Re: OT: Dave Tobie: expert view on HP 10PS for photo prints (WAS: Wide format Epson inkjet for graphic design proofing?)

["Alan Rew" <arew@patrol.i-way.co.uk>]

----- Original Message -----
From: <CDTobie@aol.com>
To: <arew@patrol.i-way.co.uk>; <epson-inkjet@leben.com>
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 1:43 PM

>> Alan Rew asked Dave Tobie:
> >Could you please give us your expert views on the suitability of the
HP
> >10PS printer for photo printing?  It's marketed by HP as a proofing
> > printer for pre-press.

> Dave replied:
> Yes, and there is absolutely no consideration of life expectancy...
this is a
> *proofer*...

This sounds like a strong warning against its use for photo printing!

> >When my Epson SP1200 gives up the ghost I'd consider the 10PS if it
was
> >suitable for this purpose, as it's within my price range.

> Why would you need PostScript for your image printing?

In the long term, when/if I can afford better tools, and the time to
learn more, I'd like to be able to do my own CMYK profiling. So it's
really a CMYK RIP issue, not a PostScript issue. RGB profiling is all
very well, but sometimes I get black ink used in parts of an image where
I don't want to see it, and tuneable black generation curves are
presumably needed to cure this sort of problem.

> >Would the self-calibration cope with third party papers, or will it
only
> >cope with HP papers?

> The self calibration is to assist in keeping the device consistant...
not
> make it work with different media; in fact getting you to *not* use
third
> party media is a more likely scenario...

Ah! So it would screw up if fed a diet of non-HP paper?

A cunning ruse. I'm surprised Epson haven't latched on to this idea.
With chipped cartridges, and a sensor that detects the presence or
absence of Epson paper, they'd have your workflow nicely sewn up!

> >Do the HP inks have a large enough gamut for photo prints?

> Yes, the gamut is quite good; though that is seldom seeen since it is
usually
> dumbed dwon to press simulations... but what good is that if it has no
> consideration of longevity?

I think I get your drift...

> >How good is the dithering of the supplied RIP?

> Very good dithering. The RIP is not a muscle RIP... I have three or
four
> other RIPs on my machine that can beat it with one hand tied behind
their
> back, but it is more rubust than PressReady, for instance; and beats
> StylusRIP hollow..

Thanks for taking the time to answer these points Dave, your replies are
very helpful.

Regards,

Alan Rew

-
Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate
subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.