Printing to Arches Watercolour paper - Epson 3880

[3dogs]

I am having a bit of a tussle with this paper. The Montval medium texture printed 'normal' images with some small signs of posterisation.
Thinking to be smart (er) I attempted to create Colormumki profiles. All goes well until a person starts to scan the 5th row where a blue patch is sitting right next to a yellow patch. They bleed into each other a tad and that (I believe ) is causing a misread and the profiling stops there and will go no further.

Using the Canson Arches ICC profile for the 310gsm version of the photo paper renders ok colour but there is still signs of very slight bleeding between some parts of the image from a .jpg source, Pic taken at a dinner a while ago.

ODD thing is I just printed a DNG colour image of the pens and some shedding on my farm of a 8x3 row panorama on this paper and the detail is just great. The file is 670.8m according to Photoshop 20384px X 11503px!!!

I'm generating this thread on the Mac, so I will post the image from the PC later, would appreciate some thoughts.

Cheers,

Andrew

 

[3dogs]

Update
I am currently talking to Xrite about this problem because the ColorMumki will NOT read the patches at ALL.
Xrite are saying they think the munki is not recognising the colours.

I'm a bit proud of that NOW I am generating colours that do not exist am I????, my new handle will be 'Lab man'

 

[3dogs]

Further update

Xrite USA referred me to their Asia Region Office...

They respond
Due to economic reasons they do not support the product in Australia because it is cheaper to replace if inside warranty because it costs as much as a new one to support it.

SO what Xrite is saying is Buyer Beware our product will only perform for one year!

Good customer support Xrite, I spend $600, and it goes bung quicktime, so I can spend another $600 to replace......Geez these guys just made the jump from dreaming straight into hallucination!!

Today I profiled :
Plain paper
Parchment
Canon Matte
Canson BFK
All gave me good easily read profiles
Canson Watercolour prints a profile page, but will NOT read column 5.
Crikey it should read the newspaper if the technology was right.

Lab man

 

[3dogs]

This saga is in jeopardy of turning into a serious investigation of the performance of profiling.... almost an international Saga... no less
The local "agent" for Colormunki has become involved and turned it right away from the slightly comedic to a real conundrum......

Why will a device successfully read patches it devises itself, on any number of papers of various textures and characteristics but suddenly turn its back on one in particular.

We are currently exploring ink density/ drying time/ paper feed speed, choice of Black ink viz. PK vs MK to create said patches. There are so many implications /ramifications out of this, for your device and what it is telling you that I am somewhat surprise at being alone on the issue.

If its the fact that I'm messing with an Art paper rather than a Photo paper, then i can understand, well sort of, but many of the folks hereabouts use ColourMunki Photo and believe/ rely on what it is telling them.........Is this the Restaurant at the End of the Universe, 42 or even a bunch of mice?
Others may already know the answers, please help, but what I am finding is that varying the factors of ink density, drying time, and paper feed rate are throwing up some gigantic variations in the "colour/ tone" generated in each patch. The fact that the Munki won't read them has (almost) taken a back seat.

For me this is tossing just about everything I thought i knew (but was afraid to ask) out the window.
I mean I can seriously affect the tonality of my Artwork? by manipulating these three key factors on the 3880, I think I need a Vallium! or at least a glass or Red..

What is your COLORMUNKI PHOTO not telling you, does it really matter..........

I REALLY want to know why My Munki hates column5 page 1 ...so much so that the Munki the prints and profile prints of various papers and assorted goodies are tomorrow bound for Sydney some 600km from for serious investigation by Daddy.

 

[The Hat]

Boy am-in't I glad I didn’t get into all the Sh!*e....

 

[3dogs]

Yes! well I am too in a way BUT the exercise has thrown up three things:
a) xrite Agent is now implying that the reason Munki no read is that I am using 3rd party inks.......suckers!! I have BOTH and Munki no like EITHER!!
b) Messing with Colour density, Drying time, and Paper feed has brought back to front of mind a discussion link ages ago posted by Pharmsist.
c) Canson's profile for Arches photo paper delivers AWESOME results on a number of related papers in their stable.

I will post a couple of scans in the What is Colour thread for those who are fully bored and have the time to look at trivia.

 

[3dogs]

Going back through other posts on Munki scans prompts me to post this in case keener eyes and wiser heads see something I am missing.

Column 5 is the offender,

 

[cls]

try it with argyllcms
oem munki software itsn't really showing ANY of the capabilites that the CM can do

 

[3dogs]

Thanks for the suggestion, just been reading a thread on watercolour paper and coatings, and I am beginning to think that a person needs to LOOK at the results, I mean really look. I am having a swipe at myself!
The results I am getting using the Canson Arches profile are good enough for me, and folks I have shown the prints are thinking the same ( regarding the print quality, not content).
I have got myself sucked in to the pursuit of a "standard" thing is (with NO offence intended to any other view) when it comes down to it the colours reproduced are in gamut, so I have a value of 170 on my paper whereas WITH profile I may have had 169 or 171, i am thinking that it is just not worth chasing JUST for the sake of having a reference point........paint art doesn't so why should (my) photo art.

There we are, thank you linesmen, thank you ball boys, game over.

Labman ???????

 

[The Hat]

Does that mean that it’s a draw…?