Epson inline spectro

[walterz]

I am dissatisfied with the values I get from the inline spectro on our Epson 9900s and have not been able to get a logical explanation for these errant values.

We have two new Epson 9900's with inline spectros. We use a proofing paper designed to conform to GRACoL's specified paper white 95,0,-2. Using three different X-Rite products (DTP70, i1-Pro, and a 939) I can get readings that are dangerously close (0.5 deltaE) to the specs. However, both of the inline spectros produce values that are more than 2 deltaE out (around 97,0.3,-0.4). These spectros do not have a UV-cut filter.

Has anyone else noticed this?
What is causing this?
Is there any resolution for these errant readings?

 

[michaelejahn]

- a sensitive question.

- a sensitive question.

I am dissatisfied with the values I get from the inline spectro on our Epson 9900s and have not been able to get a logical explanation for these errant values.

Is there any resolution for these errant readings?

Some have shared that they do not think this is a very good instrument, I will not.

We happen to use the X-Rite i1-iSis for a variety of other reasons.

Compose Color Blog: With Star Proof 6 spot color matching is a breeze

 

[meddington]

For reasons other than spectro agreement, we use an offline spectro (i1IO) for color mangement/profile creation (simply can't read targets from another source on an spectroproofer). The On-board spectro, though it doesn't agree as closely with our other instruments, isn't too far off, and has provento be consistent, so it is used for calibration without issue.

If you haven't already, you might check the backing method used on the spectro (white or black) compared to how you're measuring offline. Probably not the main issue, but could contribute.

 

[TerryWyse]

For reasons other than spectro agreement, we use an offline spectro (i1IO) for color mangement/profile creation (simply can't read targets from another source on an spectroproofer). The On-board spectro, though it doesn't agree as closely with our other instruments, isn't too far off, and has provento be consistent, so it is used for calibration without issue.

If you haven't already, you might check the backing method used on the spectro (white or black) compared to how you're measuring offline. Probably not the main issue, but could contribute.

Sir Eddington hit the nail on the head I think (for once).

I think the on-board spectros are excellent for calibration but maybe less than ideal if you're trying to actually use one for profiling where you intend to marry your printer profile with a standard profile (GRACoL, SWOP, etc.) measured with a completely different instrument.

White/black backing could indeed be the problem....I always install the SpectroProofer using the white backing since that's the most common backing used in other spectros.

I think virtually all of us that install printers with embedded spectros will use them for calibration but do all of our actually profiling off-line with something like an iSis, DTP70 or similar.

Terry

 

[Magnus]

I'v also noticed that our SpectroProofer differ a bit from our (brand new) i1Pro.

Im using GMG colorproof 5.2. I profiled (fogra39) one of our Epson 9900 with the online SpectroProofer and an other Epson 4880 manually with my i1Pro. The white was pretty close (≈1 ∆E) but some orange and green colors was "way off" (≈4 ∆E).

I trust my i1One better so I tweaked my profile made with SpectroProofer so that the visual result (and measured values) matched better with what I got from the printer profiled with the i1Pro. But the SpectroProofer is great for calibration/linearization.

But I'm a bit disappointed that X-rite can't make two different instruments with ∆E<0,5.

 

[walterz]

Chasing for an answer

Chasing for an answer

Thanks for your responses all. Like you all, I could profile the device with an offline spectro but my results appear to be good. We want to use the inline spectros for checking and certifying each proof. Right now the proofs are passing certification but just barely on the white. Paper white is reported to be about 2.5 deltaE out of GRACoL spec. Noting this in the certification report does not look good especially when I know that paper is almost perfect (<1 deltaE).

Is it possible that this device has a polarizing filter to these devices? (Phrased another way, if this device would have a polarizing filter, are these the results you would expect to see - in general good colours but the paper white reading affected the most?)

Do you think this is a hardware or software issue?

XRite can't talk due to contractual agreement with Epson - "call Epson".
The only ones I've been able to reach at Epson are their tech-support who simply say "I don't know" or "it must be the software you are using".

 

[michaelejahn]

What paper are you using ?

What paper are you using ?

Thanks for your responses all. Like you all, I could profile the device with an offline spectro but my results appear to be good. We want to use the inline spectros for checking and certifying each proof. Right now the proofs are passing certification but just barely on the white. Paper white is reported to be about 2.5 deltaE out of GRACoL spec. Noting this in the certification report does not look good especially when I know that paper is almost perfect (<1 deltaE).

What proofing paper are you using ? Not that I am here to sell you on the Compose proofing paper we sell, but it is very tough to make a GRACoL Proof on paper that routinely measures L93 a0 b0 - the paper we have made for us and we sell to our Epson using customers reads L95 a0b-2

Is it possible that this device has a polarizing filter to these devices? (Phrased another way, if this device would have a polarizing filter, are these the results you would expect to see - in general good colours but the paper white reading affected the most?)

I do not believe that it does, and while I agree that this might be an issue, i think the issue is that the device inside this gadget is not the same device that is inside an i1. That is about as far as anyone who is a vendor partner with X-Rite and Epson is willing to go on that subject.

Do you think this is a hardware or software issue?

I think it is a hardware issue, but hey, I am a vendor and sell hardware and software, so of course, I can sell you something better that you have and would be thrilled to do so !

( wink ) - [email protected] - not sure if you click on this link in my previous comment...

Compose Color Blog: With Star Proof 6 spot color matching is a breeze

XRite can't talk due to contractual agreement with Epson - "call Epson".
The only ones I've been able to reach at Epson are their tech-support who simply say "I don't know" or "it must be the software you are using".

We have customers who make GRACoL proofs. None of our customers use that in line device. To be honest though - that is probably because we really really like i1 iSis reader, also from X-Rite. many of our customers buy our Compose D7 II paper in their the EPSON 7900 / 9900.

They may or may not use our Compose RIP - anyone who has a workflow that makes 1 bit TIFF files can use Star Proof to drive the Epson. It is the Star Proof software and the X-Rite i1 iSis reader that gets them there and keeps them there.