Level 1

22 points

Awful Color on Epson 2200 after Snow Leopard Upgrade

I'm an experience photographer and printer who has done extensive printing on the Epson 2200 under previous versions of the OS using CS4. As a beta tester for Snow Leopard I had used it extensively on another machine before the release, so I did not hesitate to upgrade my photography production computer as soon as it was available this past weekend.

The problem I now have is that print colors are all wrong - very greenish (bluish?), which is typically a symptom that nothing is managing the printing out of PS. (Reddish/purplish prints are often a symptom that color is being managed by both PS and the printer's own software.) I have changed nothing else in my workflow or printing process besides doing the upgrade - I have a solid workflow process that works consistently and accurately, or should I say it DID work so until the upgrade.

I have installed the updated 2200 drivers from the Epson web site. I have removed and re-added the printer in the preferences panel. Still no joy.

Help? Advice? Anything to try that I haven't thought of yet?

Thanks in advance,

Dan

iMac 24" (aluminum), Mac OS X (10.6)

Posted on Aug 31, 2009 9:13 PM

154 replies

Oct 16, 2009 2:11 PM in response to Steve Holton

Although someone named Syd has posted here to say that Epson will in fact be releasing new drivers for Snow Leopard, I wanted to hear it from an official source (no offence Syd). I emailed the support people and specifically asked if they are going to release a new driver for the 2200, and when that might happen. I got this reply the next day:

“At this moment a driver is not available however a driver will be released with a future Mac 10.6 update. We do not have an ETA since it will be released with a Mac Update.”

At least there is confirmation from Epson themselves that a new driver is on the way, so this is the good news. The bad news is that they couldn't provide a timeline. Given that 10.6.2 has already been seeded I'd think we'd be looking at 10.6.3 at the earliest.

A few weeks ago I sent an email to an address I found for an Epson big-wig. The email was polite of course, but firmly expressed the feelings of many regarding Epson’s poor drivers, lack of customer support, failure to communicate, and failure to classify products like the 2200, 2400, 2880 as professional products when professional customers clearly make up a huge segment of their users. I never did get a response. It may have been an incorrect address, so when I emailed the support people I also asked them to give me an email address where a letter of that nature should be sent, since there isn't anything on their website. Here is the address they gave me:
james_foreman@ea.epson.com

I suggest everyone affected by this send along a note letting them know that if they don't start improving their software and getting it out in a timely fashion, and generally doing a better job of supporting their customers, we will simply spend our money elsewhere. Remember... be nice... a nasty cursing rant might make you feel better but likely won't help the cause much.

danmitchell Author

Level 1

22 points

Oct 17, 2009 12:45 PM in response to Bazzography

Being polite and reasonable doesn't hurt... but in some cases it has no apparent effect either. The long period of time since "Snow Leopard" was released and the subsequent actions (claiming a working driver, removing links, etc.) and non-actions (no concrete public statement, while users are SOL) suggests that being polite here is not going to get Epson's attention.

Companies abhor publicity that suggests that they don't care about their customers. They may not care particularly about 2200 users as a group, but they do care if a general notion about Epson's failure to support customers gets "out in the wild."

I urge everyone who has encountered this problem and Epson's "response" to share the story widely. Twitter... Facebook... your blog... photography forums... etc. Include links to this discussion and others that have focused on this unresolved issue.

Dan

Gary P

Level 4

1,418 points

Oct 18, 2009 11:15 PM in response to danmitchell

I also lost control of color output on 2 printers upon installing Snow Leopard. Reading through this thread, I see I was not alone. People talked a lot about Epson not caring. What about Apple? Apple apparently released a disaster upon their users. The Gutenprint drivers are not only infernally complex, they don't work anyway. Even if, as some conjectured, Epson doesn't know who their user are, which I doubt, Apple certainly does. Why we haven't seen better coordination between Apple & Epson through the years is a mystery to me. One would think it would benefit them both to work this out.

danmitchell Author

Level 1

22 points

Oct 19, 2009 8:26 AM in response to Gary P

Gary P wrote:
I also lost control of color output on 2 printers upon installing Snow Leopard. Reading through this thread, I see I was not alone. People talked a lot about Epson not caring. What about Apple? Apple apparently released a disaster upon their users. The Gutenprint drivers are not only infernally complex, they don't work anyway. Even if, as some conjectured, Epson doesn't know who their user are, which I doubt, Apple certainly does. Why we haven't seen better coordination between Apple & Epson through the years is a mystery to me. One would think it would benefit them both to work this out.

