Epson 3880 Lessons Learned

<p>I'd been fairly pleased with my years-old Epson 2200 printer. However, I wanted to be able to print on 17x22-inch paper (16x20 inches with at least a half-inch border). Also, I wanted an integral RIP program, primarily for black and white images (if you don't use a RIP program with the 2200, black and white prints look ghastly). I purchased an Epson Stylus Pro 3880 Large-Format Inkjet Printer Graphic Arts Edition, and have learned two things I think are worth sharing:</p>

<p>1. ColorBurst RIP and 64-bit software- Before buying the 3880 Graphic Arts Edition, I checked the Epson 3880 web pages and read that the printer would work with my operating system- Windows Vista 64-bit. I also called Epson and confirmed this with technical support staff.</p>

<p>Having received the printer, I unpacked and set it up- a lengthy process. I installed the Epson software, then opened the bundled ColorBurst RIP software and started reading the booklet. What jumped out at me was "64-bit versions (of Windows) ... are not supported."</p>

<p>I called Epson and was told by their technical support staff that, in fact, the ColorBurst RIP program for the 3880 printer would not work with 64-bit software. As it turned out, this was not true. I called ColorBurst in Virginia, and- after getting the computer to talk to the printer- the ColorBurst technical support staff was able to get the RIP program to work with my 64-bit computer.</p>

<p>As an aside, I remember printing in a wet darkroom years ago. With, for instance, Zone VI products (e.g. my cold light head), the now-deceased Fred Picker would get on the phone. Fred was a printing genius, knew everything about Zone VI products and their use, and would set me straight.</p>

<p>The technical support staff at Epson are very nice and try hard, but one doesn't get the impression there is anyone at Epson with an encyclopedic knowledge of Epson's printers and their operation. Having to work around Epson to sort out the bundled RIP program with ColorBurst did not favorably impress me.</p>

<p>2. USB v. Eithernet- Before I could get the RIP program to work, I had an hours-long battle getting the computer to work with the printer outside of the RIP program. I'll shorten this up- it turns out that if the printer is any distance from the computer you do not want to use USB cords. I had to find a crossover eithernet cable, which works like a charm.</p>

<p>When I bought my 3880 I received a phone number to call that was to the "pro help," and they clearly knew their stuff much better than regular customer support. Check your box for a card with that number.</p>

<p>Brian, I've been talking with Epson's "Preferred Technical Support." </p>

<p>So ... how do you like the output? I just spent this morning pushing some 17x22 VFA through my 3880. And I love that thing even more than I did the first week I got it. I don't <em>think</em> I'm missing the RIP package - I haven't run into any printing situation that the vanilla rig didn't handle beautifully.</p>

<p>Matt, I'm very pleased with the black and white output, in particular. The images are superb for tonality and overall exposure on the first try. </p>

<p>As I get time, I'm going to compare some black and white images printing with the RIP program and through the Epson software. I'd decided to get the RIP program for the 3880, as I'd seen some black and white prints from the 3800 made without a RIP program and was underwhelmed with their appearance. I know Epson upgraded the 3880 for black and white printing, so I'm going to give the Epson software a shot, too.</p>

<p>1. Get a mac, seriously... get a mac :-)<br>

2. Try Quadtone RIP. For black and white, for $50, it's the best thing going.<br>

I use it with my Epson 3800 and it has revolutionized my black and white prints, better than the basic drivers, better than ABW as well.<br>

Good luck.</p>

<p>Eric - While I agree completely with the "get a Mac" suggestion, Quadtone RIP is simply not needed with the 3880. I second Matt's statement: <em>And I love that thing even more than I did the first week I got it. I don't think I'm missing the RIP package - I haven't run into any printing situation that the vanilla rig didn't handle beautifully.</em></p>

<p>The 3880 prints my most challenging color and B&W images with ease on a range of papers. I see no need for a RIP with the 3880.<em><br /></em></p>

