Digital BW, The Print

I took a tour around the PhotoPlus expo in New York today.  At the 
Epson stand I viewed samples of the Epson 4000 Pro Colorburst RIP 
output on Epson Premium Luster photo paper (UC inks) and was very 
surprised to see a very neutral print that had little if any 
bronzing.  Maybe it was just the image at hand but the result seemed 
very impressive.  Has anyone else taken a look at this combination 
for RC B&W?

The Epson package has a version of Colorburst that does not allow 
the profiling of additional ink and paper combinations but one can 
upgrade to the full version.  It seemed to be very attractively 
priced vs what I had heard Imageprint was priced at.  What are 
people's thoughts re Colorburst in general?  (Colour or B&W - if 
more appropriate please respond off list.)  

The President of Colorburst made a comment to me that I did not 
understand.  He said that Imageprint treats the printer as an RGB 
printer whereas they treat it as the CMYK printer it is designed to 
be.  Can someone please explain what he meant by this?

Thanks in advance

Steve

>
>
>  The Epson package has a version of Colorburst that does not allow
>  the profiling of additional ink and paper combinations

don't buy that one

>  but one can
>  upgrade to the full version. 

buy that one

>  It seemed to be very attractively
>  priced vs what I had heard Imageprint was priced at.  What are
>  people's thoughts re Colorburst in general?  (Colour or B&W - if
>  more appropriate please respond off list.) 

I'm getting great color prints using Colorburst with Fotonics and 
Darkroom Gloss on a 7600.  I do my own profiling.  Black and white is 
another story.  I'm working with another list member to come up with an 
IP-like linearization for Colorburst for black and white. After going 
through the initial rounds of the project, the b&w prints made with the 
new linearization and profile were very close to being neutral in 
color.  But, there were some weird artifacts of a type I've never seen. 
  In going to their site to post an e mail to their support, I saw where 
there was a version upgrade to the RIP, so I downloaded it.  In 
trashing the old app and installing the new one, the artifacts were 
gone.  And my regular color profile worked fine in terms of image 
quality.  But the color is not neutral for black and white.  And when I 
tried to load the linearization we had made, the new software version 
gave me a new error message:  inks too low.  So I can't even try the 
adjustments for black and white that we've worked out.  Consultation 
with Colorburst is needed.  They've been pretty taciturn in the past. I 
may have to go back to the older version if CB doesn't respond.  In the 
past they've responded with one-sentence, cryptic answers that didn't 
help any.
>
>  The President of Colorburst made a comment to me that I did not
>  understand.  He said that Imageprint treats the printer as an RGB
>  printer whereas they treat it as the CMYK printer it is designed to
>  be.  Can someone please explain what he meant by this?

He means that CB allows discrete control of the inks- you can send a 
CMYK file to it, whereas with IP, you can't (well, you can, but all the 
lights on the front of the printer will just flash like mad).  IP does 
a good job, though. Colorbyte (IP) refuses to create a "recipe" for you 
for black and white if you're not using the UCs, though.

James

At 01:04 -0700 23.10.2004, James Irelan wrote:
*******************************************

>  >  The President of Colorburst made a comment to me that I did not
>>  understand.  He said that Imageprint treats the printer as an RGB
>  >  printer whereas they treat it as the CMYK printer it is designed to
>  >  be.  Can someone please explain what he meant by this?

It means that Mr. president of Coloburst is not able to create such 
"black box" which IP use as IP president created ;o)

The profiles of IP are profiles of RGB input data + "black box" + 
printer inks, head and + paper. Including linearisation and 
separation of input data to 1, 2, -, 7, 8 channels (inks). The IP 
idea is to control all the most sensitive and the most complicated 
steps of process - linearisation, black generation and control of 
individual inks. User controls only input data. Simple but sometimes 
lack of control.

Colorburst is "clasical" RIP - where user uses his own linearisation 
and profiles of printer + paper combo. The separation and individual 
inks must be controled by user too. Full control but very complicated.

My 2 cents

Martin
--

On Oct 23, 2004, at 1:55 AM, Martin Sluka wrote:

> At 01:04 -0700 23.10.2004, James Irelan wrote:
>  *******************************************
>
>  >  >  The President of Colorburst made a comment to me that I did not
>  >>  understand.  He said that Imageprint treats the printer as an RGB
>  >  >  printer whereas they treat it as the CMYK printer it is 
> designed to
>  >  >  be.  Can someone please explain what he meant by this?
>

Actually, I didn't write this- I responded to it.

James

It seems in regard to rips that Epson is more concerned with the cmyk market for offset 
color proofing, posters, and printing from Quark, etc. than they are in creating a fully 
functional rip for fine photogaphy. We have a service bureau here who only uses their 
9600 for proofing ad work and design work and they make much more money doing that 
than outputting photography. Epson wants it all.