Color cast when printing B&W

[emilio_petrillo1]

Hi,

 

I just bought a Canon i950 printer. I am getting good results when printing

in color but I'm having problems with B&W. When printing a "grayscale" image

on plain paper everything is fine. When I switch to high resolution inkjet

paper or glossy photo paper I get ugly blue or green cast in the print. This

happens even if I select "Grayscale" mode in the print driver. I am using

Canon brand photo papers and selecting the correct paper in the driver. I

have had equally bad results when trying to print duo's and quadtones. If I

try to manually adjust the color balance in the print driver I get warm

highlights while still getting green in the mids and shadows. I have done a

nozzle check and print head alignment and all is good. What am I doing

wrong.

 

Thanks,

Emilio

[peter nelson]

Welcome to the world of black and white inkjet printing!<P>

 

I don't have any specific help to offer, because I'm not familiar with Canon printers, but newbies should be warned that black and white printing with inkjet printers is extraordinarily difficult. People go out and buy $500+ RIPs, expensive color profiling products (probably what you will need) or even second printers with a dedicated set of third-party grayscale inks. Inkjets should really come with warning stickers saying "abandon all hope of black and white printing, oh ye who buy this product!"

[brian_c._miller]

My HP 932C does the same thing. There is no way it will ever do good B&W, because it uses color inks to produce the shades.

 

I do have hope for my new Epson 2200, though. The B&W sample on matte paper included with the printer has no cast to it. The Epson 2200 has photo black, matte black (photo and matte are mutually exclusive, though), and light black.

 

You can get an Epson 1280 for $300 new ($400 & $100 rebate) and then use an aftermarket all-black ink set in it.

[beauh44]

I'm not familiar with Canon's printer, but if it has a separate black cartridge and the driver allows it, select Black-only ink. If you do that with Epson, a "warning" box pops up telling you the world will end. But by golly, that print will NOT have a color cast! Good luck!.. Beau

[peter nelson]

<I>My HP 932C does the same thing. There is no way it will ever do good B&W, because it uses color inks to produce the shades.</I><P>

 

So does your eye. In bright light you use mainly the cones in your retina but you can still see a neutral grayscale.<P>

 

<I>I do have hope for my new Epson 2200, though. The B&W sample on matte paper included with the printer has no cast to it. The Epson 2200 has photo black, matte black (photo and matte are mutually exclusive, though), and light black.</I><P>

 

Better look again. The sample print you refer to may have no cast, but it has wicked bad metamerism! I.e., it has no cast <B>in a specific light</B>. Change the light source and it goes Technicolor on you. If you don't notice this get your eyes checked - I brought the Epson sample to work and everyone with a cube on the inside of the building (i.e., with fluorescent light) commented on how it looked pinkish. Those with window cubes (i.e., daylight) commented on how it looked greenish.<P>

 

The 2200's black and white metamerism is a hot topic of conversation on the Yahoo Digital Black and White printing group. Epson even sells a solution for it in the form of a $200 RIP, which some people have tried and reported good results with. Other people use the Imageprint RIP to fix the 2200's black and white problems but it costs over $500. So despite what you say at the beginning, apparently it IS possible to get good black and white from a 7-ink system if you are willing to pay for it.<P>

 

BTW, the Epson "light black" ink is brown, not gray.

[peter nelson]

<I>I'm not familiar with Canon's printer, but if it has a separate black cartridge and the driver allows it, select Black-only ink. If you do that with Epson, a "warning" box pops up telling you the world will end. But by golly, that print will NOT have a color cast! </I><P>

 

True but then it will have a fine pattern of black dots, which many people will find annoying and distracting.<P>

 

The other problem with black-only printing is that ALL dithering schemes represent a tradeoff between color (or grayscale) resolution and spatial resolution. If you want to print at 300 DPI then your printer has to have high enough resolution to fit a complete tonal range into .000011". But most printers can't. The Epson 2200, for instance, claims a maximum resolution of 2880x1440, which means it can fit about 47 levels into that area using black-only. But the human eye needs 100 or so levels to see perfectly smooth tonal transitions. <P>

 

So something has to give - either spatial resolution or tonal range. On the Epson it's tonal range - Black Only prints are too contrasty. I don't know what the Canon driver does but the math is simple and inexorable and must be served.