<p><strong>Unless</strong> you were trying to proof CMYK data for press work on the 3880, you didn’t need the ColorBurst RIP. The addition of that option greatly made the printing process more complicated than necessary. </p>

<p>Let me add another question to the wood pile: If I process my image through NIK SilverEfex Pro can I still print through Epson's ABW or would this be a double-profiling of sorts?</p>

<p>John - I process my images to B&W and then print using ABW. The only change I make from default is to select Dark rather than Darker in the Epson print dialog. That yields a pretty solid match for my screen. I've used both Alien Skin Exposure and Silver Efex to do the initial conversion.</p>

<p>I guess I should note that the final files are saved as 16-bit RGB TIFFs even though the image itself is B&W. I don't know if saving them as grayscale would make any difference. I don't think so, but I thought I would mention it.</p>

<p>BTW, my initial test prints on Premium Luster did not reveal much, if any, difference between 1440 dpi and 2880 dpi. Since then I've done more work on Epson's Hot Press papers and on Harman's Matt Cotton Smooth. 2880 dpi does yield a slightly sharper print on those papers. The difference is noticeable but small.</p>

<p>I think I prefer Epson's Hot Press papers for color work, but Harman Matt Cotton Smooth for B&W, though either paper is excellent for either type.</p>

<p>Andrew, I can't win. For years, imaging authorities were pushing RIP programs. </p>

<p>For the Epson 2200, black and white prints looked horrible until I added Quadtone RIP. While I found Quadtone workable, it has also been tweaky and labor-intensive.</p>

<p>I didn't get the ColorBurst RIP for color, but for printing in Grayscale. I know you are an imaging and printing expert, and if I had a fraction of your knowledge, I might have forgone the ColorBurst RIP. Perhaps after running comparisons between the ColorBurst software and the Epson software, I'll find the Epson software does good black and white. But that wasn't my impression of the 3800.</p>

<p>And Andrew, switching gears, I got a notice for PhotoKit Sharpener 2. Is that an update, or will I have to extract all of PKS 1, then load PKS 2?</p>

<p>Eric, seriously, my primary computer, on which I do all my still and video editing is a PC from work. We use PCs at work and they bought me a $5K computer with the near-$2K flagship version of Adobe Premier- which has everything. Setting aside Macs being absurdly overpriced, I need to work on PCs.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Let me add another question to the wood pile: If I process my image through NIK SilverEfex Pro can I still print through Epson's ABW or would this be a double-profiling of sorts?</p>

</blockquote>

 

<p>ABW is a black box. Its used to convert images into B&W* appearance and print using fewer inks to produce a more neutral result (if you don’t set toning in the driver) and is also more archival. You can convert the color to B &W RGB with Nik but as soon as you send that through the driver with ABW, the appearance is not honored. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>For years, imaging authorities were pushing RIP programs.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>And for many users, that was the correct answer. But you need to first define what you mean by RIP (which is really a Raster Image Processor and not necessary a 3rd party print driver). Those who need to deal with non raster data (Postscript, complex page layout docs) need a RIP. Those that need to send CMYK data through such printers need a 3rd party driver that may or may not be a true RIP but one that will accept CMYK data. The standard drivers we see in most photo printers are either Quickdraw or GDI drivers which do not understand CMYK. They must be fed RGB data. The idea behind the RIP you purchased was for this task and it may be Postscript compatible so you can send it a composed page say out of Indesign. IF all you wanted to do was make prints from RGB images, in Photoshop, Lightroom, etc, you did not need that product. You could have purchased ImagePrint, another 3rd party driver which can be purchased (for more $) to handle Postscript. Or stick with the Epson driver. IOW, like the QuadTone goodie you were using, lots of people make 3rd party drivers. Some are true RIPs. Some are not. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>I didn't get the ColorBurst RIP for color, but for printing in Grayscale.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You didn’t need the product to do that. That’s really not why it was designed or bundled with the printer as an option. Use either the Epson driver with the ABW option OF send off B&W you create and send using a good ICC profile. *Note, when I say B&W, I’m referring to an RGB document. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>And Andrew, switching gears, I got a notice for PhotoKit Sharpener 2. Is that an update, or will I have to extract all of PKS 1, then load PKS 2?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Its a totally new version with new functionality. What’s new in PhotoKit Sharpener II, see: http://www.pixelgenius.com/PKS2-PR/Whats-New.html<br />PhotoKit 1 users get a 70% discount (upgrade is $30). </p>

