Color managing proofing devices

[Al Ferrari]

In my work setting we have 2 iMacs with OS 10.6.8 and one with 10.9.2. and two Epson proofers: a 7880, and a 9890. We want to have the minimum number of profiles made made by Chromix, a color profiling company in Seattle, Washington. I am given to understand that a profile for a given device and application can be used on different computers running different OS versions as long as the same print driver is being used by the different computers.

I believe that on Mac OS systems 10.6 and up, the drivers are located here:

/Library/Printers/EPSON/Libraries/EPIJPrDrvLib2.framework/Versions/A/EPIJPrDrvLib2.

But I am finding that the driver file EPIJPrDrvLib2 has a different creation and modification dates on the different machines. Do these date differences mean these are different drivers, or are those the dates on which they were installed on each respective computer?

If Leopard 10.5x and Snow Leopard 10.6x use the same driver, would upgrading a machine from 10.5x to 10.6.8 re-install the drivers with new dates, or leave them alone with the same Finder dates?

All these questions come up in trying to verify that the different macs are using the exact same driver. Is it inappropriate to expect them to have the same dates as well as the same file names?

I realize that a way around all of this would be to get a separate profile for each mac and printer and application of choice for each case, but we are dealing with the boss's money here, and there is a need to keep costs down.

Thanks for any insight,

Al

 

[Al Ferrari]

Bump up to top.

 

[Al Ferrari]

I really could use some input on this please.

Al

 

[meddington]

Do the Colorthink guys have any input for you? Seems like this would be right up their alley.

 

[Al Ferrari]

Yes, that's where I got the understanding that having the same driver on all work stations makes the same profile usable by all. So now I need to be certain I have identified the drivers on each machine. I am actually waiting for a response from them on that, and asked here because they are moving slow.

Thanks for your response.

Al

 

[bcolour]

icc profiles and printer drivers

icc profiles and printer drivers

An icc profiles made by Chromix will be a profile for a particular paper you will be using on a particular printer. So if you had three types of paper you were going to use on a particular printer, then you will need three icc profiles for that printer. Similarly, if you had several different printers, you will need an icc profile for each paper/printer combination. In your case you have two Epson printers, you will then need two icc profiles if you were going to use only one paper type on each of those printers. If you have a RIP, then the RIP will need to know what paper icc profile you want to use. If you are using a standard printer driver without a dedicated RIP, then good luck with using the icc profile, because some printer drivers have preset profiles which you can't add to and so getting custom icc profiles made will be of no use to you.

In my work setting we have 2 iMacs with OS 10.6.8 and one with 10.9.2. and two Epson proofers: a 7880, and a 9890. We want to have the minimum number of profiles made made by Chromix, a color profiling company in Seattle, Washington. I am given to understand that a profile for a given device and application can be used on different computers running different OS versions as long as the same print driver is being used by the different computers.

I believe that on Mac OS systems 10.6 and up, the drivers are located here:

/Library/Printers/EPSON/Libraries/EPIJPrDrvLib2.framework/Versions/A/EPIJPrDrvLib2.

But I am finding that the driver file EPIJPrDrvLib2 has a different creation and modification dates on the different machines. Do these date differences mean these are different drivers, or are those the dates on which they were installed on each respective computer?

If Leopard 10.5x and Snow Leopard 10.6x use the same driver, would upgrading a machine from 10.5x to 10.6.8 re-install the drivers with new dates, or leave them alone with the same Finder dates?

All these questions come up in trying to verify that the different macs are using the exact same driver. Is it inappropriate to expect them to have the same dates as well as the same file names?

I realize that a way around all of this would be to get a separate profile for each mac and printer and application of choice for each case, but we are dealing with the boss's money here, and there is a need to keep costs down.

Thanks for any insight,

Al

 

[Al Ferrari]

I will let others comment on what you have said.

Al

 

[rich apollo]

Al, you know that you're doing this the hard way, right? Your life would be a lot easier with a RIP.

What are you going to do when the devices drift?

 

[Al Ferrari]

Well, I will comment on this after all:

"If you are using a standard printer driver without a dedicated RIP, then good luck with using the icc profile, because some printer drivers have preset profiles which you can't add to and so getting custom icc profiles made will be of no use to you."

We've had this working with a Chomix custom profile for about three years already by printing directly without the rip. The new situation is the upgrading of my iMac system from Leopard to Snow Leopard, and the addition of the 9890. And yes we do know that the profile is printer and paper specific, and also application specific. No problem there.

Now with a response yesterday from Chromix we learned that the print drivers on the two Snow Leopard iMacs are for some reason different. They have not only different dates, but also different file sizes.

I think we are not doing this through the rip for the plate maker because it would require expensive technical support from Trueflow. However, we do have one special client whose work is proofed after it is ripped but this is being done for data integrity and not for color accuracy.

I will try to get as many simple questions as possible answered by Trueflow technical support without having to buy a contract and I'll return here.

Al

 

[Al Ferrari]

Rich,

Please see my second response to bcolour above.

Al