Some tests with the ET-8550

[maximilian59]

I always said with postcard it doesn’t make sense to have six or more inks. On A4 with a full portrait good developed you might see something. Going to A3 or beyond I am pretty sure that more inks make more sense. What you have at 11x17 mm is then at about 30x40 cm and above. In my eyes it makes no sense to enlarge the Fuji test picture. It was never made for this and has not enough information in it.
And thanks for the comparison, as you write there are differences. So it’s a proof for it. For the one they are worth the other printer, for the other not.
As I don’t know whether in all printers OEM ink was used, this might make difference too. Even with profiles not all third party inks have the same color rendition than the OEM where the printer and driver is made for.
For me it’s still clear, that the less different inks are available, the less ink is on the paper on the very light tones and more paper is visible. With pigmented inks this will lead to gloss differentials. On glossy paper these areas may look different in color in different surroundings only by the paper and not the inks.
So for me I take the printer which fits the job. For postcards and up to A4 most of the time 4 inks, above A4 8 inks with dye on glossy up to A3+ or the Pro-1000 for matte and glossy papers, depending on the paper and purpose.
We have all opportunities so let’s use them if available. All my friends are impressed from the prints made with the Pro-100 compared to their 4 ink printers. It seems there is a difference already visible to the untrained eyes.
No doubt, the ET-8850 is one of the best printer for its money and covers more than 95% of all needs. I am happy it makes you glad and I love my printers. If my Pro-100 ever gives up his life, I will look at the ET-8850 or what’s available at this time.
Cheers,
Maximilian

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

My doctor told me after all these test etc prints that I got pixelitis and I should stay away for some days from devices creating pixels like monitors or printers....................... and I just will watch analogue video/TV for a while - is that non-pixeled.?

I tried other prints - e.g. a crop from a patch sheet - to look for differences of dithering between printers e.g. the graininess and uniformity of the print like this one



and to compare areas with higher or lower ink coverage but won't post all those images. I'm still trying to find a way to identify possible differences between 4 and 6-7-8-... color prints, an increased gamut is easy to measure but the effect of light inks ? What do you see on A3 prints which you don't on A4 prints ? Is it the size increase itself to enhance the impression of an image ?

Pigment inks and their appearance on different papers is another interesting but complex subject which I won't introduce here.

 

[The Hat]

We have all opportunities so let’s use them if available. All my friends are impressed from the prints made with the Pro-100 compared to their 4 ink printers. It seems there is a difference already visible to the untrained eyes.

A 5 colour printer that makes photos is great to have, and your more than satisfied with the output and results, the same goes with the guy that has an 8 colour printer, because you get used to seeing that same quality output, but what’s the difference, the answer is clearly none, But..

If you have access to both types of printers you will automatically choose the 8 colour photo as the better one, because you’ve got both to compare, but yet both are the exactly the same print.

Is it not time we viewed the photo contents instead of the output quality, we never did that when we got the photos from a lab..

 

[maximilian59]

For black and white I was my own lab. For color prints it was not so easy because of the price. Oh, and cheap color labs made bad prints. These are the ones which fade now fast as ”lightning”.

 

[The Hat]

Oh, and cheap color labs made bad prints. These are the ones which fade now fast as ”lightning”.

Yes but back then we were all happy with that quality..

 

[stratman]

Yes but back then we were all happy with that quality..

It's photography's version of Original Sin. Ignorance is bliss. Knowledge illuminates imperfection.

Smart fella that you are, you probably realized it soon after you took your first picture:

https://www.indiatimes.com/trending/social-relevance/worlds-oldest-photos-543067.html?picid=2125225

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

That's quite a long time ago - I barely remember....do I see pixels already on this image ?

 

[The Hat]

That's quite a long time ago - I barely remember.

It’s amazing how far we’ve come, it’s now the age of the Pixel peepers..

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

I'm still trying to find out if and what differences are visible between prints from printers with or w/o light inks - or are not. These claimed differences are between pretty elusive and non-existant for me. I don't see them on pixel level, but is there any other approach to come to a better conclusion on this question - e.g. using a particular test image like high key or using some abstraction to an image emphazising the areas showing a visible difference ? The Canon Pro-200 is mentioned as a kind or reference in this respect but how does it compare to prints from the IP8750 or IX6850 - the other Canon A3 printers - under otherwise the same conditions - profiled - same paper - same inks - same size - best quality level

 

[The Hat]

how does it compare to prints from the IP8750 or IX6850 - the other Canon A3 printers - under otherwise the same conditions - profiled - same paper - same inks - same size - best quality level

Back when I was bashing out thousands of sheets a week, on posters and brochures, (with photos) I used two A3 printers and two A4 printers all using the same I.S. dye inks.

1 printer A3 had 8 inks including PM and PC plus Green and Red, the other had just 3 dye inks and both the A4 printers just the standard 4 colours. (I mixed the green and red from the existing colours)

I was able to tune all the printers to output very much the same colour prints, 1 was running in standard mode and the rest were on high quality mode, and a blind man on horseback couldn’t tell the difference in any of the output sheets, back then pixel peepers were fairly scarce..
P.S. and not a Feckin Profile in sight..