<p>ColorBurst probably did you more harm than good, or at least didn't help any. QTR is a great way to print b&w. It may not be "needed," in the sense that you can certainly make respectable b&w prints on a 3800 series printer without it, but it will allow you to make better prints than Advanced BW. And you certainly don't need a Mac.</p>

<p><em>You can convert the color to B &W RGB with Nik but as soon as you send that through the driver with ABW, the appearance is not honored.</em></p>

<p>That hasn't been my experience. B&W images printed via ABW are an excellent match for my calibrated screen. Whatever choices I make during the conversion in regard to tonality, contrast, etc. are being faithfully reproduced in print.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>That hasn't been my experience.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Consider yourself lucky! To do this correctly, you need to use specific profiles built by this fellow:</p>

<p>http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/Epson3800/abwprofiles.html</p>

<blockquote>

<p>These gray curves provide screen-to-print matching when printing B&W images through the ABW driver. However, they're inconvenient to use because (1) you have to remember to apply the gray curve (e.g., via an adjustment layer) prior to printing and (2) applying a gray curve is different from the usual color-managed workflow involving ICC printer profiles. In addition, if you print from an application such as Lightroom (as I do), then you can't use gray curves at all unless you first perform an inconvenient round-trip operation to Photoshop.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>+1 to Andrew's response regarding Eric Chan's ABW profiles. They smooth out the linearity and he's done us all a service by posting them. There are some profiles up on his website for the 3880 and you need to use those rather than the 3800 profiles because of the difference in the printers. If you use papers other than those he has listed, ABW profiles are relatively inexpensive to purchase; Eric has a ABW target file that you print out and send to him. I haven't found any reason to try alternative printing procedures and about 40% of my output is B&W.</p>

<p> </p>

<p><em>Consider yourself lucky! To do this correctly, you need to use specific profiles built by this fellow:</em></p>

<p>It can't just be luck. I've printed too wide of a range of B&W photos on too many papers. I noticed you linked to the 3800 page. Perhaps there has been an improvement in the 3880 which has reduced or eliminated the need for special ABW profiles?</p>

<p>I looked at his 3880 ABW profiles page. Right now I'm using MK and I don't have any matte papers which he has profiles for. (I'm down to my stock of Harman Matt Cotton Smooth.) As soon as I switch inks or get more Hot Press Bright I'll run some tests to find out if I can see any difference between a straight ABW print and an ABW print with a profile. But I can't imagine finding a large improvement. I'm hard pressed to imagine even a small improvement.</p>

<p>"I looked at his 3880 ABW profiles page. Right now I'm using MK and I don't have any matte papers which he has profiles for. (I'm down to my stock of Harman Matt Cotton Smooth.) As soon as I switch inks or get more Hot Press Bright I'll run some tests to find out if I can see any difference between a straight ABW print and an ABW print with a profile. But I can't imagine finding a large improvement. I'm hard pressed to imagine even a small improvement"<br>

It will improve your images and correct for any non-linearity in the gray-scale response. Will it be a marked improvement? That is for you to judge. Eric provides these profiles as a public service and you can always spend the $10 to have him do a profile for the particular paper you use. I know he has some matte paper for profiling (because I sent him the samples) but you need to remember that he has a day job and a real life interest in photography. You can achieve the same results by doing a set of curves in PS but that's more complicated than using the ABW profiles.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>It can't just be luck. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>You can easily test this. Build a conversion using say a split tone or sepia in Photoshop. Now send that data through AB&W driver, if you want, try applying a similar appearance with the sliders, or just send it out as the default settings. Do they match now? </p>