"I also lost control of color output on 2 printers upon installing Snow Leopard. Reading through this thread, I see I was not alone. People talked a lot about Epson not caring. What about Apple? Apple apparently released a disaster upon their users. The Gutenprint drivers are not only infernally complex, they don't work anyway. Even if, as some conjectured, Epson doesn't know who their user are, which I doubt, Apple certainly does. Why we haven't seen better coordination between Apple & Epson through the years is a mystery to me. One would think it would benefit them both to work this out."

While it is possible that Apple messed up, considering how printer driver updates have worked in the past, the fact that Epson has updated some drivers (for newer or more expensive printers), the fact (or so it seems) that Epson continues to update drivers, and the multiple reports of support calls where Epson personnel essentially said, "Hey, get a newer printer"...

... it seems far more likely that Epson holds the solution to this problem.

In the past Apple has never been "in charge" or supplying proprietary drivers for other company's printers. The inclusion of the Gutenprint drivers is as likely evidence of Apple trying to do the right thing as it is that Apple doesn't care. In fact, given that some report that they are OK with the decreased quality and increased complexity of using those drivers, it is reasonable to presume that Apple did people a favor (though not sufficient for my purpose) by including some driver in the face of Epson's failure.

Gary P

Level 4

1,418 points

Oct 19, 2009 1:25 PM in response to danmitchell

Just to check things out, I booted into a Leopard system I had backed up, and was able to get good color out of the same printer that looks awful under Snow Leopard. My point is that Apple knows that artists & photographers use Apple systems and Epson printers more than any other setup for controlling color & obtaining high quality output. This means they were willing to release Snow Leopard knowing this would break those workflows. So what was the rush? Why don't they coordinate things better with Epson? It is true that pro shops will not upgrade the OS until everything works, but what about all the amateurs & enthusiasts that trusted Apple & upgraded only to lose control of color output? What was so important about releasing Snow Leopard early, when Leopard works fine? Why wouldn't Apple consider this counterproductive? Is it really good publicity to have a lot of users upset about bad print output after an upgrade?

I am certainly not trying to make excuses for Epson. Just saying I can't understand Apple's rationale here.

Oct 19, 2009 3:27 PM in response to Gary P

Gary P wrote:
Just to check things out, I booted into a Leopard system I had backed up, and was able to get good color out of the same printer that looks awful under Snow Leopard. My point is that Apple knows that artists & photographers use Apple systems and Epson printers more than any other setup for controlling color & obtaining high quality output. This means they were willing to release Snow Leopard knowing this would break those workflows. So what was the rush? Why don't they coordinate things better with Epson? It is true that pro shops will not upgrade the OS until everything works, but what about all the amateurs & enthusiasts that trusted Apple & upgraded only to lose control of color output? What was so important about releasing Snow Leopard early, when Leopard works fine? Why wouldn't Apple consider this counterproductive? Is it really good publicity to have a lot of users upset about bad print output after an upgrade?

I am certainly not trying to make excuses for Epson. Just saying I can't understand Apple's rationale here.

Firstly, you are assuming Apple knew that Snow Leopard would break those workflows. There is no reason to think they would as it isn't up to Apple to test their OS with third-party software and hardware. It's the other way around. Secondly, even if Apple did know, they were still absolutely correct in releasing Snow Leopard regardless.

Obviously I am not happy about the result either, but to say that Apple should have waited for Epson to build new drivers before releasing Snow Leopard is completely unrealistic.

