A paper I used frequently on the iPF 5000 printer is the Canon-branded "Heavy-weight Satin 300gsm". I've used this paper for much of the contract printing I've done. It's bright white, has a heavy weight and decent satin texture, and has a very durable surface. This durability makes it a good paper for rolling into mailing tubes for shipping. It's also inexpensive.
My friend Dean, long an Epson user, sent a small piece of Epson's "Premium Luster Photo Paper", and also a small piece of their "Premium Photo Paper Semigloss". Comparing these to the Canon HW Satin, I find the Luster is closest in tone and surface, although the Canon paper is somewhat thicker. On a whim I printed eval images on the HW Satin using Epson's profiles for both the luster and semigloss papers. I found a nice surprise in the results. Both profiles are very good with this paper. The semigloss profile seems to have a bit more "punch" in the reds and oranges, but the difference is subtle. Neither shows the slightest trace of the inversion in the light-green color ramp seen on the gloss papers. I'll be able to use my remaining inventory of HW Satin, with excellent results. When that's gone I may replace it with Epson's luster or semigloss, or simply continue using the Canon paper my clients know and like.
I should mention that prior to running these eval images I printed a nozzle check. The 7900 reported no clogs!
--Jay
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Friday, October 28, 2011
Clogs Continue
The 7900 has been idle (powered up, but in sleep mode) for about 36 hours. I still have a couple of gloss papers/profiles to test. Recent experience has shown I need to print a nozzle check before running any print jobs, so I did that as before, with plain bond paper. This showed the light black nozzles clogged, with nearly half of them missing (that is, about half the LK pattern was blank). I ran a cleaning on the MK-PK/LK channel pair. This seemed to take a very long time -- 16 minutes, in fact. When the cleaning finished I printed another nozzle check.
The LK channel looked fine, but there were a few small voids in the O channel, so I ran a cleaning of the O/G pair. This took about 12 minutes. Another nozzle check print showed O was cleared, but now VM had some missing lines, so yet another cleaning, this time of the C/VM pair. When that finished (under 10 minutes) the printer's LCD reported a cleaning failure, but I could find no missing or sloppy lines on any channels when I examined them with my 8x loupe. Enough with cleaning.
I ran a profile eval print using Harman Gloss FB Al and a profile received from a friend. The results aren't bad, but I can't differentiate the darkest blacks as well as I can with the GGFS and EEF. This paper/profile combination also suffers from the previously-described inversion in the light green color ramp on the eval image. Overall, the color images on the eval page look fine. Most likely this is not a paper I'll use, but not because of the profile's performance. I could try the profile from Harman, too, if I liked the paper better. In fact I do like the paper, but I've found a high number of flaws in the surface of the sheets in my sample pack. Given that GGFS and EEF papers cover most of my needs for papers with these types of surfaces, the Harman's surface issues push it down the list for me.
--Jay
The LK channel looked fine, but there were a few small voids in the O channel, so I ran a cleaning of the O/G pair. This took about 12 minutes. Another nozzle check print showed O was cleared, but now VM had some missing lines, so yet another cleaning, this time of the C/VM pair. When that finished (under 10 minutes) the printer's LCD reported a cleaning failure, but I could find no missing or sloppy lines on any channels when I examined them with my 8x loupe. Enough with cleaning.
I ran a profile eval print using Harman Gloss FB Al and a profile received from a friend. The results aren't bad, but I can't differentiate the darkest blacks as well as I can with the GGFS and EEF. This paper/profile combination also suffers from the previously-described inversion in the light green color ramp on the eval image. Overall, the color images on the eval page look fine. Most likely this is not a paper I'll use, but not because of the profile's performance. I could try the profile from Harman, too, if I liked the paper better. In fact I do like the paper, but I've found a high number of flaws in the surface of the sheets in my sample pack. Given that GGFS and EEF papers cover most of my needs for papers with these types of surfaces, the Harman's surface issues push it down the list for me.
--Jay
A Workaround for the Centering Issue?
In my 25 October posting I mentioned a centering issue. In a nutshell, when I print these profile evaluation images, which are 7.5" high X 10" wide, on letter size sheets, with the "Center image" option checked in the printer driver, I get top and bottom margins of exactly .5", just as I expect. But the left margin is .25", while the right margin is .75". The image is quite clearly not centered.
For most of my own work that will be matted (whether framed or not), I mostly don't care. But I think handing a client a contract-printed piece that's off-center on the sheet will look amateurish, at best, and if I cut the right edge down so the image IS centered, the sheet is no longer the size I advertise, and on which I base my prices.