[brian_c._miller]

Peter, I have the B&W sample with me at work here.

 

I see no difference between daylight coming through my windows and the Ott-Lite Vision Saver desk lamp. I don't see any metamerism difference between the flourescent light in the computer room and in my office. The cloud layer just above the Eiffel Tower seems to have some light cyan to it, but it's like 95% grey, 5% cyan, and it's the same under the various light sources.

 

My sample simply doesn't have a color shift.

 

I wonder if the images used for the sample prints are available somewhere with printing instructions. Then we could exchange the prints as a standard of reference.

 

I also wonder if some of the metamerism problems could stem from printer calibration. When I calibrated my print head alignment, I had to run the #3 high-density pattern five times to get it right. I figured I had it right when the two outermost patches had the same grain, as I couldn't tell from the inner patches from each other. It would be nice if Epson had an extended pattern sequence.

 

It could be that the printers used at the Epson factory don't have perfectly identical calibration, so there is a difference in samples. Thus, yours has hideous metamerism, and mine doesn't.

 

How do you get the printer to print solid blocks of color from the individual heads? The nozzle test pattern (jagged trapezoids) appears to have the "light black" really printing as a grey.

[peter nelson]

<I>I see no difference between daylight coming through my windows and the Ott-Lite Vision Saver desk lamp. I don't see any metamerism difference between the flourescent light in the computer room and in my office. The cloud layer just above the Eiffel Tower seems to have some light cyan to it, but it's like 95% grey, 5% cyan, and it's the same under the various light sources. </I><P>

 

I think it's you.<P>

 

On the same Epson sample print (which is apparently the same one as yours - Paris scene) that I and all my co-workers see tremendous metamerism, my wife doesn't see any at all. She's not colorbrind as far as she knows, but she just doesn't see it. Some people are like that, and perhaps you're one of them. I should also note that my company makes display systems used in medical applications so the other engineers I showed these to are probably more sensitive to color shifts and similar problems than laymen. But probably <B>NOT</B> more sensitive than photographers, artists, art directors, etc.<P>

 

The metamerism problem on the 2200 is very well established and a great deal of discussion hes been devoted to finding workarounds for it, but some people don't seem sensitive to it. That's why on the Yahoo Digital Black and White printing group when someone says that this RIP or that workflow eliminates it the first thing we ask them is, "have you <B>ever</B> seen metamerism? Would you recognize it if you saw it?". If the answer is "no" then we take their claim of having found a fix with a grain of salt. <P>

 

<I>How do you get the printer to print solid blocks of color from the individual heads? The nozzle test pattern (jagged trapezoids) appears to have the "light black" really printing as a grey.</I><P>

 

That should be a clue right there - the Epson "Light Black" is a kind of sepia brown - a "dark yellow" actually. Daniel Staver, on this forum, recently posted some images here using that ink to demonstrate this. In fact the Imageprint RIP apparently eliminates the metamerism by taking advantage of this - one of the worst metamerism offenders is the regular yellow ink. So the IP RIP doesn't use the yellow ink. Obviously, without the yellow ink that only leaves the cyan and magenta, which would create bluish prints, but the IP RIP balances out the cyan and magenta by using the "Light Black", taking advantage of its yellowness.<P>

 

I would seek some second opinions on your sample print - the usual problem reported is that it looks pinkish under fluorescent light and greenish under sunlight or bright daylight.

[peter nelson]

<I>The cloud layer just above the Eiffel Tower seems to have some light cyan to it, but it's like 95% grey, 5% cyan, and it's the same under the various light sources.</I><P>

 

Cyan raises an interesting possibility. When did you buy this printer? Can you make black and white prints on it that have the same neutrality as the sample print?<P>

 

The reason I ask is that cyan is not the usual metamerism shift reported. (pink and green are) But Epson recently released a RIP of their own that is alleged to fix the metamerism. And if it uses the same approach as the IP RIP then if the print had any color cast it would be slightly bluish, which in light areas could look cyanish. So it occured to me they may be shipping their printer with sample prints made with their new RIP - maybe not technically "false" advertising, since it was, after all, made with the 2200 - but a bit misleading since it's not made with the sw that ships with the printer. Just a thought.