<p>Take a full color image (not a converted color to B&W), send it to the driver. You don’t get color, you get B&W, again converted based on the black box process. There is no soft proof. The only image you see is that attractive woman that Greg Gorman shot to see the effect as you move the sliders. And those sliders completely over-ride the current appearance of your image. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Perhaps there has been an improvement in the 3880 which has reduced or eliminated the need for special ABW profiles?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Nope. I own the 3880 too.</p>

<p>Bottom line. Use ABW for its proprietary conversions from color (or if you want, some conversion you make) but if the later, and you want to honor that, you send RGB data without the ABW mode in the driver, using an ICC profile. </p>

<p><em>You can easily test this. Build a conversion using say a split tone or sepia in Photoshop. Now send that data through AB&W driver, if you want, try applying a similar appearance with the sliders, or just send it out as the default settings. Do they match now?</em></p>

<p>A split tone or sepia image would have color in it. I haven't tried that as those aren't my thing. But I imagine ABW would want to first convert this color to B&W. So I wouldn't try printing those images through ABW.</p>

<p>When I print a B&W image through ABW it is a faithful reproduction of what's on my screen. My choices in the respective plugin (i.e. Silver Efex or Alien Skin Exposure), along with any modifications in Photoshop (i.e. dodging and burning) appear in the print. They do not disappear and I do not get something different or unexpected. I don't send a high contrast image and get a low contrast one, for example.</p>

<p><em>Take a full color image (not a converted color to B&W), send it to the driver. You don’t get color, you get B&W, again converted based on the black box process. And those sliders completely over-ride the current appearance of your image.</em></p>

<p>If you send a color image to ABW then you're leaving the color to grayscale conversion up to the driver. I suppose that could give you anything. But I don't do that.</p>

<p>I agree that messing with the sliders would alter the look of the image. That's why I leave them at zero. The only thing I change is "Darker" to "Dark". The Darker setting was a touch too dark vs. appearance on screen.</p>

<p>I realize ABW is a "black box". And I'm open to the possibility that a custom profile or RIP could yield slight improvements. Never the less, the prints I have made through ABW have been such faithful reproductions of the work on my screen that I haven't felt any need to explore these other options. In my experience it just works. I haven't had to make any proof prints with this setup. If it looks right on screen, it prints right.</p>

<p>Your statement "...as soon as you send that through the driver with ABW, the appearance is not honored..." leaves the impression that someone could do a ton of work in Silver Efex and ABW would produce a radically different print, a print that looked like it had never been converted in Efex. I certainly have never seen that happen.</p>

<p>FWIW, Keith Cooper recommended looking at ABW in his 3880 review (http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/printer/epson_sp_3880.html) as he found the results to be very good. He also links to his articles on producing custom profiles and fine tuning B&W printing, but basically says that's for non Epson papers. Again, I can't rule out some improvement using a custom profile or RIP. But ABW does a fine job all on its own.</p>

<p>Eric;</p>

<p>1_ you didtn need a RIP (as Andrew said) it was true for the older generation like the 2200.. but since the 2400 it is not mandatory since the ABW is itself a kind of a RIP inboard for BW.</p>

<p>2_the 3880 was not tune for better BW.. it was tune for larger color gammut in the red / green if i remember correctly by replacing 2 ink with the name *vivid* like the new *vivid* majenta ; )... nothing to do with BW.</p>

<p>3_you should process your image first as BW if you want the full control out of the result of your image.. if you just simply send a color image and want it BW, yes it will work.. but the BW will be like if you just convert your color image to grayscale.. nothing to be amazed of.. saddly, a lot of people simply do this.. and think that by getting a RIP they will get better result.. wrong again.</p>

