Xerox 700 colorcal calibration problem

[JasonSacks]

Has any one else had an issue with calibration on a Xerox 700 with the colorcal method? I find the default config is great, but when I config with color cal on the integrated fiery it produced inaccurate and faded color. When I reset it to default it is fine. The curves on the colorcal calibration are not smooth lines, very jagged, eratic.

Anyone else seen this? Do others usually use Densometers?

 

[X33]

I've seen the same, I rather have the factory defaults than calibrate the unit with the color cal strip.

most of the times, the factory defaults are more than enough.

if you have very specific calibration needs, you should get a densitomer/spectrophotometer

 

[JasonSacks]

Interesting

Interesting

Are you saying when the calibration starts to wander just reset to the default?

 

[X33]

if you have them already in Factory Defaults, there's no need to reset them again; doing it won't do anything because the calibration table will be the same.

 

[JasonSacks]

Every xerox I have ever had goes out of calibration over time. So the best way to get this in sync would be to get a photospectrometer?

 

[lfelton]

From past experience, we got much more accurate results from a Xerox 250 when using a spectrophotometer to calibrate. We bought an automated strip reader (which is fairly expensive), but if the bustled RIP supports an Eye One, they're cheaper and work really well (we have those as well on other machines). BTW, EFI call an Eye One an "ES-1000". They're the same machine, but if your bustled RIP only says ES-1000, then I'd check to make sure they are compatible before buying a "standard" Eye One.

Having said all that, your machine sounds broken to me. I've always found that the "off the glass" calibration on Xerox machines (DC-12, 250) helps a lot - a spectro just works better.

You need to print out a reference (i.e. something that you know 100% what the colours should look like) on something that's well within the machines spec (like a colotech 120gsm) after doing a calibrate off the glass. Make sure you do the calibrate on the actual stock you will be using. If the colours are *completely* wrong, then I think you need Xerox in to fix it.

IMO *not* calibrating is a really bad idea in a pay-for-print environment. In my experience you should calibrate digital machines very frequently. You will inevitably get variation as consumables wear, components age and environmental conditions alter.

 

[JasonSacks]

lfeltion...

I have purchased used ES-1000 that I found on ebay, I am trying that out. It does not have the cradle, but I expect I can use a standard white tile from the calibration swatch that is for screen calibration to calibrate the es-1000 before I calibrate the machine. Does that sound like that would work in your experience?

I found that when I calibrate with aa 100lb text gloss, which is what I print with normally, it does not turn out well. When I calibrate it with standard Xerox paper that came with the machine as a uncoated 81-90 gsm then it calibration works better. ???? I have called and talked to my tech but it is just too new. I am going to call 2nd level tech but right now with the calibration from the standard paper, rather than the paper I acutally use, it seems to be at an acceptable level of calibration.

 

[lfelton]

lfeltion...

I have purchased used ES-1000 that I found on ebay, I am trying that out. It does not have the cradle, but I expect I can use a standard white tile from the calibration swatch that is for screen calibration to calibrate the es-1000 before I calibrate the machine. Does that sound like that would work in your experience?

I found that when I calibrate with aa 100lb text gloss, which is what I print with normally, it does not turn out well. When I calibrate it with standard Xerox paper that came with the machine as a uncoated 81-90 gsm then it calibration works better. ???? I have called and talked to my tech but it is just too new. I am going to call 2nd level tech but right now with the calibration from the standard paper, rather than the paper I acutally use, it seems to be at an acceptable level of calibration.

Sorry, no idea whether that would work, but if you pushed me for a guess I'd say not very well. Speak to X-rite, they'll sort you out with a replacement shoe.

I think you may have hit the nail on the head with your normal "glossy paper" vs standard Xerox colotech and you're not going to like the answer. To stand any chance of getting colour accuracy you're going to need to profile that paper for your specific machine. Xerox really should have told you that, I'm surprised. I don't know whether you can profile using the basic bustled RIP and your Eye One or whether you will need to buy more options - you're going to need to speak to Xerox about that.

Profiling paper is not that easy if you are not used to it. My advice would be to insist that Xerox come in and teach you how to do it, with them holding your hand on at least one of your paper types.

Sorry, but I think that's pretty much the bottom line.

 

[X33]

the right tool for calibration is either a densitometer or spectrophotometer

if you create a calibration table for each paper type you are using, you should not have any problems. that's how everybody is supposed to do it.

when you claibrate your 100lb text gloss, make sure you select either Normal or Enhanced Gloss ... all calibration settings have to match with the properties you select in the print driver.

 

[JasonSacks]

That sounds fine, I will call EFI about the cradle. However, what I was saying about the paper is that calibrating the system using the scanner for the paper produces poor results, calibrating it for standard paper produces good results. Not saying that is how it should work, I am just saying those are the results I am seeing.

 

[leegreen]

You can profile using the bustled RIP, you just need to get the EFI Color Profiler Suite.
The ES1000 is the dongle to active the software.

