RIP Question

[charlesp]

I'm curious to know how many of you employ Raster Image

Processors, especially if you use Epson printers and

Imageprint.. Do you feel the cost justifies the savings in bad

prints? Does it give you significantly improved print quality,

consistancy etc? Is it just as valuable for color as B&W?

Thanks

[graham_binns]

I've been considering Image print so would be intersted in experience people have with color and B&W print quality using this RIP? Although it looks expensive it should save me a considerable amount having custom profiles built assuming the profiles are as good ?

[beauh44]

Hi Charles, You might want to have a look at Quad Tone RIP. If you have one of the supported printers, it's shareware, so you can try it out for free and support it if you like it. I have a 2200 and tried it - it works quite well. Here's the link: http://harrington.com/QuadToneRIP.html Good luck!

[graham_binns]

One happy Image Print user in this thread

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=008Gmt

[alan_selk]

I`ve been using IP for almost a year but I do B&W printing almost exclusively so I can`t

give you any help on color (though I would guess that the lastest drivers from epson would

be very good). I can tell you that for B&W printing, page layout, profiles for lots and lots of

papers, you would be hard pressed to find anything close to what IP can do. I`ve been

using IP 6.0 (on a Mac) and the toning for B&W is very very good. For a serious B&W printer

the $500 is worth it just for that. It`s stable, easy to use, and well,,, I guess I`m a satisfied

IP user.

 

Alan Selk

[ashtonsmith]

What you will get out of it Patrick depends on how far down the "rabbit hole" your willing

to go. I have used ImagePrint, and I like it. It works well for me because I'm on a Mac. If I

were a PC user and had an Eye-One I would get Ergosoft's Studioprint before I would get

IP. The main reason is that StudioPrint lets you do linarizations and ink limits. I have

done color on a 2200 with StudiopPrint that I could only dream about with Epson's drivers.

Just about spot on color match with the monitor, minus the reflective-transmissive

differences.

 

I've also used StudioPrint on a 7600 with Cone Piezography inks. One nice feature is that

you can use the museum black with a set of cool inks and warm inks, mid and high tones

and switch between each in the software.

 

To your question "Does it give you significantly improved print quality and consistancy?"

The answer is definatly yes if taken all the way. If you just load IP or SP and then try and

get a good print, you won't.

 

If you have taken your prints to the highest level with Epson's drivers, and are prepared to

start you learning curve over for the most part to get to the next level. Then the answer is

yes.

[charlesp]

Thank you all for the great feedback! At this point I only do colour, but I know I

could get better colour match monitor to printer. I also have the Spyder for my

Mac LCD monitor, and I know how much this has helped. Boy, there seems to

be no end to the hardware/software upgrades to keep to optimum quality! Lets

see, if I want to eliminate bronzing on my Epson 2200 with gloss paper I need

to ... Then, of course. I have this nagging feeling I'm not really extracting all the

shadow detail from my slides with the Epson 3200.... And, gosh, this Mac G4

sure seems sluggish....

Thank gawd my Contax 645 isn't likely to be eclipsed by the latest greatest

version. I hope.

Maybe RIP really stands for Requiescat in Pace...