I posted a new article to my site today, about the decision-making process behind my purchase of the 7900. It's a bit longer than my usual monthly articles, but then, it wasn't an easy decision for me to make. The article can be seen as the "backstory" for this blog. I've added a permanent link to the article to the heading at the top of the blog page.
I've also added a block to the right listing abbreviations and other shorthand I tend to use in postings, along with definitions. I've received a few comments from people saying they didn't understand things like "GGFS" in my postings. Since I probably can't break myself of the habit of using such shortcuts, I hope the definitions help.
--Jay
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Friday, November 25, 2011
Rolling Along
Since my last posting I've made a number of prints each day. I'm working on a job for a client, photographing some original artwork and producing smaller-than-original prints. The originals are colored pencil drawings on sheets of textured, very warm-toned drawing paper. The sheets are 22 inches high by a little over 27 inches wide. I photographed each drawing in four "strips", which were then stitched together using Photoshop's PhotoMerge application. This resulted in a high pixel count file for each picture.
I had some challenges matching the prints' colors to those in the original drawings. Getting that right is what took most of the hours I've got into the job; this isn't related to the 7900, so I won't spend time on that part of the story here, except to say the prints from the Epson are excellent matches to what I see on my monitors (which are profiled, of course).
I made the first print five days ago. Prior to that I'd not used the printer in several days. As usual, I started by printing a nozzle check print. No clogs were found. I then made several test strips on a cheap matte paper, tinkering with color between each. The last test strip looked fine, so I loaded my roll of Moab Entrada Natural (a 300 gsm matte paper) and made the final print.
The 7900 handles roll paper very nicely. It's easy to load and unload rolls; once the roll is physically placed in the printer and the paper inserted into the paper path, the rest is automatic. In this regard it's very similar to loading roll paper into my old Canon iPF 5000. Unloading is also similar: press the ePlaten button (who names these things?) and the paper is wound onto the roll, leaving the printer waiting for me to load whatever's next.
Unlike the old iPF, the Epson has only one paper path. This means if roll paper is loaded, it must be removed before a sheet can be fed. I never expected this to be a problem, but given the need to print a nozzle check before doing any other printing, and since it makes sense to print nozzle checks on plain bond paper (cheap), it means unloading the roll, feeding the sheet for the nozzle check print, and then reloading the roll once all nozzles are clean. Fortunately, as already described, loading rolls is easy.
I had a number prints to make for the client, the job requiring several days to complete. Since I was making test strips from each image, and making those on an inexpensive matte paper, after the first day's printing I stopped printing nozzle checks, and just started each day making the first test strip I needed. I saw no evidence of clogged nozzles.
Prior to starting work yesterday (24 November), since I'd not done it in a while, I printed a nozzle check. No clogs found. It's now been nine days since the last clog. I've done at least a little printing most of those days. Since I have the 7900's auto-nozzle check (ANC) turned off, and since I've not switched from MK to PK ink, I assume no cleanings have been done. The capacity of the maintenance cartridge has remained at 53% for some time, which is evidence that no cleanings have been done.
Final thought for today: It is easier to get a print centered on roll paper than it is on sheets. Of course, it's all but impossible on sheets. For my client's final prints, I created a custom paper size of 17" x 14". I set the top and bottom margins to 0.6", the left and right margins to .25", and checked the Center image checkbox. The roll paper is 17" wide. After printing, the 7900 cuts each print 14" high. The printed area is not quite the same for each print, but they're pretty close. They are nicely centered on the paper, with the margins being roughly 1.4".
--Jay
I had some challenges matching the prints' colors to those in the original drawings. Getting that right is what took most of the hours I've got into the job; this isn't related to the 7900, so I won't spend time on that part of the story here, except to say the prints from the Epson are excellent matches to what I see on my monitors (which are profiled, of course).
I made the first print five days ago. Prior to that I'd not used the printer in several days. As usual, I started by printing a nozzle check print. No clogs were found. I then made several test strips on a cheap matte paper, tinkering with color between each. The last test strip looked fine, so I loaded my roll of Moab Entrada Natural (a 300 gsm matte paper) and made the final print.
The 7900 handles roll paper very nicely. It's easy to load and unload rolls; once the roll is physically placed in the printer and the paper inserted into the paper path, the rest is automatic. In this regard it's very similar to loading roll paper into my old Canon iPF 5000. Unloading is also similar: press the ePlaten button (who names these things?) and the paper is wound onto the roll, leaving the printer waiting for me to load whatever's next.
Unlike the old iPF, the Epson has only one paper path. This means if roll paper is loaded, it must be removed before a sheet can be fed. I never expected this to be a problem, but given the need to print a nozzle check before doing any other printing, and since it makes sense to print nozzle checks on plain bond paper (cheap), it means unloading the roll, feeding the sheet for the nozzle check print, and then reloading the roll once all nozzles are clean. Fortunately, as already described, loading rolls is easy.
I had a number prints to make for the client, the job requiring several days to complete. Since I was making test strips from each image, and making those on an inexpensive matte paper, after the first day's printing I stopped printing nozzle checks, and just started each day making the first test strip I needed. I saw no evidence of clogged nozzles.
Prior to starting work yesterday (24 November), since I'd not done it in a while, I printed a nozzle check. No clogs found. It's now been nine days since the last clog. I've done at least a little printing most of those days. Since I have the 7900's auto-nozzle check (ANC) turned off, and since I've not switched from MK to PK ink, I assume no cleanings have been done. The capacity of the maintenance cartridge has remained at 53% for some time, which is evidence that no cleanings have been done.
Final thought for today: It is easier to get a print centered on roll paper than it is on sheets. Of course, it's all but impossible on sheets. For my client's final prints, I created a custom paper size of 17" x 14". I set the top and bottom margins to 0.6", the left and right margins to .25", and checked the Center image checkbox. The roll paper is 17" wide. After printing, the 7900 cuts each print 14" high. The printed area is not quite the same for each print, but they're pretty close. They are nicely centered on the paper, with the margins being roughly 1.4".
--Jay
Saturday, November 19, 2011
Working With Roll Paper, and the Last Profile Test (for a while)
I accomplished two things today: I printed a profile test image on Moab Entrada Natural 300 gsm, and I printed on roll paper for the first time with the 7900.