[kit_chong]

I am considering the Canon i950 and through my readings from the internet, I have found this suggestion which might help you.

 

Site: http://www.photo-i.co.uk/

 

Select the Canon i950 review and go to page 7 "Black and White" in the drop down menu. The author mentioned "The slight cyan cast can be tweaked out in almost any imaging application, I think this is often overlooked by people, they expect the printer to be 100% neutral from the onset."

 

Please let me know if this works as I would like to know the results.

[brian_c._miller]

I do think that I have seen metamerism before: on some of my prints made by the local pro photo labs. I distinctly remember a particular color reversal print. I went during lunch hour to the lab and picked up the print. When I showed it off at work, all of us (me included) noted casts to the colors. It looked awful! So after work I drove back to the photo lab. I looked at it there with the counter man, and it looked fine. The fellow told me that the lights they used were balanced.<br>

<br>

Also, the B&W (pseudo-gray scale) prints from my HP do shift some, and I would describe the color cast as Emilio does.<br>

<br>

My Epson 2200 printer arrived last Thursday (the 20th) and I haven't yet tried printing any B&W yet. I am trying to create profiles using <a href="http://www.ddisoftware.com/prism/">Profile Prism</a> and I haven't succeeded in getting a good calibration profile. I'm doing <i>something</i> drastically wrong because I have a yellow cast on my 932C and unnaturally brilliant yellow on the 2200. The only color images which are any good have been from using the Epson factory profiles.<br>

<br>

I had presumed that the samples included with the printer are from "tuned" configurations. If that printer can produce even a mostly neutral B&W print from the factory profiles, I'll be really impressed. I'll try it tonight.<br>

<br>

When I showed the sample prints to my coworkers, nobody said anything bad about the B&W print. One of my coworkers used to run an art gallery and is quite free with his honest and unabated opinions. He thought the print was quite good. I'll run the print by them again, and get them to look at it under sunlight and other light sources.<br>

[brian_c._miller]

Yeah, that cloud line just above the Eiffel tower does go towards very, very light pink in strong sunlight, and light cyan in the shade. One of the graphics artists here agreed with me, and he also said that it's so small that it's just too picky to worry about. "Put it behind glass and they'll never notice."

 

No other part of the image changes color.

 

I have an image of a dead snag with a cloudy sky which should put the factory profiles to the test. The Paris image is on the contrasty side, and the part which shows metamerism is quite small.

[neil]

In Europe, the Epson 2200 is the 2100 and comes with a "Gray Scale Balancer" utility used to tune the gray tones of your specific printer. There is an interesting article about it here:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/making-beer.shtml

[brian_c._miller]

OK, last night I did test prints of B&W, using Photo Black and Epson Premium Luster photo paper, and everything set to factory ICC profiles. This is the worst it should get from my printer.

 

Compared to my HP 932C, it is balanced.

 

Compared to a junk RC test print on my desk, it has a blue cast in the dark areas under Ott-Lite TrueColor bulbs, and a pink cast in the light areas under Ott-Lite Vision Saver bulbs.

 

Mind you: this effect is not pronounced!! On my printer it is awfully subtle, and it is in only one band of the grey scale. If these prints were hanging by themselves instead of having a real silver print on the front, you would not notice it.

 

I think that the Epson metamerism problem is exacerbated by slight miscalibration of the printer.

[brian_c._miller]

Oh yeah, Emilio:

 

What you might try is using high-quality aftermarket inks in your printer. Also, try different glossy papers. Ilford makes a sampler pack, and some of the on-line suppliers have sampler packs of their various papers.

 

Inkjet Mall (http://www.inkjetmall.com/)

 

MIS Associates (http://www.inksupply.com/)

 

A cheap profiler is Profile Prism (http://www.ddisoftware.com/prism/). The documentation for the software is a little rambling, but overall its pretty good. The author also publishes a good printing program, Qimage.

