3880 and QTR quirk

[Kerik]

I thought those who use QTR to make digital negatives would want to know about this. Turns out how you load your OHP has an effect on the outcome of your negative. This graph shows UV density readings on two step wedges printed with a 3880 and QTR. The ONLY difference between the two is how the OHP was loaded into the printer, front tray load or sheet feed load. Pretty weird. I didn't believe it the first time, so I did it again and got the same results. A difference of log 0.2 in DMAX in the negatives!

Dead Link Removed

 

[gmikol]

Kerik--

Can you post the QTR text file so others can compare exactly? I have a 3880 and I'm curious.

--Greg

 

[Kerik]

PRINTER=Quad3880
CURVE_NAME=Pd_KK_3880-OHP_nocurve10
GRAPH_CURVE=YES
N_OF_INKS=8
DEFAULT_INK_LIMIT=100
BOOST_K=90
LIMIT_K=85
LIMIT_C=5
LIMIT_M=5
LIMIT_Y=12
LIMIT_LC=10
LIMIT_LM=10
LIMIT_LK=85
LIMIT_LLK=100
N_OF_GRAY_PARTS=3
GRAY_INK_1=K
GRAY_VAL_1=100
GRAY_INK_2=LK
GRAY_VAL_2=40
GRAY_INK_3=LLK
GRAY_VAL_3=15
GRAY_HIGHLIGHT=0
GRAY_SHADOW=8
GRAY_OVERLAP=
GRAY_GAMMA=0.9
GRAY_CURVE="0;0, 100;100"
N_OF_TONER_PARTS=0
TONER_HIGHLIGHT=10
TONER_SHADOW=10
TONER_GAMMA=1
TONER_CURVE=
N_OF_TONER_2_PARTS=0
TONER_2_HIGHLIGHT=10
TONER_2_SHADOW=10
TONER_2_GAMMA=1
TONER_2_CURVE=
N_OF_UNUSED=0
COPY_CURVE_C=K
COPY_CURVE_M=K
COPY_CURVE_Y=K
COPY_CURVE_LC=LLK
COPY_CURVE_LM=LLK

 

[clay]

Weird. Has to be some sort of mechanical issue in the printer with how the sheet is feeding through as the print heads are working. Or I could be totally full of shit.

This is right up there with the difference in measured UV density depending on whether you measure the pictorico inked side up or inked side down in the densitometer.

 

[jkschreiber]

This is a long-shot but are you absolutely sure that you didn't inadvertently change output resolution when you changed the paper feed selection? I don't think that this is an issue with QTR, but it certainly can be with the Epson driver.

Stated another way, are you absolutely sure that paper feed selection was the only difference?

I'll try to replicate this and report back later.

~ Keith

 

[jkschreiber]

Very similar result here. I'm using a 3800, not a 3880, Mac G5, PSCS3, QTR 2.7, and Inkpress rather than Pictorico. I also used my own linearized profile.

Sheet feed has a Dmax of 2.85
Front feed has a Dmax of 2.55

(Measured on X-rite 361T - ink side up.)

Nothing changed other than feed method.

This was also my first use of the Front Feed and I sure like that it leaves no transport marks on the film.

Hmmmmmmmm,
Keith

 

[Kerik]

Confirmed. Nothing changed but the feed method. Interesting to see you got the same results. I'm using QTRgui on a Win764 box.

 

[Ben Altman]

Is the platen gap different b/c of a backing sheet? Grasping at straws here...

Ben

 

[Bruce]

Hi Kerik

A possible answer to your issue. I talked to an Epson Tech Rep at a photo equipment show in Columbus Ohio over the weekend and explained your issue to him. His thoughts were that the delivery for front load tray and sheet feed load on the Epson 3880 printer may not recognize the same paper settings for the paper (Pictorico OHP) that your using.

In other words, say on front load, if you had set Photo Glossy as your paper selection and the front load didn’t recognize that paper setting , the printer head might be at a different height that when you print with the sheet load method.

This doesn’t explain why you see different UV densities in just a portion of your test but I thought you might be interested in his comments.

Just a thought. I'll be interested in future info on this matter.

 

[Kerik]

I don't use a backing sheet.

Bruce, interesting thought. Did you tell him I was printing from a RIP and not through the Epson drivers?

Either way, it's not fatal. I tweaked my profile a bit and can still get the DMAX back to where I need it to be and still use the front load tray. Good bye pizza wheel marks.

 

[PVia]

I don't use a backing sheet.

I can't get it to load without a backing sheet...

 

[Kerik]

I can't get it to load without a backing sheet...

Huh, that's weird. I've front loaded Pictorico OHP in both a 3800 and now a 3880 without a problem.

 

[Bruce]

I don't use a backing sheet.

Bruce, interesting thought. Did you tell him I was printing from a RIP and not through the Epson drivers?

Either way, it's not fatal. I tweaked my profile a bit and can still get the DMAX back to where I need it to be and still use the front load tray. Good bye pizza wheel marks.

Hi Kerik

Yes I told him you were printing using the QTR RIP.

 

[pschwart]

Paper handling is not a strength of the 3800 - too many restrictions and not terribly reliable. I can load 8-1/2x11 OHP via the front sheet loader with no backing, but I get a large percentage of misfeeds. It can take several tries to get a sheet loaded; that's minutes of standing around pressing the console buttons and cursing the printer. My 3800 used to load OHP via the rear single sheet feeder but now it refuses. I wish Epson would give us a real pro quality desktop printer instead of these cheap plastic constructions.

Huh, that's weird. I've front loaded Pictorico OHP in both a 3800 and now a 3880 without a problem.

 

[Kerik]

I wish Epson would give us a real pro quality desktop printer instead of these cheap plastic constructions.

That's not my experience. For the price to performance ratio, I think the 3800/3880 printers can't be beat.

 

[pschwart]

I think the 3800 has a lot of design and build compromises. That doesn't mean it's not a useful piece of hardware and the price/performance ratio goes way up if you buy it refurbished. It does has some advantages over the competition. I would still pay a premium for a desktop printer that had excellent media handling (including OHP), *never* left pizza wheel marks, had live channels for matte and photo black (no switching), and better head maintenance (no clogs).

That's not my experience. For the price to performance ratio, I think the 3800/3880 printers can't be beat.

 

[Kerik]

Yes, compromises are made to keep the thing affordable. Have you looked into the 4900 and above? Maybe one of those would be a better choice. Best value is to buy brand new with a good rebate. I got my 3880 brand new for about $800 after rebate. When I look at the other hardware I spend money on in my work, I've got no complaints. But I don't seem to have the same difficulties that you do.

 

[pschwart]

A 13" printer suits my needs; I have no room for a behemoth like the 4900. It also has a lot of the same issues with paper handling, clogging, and ink switching that one experiences with the 3800. Still waiting for the perfect printer ...

Yes, compromises are made to keep the thing affordable. Have you looked into the 4900 and above? Maybe one of those would be a better choice.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Yes, compromises are made to keep the thing affordable. Have you looked into the 4900 and above? Maybe one of those would be a better choice. Best value is to buy brand new with a good rebate. I got my 3880 brand new for about $800 after rebate. When I look at the other hardware I spend money on in my work, I've got no complaints. But I don't seem to have the same difficulties that you do.

800 USD is very reasonable. Checking prices this morning, the Epson 3880 is 885 GBP (1,462 USD) excluding VAT @ 20%.

Tom