Entrada Natural is a beautiful matte paper. The 300 gsm version (there's a 190, also, which I've not used) is very thick and stiff. The paper has a texture bordering on too much for my taste, but for some images it's very nice. Having no OBA, it's a warm-toned paper. It's reasonably priced, too. I've had a 17" roll for some time, having used this paper with my iPF 5000. I've printed a couple of my own panoramas on it, and I have a printing client who loves this paper.
I downloaded from Moab's site the profile for the 7900/9900, installed it, and then set up to print on the roll of Entrada. As usual, I printed a nozzle check sheet on plain bond paper (no clogs). I then followed Epson's instructions and loaded the roll of Entrada. As has been discussed at length in various forums, the 7900's spindle-less roll feed system is very nice and a snap to load. Once the paper is pushed through the paper path, the printer looks it over just as it does a sheet, moves it around a bit, and is then ready to print. I chose the option to have the print cut the paper when the print is finished.
On the computer I loaded the profile test image into Photoshop and then went into the printer driver. I set up a custom paper size as recommended in the Epson documentation. I made this 17" x 8.5". On the Printer Settings tab I made sure Roll Paper was selected, and set the media type to Ultrasmooth Fine Art Paper per Moab's specification. On the Roll Paper Settings tab I chose Normal Cut, Auto Rotate, and 17 inch, and then saved the settings. Back on the Photoshop printer dialog box I unchecked the Center image box, set the top margin to 0", the left margin to .25". The profile test image is 10" wide X 7.5" high (landscape orientation). What I hoped to get from this was .5" margins top and bottom, since the printer insists on .56" minimum margins top and bottom, and a .25" margin on the left.
The image printed, far toward the left edge of the 17" wide paper, and the sheet was cut. Overall I'd say the 7900's handling of rolls is pretty nice.
I'm very impressed with Moab's profile. The test image is excellent, with nice detail in the blacks, no color problems I could find, great skin tones, etc. An excellent paper made better by an excellent profile (in my opinion, of course).
With the sheet oriented normally in my hand, the left margin is .5". The right margin is several inches wide, this being a 10" wide image on a 17" wide roll. The top and bottom margins are slightly less than 5/8". The cut width of the sheet is about 8 5/8". When I cut the sheet down to 11" wide, the image was centered left and right, with those .5" margins. I came pretty close to getting my image centered, although the sheet size is 1/8" too high. This matches the .06" greater than 1/2" each margin should be.
--Jay
Entrada Natural is a beautiful matte paper. The 300 gsm version (there's a 190, also, which I've not used) is very thick and stiff. The paper has a texture bordering on too much for my taste, but for some images it's very nice. Having no OBA, it's a warm-toned paper. It's reasonably priced, too. I've had a 17" roll for some time, having used this paper with my iPF 5000. I've printed a couple of my own panoramas on it, and I have a printing client who loves this paper.
I downloaded from Moab's site the profile for the 7900/9900, installed it, and then set up to print on the roll of Entrada. As usual, I printed a nozzle check sheet on plain bond paper (no clogs). I then followed Epson's instructions and loaded the roll of Entrada. As has been discussed at length in various forums, the 7900's spindle-less roll feed system is very nice and a snap to load. Once the paper is pushed through the paper path, the printer looks it over just as it does a sheet, moves it around a bit, and is then ready to print. I chose the option to have the print cut the paper when the print is finished.
On the computer I loaded the profile test image into Photoshop and then went into the printer driver. I set up a custom paper size as recommended in the Epson documentation. I made this 17" x 8.5". On the Printer Settings tab I made sure Roll Paper was selected, and set the media type to Ultrasmooth Fine Art Paper per Moab's specification. On the Roll Paper Settings tab I chose Normal Cut, Auto Rotate, and 17 inch, and then saved the settings. Back on the Photoshop printer dialog box I unchecked the Center image box, set the top margin to 0", the left margin to .25". The profile test image is 10" wide X 7.5" high (landscape orientation). What I hoped to get from this was .5" margins top and bottom, since the printer insists on .56" minimum margins top and bottom, and a .25" margin on the left.
The image printed, far toward the left edge of the 17" wide paper, and the sheet was cut. Overall I'd say the 7900's handling of rolls is pretty nice.
I'm very impressed with Moab's profile. The test image is excellent, with nice detail in the blacks, no color problems I could find, great skin tones, etc. An excellent paper made better by an excellent profile (in my opinion, of course).
With the sheet oriented normally in my hand, the left margin is .5". The right margin is several inches wide, this being a 10" wide image on a 17" wide roll. The top and bottom margins are slightly less than 5/8". The cut width of the sheet is about 8 5/8". When I cut the sheet down to 11" wide, the image was centered left and right, with those .5" margins. I came pretty close to getting my image centered, although the sheet size is 1/8" too high. This matches the .06" greater than 1/2" each margin should be.
--Jay
Friday, November 18, 2011
Centering Test, Part II
Today I made my first call to Epson's support for their large-format printers. I took a little time to prepare for that call, getting my notes together from my attempts to print images centered on sheet paper.
After making my way through the phone tree I waited only a couple of minutes for a support technician. After the usual process of identifying my 7900 (first) and then me (second, which I found a little amusing), I began an explanation of my problem. I'd planned to describe what I'd done thus far, and the results I'd seen, but the tech interrupted before I got very far.
He provided a two-part answer: first, checking the Center image checkbox in the Photoshop driver doesn't mean the print will be centered. I'd learned that myself, of course, but I'd hoped that checkbox had a purpose beyond enabling the position fields when the box is not checked. He then explained that when printing sheets the printer requires top and bottom margins* totaling 1.12 inches, and the bottom margin will always be at least half of that, .56 inch. "So,", I said, "The only way to center an image on a sheet is to get out my calculator and figure the margins, and then enter those into the position fields?" He said that was correct, that I needed to add .56 inch to the top margin.
He quickly followed up that comment with part two of his answer: Just print on roll papers if I want my images centered. (I should note here I've not yet printed anything on roll paper except the printhead alignment pattern when I initially set up the printer.)
I'm very much less than happy with those responses. It also contradicts comments made by friend Dean (see yesterday's posting) based on a test he did recently with his 7900.
