|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
1. I've posted a summary of the Aztec color mgmt. seminar to the email@example.com group in case anyone is interested in knowing what was talked about. The following are just a few notes out of the length firstname.lastname@example.org post. In brief, you must do real-world tests with test targets like the USAF 1954 resolution target and the Kodak ST-34 Linear Gray Scale Density Target to find out the real-world performance of your scanner -- you -can't- rely on the box ratings at all. In general, if you're not going for a drum scanner, expect Dmax/resolution to be lower that rated by a long-shot -- you'll be surprised by how much the makers lie. Film is the highest resolution storage format for image data, and not even a digital camera, PC, etc. can touch it. (so much for those digital camera buffs) However, everything has it's nitch, so if you don't want high-res, you can pick something else. Know what the scanners will give you and match that to the project you are working on. If your project needs exact color matching and super-high-res-scans, don't expect a flatbed scanner to do the trick for you - just go straight to a drum scanner. On the other hand, web work is fine off a cheap flatbed. Something about S-gamma vs. monitor gamma and how some monitors can be set to S-gamma so you don't even need color. mgmt./ICM once everything's setup correctly. Of course, what about us who don't have S-gamma monitors? How do we see on-screen what the color is supposed to be for adjustments? Expensive color spectrometers? Fly-by-eyedropper-only? Ran into overtime and didn't cover that too well. real-world specs of tested scanners re: dpi/resolution they actually achieve. 2. Epson P2000. Looks like all the shops have got them (eg. Samy's Camera in Los Angeles), and we're all wondering why we can't get them ourselves....they be everywhere at Photoexpo booths. Output to textured, semi-glossy paper from a P2000 wasn't all too suprising. You can still see dots (in the yellow,brown areas - again, most 6-color inkjets fail to produce smooth gradiants in certain color ranges), and the output isn't that far off from an 870/1270, given that they're still running at 1440x720 and everything else about the mechanisms (besides the print head/dot size) is about the same as the other Epson printers. Print speeds are on par with the latest Epsons, so don't expect it to do huge PPM output speeds. As for the output, if you'd never seen an epson 870/1270 glossy premium photo paper print, you'd be suprised and you're jaws would drop. But if you've seen an 870/1270 glossy print, the texture semi-glossy print simply IMO isn't as Wooing, and I really do prefer the glossy premium paper prints more -- they have that much more snap and depth to them vs. the flatter looking semi-gloss textured prints -- this may also have to do with the fact that they're using pigmented inks in the P2000 vs. dye-based inks in the 870/1270 printers. I didn't see any noticable horizontal dither lines, but again, this was on textured semi-gloss paper which hides defects better than smooth glossy. Thus, based on preliminary prints from a demo P2000 printer (may be improved in production models), I'd say that it's on par with a 870/1270 for most intents and purposes, and you can safely go ahead and buy the 870/1270 if you don't want to wait or spend the extra $$$$ for the pigmented P2000 inks. The difference in quality and visibility of dots is minor (you'd have to examine a print at 8" or closer for some time to see dots on either printer if you've never examined an inkjet print for dots before -- ie. most viewers of your prints), and this is more of a first-generation thing than anything else (ie. Epson's first pigemented inkjet printer; next generations will clearly optimize it far better). Naturally, since they're all based on the 1440x720dpi engine, there are no improvements in maximum achievable resolution of note -- the 870/1270 can already render 1/2mm text crisply, and you really don't print with that level of crispness in large format prints. Nevertheless, I'm eager to get my hands on a test print and do a good side-by-side comparison vs. the 870 Photodisc test target print I've already got. david =) The Dotty Spotty Printer Column www.silverace.com/dottyspotty/ - Turn off HTML mail features. Keep quoted material short. Use accurate subject lines. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.
[Photo] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [Scanner] [Gimp] [Gimp Users]