Boss says he's fed up with our proofer and is getting a new EPSON.
Salesman says, you have fiery XF, most shops set these up themselves.
Boss says "Can you setup this proofer by yourself?". I say no. We don't have the measurement tools, knowledge etc. to do this. Makes me feel dumb.
Am I missing something here? I doubt it
Super easy to setup and configure, BUT you're gonna want a color guy come out and profile it for you BEFORE you start proofing to customers. IF you have an Eye-1, you CAN color profile it yourself, but you have to have software to do this, and chances are you don't own the software. ALSO, I have done this way of profiling myself, and it is in no way, shape or form as good as having a real color guy do it for you. A good color guy will probably run you about $5,000 total. Try Terrance Wyse.
Yes, well the salesman want's to sell us the Epson.
Of course it virtually works by itself right out of the box. (prepress guy must be dumb if he can't make work right?)
The color guy will cost more that the printer. But I already knew that.
:drunk3:
When we bought our Epson 9900 setup was included in the price and was certainly not $5000, that would have been almost half the bill which included the RIP and setup of 2 profiles.
If you are having headaches with your current product why would your boss want to skimp when it comes to a new one rather then have it setup properly to hopefully avoid more headaches down the line?
I agree that the color guy is the "right" way.
I also haven't been able to do anything the "right" way here, ever so yeah you can probably get it to work but don't expect it to be dead nuts color correct. Mind you I had to set up the epson here when the Kodak techs couldn't figure out how to assign it an IP. @ days of back and forth with their guys and nothing. I got bored and googled it. 15 minutes later I have it discoverable on the network and the install techs were amazed. Mind you at the time Kodak sold the exact same 9800 as their proofing solution...
I think I got the FNG's for the install.
Wonderings, I wish I worked at your shop. The concept of the "right way" didn't exist at the last 2 places I worked.
Quote from: wonderings on February 14, 2018, 01:32:07 PMWhen we bought our Epson 9900 setup was included in the price and was certainly not $5000, that would have been almost half the bill which included the RIP and setup of 2 profiles.
If you are having headaches with your current product why would your boss want to skimp when it comes to a new one rather then have it setup properly to hopefully avoid more headaches down the line?
Exactly. If the salesman hasn't hopelessly brainwashed him than that's the gist of what he has to understand.
If you had 2 profiles included, what would you choose?
B.
Quote from: pspdfppdfxhd on February 14, 2018, 01:52:14 PMIf you had 2 profiles included, what would you choose?
A career in ______________ (not prepress).
Quote from: pspdfppdfxhd on February 14, 2018, 01:52:14 PMIf you had 2 profiles included, what would you choose?
They were profiles for stocks. We really only use one an 8mil photo satin paper. I did have a canvas profiled as I wanted to try and get into that a but, but nobody seems to want that and the price for changing over between the two blacks and the lack of work for canvas would make it very expensive.
I mean can't they make a coated and uncoated profile on the same paper?
OR for the uncoated, would everything have to be tagged as uncoated in the pdf when sending.
I just be wondering......
Could you control 2 inkjets on 1 fiery XF licencse?
By the book, no. Technically, yes, tho, but you can only operate one at a time.
[edit] and you have to have the right license. They are based on size. A M license won't operate and run an XL proofer for example.
A trained color guy is super helpful. I tried to follow the instruction manual for our Oris RIP for our Epson 9900 and couldn't get the printer reference profile setup properly. I had to go back to our previous reference profile which for some reason is getting worse and worse with each calibration. It also calls for a different type of paper than what we've always had in the Epson, so that's confusing. Basically our proofs are getting more and more red or "hot" as the pressmen like to call them, yet when I scan a swatch test through our G7 software, everything always comes back ok. Something seems up.
Anyhow, now I'm trying to convince my boss that we need Oris training in addition to the Fuji tech coming out to certify us for G7 for the coming year. Our certification is due at the end of March and we're humming and hawwing it (like last year, and we were two months late on certification) :shoots_self:
Back when I had the 7880 and I was goofing around with the profiling software before the color guy came out. I think we had an already outdated version of ProfileMaker. I ran all the swatches for the Eye-1, which is a pain because you have to scan thousands of patches by hand and the spectrophotometer isn't as good as what they have. Plus, it can take hours. The color guy showed up (we used Lou Prestia out of Oakland), and he had an automated robotic scanner that was not just far more accurate at reading patches, but it scanned far more patches in a far shorter period of time. His profiles kicked my profiles respective asses (we did a coated profile and an uncoated profile for a 7880 and a 10600). It's all about how many swatches can you read in. The more you can scan in, the better your profile will be, and in turn, the more accurate your color will be.
Dumb question here from a guy who should know this better, but, can you do an uncoated proof workflow on the same satin paper as the coated workflow?
Like showing how the gracol coated file would look with an uncoated intent, with ink limit reduced, etc.
Our previous color guy (now promoted so we're getting a new one), said it was possible with Oris, but most shops that do it just have a separate profile that was basically just a cutback on ink. I'm not sure what software you're using to run the Epson so that might be a limitation. Not sure though.
Quote from: pspdfppdfxhd on February 15, 2018, 04:32:36 PMDumb question here from a guy who should know this better, but, can you do an uncoated proof workflow on the same satin paper as the coated workflow?
Like showing how the gracol coated file would look with an uncoated intent, with ink limit reduced, etc.
I believe so. It just dulls it back a bit.
Quote from: AaronH on February 15, 2018, 06:24:06 PMOur previous color guy (now promoted so we're getting a new one), said it was possible with Oris, but most shops that do it just have a separate profile that was basically just a cutback on ink. I'm not sure what software you're using to run the Epson so that might be a limitation. Not sure though.
EFI Fiery XF.
Quote from: DigiCorn on February 16, 2018, 10:12:10 AMQuote from: pspdfppdfxhd on February 15, 2018, 04:32:36 PMDumb question here from a guy who should know this better, but, can you do an uncoated proof workflow on the same satin paper as the coated workflow?
Like showing how the gracol coated file would look with an uncoated intent, with ink limit reduced, etc.
I believe so. It just dulls it back a bit.
Actually, having a flashback to many years ago. Technically, if you use the Epson coated paper, and have calibrated and profiled properly, it should show a better representation of uncoated reproduction better than if you run the proof on Epson uncoated paper.
We never ran Epson paper; we ran Alameda, but it's pretty damn good too. Not 100% dead on balls accurate, but real damned close.
Ok ownersip pulled the trigger. Brand new Epson 6000 coming in next week. The fun never stops.
congrats on your new job....
:sarcasm:
We use the efi xf server for our 9900 epson and we have a coated and uncoated profile but we had a color tech come and calibrate our presses and our epson printers
Well the new EPSON P6000 is up and running, with 2 profiles for coated and uncoated made on XF. Everything is looking very good. Owner is very happy.
(Y all can insert sarcastic negative remarks if you want, but I have been pleasantly suprised how well things went, was expecting the worst but it did not happen for a change).