After the phone call I ran three test images, all the same file at the same size on letter size sheets. (The prerequisite nozzle check print showed no clogs.) The file was 8.2 inches wide X 5.5 inches high (in landscape mode). If it printed centered, I'd have top and bottom borders (relative to the image) of 1.5 inches, left and right borders of 1.4 inches. This "left and right" corresponds to the driver's top and bottom values. Using only the driver's attempt at centering, i.e. checking the Center image checkbox and making no other adjustments, the print had 1 1/2 inch borders along the long axis (top and bottom relative to the image), but the left border measured 1 3/16 inches, while the right border measured about 1 5/8 inches.
For my second test I unchecked the Center image box, left the left margin field as it was and added .56 inch to the top margin (.56 being half of the 1.12 inches the tech specified as an offset). This sounds completely wrong, but it's exactly the method the tech described. And it doesn't work. My print had a left margin of 1 3/4 inches, and a right margin of 1 1/16 inches. Not an improvement.
For final test I set the top margin to .28 inches larger than the centered value (that being half of .56 inch). On that print the left and right margins differ only by 1/8 inch.
Of course, I was being lazy with the trial and error prints. I should be able to offset the top margin by half the measured difference between the default "Center image" print's left and right margins and have the next print be spot on. Unless it's not.
What does this mean? I think it means the only way I can print centered on cut sheets is:
*"Top" and "bottom" mean the leading and trailing edges of the page as it's fed through the printer, whether the image itself is in landscape or portrait orientation. In other words, to the driver, top and bottom are page-specific and always the same edges of the sheet, not image-specific. This is confusing, but the print preview in the Photoshop Print dialog box make this a little easier to understand.
--Jay
After making my way through the phone tree I waited only a couple of minutes for a support technician. After the usual process of identifying my 7900 (first) and then me (second, which I found a little amusing), I began an explanation of my problem. I'd planned to describe what I'd done thus far, and the results I'd seen, but the tech interrupted before I got very far.
He provided a two-part answer: first, checking the Center image checkbox in the Photoshop driver doesn't mean the print will be centered. I'd learned that myself, of course, but I'd hoped that checkbox had a purpose beyond enabling the position fields when the box is not checked. He then explained that when printing sheets the printer requires top and bottom margins* totaling 1.12 inches, and the bottom margin will always be at least half of that, .56 inch. "So,", I said, "The only way to center an image on a sheet is to get out my calculator and figure the margins, and then enter those into the position fields?" He said that was correct, that I needed to add .56 inch to the top margin.
He quickly followed up that comment with part two of his answer: Just print on roll papers if I want my images centered. (I should note here I've not yet printed anything on roll paper except the printhead alignment pattern when I initially set up the printer.)
I'm very much less than happy with those responses. It also contradicts comments made by friend Dean (see yesterday's posting) based on a test he did recently with his 7900.
After the phone call I ran three test images, all the same file at the same size on letter size sheets. (The prerequisite nozzle check print showed no clogs.) The file was 8.2 inches wide X 5.5 inches high (in landscape mode). If it printed centered, I'd have top and bottom borders (relative to the image) of 1.5 inches, left and right borders of 1.4 inches. This "left and right" corresponds to the driver's top and bottom values. Using only the driver's attempt at centering, i.e. checking the Center image checkbox and making no other adjustments, the print had 1 1/2 inch borders along the long axis (top and bottom relative to the image), but the left border measured 1 3/16 inches, while the right border measured about 1 5/8 inches.
For my second test I unchecked the Center image box, left the left margin field as it was and added .56 inch to the top margin (.56 being half of the 1.12 inches the tech specified as an offset). This sounds completely wrong, but it's exactly the method the tech described. And it doesn't work. My print had a left margin of 1 3/4 inches, and a right margin of 1 1/16 inches. Not an improvement.
For final test I set the top margin to .28 inches larger than the centered value (that being half of .56 inch). On that print the left and right margins differ only by 1/8 inch.
Of course, I was being lazy with the trial and error prints. I should be able to offset the top margin by half the measured difference between the default "Center image" print's left and right margins and have the next print be spot on. Unless it's not.
What does this mean? I think it means the only way I can print centered on cut sheets is:
- Size my image so the total "top and bottom" margins are at least 1.12 inches,
- Make a print with the Center image box checked,
- Measure the actual borders, and finally,
- Make a second print after entering an offset based on the measurement in #3.
*"Top" and "bottom" mean the leading and trailing edges of the page as it's fed through the printer, whether the image itself is in landscape or portrait orientation. In other words, to the driver, top and bottom are page-specific and always the same edges of the sheet, not image-specific. This is confusing, but the print preview in the Photoshop Print dialog box make this a little easier to understand.
--Jay
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Centering Test
I've had lengthy email discussions with friend Dean, who as I've mentioned has had a 7900 for some time, about my centering issue. He said he's not noticed the problem with his prints (and he would if it was there). He printed a small test picture, 7" x 9.288", on a letter size sheet. He said it was perfectly centered (he measured).
A few minutes ago I printed an image for an 11" x 14" mat. I use these in small bins I have in local galleries, the prints being matted and bagged. The mat opening is 8" x 5" -- I like fairly wide mats. I sized my image to 8.2" x 5.47", and after printing a nozzle check (no clogs!), printed with the Center image box checked, and the driver determining image position. This was a horizontal (landscape orientation) picture.
The print's top and bottom margins are identical, as close to 1.5" as I can measure. But the right margin is over 5/16" wider than the left. Pretty far from being centered.
--Jay
A few minutes ago I printed an image for an 11" x 14" mat. I use these in small bins I have in local galleries, the prints being matted and bagged. The mat opening is 8" x 5" -- I like fairly wide mats. I sized my image to 8.2" x 5.47", and after printing a nozzle check (no clogs!), printed with the Center image box checked, and the driver determining image position. This was a horizontal (landscape orientation) picture.
The print's top and bottom margins are identical, as close to 1.5" as I can measure. But the right margin is over 5/16" wider than the left. Pretty far from being centered.
--Jay
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Messing with Matte
I have an image I wanted to print for a show going up later this week. I've printed this before on my now-departed Canon printer, and I like the picture best on matte papers. In this case that's Epson's Ultra Premium Presentation Paper Matte, formerly known as the much friendlier to type Enhanced Matte. To begin, I made a change to the 7900's default settings: I turned off ANC (auto-nozzle check). I checked ink levels on the printer's display, and then pressed the black ink change button.