Also, I have one "special" print I do that requires pretty precise positioning on the page. I print two pictures on a 13x19 sheet. They have .5" borders on all sides. I need those .5" borders! I put 1" between the pictures, so when I cut them apart I have half-inch borders on that side, too. With the iPF 5000, I'd make a new file that's 18" wide x 12" high (or vice versa) at appropriate resolution. Each picture would be optimized the way I'd want, flattened, pasted into the new document as a layer, and then positioned so it's 1" from the other picture. When printing, I'd choose 13x19 sheet, check the box to center the image on the page, and print. It would come out with perfect 1/2" borders on the four sides. (This doesn't provide a lot of area for hinge mounting, but it's worked fine so far. I use acrylic self-adhesive "conservation corner mounts" on the bottom two corners for additional security.) I've been framing these with Larson-Juhl Digital White mats and Nielsen "standard" frames in graphite. This makes a very nice looking picture that's clearly larger than one can make on a "kitchen-table" printer, doesn't cost a lot to produce, and sells at a reasonable profit. Honestly, I don't know if I can do this with the Epson. I can certainly print one such picture on a sheet, let the Epson print it off-center, and frame it as usual (after cutting down the sheet a little). Doing that doubles my paper cost for these pictures, but if I have to live with that I can. It's about time to raise my price for these 10% or so anyway!
For most of my own work that will be matted (whether framed or not), I mostly don't care. But I think handing a client a contract-printed piece that's off-center on the sheet will look amateurish, at best, and if I cut the right edge down so the image IS centered, the sheet is no longer the size I advertise, and on which I base my prices.
Also, I have one "special" print I do that requires pretty precise positioning on the page. I print two pictures on a 13x19 sheet. They have .5" borders on all sides. I need those .5" borders! I put 1" between the pictures, so when I cut them apart I have half-inch borders on that side, too. With the iPF 5000, I'd make a new file that's 18" wide x 12" high (or vice versa) at appropriate resolution. Each picture would be optimized the way I'd want, flattened, pasted into the new document as a layer, and then positioned so it's 1" from the other picture. When printing, I'd choose 13x19 sheet, check the box to center the image on the page, and print. It would come out with perfect 1/2" borders on the four sides. (This doesn't provide a lot of area for hinge mounting, but it's worked fine so far. I use acrylic self-adhesive "conservation corner mounts" on the bottom two corners for additional security.) I've been framing these with Larson-Juhl Digital White mats and Nielsen "standard" frames in graphite. This makes a very nice looking picture that's clearly larger than one can make on a "kitchen-table" printer, doesn't cost a lot to produce, and sells at a reasonable profit. Honestly, I don't know if I can do this with the Epson. I can certainly print one such picture on a sheet, let the Epson print it off-center, and frame it as usual (after cutting down the sheet a little). Doing that doubles my paper cost for these pictures, but if I have to live with that I can. It's about time to raise my price for these 10% or so anyway!
Those are my reasons for being more than a little unhappy that the Epson has this "feature". It just seems ridiculous. I dug around on Luminous Landscape's "Printers, Papers, and Inks" forum and found one other post, from 2009, I think, in which the OP complained about this and asked for help. The consensus was, most users don't care, don't really object to this. I find that pretty amazing, too.
I tried a test in which I created a custom paper size, which is done in the printer driver. This custom size is 8.5" X 11", but has a top margin of .25", with the remaining three margins set to 0.00". When I save this, complete my page set-up in the driver, and then save (which returns to the main printer driver window), the dimensions shown under the "Center image" checkbox are Top: 0.5", Left: 0.375". The preview image shows the entire sheet shifted slightly to the left. When I make the print, the resulting left margin is just slightly under 1/2", while the right margin is about 9/16". Still not quite centered, but I think this is as good as it gets. With these settings the image is dangerously close to being clipped on the right.
--Jay
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Nozzle Clogs and Profile Evaluations
A confession: Yesterday I said I wasn't keeping score, but of course I am. I can't help but filter everything I do with the Epson through the filter of nearly five years using the Canon iPF 5000. Much of the workflow I've developed while using the Canon will remain the same for the Epson, or for any printer. The goal is to produce high-quality, fine-art prints, no matter what printer I'm using; as I climb the learning curve and get comfortable with the 7900 I'll be making lots of comparisons.
