June 08, 2007

Printing in CS3: The inside scoop

Hang around the Photoshop booth at a trade show for 20 minutes and you’ll get a very clear message: the task of simply printing a photo to a desktop printer, getting just the results you saw on screen, is much harder than it should be.  After you’ve heard the hundredth question about setting up color management, then getting Photoshop and one’s printer driver to play well together, you’ll really want to get this situation sorted out.

The good news is that we’ve been thinking about these problems for quite a while; the less-good news is that solving them takes time and coordination.  Adobe has been working with the printer vendors, as well as the Apple & Microsoft operating system teams, on plans to improve the printing experience.  [Update: Please see this follow-up post.]

For the CS3 cycle we brought on a new printing expert, Dave Polaschek, to buff up Photoshop’s printing code.  He’s been able to make some visible improvements (e.g. a print preview that’s color managed), and to do quite a bit more behind the scenes.  In response to some questions about how PSCS3 prints (especially on Windows), I’ve asked Dave to contribute a guest blog post. Read on to hear his thoughts.


John’s been seeing some comments here about printing on Windows from Photoshop CS3, and asked me to respond. Rather than post a short comment, I asked if it would be okay to guest-blog something longer, discussing the changes that we made to the printing in CS3. Not sure if he knew what he was getting into when he said "yes," but he did, so here we go:

The change which seems to be causing the most consternation is the change from application-wide page setup to document-specific page setup in Photoshop on Windows. This is the way the Mac version has always behaved, and was the way the Windows version of Photoshop was intended to behave way back in the day, but for one reason or another, that never quite got hooked up.

With CS3, I was brought in to "improve and modernize the printing code," and part of that effort has been trying to get the Mac and Windows versions more in sync. In the short run, this means trying to rip out code that behaved differently between the two platforms, or add code to make them behave identically because of a shortcoming on one platform or the other. In the long run, it means less code to think about and to write so we can add new features more quickly.

But people are still feeling pain. Well, there are at least two solutions to the problem. The first is using Actions in photoshop. If you start recording a new action, go to File->Page Setup in Photoshop and set up your page and printer and all the printer settings, you can run that action on every new document you create to give it that page setup. Or even easier, if you always want all documents set up the same for your default printer, you can follow the directions in our technote on non-centered documents [link updated] which tells how to change the page setup system wide.

And that brings me to the centering issue. Photoshop CS2 would happily center images with little pain on just about any printer out there. In CS3, things seem a little rougher. Why is that?

In CS2, the printing code in Photoshop would helpfully adjust the margins of the paper to zero. If the printer driver couldn’t actually handle margins of zero, it was up to the driver to correct things. Or cut off part of your image. Or make your printer explode (though thankfully, few vendors chose that option). It really was out of our control once we’d changed things initially, but in most cases it seemed to do what people wanted, which was make it easy to center images on the paper.

The problem with that was that it didn’t work that way on the Mac, and it won’t work that way on Vista. Again, the solution was to bring the two platforms into closer alignment. We’re going to leave setting the margins to the printer driver (which, since it actually knows about your printer, should have a better idea of what’s realistic than we do), and all will be well. Except for some pain now, as people have to learn to hunt for the "Minimize Margins" or "Center Image" or "Borderless" or other vendor-specific language in the printer driver’s dialogs. Or in the worst case, you might have to set up a custom paper size, with custom margins that actually does the right thing, but that should be pretty rare.

In the long run, it’s for the best. Photoshop shouldn’t have to know or care that a printer has a half-inch margin on one side of the paper and a one inch margin on the other. That’s the sort of thing the people who make printers should have to worry about. Are there some older printer drivers that aren’t going to work as well this way? Almost certainly. But we’ve got to look forward. There are a ton of neat things we can do on Vista and Leopard. But we can’t take advantage of the new technologies if we’re spending all of our time working on incompatibilities with drivers that were written last century. Like drinking cod-liver-oil, it may not be the most tasty thing right now, but it’ll be good for us.