The printer made its "thinking about this" sounds for a couple of minutes and showed a progress bar on the LCD. When finished it then displayed "Matte Black" where it had previously shown "Photo Black". I again checked ink levels and found no change to any color, nor to the remaining capacity of the maintenance cartridge. I'd read this process consumes a small amount ink when switching between blacks. Must be a pretty small amount (this is defined in the manual).
I then ran a nozzle check print. This is where something unexpected happened. I inserted a letter size sheet of plain bond paper as usual, and used the printer's control panel to initiate the nozzle check print. The machine started as usual, but instead of printing, the print head made numerous passes across the full width of the carriage, something it had not done before. It did not feed the sheet of paper as it was doing this. Thinking something was wrong I canceled the process, and then tried again. Same result, so I canceled again. I cycled power to the printer and then tried again, with the same result. This time I let the printer run, just to see what would happen. The print head ran back and forth for a couple of minutes (I did not time it), and then the nozzle check printed as it usually does. There were no clogged nozzles (the printer does run a cleaning cycle when the blacks are switched). It's not clear whether this cleaning affects all channels or just the blacks (MK/PK is paired with with LK). I checked ink levels and found C, MK, VM, and LK had all dropped by 1%, which may answer the question regarding other channels being cleaned as well. There was apparently no change to the maintenance cartridge.
I conclude from this that the switch from one black ink to the other is not completed when the progress bar gets to 100% and the process appears to be finished. It completes when the next print job begins. Whether the process appears the same when switching back to PK remains to be seen.
With that out of the way I ran a profile test print using the Epson-supplied profile for the Enhanced Matte paper. Despite the new name, I don't consider this a premium paper, but I rather like it. It's smooth, bright-white, inexpensive, and the profile test image looks very nice. Being a matte paper with far lower Dmax than Ilford's Galerie Gold Fiber Silk or Epson's Exhibition Fiber, the blacks and dark shades don't hold up in side-by-side comparisons, but on its own it looks pretty good. The big gotcha with this paper is its poor archival properties. For the print I started out to make this isn't an issue.
I ran in to trouble right away when I set up to print my picture. This is a vertically oriented image. The top and bottom margins on a letter size sheet must be quite small to accommodate the mat and frame I'd planned to use. I knew when I was setting up I'd likely find the image clipped, and that turned out to be the case. I will not be able to print this image on letter size sheets on the Epson. The Canon iPF 5000 handled the small margins on the sheet just fine. Fortunately, I don't often want to make a print with such small borders, but when I do I'll have to use larger sheets and cut them down after printing. I should make it clear the printer's manual states sheets should be fed with the narrow edge down, but this experiment seemed worth trying.
I wasted about half an hour trying to make the print in landscape mode with the paper fed into the printer with the wide edge down. This should have worked because my side borders on this image are considerably wider than the top and bottom. Feeding the paper "sideways" would give the printer plenty of room to grip the sheet on the trailing edge. But no combination of settings in the driver, nor rotating the image 90° in Photoshop, would alter the orientation of the printed image. I even created a custom paper size and once again tried all of the orientation options, with the same result. I eventually gave up.
So, after all that, I didn't get the print I set out to make.
Since I'd switched to MK, I ran a profile test print on Museo Portfolio Rag, using the profile downloaded from Museo's site. I'm still trying to interpret the results, which are a little strange. I'll set the print aside until tomorrow and then look at it again. This is a heavy, 100% cotton rag paper with a smooth texture and, lacking optical brighteners, a warm tone. I like it, but I've had problems in the past determining which side is to be printed. Even under magnification I can't tell the two sides apart, and in my experience with a single package of cut sheets, Museo has not been consistent in getting the printed side up (or down). There's no indication on the box which side is "up". My box was thoroughly mixed, and I wasted a number of sheets by printing on the wrong side. It's very obviously wrong, but only after printing has begun. I won't be buying any more of this paper, but I do have a small quantity I'd use if I could figure out how. Back when I bought this box, my emailed inquiries to the maker went unanswered.
I have one more matte paper I want to test. Moab's Entrada Natural 300 gsm was wonderful, if one could get past the texture, on the iPF 5000. I have a couple of pictures that look great on this paper. I have a 17" roll, so when I get some time I'll cut a piece from it, download the profile from Moab's site, and run the test print.
--Jay
The printer made its "thinking about this" sounds for a couple of minutes and showed a progress bar on the LCD. When finished it then displayed "Matte Black" where it had previously shown "Photo Black". I again checked ink levels and found no change to any color, nor to the remaining capacity of the maintenance cartridge. I'd read this process consumes a small amount ink when switching between blacks. Must be a pretty small amount (this is defined in the manual).
I then ran a nozzle check print. This is where something unexpected happened. I inserted a letter size sheet of plain bond paper as usual, and used the printer's control panel to initiate the nozzle check print. The machine started as usual, but instead of printing, the print head made numerous passes across the full width of the carriage, something it had not done before. It did not feed the sheet of paper as it was doing this. Thinking something was wrong I canceled the process, and then tried again. Same result, so I canceled again. I cycled power to the printer and then tried again, with the same result. This time I let the printer run, just to see what would happen. The print head ran back and forth for a couple of minutes (I did not time it), and then the nozzle check printed as it usually does. There were no clogged nozzles (the printer does run a cleaning cycle when the blacks are switched). It's not clear whether this cleaning affects all channels or just the blacks (MK/PK is paired with with LK). I checked ink levels and found C, MK, VM, and LK had all dropped by 1%, which may answer the question regarding other channels being cleaned as well. There was apparently no change to the maintenance cartridge.
I conclude from this that the switch from one black ink to the other is not completed when the progress bar gets to 100% and the process appears to be finished. It completes when the next print job begins. Whether the process appears the same when switching back to PK remains to be seen.
