Sounds like the hornets nest is open! I for one am pleased (at your
expense, sadly!) to hear you say that you have dumped profiles. I would
really like to avoid profiles for my 1270, and if it is possible to get
consistently good results with the sliders, I would love to know your
methodology. (As no doubt it would be a bit more logical than my hit and
May I ask:
- *are* you using a 'method' to do this, eg a Q80, or have you just tweaked
the controls over a range of images to get the best result?
- are the results consistent? Someone else has already asked whether you
have to re-tweak for different images.
My only concern is that this method isn't applying curved corrections, and
I had assumed that would be necessary given the nature of the beast..
Umm, and if you are using a fancy method, please remember it's nice to
share with the lesser mortals ... ;-)
Regards, mark t
At 11:02 AM 10/08/01 +0100, Tony wrote:
>I have wasted maybe 100hrs mucking about with profiles and stuff on a 1200,
>read shedloads, tried the various things Ian Lyons suggests, and got
>nowhere. All I have to show for it is 200+ rotten test prints. Not one was
>Apart from anything else I came to the conclusion that CM within the Epson
>driver is completely broken. So Pixl or any other profiles are not likely
>to help me. The 1270 may be better.
>A couple of months ago I gave up with all the autopilot approaches, and set
>about merely doing manual adjustments in the printer driver (CMY,
>saturation, contrast). This has worked far, far better than anything else :
>prints are now as close to the screen image as is possible within the
>limits of a different gamut. And it's free.
>http://www.halftone.co.uk - Online portfolio & exhibit; + film scanner info