Posted by John Nack at 1:46 PM on June 08, 2007

Comments

  • David Haynes — 4:02 PM on June 08, 2007

    I am currently using CS2 and printing to Canon’s iPF5000 using the 16bit plugin. I have read (forget where) that the 16bit print plugin does not work in CS3. Is this true?
    If “yes” is it Canon’s job to address this or is it Adobe’s job (or both)?

  • Rosyna — 4:25 PM on June 08, 2007

    I’ve not heard of a printer exploding error, just a printer on fire error.

  • George Tally — 4:33 PM on June 08, 2007

    Sounds OK but.
    You seem to be saying that Adobe CS software shouldn’t have to be aware of the differences in drivers; that you just have to pass on those specifics to the customer; and so it’s a favor to her that you make one work like the other.
    The whole point of applications is to hide those specifics from customers.
    Put another way, customers are mostly not cross-platform – such conformity is not reasonably a customer responsibility.
    CS software seems to be passing on to the customer, the requirement to deal with the drivers’ respective idioms.
    But that is precisely the role of the application software – to know the drivers and mold them to the expected user’s experience, whatever that may be. (BTW: Drivers provide software writers with a rich set of software-accessible metrics, for just this purpose.)

  • Alex — 5:42 PM on June 08, 2007

    I am very glad that you have chosen to address this issue.
    I am constantly having one crisis after another with the printing. Everything I do I eventually print on one of my 4 Epson large format printers. I do front and back, upside down over and out everything.
    Where CS2 after 2-7 prints would have to be rebooted to continue to allow itself to print, CS3 is less tempermental- it just closes down in the middle of a print.
    Centering is worse now since by swithching the view from landscape to portrait also seems to change how it measures the margins. You tell me the space I have left from the top and left of the document but fail to tell me whether the margin is taken into account.
    I have been confused on this from day one. All I ask for is clarity and precision on the setup. I print to within .010 of an inch regularly and sometimes on both sides that have to match one design over another. I accomplish this with a lot of work. I use PS3 directly with epson’s drivers.
    So much of the CS3 is so precise and accurate and easy to use that I am a little dismayed you have fallen a little short here. And no matter what you say the reality is photoshop should and must care about what the printer sees in margins. Why go so far into the race and then pull up on the reins just as you go across the finish line? If we are just after “neat” things then I have the wrong software. I have CS3 and years of my life involved in it not for “neat things” but to make a living in a world where I come up with a new panoramic idea today and someone in Germany comes up with it tomorrow, or yesterday. Don’t tell me about how good cod liver oil is and good this is for me, unless you are planning to give me PS3 for free. Fix it or move on to another company. You sound like a Klingon justifying the end of the klingon empire’s battle with the federation. That’s clear enough isn’t it?

  • Alex — 5:44 PM on June 08, 2007

    I am very glad that you have chosen to address this issue.
    I am constantly having one crisis after another with the printing. Everything I do I eventually print on one of my 4 Epson large format printers. I do front and back, upside down over and out everything.
    Where CS2 after 2-7 prints would have to be rebooted to continue to allow itself to print, CS3 is less tempermental- it just closes down in the middle of a print.
    Centering is worse now since by swithching the view from landscape to portrait also seems to change how it measures the margins. You tell me the space I have left from the top and left of the document but fail to tell me whether the margin is taken into account.
    I have been confused on this from day one. All I ask for is clarity and precision on the setup. I print to within .010 of an inch regularly and sometimes on both sides that have to match one design over another. I accomplish this with a lot of work. I use PS3 directly with epson’s drivers.
    So much of the CS3 is so precise and accurate and easy to use that I am a little dismayed you have fallen a little short here. And no matter what you say the reality is photoshop should and must care about what the printer sees in margins. Why go so far into the race and then pull up on the reins just as you go across the finish line? If we are just after “neat” things then I have the wrong software. I have CS3 and years of my life involved in it not for “neat things” but to make a living in a world where I come up with a new panoramic idea today and someone in Germany comes up with it tomorrow, or yesterday. Don’t tell me about how good cod liver oil is and good this is for me, unless you are planning to give me PS3 for free. Fix it or move on to another company. You sound like a Klingon justifying the end of the klingon empire’s battle with the federation. That’s clear enough isn’t it?