With that out of the way I ran a profile test print using the Epson-supplied profile for the Enhanced Matte paper. Despite the new name, I don't consider this a premium paper, but I rather like it. It's smooth, bright-white, inexpensive, and the profile test image looks very nice. Being a matte paper with far lower Dmax than Ilford's Galerie Gold Fiber Silk or Epson's Exhibition Fiber, the blacks and dark shades don't hold up in side-by-side comparisons, but on its own it looks pretty good. The big gotcha with this paper is its poor archival properties. For the print I started out to make this isn't an issue.
I ran in to trouble right away when I set up to print my picture. This is a vertically oriented image. The top and bottom margins on a letter size sheet must be quite small to accommodate the mat and frame I'd planned to use. I knew when I was setting up I'd likely find the image clipped, and that turned out to be the case. I will not be able to print this image on letter size sheets on the Epson. The Canon iPF 5000 handled the small margins on the sheet just fine. Fortunately, I don't often want to make a print with such small borders, but when I do I'll have to use larger sheets and cut them down after printing. I should make it clear the printer's manual states sheets should be fed with the narrow edge down, but this experiment seemed worth trying.
I wasted about half an hour trying to make the print in landscape mode with the paper fed into the printer with the wide edge down. This should have worked because my side borders on this image are considerably wider than the top and bottom. Feeding the paper "sideways" would give the printer plenty of room to grip the sheet on the trailing edge. But no combination of settings in the driver, nor rotating the image 90° in Photoshop, would alter the orientation of the printed image. I even created a custom paper size and once again tried all of the orientation options, with the same result. I eventually gave up.
So, after all that, I didn't get the print I set out to make.
Since I'd switched to MK, I ran a profile test print on Museo Portfolio Rag, using the profile downloaded from Museo's site. I'm still trying to interpret the results, which are a little strange. I'll set the print aside until tomorrow and then look at it again. This is a heavy, 100% cotton rag paper with a smooth texture and, lacking optical brighteners, a warm tone. I like it, but I've had problems in the past determining which side is to be printed. Even under magnification I can't tell the two sides apart, and in my experience with a single package of cut sheets, Museo has not been consistent in getting the printed side up (or down). There's no indication on the box which side is "up". My box was thoroughly mixed, and I wasted a number of sheets by printing on the wrong side. It's very obviously wrong, but only after printing has begun. I won't be buying any more of this paper, but I do have a small quantity I'd use if I could figure out how. Back when I bought this box, my emailed inquiries to the maker went unanswered.
I have one more matte paper I want to test. Moab's Entrada Natural 300 gsm was wonderful, if one could get past the texture, on the iPF 5000. I have a couple of pictures that look great on this paper. I have a 17" roll, so when I get some time I'll cut a piece from it, download the profile from Moab's site, and run the test print.
--Jay
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Something a Little Larger
I haven't made any large prints. I have yet to order 24" wide paper, although a 24" roll of EEF is supposed to be coming from Epson as part of their incentive/rebate package. I'm hanging some new work in a show later this week, and for that I want a wintry scene from Glacier National Park printed on a 13x19 (A3) sheet. This will be my largest print to date from the 7900.
I ran a nozzle check print, and found O and G almost completely clogged. There was also just a bit of a line missing from the C pattern. I've been tied up with other work, so the printer's been idle for several days. O and G are conveniently paired, so I ran a cleaning on that pair. When the cleaning finished, the printer's LCD reported "INK LOW", with flashing icons on the C and VM channels. C was at 16%, VM at 19%. The 7900 reported no clogs after the cleaning, and I could find none when I inspected the print with my loupe.
I set up as usual to print my photo on EEF, and ran in to a bit of confusion. Installed along with the rest of the Epson software was a profile for EEF, SP7900 9900 EFP PK 2880 v1.icc, dated 18 Dec 2008. This appears as Epson_9900_7900_Exhibition_Fiber_Paper_PK_v1 in Photoshop's list of profiles, and in the drop-down profile list in the printer driver. Also in the printer driver one can select a media type for "Exhibition Fiber Paper". But on the printer's LCD, there is no Exhibition Fiber Paper media type available.
I went to Epson's site and downloaded the profile there for EEF. This seems to be the same profile as the one I have, but the download includes a brief PDF listing printing settings and other details for the paper. That indicates a media type of "Premium Luster Photo Paper (260)" should be used. There IS a matching setting for this in the printer's list.
I made my print using Premium Luster Photo Paper (260) for the profile and media type. The prints looks good, but when I soft-proof in Photoshop I prefer the result using the EEF profile.
I've asked my friend Dean for comments and advice on this, since EEF is one of his preferred papers. Stay tuned.
--Jay
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
My printing workflow at this early stage
This will be a long post. Apologies in advance.
In several posts I've said things like "...prep'd the file in the usual way", or "...set the remainder of the print settings as usual." So, what is the usual? Here's a brief run-down of my workflow. I'll begin here after I've made any image adjustments I feel are needed, I've soft-proofed using the appropriate profile, and I'm ready to print.
Resize the image: I had worked out what I felt was the best way to do this when I printed on the Canon iPF 5000, which wanted files at 600ppi. I resized and resampled as necessary to make 600ppi files in the size I wanted. If I didn't do this, the printer driver would, with a result that was not always optimum.
For the 7900, the process is a bit different. I took advantage of comments made by Jeff Schewe in an October posting on Luminous Landscape's "Printers, Papers, and Inks" forum. In part:
Output sharpening: I use Photoshop's Smart Sharpen. I've been very happy with that through my years of printing with the Canon; I have not investigated other sharpening tools. (Note that I do a little capture sharpening in ACR, which certainly affects the output, but is a little beyond the scope of this post.) I set the on-screen size (zoom) to 25% to 33%. I then set the Smart Sharpen amount and radius to values I know will result in a properly sharpened print. This generally looks somewhat over-sharpened, or "crunchy", usually with some haloes, on-screen. Experience has taught me how far to go with this to get a properly sharpened print. I assumed this would hold true when printing with the 7900, and so far it has.
Open the Print dialog: This is where things get interesting for me. I never used the standard print driver with the Canon, choosing instead to use their excellent print plug-in for Photoshop. Epson has nothing like this. The print dialog is a multi-level affair. I use a Mac, but much of this is the same in Windows operating systems.
