would buy the Epson (maybe even the 1280 to save money), except I'm afraid that I will not be able to "callibrate" and do all the stuff to get good photos".
My comment was:
'As long as you stick with OEM cartridges and paper, my opinion is that you can get very good quality prints without having to worry about "calibration"'; in other words, starting with a properly exposed and white-balanced picture taken with the G3, he should be able to get a print that is a good representation of the picture, without worrying about "calibration". Even though the camera and the printer are from different manufacturers, the common denominator is sRGB.
Obviously, if the monitor is poorly adjusted, the display image will not match the original picture or the printout.
BTW, I do calibrate my monitor using ColorBlind ProveIt (with a Sequal Imaging sensor); and I do use Profile Prism in conjunction with non-OEM ink or paper.
As for the uploaded scan, it does closely match the original image, as displayed on my calibrated monitor.
My comment was:
'As long as you stick with OEM cartridges and paper, my opinion is that you can get very good quality prints without having to worry about "calibration"'; in other words, starting with a properly exposed and white-balanced picture taken with the G3, he should be able to get a print that is a good representation of the picture, without worrying about "calibration". Even though the camera and the printer are from different manufacturers, the common denominator is sRGB.
Obviously, if the monitor is poorly adjusted, the display image will not match the original picture or the printout.
BTW, I do calibrate my monitor using ColorBlind ProveIt (with a Sequal Imaging sensor); and I do use Profile Prism in conjunction with non-OEM ink or paper.
As for the uploaded scan, it does closely match the original image, as displayed on my calibrated monitor.
Joe Wilson
Senior Member
sRGB doesn't necessarily equate to a printer profile. Specifically, the Canon S9000 doesn't map as closely as you might think.
http://www.joesimages.com
--
http://www.joesimages.com
Joe Wilson
Senior Member
Dominic.Chan
Veteran Member
I never said that sRGB equates to a printer profile. All I said was that, using OEM ink and paper, one should get a reasonably good reproduction of sRGB images without resorting to customer profiles.
We have both expressed our views. It's probably time to terminate this thread.
We have both expressed our views. It's probably time to terminate this thread.
Similar threads
- Question
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum