P400 prints don’t match 9900 prints

I finished converting a 9900 to Pro K5 but my prints are much lighter than the ones printed on my p400. I ran 2 initfills and several power cleans. What could the causing this ? 9900 print on the bottom :

1 Like

looks like the right ones were printed with ICC and the left ones were printed linear . . . .

workflow change? it could be useful to print and send lin targets my way. I can make you a set of a 3 (cool, neutral, warm) to true things up

-Walker

Workflow is the same and I’m using the same PC. I tried the K4 curves and it’s about the same. Same thing printing PK on PhotoRag Pearl. I noticed the density is also lighter on the 9900 printing the purge files - but I haven’t measured them yet with my colormunki. The nozzle pattern on the 9900 is thinner/finer compared to the p400. Shouldn’t they be the same thickness ?

That might be a good option if I can’t figure it out.

I’ll post some additional photos over the weekend.

I took some measurements of the MK (UHD Matte Black) with a Colormunki.

p400 => 15.2 (from the 8 color purge file)
9900 => 19.1 (from the 10 color purge file)

It also looks like there’s a slight amount of banding throughout and more pronounced banding near the end of the purge file. I ran a head alignment but it did not help. I don’t think the firmware on the 9900 was ever upgraded - should I ?

Here is a comparison of the of the nozzle checks : is is there a reason the one from the 9900 are so much finer ?

And a close-up of MK channel on 9900

Paul

Please print a channel calibration target (in calibration) mode on Glossy paper but with the MK ink activated. This looks like a MK/PK fill issue to me,.

If it’s glossy you have PK in your MK channel. If not then something else is going on.

regards,
Walker

Ok I’ll check this afternoon. I numbered the bottles and cartridges 1-11 in order of cartridge placement and triple checked but you never know…

I think it may be something else. I measured the other corresponding channels and they are all lighter :

Channel = 9900 - p400

LK = 67.2 - 63.2
LM = 43.7 - 38.2
LC = 45.6 - 43.4
Y = 67.2 - 62.2
M = 36.6 - 32.3
C = 35 - 33
K = 19.1 - 15.2

I’m using Printing Model Quad9900-Pro-K5 and x900-Hahn-PhotoRag-Neutral curve, Matte Paper (Type) and Matte Ink (Black Ink), Advanced adjustments are 0, Ordered.

Just to update this thread:

Paul sent me some great targets yesterday and I was able to measure and do luminance matches with PPEv2 (a hidden but important feature of PPEv2). Luminance can vary from head to head and printer to printer (or channel to channel!). So this is why PPEv2 is important. Also, because he has so many prints out of the P400 with slightly darker-than-linear shadows and because the P9000 is generally slightly light, it’s useful to do a luminance match calibration so he does not need to re-edit his large print files from his small print files (too much work!).

P400 linearity:

![Screen

Luminance-match showing P9000 too light (red) and target luminance values of P400 (green):

I’ve gone and done luminance match calibration to the P400 here (for show printing):

Px-Hahn-PhotoRag-Neutral-P4Match.quad (9.1 KB)

Px-Hahn-PhotoRag-Warm-P4Match.quad (7.5 KB)

Px-Hahn-PhotoRag-Cool-P4Match.quad (7.5 KB)

And here is Linearized P9000 curves (these will print slightly more open than P400 in shadows but will be a linear base-line for all future printing of new work).

Px-Hahn-PhotoRag-Neutral-Lin.quad (9.2 KB)

Px-Hahn-PhotoRag-Cool-Lin.quad (7.5 KB)

Px-Hahn-PhotoRag-Warm-Lin.quad (7.5 KB)

Measurements:

Paul_Warm_P9000.txt (27.6 KB)

Paul_Cool_P9000.txt (28.4 KB)

Paul_Warm_P400.txt (27.4 KB)

Paul_Cool_P400.txt (28.2 KB)

1 Like

Paul is using SP-9900 and you’ve referenced the P9000, is this just a typo or are those curves for the P9000?

I’m assuming the curves are compatible with both p9000 and 9900 - Walker labeled them 9x-

Although it probably doesn’t matter. I don’t think the calibration software takes into account the printer model used - only the printed target.

I’ll try it today :slight_smile:

1 Like

Super, thanks Paul - I’m also using 9900 :slight_smile:

I’m still getting to grips with creating all the curves, but I absolutely love the tonality that’s coming out of these inks. Walker has be brilliant in guiding me with the conversion.

1 Like

P9000 curves = 9900 curves sorry.

best

Walker

1 Like

It’s a little overwhelming at first but so worth the effort I can’t imagine ever going back to printing black and white with color inks :nauseated_face:

I tried the compensating curves over the weekend and wow, they are bang on. I’m THRILLED with the results and very relieved I can print my images on time for my show !!

Thanks Walker !!

you are very welcome. I invented this luminance match technique when printing for people at Black Point Editions in Chicago. I would ask them to print a target on their home printer and then I could match the luminance in my lab so when they sent files for large prints I could bang them out without messing anything up

:slight_smile:
cheers!
Walker

1 Like