In the main Print dialog I set "Color management" to Document, set "Photoshop manages color", select the correct profile and rendering intent (so far all of the Epson profiles I have used "perceptual") select portrait or landscape orientation, and then click the Printer Settings... button. This raises a second dialog box, also titled "Print". Here I choose a paper size. If a custom size is needed, or a size with custom margins, I can create it here. So far I've done this only as described in my 28 October posting. This was a mostly-successful attempt to center my profile test prints on the page.
This dialog has a number of tabs, including Layout, Color Matching, Paper Handling, Cover Page and Scheduler. The settings on the Color Matching tab are disabled because the printer is not managing color (Photoshop is). Otherwise, most of these settings can be ignored.
The next set of tabs is where the money is. Under Printer Settings/Basic I select the media (paper) type as needed for the profile I'm using. This can be confusing; not only does Epson have a bizarre naming scheme for its papers, but it changed many of the names a few years ago. Some papers are still identified by the former name. Some roll papers have a different name than the same paper in cut sheets. Friend Dean pointed me to the Epson Professional Media Guide booklet that was included with the printer. Mine's from Fall, 2010; it's been a big help. Selecting the media type automatically selects other options, including the correct black ink, which so far for me has always been Photo Black; output resolution; and the SuperMicroWeave setting. These last two can be changed if the default for the chosen paper type isn't what's needed for the profile (assuming the profile specifies this, which it should). Jeff Schewe recommends checking the "Finest Detail" checkbox if the file resolution is 720ppi. I have not tested this.
The Mac's printing architecture is 16-bit throughout, so I make sure the 16-bit box is checked. This setting is sticky -- it was only necessary to set this once.
The settings under the Advanced Color Settings tab are disabled when Photoshop manages color.
I have not yet printed on roll paper. When the media type is a sheet paper, the settings here are disabled.
Finally, I've done nothing with the settings under the Advanced Media Control tab except leave them at their defaults.
When the Save button is clicked this dialog closes and returns to the earlier Print dialog. Here I can see the margin settings (in the Position box) and see a small preview of the image position on the sheet. As mentioned in earlier posts, getting an image centered has been a hassle; the settings here have let me get close, but with narrow margins clipping is likely.
Print: Now it's time to go to the printer, which is in another room, probably 20 feet away. Prior to my first print of the session I'll make a nozzle check print. This almost always shows clogs; sometimes cleaning nozzle pairs to clear the clogs results in other nozzles becoming clogged. I do pair cleanings as necessary until all look good.
I insert the sheet for my print, allow the printer a minute to find its position and size, and then from the control panel enter a media type (the printer always asks when a sheet is inserted, but it remembers the last media type used). I then return to the Mac and click the Print button.
This is a long and detailed explanation of a process that takes only a couple of minutes (plus nozzle cleaning time, which is not inconsiderable). With a few early exceptions, the prints have been at least very good, more often excellent.
--Jay
In several posts I've said things like "...prep'd the file in the usual way", or "...set the remainder of the print settings as usual." So, what is the usual? Here's a brief run-down of my workflow. I'll begin here after I've made any image adjustments I feel are needed, I've soft-proofed using the appropriate profile, and I'm ready to print.
Resize the image: I had worked out what I felt was the best way to do this when I printed on the Canon iPF 5000, which wanted files at 600ppi. I resized and resampled as necessary to make 600ppi files in the size I wanted. If I didn't do this, the printer driver would, with a result that was not always optimum.
For the 7900, the process is a bit different. I took advantage of comments made by Jeff Schewe in an October posting on Luminous Landscape's "Printers, Papers, and Inks" forum. In part:
"I decided to do some tests and write an article for DPP magazine...the net/net result is that if your native image resolution (at the print dimensions) puts the PPI below 360 (for Epson, 300 for HP & Canon) upsample to 360 PPI (300 PPI) before printing and then do your output sharpening (easy in LR).
If the native rez is above 360 but below 720 PPI (600 PPI for HP & Canon) upsample to 720 PPI (or 600 PPI) and then output sharpen.
The advantages are visible to the naked eye (if you know what to look for) and generally involve a high contrast diagonal or circle and/or super high frequency texture. Test it yourself (I did before writing the article).
It's easy to upsample and then output sharpen in Lightroom...more difficult (but doable) in Photoshop..."I don't use Lightroom, but I didn't find this a challenge to do with Photoshop. I haven't had time to do exhaustive testing of the 360ppi vs. 720ppi issue, but using Jeff's method seems to work very well. Doing this gets me to the image (print) size I want, at the resolution required by the printer for best results.
Output sharpening: I use Photoshop's Smart Sharpen. I've been very happy with that through my years of printing with the Canon; I have not investigated other sharpening tools. (Note that I do a little capture sharpening in ACR, which certainly affects the output, but is a little beyond the scope of this post.) I set the on-screen size (zoom) to 25% to 33%. I then set the Smart Sharpen amount and radius to values I know will result in a properly sharpened print. This generally looks somewhat over-sharpened, or "crunchy", usually with some haloes, on-screen. Experience has taught me how far to go with this to get a properly sharpened print. I assumed this would hold true when printing with the 7900, and so far it has.
Open the Print dialog: This is where things get interesting for me. I never used the standard print driver with the Canon, choosing instead to use their excellent print plug-in for Photoshop. Epson has nothing like this. The print dialog is a multi-level affair. I use a Mac, but much of this is the same in Windows operating systems.
In the main Print dialog I set "Color management" to Document, set "Photoshop manages color", select the correct profile and rendering intent (so far all of the Epson profiles I have used "perceptual") select portrait or landscape orientation, and then click the Printer Settings... button. This raises a second dialog box, also titled "Print". Here I choose a paper size. If a custom size is needed, or a size with custom margins, I can create it here. So far I've done this only as described in my 28 October posting. This was a mostly-successful attempt to center my profile test prints on the page.
This dialog has a number of tabs, including Layout, Color Matching, Paper Handling, Cover Page and Scheduler. The settings on the Color Matching tab are disabled because the printer is not managing color (Photoshop is). Otherwise, most of these settings can be ignored.
