Getting a new photo printer. Is colour gamut something to be concerned with. What really matters

[@RichAdamsFineArt]

It's refreshing to hear honesty about modern tech: everything is way better than it used to be and is way better than most people need. Professionals know what they need and are willing to pay for better stuff but that's a rare case. I used to own the Epson R2400 and upgraded to the P700 about a year and a half ago and the improvements were amazing for the same basic price point.

[@KeithCooper]

Yes - if I can't make a great print, it's not the printer's fault ;-)

[@johnvaleanbaily246]

I always learn something from you in your videos about printing, inks, papers etc. Thank you Keith.

[@KeithCooper]

Thanks!

[@mondomicio]

Keith, just a note after watching so many of your interesting videos and reading your reviews on the website... for a printing ignorant like me it would be nice some time to have a shot of the prints taken at a very short distance, so that the paper texture/reflectivity can be seen...

[@KeithCooper]

That's what my written articles are for - such images/results would be pretty meaningless on a YT video.

[@mondomicio]

Thanks for the video Keith, I'm an amateur photographer and I've decided to go with the ET-8550 instead of this one anyway. I hope to have done the right choice. I did it because i plan to print some BW as well and the ET-8550 has pigment black, and has a display... The P700 was 80 € more pricey but it's my first color printer since ages and I'm scared by ink cartridges cost for the P700...

[@KeithCooper]

Yes for B&W and general flexibility, the 8550 would be my choice of the two

[@markflanagan521]

Hi Kieth, informative video as ever and thanks. Glad to report, that the ET8550 update seems to have resolved the roller mark issue on my printer at least. I used to get only one line roller mark, hard to see but once viewed at an opaque angle it was clearly visible but now no more on the more sensitive papers. Also glad that you will be covering a direct comparison of et8550 and this one the et8100l or what ever its called😀

[@KeithCooper]

Thanks - I'm glad the update has helped some people

[@davidemassussi3735]

Hi Mark, on what kind of paper the firmware update has solved the problem? on thicker papers (baryta) I still have the issue

[@markflanagan521]

@@davidemassussi3735 The Perma jet FB gold silk, which is 315gsm and is a true baryta paper. I haven't tried it on the Hahnemuhle papers as of yet. hope this helps

[@jpdj2715]

What a nice review - as always - Keith. When you discuss gamut, you point to banding and then talk about Photoshop and being able to reveal the out of gamut pixels. Would you agree with me that banding and out of gamut (in the images you point to here) are different things? Now, as you take the image into Photoshop anyway, my speculation is that you can easily get rid of any banding if you convert to 16 or32 bits per channel. It's interesting that even a (very good) 8 or 10 bits per channel monitor will make us aware of the difference. I'm not sure what happens with, say, 32 bpc when I print that. You? While Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) converts our raw pictures (with monochrome data elements) in to a ProPhoto colour space into Lightroom Classic's workspace, that says nothing about "gradation resolution" as in bpc - LrC may do with 9bpc RGB pixels.

[@KeithCooper]

Thanks Yes, I'm being relatively loose with descriptions of things like banding here - those who understand what is going on won't need me to explain it ;-) I'm really using this as a tool to convey the idea of gamut rather than to suggest fixes... This is always an issue with stuff on YT - I'm told my videos are quite long enough as it is ;-)

[@jpdj2715]

@@KeithCooper - 2,000 years ago, in Latin, someone wrote, I write you a long letter because I have short time

[@timmiller9114]

Hi Keith, where is that i1profiler test image located on the computer? I have an X-rite i1photo pro 3 plus with i1 profiler using Mac.thanks

[@KeithCooper]

You need to look for the image resources. The print is a composite image I made of the individual images. Look in the various system/library folders where all the X-Rite stuff lives...

[@islephoto2536]

Hi Keith, have you got a time scale for the final 18100 and 8550 comparison video's as I'm awaiting them before I make a decision on which printer to go for?

[@KeithCooper]

Could be weeks - I have holidays and quite a bit of paying work coming up. It's actually pretty easy - do you want anything more than colour prints on gloss/lustre/metallic RC style photo papers? If yes, then get the 8550... If you just want great colour photo prints on RC style photo papers, get the 18100

[@jefffenske1958]

Keith, thanks for explaining how the light grays are mixed with strong colors to get more colors in printers that have gray inks! That's been a mystery to me. Also, if we choose to print in the perceptual colorimetric, do we need a different profile than one for relative colorimetric? Or can one profile be used with both? I'm thinking that when paper companies supply profiles they only supply one profile per paper for a given printer. If that's true, can that profile be used for either perceptual or relative printing? Thanks.

[@KeithCooper]

Thanks A single profile contains several rendering intents. Perceptual and Relative Colorimetric are the ones most often used. Some applications may give Saturation and Absolute Colorimetric The differences of Perceptual/RelCol depend on just how the profile was built - some images show differences more than others en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_management#Rendering_intent

[@fredwestinghouse2945]

For yourself, with your trained eye, on titanium gloss paper, which printer/dye ink would you chose to print the orchid photo? I ask this because I print for myself. At A3+ sized prints, I see my own mistakes. I see the printers flaws - e.g. pizza wheels, gloss differential etc. So, things like colour gamut could matter to me and to some others. I am not obsessing over these things, there are other factors to consider - e.g. cost of printer, cost of ink, maximum paper size etc - but it is good to know.

[@KeithCooper]

It would be this or the Canon PRO-200 - I'd need to check the actual image gamut to see if the 8 inks of the 200 made any difference. However I'd not expect to be able to easily see any difference in the prints. I'm not saying colour gamut doesn't matter, just that it needs to be placed alongside a whole number of other factors connected with 'print quality'. It's about realistic/relevant differences, not just numbers on charts/graphs

[@alanglassman6473]

So, question Keith. How does the gloss potential of a print made on a Canon pigment ink printer with gloss optimizer compare to a glossy print made on this Epson. Thx

[@KeithCooper]

No - the CO improves the 'look' but doesn't look like this. It's still pigment ink. I've covered CO (and some of its flaws) in several of my Canon printer reviews over the years [the written reviews - before I did videos] In these prints there is no sign of ink on the paper

[@alanglassman6473]

@@KeithCooper thanks Keith.

[@1stWorldProblemsSolved]

No ?s today, but good to see you're doing well!

[@KeithCooper]

Thanks