Download it from here, you will need to sign up an email address to login.
EFI - Drivers Download

You will need to profile the device as a 'Generic CMYK device' as the X 700 is not listed as a supported device at this time. You profile the 700 in a raw state, and embeds all the fiery setting, so you wont need to change your driver settings.

Could you post a picture of your results? I am getting woeful results from my profiles on the X700, I have used the ES 1000 on a few other machines here such as the Canon iPF 8100 (wide format inkjet) with great results.

 

[JasonSacks]

You want me to post pictures of my results now with color cal? Or with the ES 1000 once I get it? If it is with the ES-1000 it may take a month as I will have to buy a new one. I am getting decent results now that I am using the calibration from the plain paper (though my idea of decent may be different.)

I am realizing that the ES-1000 on ebay was a waste of $400. Without the cradle I can not calibrate it. I called x-rite and the es-1000 is calibrated for the specific tile. After spending the money for them to set it up with a new cradle, I might as well just buy a new one and know that it will work for sure rather than mess with this one.

 

[leegreen]

Results from the ES 1000

This is what my output is like with a profile made with the ES 1000 (see picture), top sheet is from a IT8.7/1 patch measurement with no adjustments, bottom sheet is the same profile with heavy adjustments to the DMAX to get an acceptable print. My Xerox tech are offering no assistance with the ES 1000, and EFI are yet to respond to my questions on their color forums..

I would not think I should have to do such adjustments to the dmax as getting all my media profiles to produce a similar print would be a week long event..

 

[JasonSacks]

From the photo the baby image looks dark, but that is just from the photo. Is that what matches your screen better? Is the match better in the photo or the solids?

 

[leegreen]

The top sheet which is dark does not match the supplied PDF (not even close). Photo and solids are printing with far too much cyan and little too much magenta..

 

[che.c]

I know this thread is based around the 700, but I maybe my experience with colour and a 250/260 might be of some help. I started off with grand ideals about calibrating for every different stock, coating and weight that we had and that lasted about a week. There was very little difference between the calibration sets.

Now the way I've got them set up is

• I picked my favourite profile (Colotech 220+) from the defaults.
• Turned CMYK Sim Off (I find this usually causes more problems than it solves)
• Tweaked the Dmax (that print looks like there's too much yellow? Take some yellow out. simple as that. Rinse and repeat for different jobs until you get a consistent result.)

And that's it. I use one media output profile (well, two, one looks at a coated calibration the other looks at an uncoated one) and do two colorcals - one for coated, one for uncoated.

I find this gives me a decent colour, and there's not too much upkeep trying to hold it there. Not exactly scientific, but then again, you're a printer - trust your eyes!

Might start to tweak the curves in the next while, but that's just being fussy, Dmax is enough to get you nearly there.

 

[leegreen]

• I picked my favourite profile (Colotech 220+) from the defaults.

I think this is my problem when creating media profiles...

The printer should be printing the swatches in a raw state. So outputting the swatches with a colortech profile is screwing with the IT8.7/3 target.

I will give your method a go today and try a few other options - such as 'colowise - off'

Thanks for your input.

 

[Craig]

I know this thread is based around the 700, but I maybe my experience with colour and a 250/260 might be of some help. I started off with grand ideals about calibrating for every different stock, coating and weight that we had and that lasted about a week. There was very little difference between the calibration sets.

Now the way I've got them set up is

• I picked my favourite profile (Colotech 220+) from the defaults.
• Turned CMYK Sim Off (I find this usually causes more problems than it solves)
• Tweaked the Dmax (that print looks like there's too much yellow? Take some yellow out. simple as that. Rinse and repeat for different jobs until you get a consistent result.)

And that's it. I use one media output profile (well, two, one looks at a coated calibration the other looks at an uncoated one) and do two colorcals - one for coated, one for uncoated.

I find this gives me a decent colour, and there's not too much upkeep trying to hold it there. Not exactly scientific, but then again, you're a printer - trust your eyes!

Might start to tweak the curves in the next while, but that's just being fussy, Dmax is enough to get you nearly there.

It's not scientific.... but what the hell it works for you!!! That's all that matters!

 

[leegreen]

I finally sorted out my issues when creating a profile for the Xerox 700

Turn off all 'expert color settings' - i was led to believe that EFI Color Profiler Suite embedded fiery settings when producing the swatches, which may be correct - however this did not produce the right results for me.

Quote from EFI support forum
"There is no need to choose anything if you are choosing the raw option when you are printing the patches from Color Profiler Suite to the Fiery. We already code the Fiery Job Properties so that the Raw printer state is automatically used regardless of the user defined settings."

However when I followed this instruction, the result of my profile was incorrect. The reason for the shotty profiles was so obvious in the end. The fiery was applying all the Expert Color settings to my swatches.

It has only taken a couple of weeks to get this machine printing correctly, hopefully smooth sailing from here when I profile the rest of my media.

 

[Craig]

There is a learning curve that seem to grow in length whenever we get a bigger box. I'm still finding out things after more than a year.