Can anyone tell me if HP is pulling the same scam with the 3200 as they did with the 3100 where an extra APS $800 package is required to make the spectro work the way it should?

Hi Charles-

Would you consider it a scam if you didn't need the capabilities of APS, but had to pay for it anyway, wrapped up in the price of the printer? Epson charges extra for the pro version of its printers, a version which only works with Epson papers.

There are plenty of things to criticise HP for re: the z3100 printers (don't get me started!!) APS is not one of them, IMHO.

Bill

At about $3000 for the z3100 and with a built in spectro who would not expect the best possible performance the hardware in the box (on a crate) has to offer?
If its their top of the line wide printer, and it was at the time, why sell it half a**ed and, oh, by the way for an extra $800 you can make the built in spectro, a big reason many bought it, work the way anyone who goes to the trouble to use a spectro, expects it to work. :rolleyes:
This has been my argument all along. Its like Ferrari selling every Testarossa with a 100hp four cylinder and saying you can get the real engine at an additional cost. Maybe not a scam but non-sensical at best.
If they offer the 3200 with proper software and trade-in discounts I may go for it. But not until its been tested in the field. By someone else..

If you bought the APS for the Z3100 you could have used it for all your profiling (monitor as well) + profile editing and transfer it to the Z3200 when you get that one.
It was included in the PS model and it will be included in the Z3200 PS model as I understand it.

The 8100 Euro Epson 9900 has the spectrometer included, a 1200 Euro difference to the 9900 without spectrometer. If you intend to buy the spectrometer later on it will cost 2000 Euro. All excl VAT.

Trade in discounts is very much a HP policy and not an Epson policy. But I think you can make a better deal by trading in an older Epson 44" and sell the Z3100 on Ebay. The fact that the new user can get heads easily and replace them must make the secondhand value better. The HP 5000/5500 showed that before. Enough cheap 44" Epsons around and much harder to get them back in condition since Epson limited access to spare parts.


Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

Thats very good news Ernst! The APS being able to transfer to the 3200 will be great.

I personally would not bother too much with APS for now. I have been doing some intense colour testing on the 3200 for a while and the results using the latest HP colour centre are more than adequate and far better than APS is delivering.

Regards

Robert

Robert,

Did you work with the z3100?

Does the APS provide better prints on the z3100?

Thanks,

Pierre

Can you explain that a bit more ?
Third party papers etc ?


Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

Hi Pierre and Ernst

I have a 3100 and have been testing a 3200. I have never been impressed with APS and will stick to my conclusions which HP are aware of, that APS and the profiling algorithms it uses, played a big part in contributing to the colour issue we experienced with the 3100.

Test with the 3100 using custom media setups and Printfix Pro and Monaco profiling system resulted in far better colour that could be obtained using APS or HP Colour centre.

With the 3200 driver suite, I am finding that the results generated by the Colour Centre now match the results that I get when profiling using SpyderPrint (new PrintfixPro) and Monaco.

If I print a 24 patch X-rite colour checker chart, with the colour centre profile, and compare it with the chart supplied by X-rite you would be hard pressed, on most media, to see a significant difference between them or tell which is which.

Colour Centre will profile any media that is loaded so there are no problems with 3rd party medias.

Again as with the 3100 I am not using APS for any of my profiling at this stage due to inconsistent and non accurate results.

I am sure Hp will and probably is addressing these issues with APS but for now colour centre does an excellent job.

So what you are saying is that the built - in profiling software of the 3200 is working as well as the printfix or monaco?

I would not really expect anything from HP where aps is concerned. Maybe they'll post a corrupt update file on their website, respond like they're stoned when people ask whats wrong, then leave the corrupt file up there for download for weeks even though hp reps have responded that they know its corrupt. Ohhh there I go again being pessimistic

Hi Charles,
Very subtle, concise and creatively put criticism.

After my experience I concur that there is a rampant bozo factor with HP, and I haven't figured out if it's astrological or what, but wait. FYI, I worked very hard to resolve a number of issues, (that are now nearly all resolved), and I can tell you that happily, I have dealt with a number of HP people who have been the opposite of your experience, who have been straight shooters, and who have gotten positive results. They were the first to state that yes there are problems, but they want to help solve them. So don't give up the ship, and keep trying.

Sure HP's web site is trying to get rebirthed, and you can hardly find the simplest facts there, and it seems you are constantly entering all your user data and model numbers and serial numbers just to get to GO. You have to give this large company a lot of birth, like a super tanker going through the Panama Canal.