<p>A RIP dont and wont replace the work you do in darkroom.. so yes you can use Silver Effex, and when you are happy you use the ABW to get your BW neutral and perfect.</p>

<p>As for the 1440 vs the 2880 ppi thing.. you will never really see anything different with your bare eyes.. i print everything at 1440 ppi.</p>

<p>When people suggest to get a RIP of any sort with a 3800 because it give better result, stunning, amazing .. far better than the original.. i just suspect a lack of knowledge to start with .. no offense. But i consider myself a fine art print guy, and i have try a RIP, QTR, ABW, printing from a RGB, from a grayscale, with and without ABW... and the best and simple way of doing thing to get a incredible image with or without a learning curve was simply to send the image in whatever mode to the ABW without using any paper profile in Photoshop.. as it is writen in your manual ; )</p>

<blockquote>

<p>A split tone or sepia image would have color in it. </p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yet you can add color (tone) with the ABW! Its not just for neutral output. <br>

Take say a MacBeth 24 patch target and convert it from color to your preferred B&W rendering (in RGB of course). Try to get each patch to separate in tone. Now print it using ABW, even using a neutral setting. The tone (separation) you feed it to the ABW driver will not be identically honored because again, its going to convert that data its own way. It might be close. But identical? Try it. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>If you send a color image to ABW then you're leaving the color to grayscale conversion up to the driver. I suppose that could give you anything. But I don't do that.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is one way to work (let the driver take the color image and convert). But again, you can very carefully do the conversion and unless you use an ICC profile, the driver will still convert the data using ABW. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Your statement "...as soon as you send that through the driver with ABW, the appearance is not honored..." leaves the impression that someone could do a ton of work in Silver Efex and ABW would produce a radically different print, a print that looked like it had never been converted in Efex. I certainly have never seen that happen.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Radically different no, identical, never seen it. </p>

 

<p>Patrick<em> - As for the 1440 vs the 2880 ppi thing.. you will never really see anything different with your bare eyes.. i print everything at 1440 ppi.</em></p>

<p>I can see a difference on the Epson Hot Press papers. 2880 does yield a sharper print. But the difference is very, very small. I doubt the average person would notice, especially at normal viewing distances. And every image probably doesn't exhibit it as I can only reliably spot it in certain areas of certain prints.</p>

<p>Never the less, excellent summary and advice.</p>

<p>Andrew - <em>But again, you can very carefully do the conversion and unless you use an ICC profile, the driver will still convert the data using ABW.</em></p>

<p>What is your basis for this? Are you assuming that because ABW will translate a color value to a grayscale one that it must translate values which are already gray? Most of your tests center around that assumption but don't prove it. I ask as a programmer because detecting if a pixel is a shade of gray versus a shade of color is about the easiest thing in the world. Why would Epson programmers do anything with a gray pixel value other than try to faithfully reproduce it on the selected media type? It's entirely possible that someone might create a profile or RIP which is more successful than their driver in this reproduction. Such things are old hat in the industry. But the bar is pretty high this time.</p>

<p>I'll have to try the color chart test when I get some more paper so that I can use the linked profiles. But I'm not expecting any surprises. Could a custom profiled print of such a test yield greater accuracy? Sure. I would be shocked if the difference was great enough to lose sleep over.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Are you assuming that because ABW will translate a color value to a grayscale one that it must translate values which are already gray?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No, not necessarily. Any kind of toning I do isn’t honored. If the image is totally neutral, all values are R=G=B, I think they are honored depending on the settings (you have to find the magic settings). IOW, Dark, Darker and as importantly, the Horz and Vertical settings in the Advanced area of the driver. This is assuming the popup is set to Neural (which depending on factors like paper and how you view the print, doesn’t guarantee neutral but its closer than the other options of course). </p>

<p>Anything I need to print that isn’t expected neutral, I have to send out with an ICC profile because the non R=G=B values get converted in the “black box”. Or I have to attempt to set the driver for a color appearance I wish, using the Gorman image instead of my own. </p>