Underwhelmed By Pro-100

[opurora]

Thanks for the continued input guys.

Mr. Sletcher your advice about printing the test image and one of my images on the same sheet is a good one, I will try that.

 

[Methodical]

...At the very least you need a good IPS panel...

Roy S.

This is something to seriously consider from my reading and research for photo editing monitors. The IPS monitors have better and more consistent color quality than a TN panel. Your monitor is a TN panel type.

 

[The Hat]

I have watched this discussion with interest and stayed out of it because I don’t edit or alter my photos that I take, just print them as they were shot and use fairly expensive un-calibrated Eizo monitors.

I know this is a sacrilege to most photographers but that’s the way I do it, so I reckon one way to solve this dilemma for @opurora would be for him to send someone one of his problem photos and one unedited, both taken by him of course.

Then we could print both of them on a single sheet together and post the results and @opurora could do the same his end that way we could then see the differences and make our recommendations.

Wouldn't that work !

 

[Roy Sletcher]

So what would this test image be?

Printing Insights #048
Printer Evaluation Image

note by Uwe Steinmueller


This is the one I use. it comes with a text file to help interpret what you are seeing.
I have files of this image going back to 2008. Interesting to see how my printing quality has improved.

You can download it from here:
http://www.outbackphoto.com/printinginsights/pi048/essay.html

Every paper I use is profiled and a printout of this image dated and filed.

Gives me a visual reference and comparison of the result of different papers.

More importantly! When you get weird results, and at some point you will - believe me, you now have a reference of what NORMAl looks like.

Not a perfect system but quick, simple and gives a hard copy reference for trouble shooting comparison images.

There are other reference files, just look for them on the web.

Roy S.

 

[Methodical]

Background:

Ok. I printed the “Printer Evaluation Image” to see where my printer stands. I compared the Canon Custom ICC paper profiles to the Custom paper profiles I created with the Colormunki Photo. I printed 2 images for both profiles (all settings were identical); one using perceptual and one using relative rendering. To be honest, I can’t really tell the difference between perceptual and relative. I just know what my eyes like – which are both. Below are my observations.

Equipment Used:

Dell U3011
Colormunki Photo
Canon Pro 100
Canon Ink
Canon Photo Paper: Pro Luster, Semi gloss and Gloss

Results:

The Canon photos were a bit warmer (i.e. a hint more red) than those using my custom profiles, but not too bad at all though. I also noticed the blacks were more grayish than the custom icc blacks. To get the human skin tones the way I like with the Canon profiles, I'd have to de-saturate the reds and the oranges by a little, but nothing extreme, so not a lot of additional work to get the image right in my eyes. The Custom ICC profile human skin tones do not look too warm and the blacks were blacker. So, I can confirm that the Canon paper profiles are just a touch warmer, nothing to troublesome that would not stop me from using them if I did not have the custom profiles.

Bottom Line: I'd have no problem using either the Canon or the Custom profiles. It's amazing what you can see when you print the various profiles and set them side by side. I think this is something that everyone who prints should do to see for themselves how this stuff actually works.

Suggestions:

To the OP, in my opinion, you have several choices, well maybe more, but these are the 3 I chose:

1. At a minimum, purchase a calibrator that allows you to create custom monitor/paper profiles with your existing monitor – something like the colormunki photo, which would give you the most accurate output for your monitor and closest to an industry standard.

2. Ultmate. Purchase an IPS monitor that has more consistent and accurate colors and do step 1.

3. My least favorite. Process an image until the colors are the way you want with your existing monitor, test with all the photo paper you use to your liking and save as an action for future printing use. Could be a lot trial and error.

Just One Man's Opinion

 

[opurora]

Interesting twist. A friend came over with his Windows XP laptop which had never had any print drivers or photo software on it. We downloaded all the drivers and the trial of Qimage and printed up some of my shots. Wow, did they come out great! Extremely close to old reference prints I made on my 9000II. So I'm thinking maybe the drivers on my computer have been corrupted somehow. I know on Apple mac's you can "reset the printing system" and start fresh. How do you do this on Windows 7 machines? Just the regular 'remove application' procedure?

 

[ThrillaMozilla]

Just remove the printer (from the computer). I'm sure there are other ways, but I think that will do it.

 

[FalconST]

Hi opurora,

Just read through your posts.
Funny, I just finished printing several test prints using my Pro-100 and the same image.
I printed on Canon Pro Luster, Canon Semi-Gloss, Canon Pro Premium Matte, Canson Infinity Baryta, Red River San Gabriel Semi-gloss Baryta, and Red River Pearl Metallic and most turned out great. The worst was the Canson Baryta print as it seemed muted compared to the others. I also have the Pro9000 and the Pro-100 is much better than the previous generation printer.

When I first received the Pro-100 last year, I also thought the printer wasn't as good as the Pro9000, however, after some experimenting and proper setup, things have gotten much better. It is important to use the XPS driver with the Pro-100, 16-bit vs the 8bit driver makes a world of difference. I use Lightroom 5 and set the images for printing using perceptual, the resolution is left "unchecked" (provides native printer resolution), and always use an ICC profile matched to the paper with Lightroom controlling the printer. It is also very important to keep the Canon printer driver set to Matching None.

When you change to different papers, recheck ALL property settings!!! I have noticed that when I change papers within the printer properties, the quality level changes every time.

When printing Black and White images, DO NOT check the "black and white image" box within the printer properties dialog. Let Lightroom control the printer. If you check the box, you will end up with a slight color cast to the image.

Upgrading your firmware will add a few new features to the printer.
1. Add a new Pro Platinum color rendition "N"
2. Add the new Canon Photo Paper Pro Premium Matte
3. reduce the 35mm "Fine-Art" border to 30mm.
and it seems to print faster as well.

Hope these tips help.

Brian

 

[Methodical]

...
When you change to different papers, recheck ALL property settings!!! I have noticed that when I change papers within the printer properties, the quality level changes every time...

Brian

One thing I did is go through all the paper type (i.e. luster, gloss, semi-gloss etc) and setup each and saved the profile, so that I don't have to always double check the settings - just click which paper I want to print on and all settings are automatically retrieved for that particular paper.

I'll let the experts talk about the chances one takes when upgrading firmware and refilling issues.

 

[opurora]

@FalconST and @Methodical
I appreciate you taking the time to read thru my posts and offer suggestions to my problem. I normally use Qimage and have all my various paper and size settings saved. I don't have any experience with Lightroom, only PS CS5/6 and Qimage.

@FalconST What do you think of Canon's new Pro Premium Matte? How different is it compared to their normal matte?

The initial pictures I printed on my friends laptop did come out well however they are dark. I had to bump up the brightness several notches to get them to look decent.

However, we met again and printed some more. It's weird, some further shots came out great, others came out awful. I'm stumped. I'll have to continue to experiment...