Today I wanted to print profile evaluation images for several more papers. I planned to work through my gloss papers, those that will use the printer's photo-black (PK) ink. This includes Epson Exhibition Fiber (EEF), Ilford Galerie Gloss Fiber Silk (who names these things, anyway? I'll call it GGFS), Harman Gloss FB Al, and my most recent find, Canson Infinity Platine Fiber Rag.
I inserted a sheet of EEF, which woke the printer from its power-save (sleep) mode. I followed the normal procedure for feeding the sheet. The printer gave the sheet a look, thought about it for a few seconds, adjusted the sheet's position, and then asked for the media type. From the control panel I selected the Epson-recommended media type. At the computer I loaded the test image into Photoshop and then selected File/Print.... I set up the print dialog, saved, and then clicked the Print button.
Most of the test page looked OK, but there was terrible banding in the sunset image and the red-rock arch image, and also in the orange patterns in the color grid. I loaded a sheet of plain bond paper and printed a nozzle check pattern. The orange grid had missing nozzles. The rest of the colors looked fine.
I ran a head cleaning on the channel pair that includes orange, and then ran a second nozzle check print. The cleaning cleared the clog. I then ran another profile eval print on EEF. The Epson-supplied profile is quite good, in my opinion.
The lesson here: always run a nozzle check print before printing anything that matters.
Today I wanted to print profile evaluation images for several more papers. I planned to work through my gloss papers, those that will use the printer's photo-black (PK) ink. This includes Epson Exhibition Fiber (EEF), Ilford Galerie Gloss Fiber Silk (who names these things, anyway? I'll call it GGFS), Harman Gloss FB Al, and my most recent find, Canson Infinity Platine Fiber Rag.
I inserted a sheet of EEF, which woke the printer from its power-save (sleep) mode. I followed the normal procedure for feeding the sheet. The printer gave the sheet a look, thought about it for a few seconds, adjusted the sheet's position, and then asked for the media type. From the control panel I selected the Epson-recommended media type. At the computer I loaded the test image into Photoshop and then selected File/Print.... I set up the print dialog, saved, and then clicked the Print button.
Most of the test page looked OK, but there was terrible banding in the sunset image and the red-rock arch image, and also in the orange patterns in the color grid. I loaded a sheet of plain bond paper and printed a nozzle check pattern. The orange grid had missing nozzles. The rest of the colors looked fine.
 |
The nozzle check print showing clogs in the orange channel. Light black (LK), next-to-last at right, is fine, but doesn't show up well in this scan. The low-rez scan makes the entire print look rougher than it is. |
I ran a head cleaning on the channel pair that includes orange, and then ran a second nozzle check print. The cleaning cleared the clog. I then ran another profile eval print on EEF. The Epson-supplied profile is quite good, in my opinion.
The lesson here: always run a nozzle check print before printing anything that matters.
 |
| Inversion in the light-green band |
There is one problem area on the eval print. The light-green band in the color ramp section shows what I'd call a severe reversal in the upper third of the band. I assume this is either a problem with the profile, or an issue with this color/tone in the printer. I've read no reports of the Epson having issues with the greens, and in fact the other green ramps and grid samples on the eval print look perfect. For now I'll file this away for future consideration after I've looked at the other papers and their profiles.
Next I made two eval prints for Ilford GGFS. These were made with two different custom profiles received from a friend who's had a 7900 for a couple of years. The two profiles are quite similar except in the reds/oranges/yellows, where one seems somewhat more saturated than the other. I think both profiles will have their uses. Both profiles exhibited the inversion in the green band, but in both this is a bit more subtle than what's shown above for the EEF.
At this point I had to stop to take care of some other business. When I have a few minutes I'll continue with my remaining gloss papers, the Harman and the Canson.
At this point I had to stop to take care of some other business. When I have a few minutes I'll continue with my remaining gloss papers, the Harman and the Canson.
--Jay
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
The First Print -- Evaluating Profiles
My first order of business is to run a profile evaluation print for each of the papers I expect to use. In my nearly five years of printing on the Canon iPF 5000 I'd sampled a lot of papers. I'd determined my "favorite" papers and which was appropriate for various purposes and subjects. In my early days using the Canon I'd purchased many sample packs of papers from various makers, including one from Red River Paper. As it turned out, there's nothing there I'd want to use, but I had some sheets left from that pack, so "wasting" some to get started with the new printer seemed a good idea.
