Hi... I've had a problem and don't know where to turn for help in Ottawa. I've had a MacBook Pro for over 2 years. An Epson R1800 printer for much longer. As soon as I switched to the Mac, the printer stopped printing what I saw on the screen. I've tried many different setting changes on the Mac, and nothing seems to work. Is there anyone in Ottawa (and yes, I'm willing to pay for this) who understands both Mac OS and Epson printers who might be able to help me salvage the printer investment?
Thanks for any advice.
--tg
First question: Are your printer drivers up to date? This printer is still supported by Epson (many older ones are not) and you can find the latest drivers here:
http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/support/supDetail.jsp?BV_UseBVCookie=yes&oid=14121&prodoid=53540919&infoType=Downloads&platform=Macintosh
yep. printer driver up to date as recently as november.
Hi,
We need a few more details to help you solve your problem,
1 What version of the OS are you using, and which version of the printer s/w?
2 Describe the problem - is it just a problem with colour matching, or is it something worse?
Those are great printers, and capable of very faithful reproduction, so you made a good investment, and a MacBook Pro is also a great choice for editing. Most laptops are not a great choice for critical colour work however, and as good as the MBP's screen is , as the screens are not the same quality as dedicated screens.
Happy Mac'ing
Dan
Hi Dan,
Mac OS is 10.6.3
Epson Driver version is 6.12, and i've got 11443 and 11445 loaded
The problem is colour. What I see on the screen and what comes out the printer are so not-connected. I could live with slight problems, but there are colour variation, and omissions that make the prints completely impractical and because of the type of photography I do, its problematic to have the colours be so very off. I have used colour sync that comes with the Mac and it made a small difference but... and I truly hate to say this... when the printer was connected to PC laptops, I never had problems with colour matching.
At this point, the printer is neglected. I haven't used it in months and the heads are probably a little clogged. I hate to give up on it but don't know what to do.
Thanks for the questions. And whatever help/advice you have.
--tg
Hi TG,
Have you calibrated the screen of your MBP? You can do a basic calibration by eye using the Display settings in System Preferences (under the menu).
It's a little tricky on a laptop, especially setting the brighter highlights and deeper shadows, but get them as close as you can and set the gamma to 2.2 when it asks for it, if it isn't the default choice. Save the calibration and make note of the name you give it - you'll need it for Colorsync setups. Setting the desktop to a known-good rendition of a good black-and-white image while doing this will help you achieve a neutral gray and get rid of colour-casts as well - I use an Ansel Adams photo as my desktop when I am calibrating by eye. Of course, if you're very serious about colour, you can get a calibration tool that will do all this for you, and help calibrate your other devices as well.
ColorSync is a system-wide utility for colour management - it works in all apps, but it must be setup with the profiles of ALL the devices and materials you will be using, i.e., camera, scanner, printer and paper profiles. Colorsync is a great system when you have all the pieces, but is only as strong as its weakest link. The alternative is to work without it - then the colour settings are all in the printer - calibrating your monitor is still the central requirement for this workflow. This empirical approach to colour management can work - as it did on your PC laptop - but output is determined by the printer driver, and Epson has many non-colorsync tools to help, and also by the software, i.e. PhotoShop tries to show you what your print will look like based on it's own colour settings, but Preview (the Mac app) may show you very different colours, while both print the exact same output.
Colour management is deep water, but the empirical approach can and does work. Serious image manipulation requires serious equipment, and only a select few LCD-based screens are up to the job - see Barco or LaCie for examples. Outside of those two companies, only Apple's 24" and 27" iMacs meet the stringent requirements for colour accuracy. However, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and so is achieving "pleasing colour". Once you "know" your system, you will be able to predict colour very accurately though you may not "see" it on the monitor.
I've used both the ColorSync and empirical approaches, and both work, but the ColorSync workflow requires strict adherence to it's scientific methods. When it is working it is a marvel - able to accurately show you what your print will look like on different substrates (glossy, matte, newsprint, photo paper, etc.) before you commit to print. This is a wonderful facility for pro photographers, but much more elaborate and expensive to maintain than the good ole empirical method, which can also predict your output very successfully, but only under a limited range of variables.
What apps are you working with? Without ColorSync each app lives in it's own colour world, and the workflow varies with each one, but once you establish a good calibration and print setting, your output should be very predictable AND pleasing.
Happy Mac'ing!
Dan
p.s.: that should be Eizo or LaCie - not Barco or LaCie - I'm getting so old...
Dan
thanks dan for such a complete response.
most of the time i use aperture 2. am about to upgrade to aperture 3 but haven't gone there yet. (was thinking of changing to lightroom but have decided against it. its kind of fun being mostly-mac dependent). i also use photoshop on occasion.
i will take a few days and go through your suggestions. i really appreciate the your detailed response. i've just returned from a trip with some amazing photos from utah and a progressive set of pics of a pair of hummingbird babies that go from egg to almost-fledgling. want to print these photos properly. its hard word for me to be methodical and empirical but i'll give it a shot.
thanks again,
trudy