Persistence and patience will do it. My 2 cents.

So long for now, TOM

Hi Charles

Yes, the internal profiling through Color Centre is doing, IMO, as good a job as Monaco or Printfix. There may be subtle differences as it uses less patches than the other packages but all the testing I have done indicates that the results are extremely competent.

As for APS, I am not sure what HP intends to do but I do know the engineers have been listening to us and have been working really hard on the z3200 to fix the short comings that the z3100 had.

Robert

I just spoke to an HP technician who works for one of the distributors asking him about HP's Advanced Profiling Solution and he told me that it really only works well with HP media. His opinion (and what he was told by HP) is that it doesn't work well with non-HP media. There was also some mention about the internal RIP and firmware but I can't understand this relationship because the entire concept for profiles is to reproduce color gamuts accurately. Since I am printing from Photoshop and having Photoshop manage the colors, (not the printer), I can't understand why APS would not benefit most paper manufacturers...

Can anyone verify or counter this claim?

I am looking ay buying the APS for my z3100 to get the best colors and want to know whether I should or not. I like it because it uses the embedded spectrophotometer and produces profiles very easily.

TIA,

Pierre

Hi Pierre-

Frankly, I think that tech either doesn't know what (s)he is talking about, or more likely, just spouting the HP line that encourages the use of HP media. There has been much discussion of the difference between the built-in profiling and the APS, and it boils down to this:

APS uses far more patches, which should and does lead to a more accurate profile; smaller numbers of patches lead to less accurate, but often smoother profiles, that MAY look better with SOME images.

IMHO, if you care about accurate profiles (I am a photographer, and I also print limited edition reproductions of paintings, and I need accuracy), the APS is well worth it. I can also see that for many photographers, who normally are not pushing the gamut anyway, APS may be superfluous.

In any case, it's got nothing to do with HP media or not, again, IMHO.

YMMV

Bill

Robert,

First I got the impression you think APS is flawed. I do not have that experience but okay. That the Z3100 profile creation is limited (but alright for matte papers) was known already but what is the score now: is the Z3200 Color Centre profiling that much improved that it matches Monaco (Profiler ?) and APS isn't matching Monaco (Profiler?) or worse APS has flaws that makes it unusable ?

What Printfix does in this scoring is more confusing, the LL archive has a nice review of several profile creation programs and Printfix wasn't the one that proved to be a match to Monaco Profiler, ArgyllCMS and Heidelberger's package. EDIT: my memory of the review was wrong, there are errors I made and the results of the review were more complex to interpret. However I still think that the Printfix program did show odd behavior.

Then there is the UV filtering on the Z3100 spectrometer system and the possible absence of that in the other systems that may be part of your experience.

There are some features in APS to allow profiling of other printers. There's the profile editing, monitor calibration + profiling. Is that available in the Z3200 Color Centre too ?


Ernst Dinkla

Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/

I have edited this post as I have decided to rather wait until my testing is completed and post comparative results.

Robert

Robert,

Thanks for all the info. I hope that when HP fixes APS they don't forget those of us who've already purchased it and are using it on the Z3100. It would sure be nice to get an update that addresses the issues you've highlighted.

Hi All


It seems that we have gotten to the bottom of my issue with APS and it now works properly, sort of… Hp colour centre assumes a target illuminant of D50 while APS gives you the option of D50 or D65. I am still not convinced that this works properly in either case which is where my sort of comment comes into play.

If you are using Photoshop CS3 to Softproof and print combined with Qimage you will need to make two profiles with APS in order to use Absolute rendering.

An APS profile created with an illuminant option of D65 will try simulate D50 lighting conditions when soft proofed or printed using Photoshop and Absolute Colormetric rendering. This same profile will work perfectly with Qimage with Absolute Colormetric.

An APS profile created with an illuminant option of D50 will work perfectly in Photoshop when using Absolute Colormetric but will try simulate D65 lighting when using Qimage and Absolute Colormetric.

Now with the Colour Centre profile, you do not have the option of selecting D65 so it will only work properly with Photoshop when using with Absolute Colormetric rendering.

My tests were conducted with Photoshop and Absolute Colormetric rendering and which is where the issue arose as I was using the D65 option and it was even more confusing when the same profile worked properly in Qimage.