I downloaded from Red River a profile for their 68 pound UltraPro Gloss. This is a thin, very glossy paper with a rubbery feel. At the printer I inserted the paper. One aligns the paper to a scribed mark and then lowers it into the printer until it stops. Unlike my Canon, there's no hard guide against which the paper's edge is placed. It feels loose and lacking precision on the Epson. I then used the printer's control panel to set the paper type per Red River's instructions, and then moved to the computer, which is not in the same room as the printer. I opened the evaluation file I've been using for years. This is from Digital Outback Print (DOP), which not only makes the image freely available, but also has a very nice page explaining its use.
During my years using the Canon printer, I'd printed only from Photoshop. I used Canon's excellent printing plug-in for PS, which means I rarely used the standard printer driver. Epson offers nothing comparable to Canon's printing plug-in, so I was stuck using the driver, which seemed pretty foreign. I worked my way through its layers, turning off the driver's color management ("Photoshop Manages Colors"), selecting the correct profile and rendering intent, checking the Center Image box, and then moving to the Print Settings dialog and completing the page set-up there. I saved the settings and then clicked the Print button.
I'd read that these printers are very quiet; as it began processing the print job, the 7900 seemed about the same as the Canon I was used to. And like the Canon, after the printhead had made a few passes the machine quieted considerably. Not that I'm keeping score, but in this regard I'd call it a tie between the two machines.
The 7900 is fast, and this was a small print, only 7.5" high by 10" wide on the letter size sheet, so the job completed quickly. I ejected the page and noticed immediately the image was not centered. The top and bottom margins were .5" exactly. But the left margin was .25", while the right margin was .5" wider. Clearly, the "Center Image" checkbox in the printer driver doesn't. Otherwise, the evaluation print was excellent. I won't be using Red River 60 pound UltraPro Gloss, but if you're looking for a bright-white, high-gloss, thin paper with a typical RC paper feel, you might want to check out the UltraPro Gloss.
Except for the centering issue, my first print was a success. I could tell right away I wasn't going to be very happy with the 7900's paper (output) basket. It seems to be designed to either dump the print onto the floor, or flop it print-side down into the basket beneath the printer. I may not be deploying it properly; I suspect I'll have more to say about the basket.
--Jay
I downloaded from Red River a profile for their 68 pound UltraPro Gloss. This is a thin, very glossy paper with a rubbery feel. At the printer I inserted the paper. One aligns the paper to a scribed mark and then lowers it into the printer until it stops. Unlike my Canon, there's no hard guide against which the paper's edge is placed. It feels loose and lacking precision on the Epson. I then used the printer's control panel to set the paper type per Red River's instructions, and then moved to the computer, which is not in the same room as the printer. I opened the evaluation file I've been using for years. This is from Digital Outback Print (DOP), which not only makes the image freely available, but also has a very nice page explaining its use.
During my years using the Canon printer, I'd printed only from Photoshop. I used Canon's excellent printing plug-in for PS, which means I rarely used the standard printer driver. Epson offers nothing comparable to Canon's printing plug-in, so I was stuck using the driver, which seemed pretty foreign. I worked my way through its layers, turning off the driver's color management ("Photoshop Manages Colors"), selecting the correct profile and rendering intent, checking the Center Image box, and then moving to the Print Settings dialog and completing the page set-up there. I saved the settings and then clicked the Print button.
I'd read that these printers are very quiet; as it began processing the print job, the 7900 seemed about the same as the Canon I was used to. And like the Canon, after the printhead had made a few passes the machine quieted considerably. Not that I'm keeping score, but in this regard I'd call it a tie between the two machines.
The 7900 is fast, and this was a small print, only 7.5" high by 10" wide on the letter size sheet, so the job completed quickly. I ejected the page and noticed immediately the image was not centered. The top and bottom margins were .5" exactly. But the left margin was .25", while the right margin was .5" wider. Clearly, the "Center Image" checkbox in the printer driver doesn't. Otherwise, the evaluation print was excellent. I won't be using Red River 60 pound UltraPro Gloss, but if you're looking for a bright-white, high-gloss, thin paper with a typical RC paper feel, you might want to check out the UltraPro Gloss.
Except for the centering issue, my first print was a success. I could tell right away I wasn't going to be very happy with the 7900's paper (output) basket. It seems to be designed to either dump the print onto the floor, or flop it print-side down into the basket beneath the printer. I may not be deploying it properly; I suspect I'll have more to say about the basket.
--Jay
Monday, October 24, 2011
Getting Started
Sunday (23 October) three friends helped me carry the printer down a flight of stairs and place it on the stand I'd assembled earlier. Even with four people, it was a struggle getting the thing down the stairs. There's no shortage of reports on the Web about receiving, uncrating, and setting up these printers; I'll not repeat any of that here, except to confirm that this printer is big and heavy. Once it's on its stand, it's easy to move around. Mine is on a concrete floor, so it rolls easily. Of course, once I have it in its intended location, I don't expect to move it often. It's installed in the same location where my Canon iPF 5000 had been, and plugged in to the same network connection.
