Pro-100 Driver Update

[PeterBJ]

It seems XPS is a Microsoft file format, with a purpose similar to that of Adobe's PDF. It looks like the match screen/paper is more about layout than about colour. Here is an explanation of XPS.

Microsoft XPS document writer is part of all Windows OS from XP and newer. It is a virtual printer that converts a document and saves it in the XPS format.

To print these files with a Canon printer you need an XPS driver. It looks like these drivers are only available for printers of the PGI-x25/CLI-x26 generation or newer. I have an MG5150 and an MG5550 for which XPS drivers are available, so I could give it a try. But I have never seen an XPS file, so I have had no need for an XPS driver.

 

[The Hat]

I got a good feeling that I’ll never need to print through XPS, I use Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign and Acrobat Pro, so I could never see a time that the Windows XPS format could ever integrate or compete with these heavy weights...

 

[mikling]

I got a good feeling that I’ll never need to print through XPS, I use Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign and Acrobat Pro, so I could never see a time that the Windows XPS format could ever integrate or compete with these heavy weights...

I am of the same opinion BUT the XPS possibly is trending towards the "Apple" way of things. Make things simpler, remove the requirement of understanding what is going on behind the scenes and thus remove control and understanding of the technology. On the other hand, those with less knowledge can do more but at least they can DO something....BUT at the control of someone else and their abilities now are tied to the platform completely. The ability to leave this framework and still be productive is very very hard to do. Apple has done this very effectively and is where they are because of this.

 

[Jim Walker]

You asked me if I had tried setting the XPS to the default driver. I did and it made no difference. Even with the XPS as the default driver the network only recognizes the WS series.

 

[Jim Walker]

After playing around with the computer I was finally was able to get the WIFI network to recognize the XPS series driver. I uninstalled everything that was associated with the Pro-100 drivers and then started from scratch and reinstalled the WS series and then the XPS series and everything was recognized. Must have corrupted something when I was trying to get it to work originally. Just want to see if using the XPS makes any difference in the prints. I'll post the prints for comparison if it looks like it makes a difference.
Thanks for all the help and suggestions.

 

[stratman]

Specifically, what does "made no difference" mean? Your printed images look no different to you? That may be because the image you are printing does not provide any benefit for the XPS driver, or the printer itself, to utilize.

From my reading, the WS driver is the network capable driver, the XPS is not. The WS driver must be installed for your printer to work, the XPS is optional.

The WS driver can print up to 8-bpc images. The XPS can utilize 16-bpc images, the theory being that gradients can be smoother in the printed image given the appropriate circumstances.

Better and more complete explanation by Googling "16-bpc printing".

 

[stratman]

I'll post the prints for comparison if it looks like it makes a difference.

Unless you use a 16-bpc image for your test then there appears to be little to no point.

From http://www.diyphotography.net/8-bit-vs-16-bit-color-depth-use-matters/:

Q. My source image is in 8-bit. Should I convert it to 16-bit while editing it?
A. Probably not. The conversion will not help with your existing tonal graduations and color tones. Though if you are doing any editing that introduce new graduations, or very subtle color variations, you might benefit from converting.

 

[The Hat]

I hate to knock Microsoft but their XPS driver has been around for quite a while and has been largely ignored, its much like the 16 bit colour driver, if you ever bother to use it, you’ll be in exactly the same boat as @Jim Walker is.

Why, because your printer wont print 16 bit colour even if it has the proper driver, the finished print will look no different than one printed using 8 bit colour, it’s the same as the 300 DPI saga, the human eye can’t see anything above it...

 

[stratman]

Some agree, some disagree, about the utility of the XPS driver based on my reading through several sites found in my Google search It can, given the proper circumstances, smooth out color gradations/banding. However, one cannot print colors that are out of gamut for that printer no matter what driver you use.

An article against 16-bit: http://www.danecreek.com/blog/2010/07/06/is-there-a-difference-printing-16-bit-instead-of-8-bit.html

An article for 16-bit: http://www.diyphotography.net/8-bit-vs-16-bit-color-depth-use-matters/

An article for and against 16-bit: http://www.steves-digicams.com/knowledge-center/hype-or-hero-take-2-16-bit-printers.html

 

[stratman]

To make matters even more interesting...

There is confusion on how to actually use the XPS driver to do 16-bit printing: http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=85724.20

Some think Canon's Print Studio Pro plug-in must be installed, the XPS driver selected, that 16-bit printing be selected in your printing application, and a 16-bit image file be use (of course).