[brian_c._miller]

Update on my initial 2200 B&W prints:

 

They've turned green.

 

Not like the HP green, but green nonetheless. Under office flourescent lights they look completely balanced. I talked with a fellow who used to run an art gallery, and he said that if he hadn't been told they were inkjet prints, he would have thought they had been printed on a different sort of B&W paper.

[peter nelson]

I'm confused.

Brian C. Miller writes: <I>Update on my initial 2200 B&W prints:<BR>

They've turned green.<P>

 

Not like the HP green, but green nonetheless. Under office flourescent lights they look completely balanced. I talked with a fellow who used to run an art gallery, and he said that if he hadn't been told they were inkjet prints, he would have thought they had been printed on a different sort of B&W paper.</I><P>

 

So they look neutral under fluorescent but green under - - - what? Daylight?<P>

 

That's the usual pattern with the 2200 - if you balance prints for neutral under fluorescent they look green under daylight. But are you saying they just turned this way? That they look different from yesterday? I've never heard of that. Keep in mind that "daylight" color temperature can vary <B>greatly</B> over the course of the day, anywhere from 2000K to over 6000K - maybe you're looking at them in different color-temperature daylight than yesterday.

[eyelight]

Hi.

 

You're probably doing nothing wrong, and it would seem natural for a famous camera company to make a printer that would please photographers. If I had a buck for every bum print from my i960 I wouldn't feel too bad, although that's still not breaking even.

 

While you can print with black-only, you will not get any sort of reasonable gray scale. On mine, it appears that the cyan cartride is used to make the mid grays. I've tried tweaking with no luck. I suspect the only solution is to get some Lyson inks and then try again. You might also have a look at your color prints - instead of dark colors, you get a rather ugly blend of raw black in the shadows. This seems to be the way the printer works (at least without some other rip or inks). It's odd that so many people find the Canon printer good. For me, it only looked good for the first few prints until I started to notice the crude shadows and less than "photographic" tones. Great printer for snapshots of the kids, etc.

 

I've found that Kodak paper prints very cyan, Epson matte paper prints a little more neutral. While not consistent, for some reason the Canon Photo Paper Pro glossy prints more neutral than anything I've tried.

 

Not to knock Canon's stuff, however you might try getting some Lightjets done at a good lab. Considering all the cost of inks, papers and less than wonderful results, the Lightjets tend to elicit more of an instant "wow!" response from people.

 

I'll post something when I get the Lyson ink set. Who knows how that will work, and with any luck, the i950 may work out alright afterall.

[eyelight]

To complete the note. I tried the Lyson Quad Black set in my Canon i950 printer, along with a range of papers. The result was a waste of money. Color casts, inconsistent results, and washed out blacks. A few pictures DID look much better than Canon ink B&W prints, especially in the lighter grays. The most neutral print I've ever had out of my Canon i950 was using Photopaper Pro and grayscale printing. In all cases, the transition to the last part of black was always disturbing.

 

Sorry to say this - I purchased an Epson 2200 (larger format, pigment inks). On Epson Matte paper, the black and white print is really very pleasing right out of the box, and it is in another league beyond the Canon. Surprisingly, the Epson is quite fast when feed a 300dpi image,

which is about all most eyes can detect, and the same resolution as most Lightjet prints. Summary - for decent B&W inkjets that can be quite pleasing - advantage = Epson. The i950 was a real waste of money for me.

[_ukasz_kacperczyk]

Ed - how can I print with black ink only on my S900? I know you had a i950, but their drivers seems more or less the same.

 

TIA.

[shannon_cole1]

I'm a true amateur, and I'm using an HP 4550 (which is already obsolete...go figure). I had the same problem, and yesterday I finally found a reasonable solution. Under the printer options, you have to make sure you have selected the "print only with black ink" option. On my first trial, the result was too bleached. Then I went back and did two more things: I set the DPI quality to the highest resolution and set the ink volume to heavy. The result was perfect...except a few smudges on the margins of the photo...which I believe I could have prevented by also adjusting the "dry time" bar underneath the ink volume bar.

 

Perhaps other printers also have this feature?