Prior to receiving the printer I'd downloaded the most recent driver, firmware, and other software. I'd also downloaded the collection of manuals and read them. I'd hoped this would give me a good idea of what to expect as I set up the machine.
I spent most of the day completing the set-up, charging the ink lines and head, and installing software on my Mac Pro. When the ink installation was complete the printer ran a nozzle check. When that finished the printer's LCD reported a cleaning error and offered to repeat the cleaning. I selected "No". I ran a nozzle-check print on letter-size plain bond paper. Viewing each color channel's pattern with an 8-power loupe I found no missing or deformed lines. (Note the nozzle check print shows 10 sets of patterns. The illustration in Epson's manuals shows eleven. Since there are only ten channels in the head, getting a print with eleven patterns isn't possible.)
I installed the most recent printer firmware, dated 6 September 2011 on Epson's site. This is HN028AA 2.10 A000.
Except for setting the time and date, I left all of the printer's settings at their defaults. This includes leaving Auto-Nozzle Check (ANC) on, in its "periodic" mode.
Finally, everything was assembled, installed, charged, and ready. It had been a long day and I was tired. More tomorrow.
--Jay
 |
A tale of three printers. The 7900 is large. The 17" Canon iPF 5000 is in front. A typical HP laser printer is dwarfed in the background. |
Prior to receiving the printer I'd downloaded the most recent driver, firmware, and other software. I'd also downloaded the collection of manuals and read them. I'd hoped this would give me a good idea of what to expect as I set up the machine.
I spent most of the day completing the set-up, charging the ink lines and head, and installing software on my Mac Pro. When the ink installation was complete the printer ran a nozzle check. When that finished the printer's LCD reported a cleaning error and offered to repeat the cleaning. I selected "No". I ran a nozzle-check print on letter-size plain bond paper. Viewing each color channel's pattern with an 8-power loupe I found no missing or deformed lines. (Note the nozzle check print shows 10 sets of patterns. The illustration in Epson's manuals shows eleven. Since there are only ten channels in the head, getting a print with eleven patterns isn't possible.)
I installed the most recent printer firmware, dated 6 September 2011 on Epson's site. This is HN028AA 2.10 A000.
Except for setting the time and date, I left all of the printer's settings at their defaults. This includes leaving Auto-Nozzle Check (ANC) on, in its "periodic" mode.
Finally, everything was assembled, installed, charged, and ready. It had been a long day and I was tired. More tomorrow.
--Jay
Welcome!
I installed an Epson Stylus Pro 7900 in October of 2011. I'll be writing about my experience with the machine, covering general use, maintenance, problems and resolutions, surprises, gripes, and overall impressions. I hope to continue this for some time, creating a long-term usage report.
I did a lot of research before buying this printer. Something I couldn't find was any sort of story about the experience of owning and using the machine over a period of several years. This surprised me, since the printer's been available since 2008. This blog is my attempt to rectify that.
By the time this record is of any interest Epson will no doubt have replaced the 7900 with a newer model. Such is life in the technical end of photography.
This is the initial posting; I'm just getting my feet wet with Blogger. I'll be tinkering with the design as I learn more, and I'll eventually get a profile in place. It's a busy time for me right now, and for the next few weeks, so postings will be sparse for a while.
Thanks for reading. Please check in now and then to see how I'm getting along with my new printer. Please visit www.lumen-perfectus.com to view my landscape and wildlife photography, purchase fine-art prints, and read photo-related articles.
--Jay
I did a lot of research before buying this printer. Something I couldn't find was any sort of story about the experience of owning and using the machine over a period of several years. This surprised me, since the printer's been available since 2008. This blog is my attempt to rectify that.
By the time this record is of any interest Epson will no doubt have replaced the 7900 with a newer model. Such is life in the technical end of photography.
This is the initial posting; I'm just getting my feet wet with Blogger. I'll be tinkering with the design as I learn more, and I'll eventually get a profile in place. It's a busy time for me right now, and for the next few weeks, so postings will be sparse for a while.
Thanks for reading. Please check in now and then to see how I'm getting along with my new printer. Please visit www.lumen-perfectus.com to view my landscape and wildlife photography, purchase fine-art prints, and read photo-related articles.
--Jay
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)