There are literally thousands of software companies that making hundreds of thousands of software titles for OS X. If Apple was to wait for all of them to get their act together there would never be a another new OS released ever again. New operating systems are necessary to allow new technologies and new features to be brought to light in the future. If Apple doesn't keep up with the development of new hardware and software they will be left in the dust by their competitors and there won't be a Apple in the future. What you are suggesting would mean that Epson and every other company that is either too slow, too incompetent or just too uninterested in updating their own software would end up dictating the timeline of Apple's development. I can't imagine any company allowing that to happen.

This is why Apple seeds copies of new operating systems to developers way in advance. I found a news story about Apple seeding Snow Leopard to developers back on June 10, 2008... that's 2008, not 2009. That's 15 months in advance. Nobody was taken by surprise by this. Most other companies managed to update their software, why didn't Epson? I don't know why, and it doesn't really matter. Apple can't be expected to change the company's development timeline (which will be mapped out years, possibly decades, in advance) just because Epson failed to update their software.

The point is, when it's time for the train to leave the station, you either get on or you get left behind. The train has a schedule it must keep, and it will not wait for you just because you're running late. Epson had the train schedule a long time ago but still didn't get on in time. Don't blame Apple for leaving the station.

danmitchell Author

Level 1

22 points

Oct 19, 2009 9:04 PM in response to Steve Holton

Steve, I just returned to your post linking to a "solution" to the 2200 printer problem under Snow Leopard.

Sorry, but no go. I'm a very careful photograph printer who has a carefully crafted workflow that creates prints that look exactly the way I want them to look, and this must be repeatable each time I print an image. The color/quality of my prints can't vary all over the map.

I really wish your "solution" worked, but it doesn't work for any critical work. Glad you are happy with what it does for you, but it is not a solution for critical work.

(I suspect that you are letting the printer handle the color management rather than using the more typical and correct approach of letting the software - e.g. Photoshop - manage the colors. This can produce results that are not terrible. In other words they seem OK if you aren't too critical about color management. But they are not the same results that come from using working Epson drivers under 10.5.)

Dan

Oct 19, 2009 9:15 PM in response to danmitchell

I'm not happy with the way it works. It wasn't really a solution, I just wanted to say there was at least a way to get semi OKish results. But as you say, it's not proper workflow/color management. I don't rely on printing for sales, so I can sit tight and wait a bit for it to get "fixed", assuming it ever will.

Yes, the best I have come up with is to either let the printer manage color or use a "ColorSync" type workflow, which basically lets the printer manage color. Most of this thread is about the 2200, and there is some hope it will get fixed (ie new drivers, that actually work), but I use a 1280 and it's much older, so I think i am pretty much hosed! At least Costco does some fair prints (if you use the specific printer profiles they have available)

Oct 20, 2009 10:50 AM in response to danmitchell

Dan,

Well it looks like I'm joining the ranks of the unhappy and eat some humble pie.

I do have a very good understanding of Color Management and a good consistent workflow and let PS and LR not the printer handle the color when printing, but local print isn't my principle work product.

My principal testing was done before the formal release of 10.6. including the final release.

Yesterday ran some tests and the results are not OK. I re-calibrated the monitor to be sure and the greens are just not right in the prints I made. I booted my 10.5.8 partition and the print look as expected - the difference between the PS soft-proof and a properly illuminated print are indistinguishable within an expected minute tolerance.

The puzzling thing is the fact that I had saved the actual test prints I made when testing and re-examined them and they look the same 10.5 versus SL. I re-printed one of the test prints on 10.5.8 and 10.6.x and it still looked good, but looking at it, it is probably a poor representative of an image for a comprehensive test.

At this point I'm not sure what has happened since I first began making tests in March. The support of the 2200 was a key interest of mine, as Apple position was the 2200 was unsupported in their view (except for Gutenprint), and I wanted to be "sure" it actually worked. Looks like I was to easy to accept that what I observed was the result I desired! ... and failed to test a broad range of test images...

For the moment I'm going to rely on the 10.5.8 for such printing as I need to do.