The next set of tabs is where the money is. Under Printer Settings/Basic I select the media (paper) type as needed for the profile I'm using. This can be confusing; not only does Epson have a bizarre naming scheme for its papers, but it changed many of the names a few years ago. Some papers are still identified by the former name. Some roll papers have a different name than the same paper in cut sheets. Friend Dean pointed me to the Epson Professional Media Guide booklet that was included with the printer. Mine's from Fall, 2010; it's been a big help. Selecting the media type automatically selects other options, including the correct black ink, which so far for me has always been Photo Black; output resolution; and the SuperMicroWeave setting. These last two can be changed if the default for the chosen paper type isn't what's needed for the profile (assuming the profile specifies this, which it should). Jeff Schewe recommends checking the "Finest Detail" checkbox if the file resolution is 720ppi. I have not tested this.
The Mac's printing architecture is 16-bit throughout, so I make sure the 16-bit box is checked. This setting is sticky -- it was only necessary to set this once.
The settings under the Advanced Color Settings tab are disabled when Photoshop manages color.
I have not yet printed on roll paper. When the media type is a sheet paper, the settings here are disabled.
Finally, I've done nothing with the settings under the Advanced Media Control tab except leave them at their defaults.
When the Save button is clicked this dialog closes and returns to the earlier Print dialog. Here I can see the margin settings (in the Position box) and see a small preview of the image position on the sheet. As mentioned in earlier posts, getting an image centered has been a hassle; the settings here have let me get close, but with narrow margins clipping is likely.
Print: Now it's time to go to the printer, which is in another room, probably 20 feet away. Prior to my first print of the session I'll make a nozzle check print. This almost always shows clogs; sometimes cleaning nozzle pairs to clear the clogs results in other nozzles becoming clogged. I do pair cleanings as necessary until all look good.
I insert the sheet for my print, allow the printer a minute to find its position and size, and then from the control panel enter a media type (the printer always asks when a sheet is inserted, but it remembers the last media type used). I then return to the Mac and click the Print button.
This is a long and detailed explanation of a process that takes only a couple of minutes (plus nozzle cleaning time, which is not inconsiderable). With a few early exceptions, the prints have been at least very good, more often excellent.
--Jay
Monday, November 7, 2011
More Birds
Kelly Apgar is a good friend and an outstanding painter. She dabbles in photography and sometimes mixes her photographs, painting, and other media into interesting collages. She's been very generous with both her advice and her art. One of her paintings inspired a photo I spent weeks last winter attempting to capture. The result was worth the effort. When I displayed it in a local gallery I included a small plaque crediting Kelly with the inspiration for the photo.
Kelly loved the photo, and a few weeks later gave me a small painting very similar to her 24" wide X 12" high original.
I've wanted to give her a print of my photo, but have simply not gotten around to making it. No time like the present. I prep'd the file in the usual way, and sized it 15 inches wide for an 11x17 inch sheet of Canson Infinity Platine Fiber Rag. To attempt to center the image on the sheet, I set the left margin to 0.9", the top margin to 1.5". The nozzle check print I ran prior to printing the magpie showed missing nozzles in O and VM. I ran a cleaning on the O/G pair. Six minutes later the 7900's LCD reported cleaning had failed. I printed another nozzle check and found a single missing dot in the C channel. Once again, cleaning a pair seems to have unclogged some nozzles not related to that pair (VM), while a new clog appeared in another channel (C).
I printed the magpie anyway; I can find no problems with the print. It looks fine. The left margin is 1/16" narrower than the right, while the top and bottom margins are identical.
While I was running the machine I printed a couple of additional raven prints, including the best-seller shown in yesterday's posting. These were printed on Ilford's GGFS. On a whim, to print these I sent the printer a file I'd made some time ago, optimized for the Canon iPF 5000. This was upsampled to 600ppi rather than the 360 or 720 the Epson prefers. I expected I was wasting a sheet of paper, but the result is excellent (a little off-center on the sheet, of course). The driver worked whatever magic it does, resulting in a print with the usual good properties the Epson produces, and it's perfectly sharpened despite that having been done for a very different printer.
Today was also the day the remains of the iPF 5000 were hauled away. I felt a little sad about that. I learned a great deal while using that printer, and made many very nice prints. RIP, old friend.
--Jay
 |
| Blackbilled Magpie, inspired by a Kelly Apgar painting |
I've wanted to give her a print of my photo, but have simply not gotten around to making it. No time like the present. I prep'd the file in the usual way, and sized it 15 inches wide for an 11x17 inch sheet of Canson Infinity Platine Fiber Rag. To attempt to center the image on the sheet, I set the left margin to 0.9", the top margin to 1.5". The nozzle check print I ran prior to printing the magpie showed missing nozzles in O and VM. I ran a cleaning on the O/G pair. Six minutes later the 7900's LCD reported cleaning had failed. I printed another nozzle check and found a single missing dot in the C channel. Once again, cleaning a pair seems to have unclogged some nozzles not related to that pair (VM), while a new clog appeared in another channel (C).
I printed the magpie anyway; I can find no problems with the print. It looks fine. The left margin is 1/16" narrower than the right, while the top and bottom margins are identical.
While I was running the machine I printed a couple of additional raven prints, including the best-seller shown in yesterday's posting. These were printed on Ilford's GGFS. On a whim, to print these I sent the printer a file I'd made some time ago, optimized for the Canon iPF 5000. This was upsampled to 600ppi rather than the 360 or 720 the Epson prefers. I expected I was wasting a sheet of paper, but the result is excellent (a little off-center on the sheet, of course). The driver worked whatever magic it does, resulting in a print with the usual good properties the Epson produces, and it's perfectly sharpened despite that having been done for a very different printer.
Today was also the day the remains of the iPF 5000 were hauled away. I felt a little sad about that. I learned a great deal while using that printer, and made many very nice prints. RIP, old friend.
--Jay
Sunday, November 6, 2011
A New Print
 |
My popular 2008 "Snow Raven in Yellowstone" photo. |
I love shooting in snowy weather. It's cold, wet, often windy, and generally just messy. I'll set up my gear, spend 20 minutes working my subject, and when I get back in the car I'll have three inches of snow on my shoulders. I do worry a little about the moisture affecting my gear, but so far I've been lucky and suffered no equipment problems.
We were in Yellowstone in May (2011), and once again spent several days in blizzard conditions (rain at lower elevations). One of the photos I made then was of a raven in snow. Unlike the 2008 situation, this time it was snowing really hard. I was pretty sure at the time the photos would be worthless, but one never knows until the files have been downloaded and examined on a larger screen.