All of the profiles work properly in all of the application with the other rendering intents.

So in conclusion I am happy to report the results from APS on a Z3200 are really good (as good if not slightly better than from PrintFix pro) but you may need two profiles.

The results from APS on the z3100 are still not as good as I get from PrintFix pro.

Robert

Robert,

To re-state what you just said, for the z3100:

Printfix (aka Spyder3Print) will produce better results than HP's APS 1.40 which is better than Color Center (the built-in profiler).

My questions are:

1) Is the difference from one to the other very visible? In what part of the color gamut do you see the benefit?

2) On what kind of papers are you testing this? For example, Is there a visible difference on HP's Instant-Dry Premium Gloss or more on matte and fine art papers?

I'm asking 'cause I just recently bought a z3100 and am trying to decide whether to go with APS or Spyder3Studio...

Thanks,

Pierre

Silly question #1. Is APS on the Z3200 the same version as the APS on the Z3100?

Silly question #2. Why Absolute Colormetric rendering?

There is a new version of APS for the 3200- also works for the 3100

Not sure why Absolute is beneficial.

Bill

1) Yes, same version of APS used on both machines.

2) Hp wanted me to use Absolute so that we were matching the test chart and test file as closely as possible (visual and measured data collected from the prints). Generally for my own work I use Relative Colormetric but I have two clients where I need to match colours exactly and then I need to use Absolute.

One of these clients just happens to use a red that the z3100 cannot match, but fortunately the work was A2 and my Epson 4000 could match the colour. The Z3200 matches just about everything I have thrown at it.

Maybe I should mention that I am essentially working in a Grey room with D65 lighting and an HP 3065 30" LCD (hopefully will be upgrading to dream colour soon). Using the X-Rite 24 patch colour checker, Relative Colormetric on the z3200 gives a really good result but there is a slight difference between Relative and Absolute is closer to the screen and the Colour Checker.

HA! not really too subtle unless a sledgehammer is subtle
I really did not expect this printer to be in my possesion less than two years before needing to replace it entirely to get what I need. I'm a bit too detail oriented to keep this if something better is available. As is I am sure the 3100 is perfectly suitable to many photographers as long as they are techno types who can make it work. Average Joe - forget it.

Hi Bill,

What's different with the new APS? Will it be available as an update to my current APS?

The APS I have uses Logo CMS and tables to create profiles from the measured data that is similar to Profile Maker 5. The details on the exact differences are not disclosed to anyone I know, nor to myself. Yet working with Logo/Gretag-X-Rite for many years I do know where to look, even if I don't have the same regard as a colour scientist would.

The HP proprietary profiler is a quite interesting application with a lot of hybrid math going into it to make very acceptable profiles for a medium number of patches with calculations for expected deviation and or phenomena encountered with specificities of HP inks. Quite remarkable actually.
Now the APS is a Logo thing. OR let's call it X-Rite as they are the owners of the intellectual property since buying Gretag MacBeth.

X-Rite do things quite differently than HP in this regard. The tables the grey builds, tags, smoothing, optimisations, etc etc.

Which ones are better? Well it depends. I found that the HP app or Color Center if you must is better at non photo papers. IS it more accurate or more precise than APS? Uh no but neither are accurate.
The more diffusion you have the more you are changing the difference between a 2º observer reference when you are actually looking at the print. So it comes down to a much more practical call: subjective analysis of the rendering through the entire system.

Photo media. Well it's not too hard to run a loop to see which one is more probable at reducing overall dE. APS is much better in all the tests I did.
Yet what are tests good for? Just get yourself a bunch of images with colours that approach the boundaries of the working space, and the printer. Print a lot, look closely. IF you can't find any differences keep looking. OR if you're satisfied then stop and have fun; print.

I did have a hard time with the soft proofing A2B 0 tables in the Color Center profiles though. Couldn't use them for soft proofing. X-Rite aren't that much better.

In the end the ideal would be they program Argyll into the printer since after all it is Unix. Someone in Canada was trying to set up Argyll with a SDK for the Z . No idea where that went.
Next best thing would be Monaco Profiler Gold.

Yet for the price of a nice i1D2, monitor and printer, and outsourced automated profile measure and create, the APS package is very reasonable for what it allows you to do.

While it may be true that the optimised HP media probably do profile better than non optimised media, it is simply not true that on a similar quality paper and surface there is anything special going on with a media brand agnostic spectrophotmeter.