Steve

Message was edited by: Steve Holton

Oct 21, 2009 7:55 AM in response to Bazzography

In addition to your right-on comments, assume for the sake of argument Epson's lack of support for 2200 printers continues. Not only do they drive a lot of 2200 owners to the competition, they also lose the very lucrative ink cartridge sales. I am a relatively casual (not professional) user and buy a $100+ set of cartridges every 12 - 18 months. I can just imagine how much more pro's spend.

It seems to me the margin from a couple hundred cartridge set sales should more than fund the driver development for 2200. You would think Epson would want to keep that margin but maybe not...

Oct 26, 2009 3:52 PM in response to JohnZonie

Just to let you all know, I got a response to my letter to Epson management which included the following:

"...we do not have an exact date but we are planning to have the Snow Leopard driver for the Stylus Photo 2200 in the 1st quarter of 2010. When this driver becomes available it will not be posted on the Epson web site but will be made available through an Apple update."

He was apologetic about the delay, and suggested that if color management is critical to my workflow that I would have to use 10.5 until the update is available.

So there you have it... nothing to do but wait and watch. Better late than never... I guess.

ssteuer

Level 1

5 points

Oct 27, 2009 1:56 PM in response to Bazzography

Hi Folks.
I just spoke with them myself-- and they said there is already a work around-- and that they're not going to be posting another driver, because this fixes it-- I don't have Snow Leopard (I'm waiting to buy a new machine until this is fixed!)-- can someone confirm if they are correct, or if not, we should be contacting them to say that this doesn't work:

Instructions:
Delete current printer in the print dialog (which likely says Printer Features)
From the Epson 2200 driver page:
Download and install the Printer Driver v3.0aAs (3rd item under Mac OS)
then Download and install the Common Updater (1st item under Mac OS)
add the new printer driver which should now say Print Settings, and should access all control settings.

and the question is: Does it?
please report back here!
thanks!
--ss

Oct 27, 2009 2:29 PM in response to ssteuer

The short answer is NO.

What this procedure does do is install a driver with the controls that one expects i.e that were available in 10.5 and earlier.

It does also produce a print.

But the color is wrong - badly wrong in many cases (at least when you run a color managed workflow and don't let the printer handle color)

I suspect that Epson figured if the driver and its controls appeared and worked - i.e. printed anything all was OK.

It is not.

It is possible that with the printer handling color you might get something half-way decent, but that is:
1. Not how serious folks do it.
2. Half way decent is far from acceptable.

Thus their response to you is not encouraging and we should continue to try and pressure them.

In the meantime keep a 10.5.x system for printing.

Steve

Oct 27, 2009 3:12 PM in response to ssteuer

ssteuer wrote:
I just spoke with them myself-- and they said there is already a work around-- and that they're not going to be posting another driver, because this fixes it...

I'm guessing that you spoke to one of the regular technical support staff members who takes tech questions from the public, yes?

Possibility 1) It is likely he/she is simply not yet aware of the company's plans for a new driver.

Possibility 2) There is confusion over what someone means when they say it "works". As Steve mentions above, the existing drivers does in fact work in the sense that yes, you can use all the available driver features and produce a print. But what it does not do is _produce accurate color when used within a proper color-managed workflow_. Thus to say the driver "works" doesn't really mean much and causes a great deal of confusion over this issue.

Regardless, the person I spoke to is the Assistant Manager of Epson Technical Support. He would know, surely. Unless you spoke to someone higher up in management than I did, I'd think the information I posted earlier is accurate, and a new driver is on the way.

ssteuer

Level 1

5 points

Oct 28, 2009 1:48 PM in response to Bazzography

Thanks guys-- I spoke with a regular tech person--so I'm hoping that the manager is correct.
It's scary buying a new machine that will only run snow leopard or later if I'm not going to be able to get good prints out of the 2200.... and I have to buy before the end of the year...
hopefully there WILL be support next quarter (and I'll keep this machine to print meanwhile)...
not a good solution though.

Please do keep this thread updated with any new info!

This thread has been closed by the system or the community team. You may vote for any posts you find helpful, or search the Community for additional answers.

Awful Color on Epson 2200 after Snow Leopard Upgrade