Horrible PRO-100 B&W

[Paul Verizzo]

So I gave in, found a good price on a brand new PRO-100, got it up and running. Ran my favorite test image having both color and B&W panels.......................horrible B&W! VERY warmtone. And the warmth shows in the color portion. Did a Pattern Print, and the best change level was at the lower fringe, C+20, M+5, Y-25.

Took the original B&W test portion only, printed it alone in B&W, same results except the colorized B&W has better (more) contrast. Put it through my 9000 MK II, almost perfect. Very, very slight warmth. I ran both on the same sheet. While the photo of it is poor, you can readily see the totally unsatisfactory coloring of the PRO-100.

What the hell is this about? Same settings for both machines, same Canon Glossy II paper, factory inks.

 

[Thombar]

Couldn't find the link to the print, or it was broken. Would love to see it since I too have the Pro100 but haven't printed any B&W yet.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Thanks, is this any better? http://1drv.ms/1zXgfg0 I tried inserting the image with the URL, but it apparently didn't like me. (So what else is new?)

This is so "off color" it should be showing up in your color prints in white to light toned areas. It's the worse color mismatch I've ever experienced, even when mixing printers, inks, and papers.

 

[Łukasz]

Hello,

how do you get grayscale print? By printer driver settings?
Try making grayscale image first (in photo processing software), then print as standard color image (without grayscale printing option set to on).

In MG6250 (US -> MG6220) i got brown cast while using grayscale printing via driver option. MG6250 has one GY ink.

Ł.

 

[ThrillaMozilla]

That looks like my HP. HP paper has a bar code on the back. If the printer sees that and thinks it's a B&W image (even if it's a color image file!), it gives you sepia tone for no additional cost. The only way I found to defeat it is to use Canon paper. I suspect you have the same problem, possibly without the bar code intrigue.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

@Lukasz: That's exactly what my test images do. The one that you see in my print starts as a downloadable image from TSS Photo. I then used Levels to get the full 0-255 sRGB range. I then converted it to grayscale and combined the images.

Trust me, this has nothing to do with my source. It has to do with the printer. If it was the source, I'd get the bad results on the other two printers I have.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

That looks like my HP. HP paper has a bar code on the back. If the printer sees that and thinks it's a B&W image (even if it's a color image file!), it gives you sepia tone for no additional cost. The only way I found to defeat it is to use Canon paper. I suspect you have the same problem, possibly without the bar code intrigue.

Nothing at all about bar codes. All Canon, printer, ink, paper.

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Just when I thought I had the issue resolved.......

I had my printing program on ICC profiles for both the 9000 and PRO-100 for that test shot. Radically different results. Spending some time in the Help manual, there is a PRO rendering in the, um, PRO printer. When I set it there, bueno! The black image was very close to neutral. Still a puzzle why such a difference with the two printers, but OK.

So then I printed the Pattern Print with the new settings of the B&W only test image without the Print Shop Pro (Note to Canon: It sucks. The old Easy Photo Print PRO is easier to use and operates faster. Why is it the PRO-100 printer isn't recognized, but my ancient iP4500 IS in Print Shop Pro?) Right back to where I started from.

I'm not a printer expert, although I'd guess I know more that 90% or more of the public. There's something really, really wrong when the beloved 9000 MK II can make perfect prints with a blindfold on, but the PRO-100 keeps cranking out crap while wasting ink and paper. I'm sure there is a "logical" reason for my ailments, but they sure aren't obvious.

 

[Roy Sletcher]

Just when I thought I had the issue resolved.......

I had my printing program on ICC profiles for both the 9000 and PRO-100 for that test shot. Radically different results. Spending some time in the Help manual, there is a PRO rendering in the, um, PRO printer. When I set it there, bueno! The black image was very close to neutral. Still a puzzle why such a difference with the two printers, but OK.

So then I printed the Pattern Print with the new settings of the B&W only test image without the Print Shop Pro (Note to Canon: It sucks. The old Easy Photo Print PRO is easier to use and operates faster. Why is it the PRO-100 printer isn't recognized, but my ancient iP4500 IS in Print Shop Pro?) Right back to where I started from.

I'm not a printer expert, although I'd guess I know more that 90% or more of the public. There's something really, really wrong when the beloved 9000 MK II can make perfect prints with a blindfold on, but the PRO-100 keeps cranking out crap while wasting ink and paper. I'm sure there is a "logical" reason for my ailments, but they sure aren't obvious.

I have used both printers for B&W.

In my opinion it is no contest - The pro 9000 is a brute for neutral B&W, but it can be done.

Neutral B&W with the Pro 100 and it`s two grey inks is simplicity itself.


RS
I should be smarter than to make claims for any print output - better to say `Let`s see what this looks like`

 

[Paul Verizzo]

Funny how our results can be so contrary. For me, the 9000 always made almost perfect, hands off B&W's in the B&W setting. Frankly, also color when using Canon papers. Ninety nine percent of the hoi paloi would think them perfect.

But my predicament with this 100 is about the color; my comments about B&W is mostly about using it as a superior "window" into color fidelity for the color portions of the test images. I mean, come on, when you have to adjust two of the three ink colors over 20 points to get some fidelity, somethings wrong.

I made a duplex test print, the tweaked Kodak model and my trusty tweaked TSS Photo, on my "go to" very cheap dual sided off brand matte paper. After letting it dry for a couple of hours, stunning. Well, at least as good as I get on the 9000. No adjustments at all.