Today I made a print of one of the raven photos from that trip. As usual I started by running a nozzle check print. The 7900 had been idle since 1 November, a full five days. I expected nozzle clogs across the page. But there was none! As mentioned in an earlier posting, I've left the printer's default "Auto Nozzle Check" enabled. My Canon iPF 5000 does regular nozzle checks and cleanings, waking up at all hours, making noise for a few minutes while checking, and then either going to sleep or continuing with the noise to run a cleaning cycle. On the Canon this is not optional -- it can't be turned off. I have never heard the Epson start itself up and do any kind of process. It's either very quiet, or it's not done anything similar to the Canon's process. Regardless, there were no clogs after this five-day idle period.
I wanted the new photo printed on one-half of a 13x19 sheet. I sized the image to 12 3/4" wide by 8 1/2" high to fit a mat and frame size I keep in stock. I sharpened based on past experience with the Canon. Although the two printers use very different dithering patterns and printhead dpi, after resizing the image for the Epson I sharpened for the same look on-screen as I'd always done for the Canon.
 |
| The printer driver dialog box, showing the Position fields and the values I used. |
The resulting print is terrific. The top margin is exactly 1/2", a bit larger than I specified. The left margin is 3/32" wide. The right margin is 1/16" wider. Given the nature of this image, which doesn't have much detail in the background, it's a little hard to tell with certainty, but it appears about 1/16" of the picture was clipped on the right, as the preview indicated, that being the side with the slightly wider margin.
One surprise during printing: On the Canon, when I'd print something like this, an image considerably smaller than the sheet size, the printer would print the image, and when the last of the ink was laid down, eject the sheet. The 7900 printed the image, but continued to feed the empty bottom half of the sheet in the normal way, with the printhead making passes back and forth as if there was something to be printed. It did indeed print that area, laying down a very fine pattern of faint blue-ish dots, which I can only see when I view the page under magnification. I've no idea what's up with that. Of course this means I can't use that "empty" half of the sheet for another print, as I'd planned to do. More to learn....
--Jay
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Finally -- Printing a Photograph!
I've had my fill of printing profile evaluation images, although I'll need to continue this for the couple of mat-finish papers I have. Making these prints is necessary, the only way to determine the quality of the profiles. It's been an interesting exercise, mainly proving what I've read about the build quality and unit-to-unit manufacturing consistency of the Stylus Pro 7900 being extremely high. The profiles provided by Epson are excellent, with Epson-branded papers, of course. And once in a while one can get lucky with other papers, as I seem to have done with the Canon HW Satin. The custom profile I tested for Harman Gloss FB Al was OK, but not great. The two I tested for Ilford Galerie Gold Fiber Silk are both good, but slightly different. I'm delighted with the 7900's output on these eval pages. I don't have the tools to put numbers to these observations, but I am impressed with the color, with the shadow and highlight detail, the total lack of bronzing, and the minimal gloss differential I see in these images. The iPF 5000 was good, but clearly had problems with bronzing and gloss diff.
It's (finally!) time to print one of my photographs. It is generally accepted that when one receives a new camera, the first photo taken must be of one's cat. If you've not heard this, you've not spent much time in the camera forums at dpreview. I'm not sure the same requirement holds for printers, but not wanting to take any chances, my first print was to be of PC, our aged calico. I don't take a lot of cat pictures. The only one I have of any reasonable quality was made in 2010 with a point-n-shoot camera.
The profile eval images were printed with no processing in Photoshop. PC's picture would require a little work, since it's a high-ISO photo, shot hand-held with a camera that doesn't do high-ISO well. It's also a crop from a full frame that's not large to start. I resampled the image using values extracted from comments by Jeff Schewe in Lula's printers, etc. forum. I then output sharpened based on my experience with the Canon iPF 5000. When I had the file ready to print, I ran a nozzle check print and found about 30% of the G and LLK nozzles missing. I did a clean on the Y/G pair, which took about six minutes to complete. The nozzle check print I then made showed no clogged nozzles; the LLK clog had magically disappeared. Clearly, doing a clean on a pair moves some ink through other nozzles as well.
I should note that after the initial set-up, ink installation, and charging of the lines and head, the available capacity of the maintenance cartridge was 65%. After this last cleaning, it was 57%. I did not make a note of the ink levels after the initial charging, so I can't say how much ink has been used in the cleanings and printing done so far.
PC's picture has very good color and shadow/highlight detail. There is no bronzing or gloss differential. It's also waaaay over sharpened, which is entirely my fault. Clearly I've got more test prints to make, using files from my DSLR, to learn appropriate sharpening values for the 7900.
I'll be unable to work with the printer for the next few days. I hope to be back at it early next week.
--Jay
 |
Enough already with the profile testing! This is a pile of profile eval images made over the last few days with the 7900. These are in plastic sleeves for easy storage and access in a three-ring binder. My margin notes include everything needed to use that paper and profile for printing. |
The profile eval images were printed with no processing in Photoshop. PC's picture would require a little work, since it's a high-ISO photo, shot hand-held with a camera that doesn't do high-ISO well. It's also a crop from a full frame that's not large to start. I resampled the image using values extracted from comments by Jeff Schewe in Lula's printers, etc. forum. I then output sharpened based on my experience with the Canon iPF 5000. When I had the file ready to print, I ran a nozzle check print and found about 30% of the G and LLK nozzles missing. I did a clean on the Y/G pair, which took about six minutes to complete. The nozzle check print I then made showed no clogged nozzles; the LLK clog had magically disappeared. Clearly, doing a clean on a pair moves some ink through other nozzles as well.I should note that after the initial set-up, ink installation, and charging of the lines and head, the available capacity of the maintenance cartridge was 65%. After this last cleaning, it was 57%. I did not make a note of the ink levels after the initial charging, so I can't say how much ink has been used in the cleanings and printing done so far.
PC's picture has very good color and shadow/highlight detail. There is no bronzing or gloss differential. It's also waaaay over sharpened, which is entirely my fault. Clearly I've got more test prints to make, using files from my DSLR, to learn appropriate sharpening values for the 7900.
I'll be unable to work with the printer for the next few days. I hope to be back at it early next week.
--Jay
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)