  • Gervaise Davis — 6:16 PM on June 08, 2007

    Dave, your comments on this issue come across as uncaring and arrogant on the part of Adobe.
    It is all well and good for Adobe to decide it is easier for your engineers to ignore differences in printer drivers and to leave it to the user to guess how to deal with your unannouced changes, but the very least you could do would be to post some notice of what you have done for your own cost-saving reasons, AND to suggest how users of the mainstream printers like Epson and Canon and HP should correct for what you have arbitrarily done without telling the end user.
    It really is amazing how arrogant you guys have become with your successes. It is reminescent of GM and the comment “What is good for GM, is good for the country.”

  • Gervaise Davis — 6:20 PM on June 08, 2007

    John and Dave, it would also be nice if when you suggest users go to a tech note, as in, technote on non-centered documents, that the Technote be there. When you click on this one, your system says “sorry. this is not available.” that is hardly helpful.

  • Ramón G Castañeda — 11:17 PM on June 08, 2007

    Dave,
    First, your link to “your” TechNote as posted by John Nack is not working.
    Second, you totally avoided the real printing issue here: color management when printing in Photoshop CS3. The fact is that Adobe recently published another TechNote directing users to “Let the Printer Manage Colors”, at least on certain printers like my Epson 2200. And that tech note does not comport with reality. It also contradicts the video and pdf tutorials published by Adobe for CS3, as well as the advice of established experts like the late Bruce Fraser, Andrew Rodney and others.
    I conducted many, many tests and found that I still get the best prints out of my Epson 2200 by letting Photoshop CS3 determine the colors and setting the Epson driver to “No Color Adjustment” on my Mac.
    If you had nothing to do with writing that infamous TechNote, please speak up and have Adobe staff pull that TechNote. If you did have an input there, please explain what on Earth was going on when you were printing,
    It’s most confusing.
    There is an existing thread on the Adobe Photoshop Forum on this. Do a forum search on “infamous”.

  • Armand — 2:06 AM on June 09, 2007

    Somehow I’ve always found Corel Draw’s print options, preview and options very easy and clear (as well as the color management options). Maybe you should have a look.
    One thing I don’t understand about Photoshop is it takes ages to modernize the interface. For example dockable panels have been implemented in other programs more than 5 years ago.

  • JB Kramer — 1:08 PM on June 09, 2007

    Why doesn’t Adobe buy QImage and convert it to a plugin. It works but has a really ugly UI. At least you’d get someone who knows something about making printing work.
    The explanation that since the Mac version has been broken we had to braks the windows version seems to be rather unsatisfactory.

  • Fred Nirque — 4:46 PM on June 09, 2007

    More “Blah blah blah blah” spin from Adobe.
    Here’s my response to that extracted from a reply I made in the Photoshop Windows user to user forum under “CS3 has a major printing bug or programming issue”:
    The application is Photoshop. (emphasis on “Photo”)
    When printing photographs, the common scenario is printing many different files with the same settings.
    With word and graphics programs, the common scenario is to print many duplicate prints from the same file. Subsequent files are likely to have different settings.
    I think the Windows developers got it right – which is why it was continued over so many versions, and if Mac works differently, then it is the Mac developers that got it wrong.
    If they had changed the Mac version to run the way CS2 Windows works, my bet is that the Mac forum would have been full of glowing praise for this huge improvement!
    There should be a selector to give the choice of retaining settings or not. Mac or Windows.
    Including a “remember” button that doesn’t work within the meaning of the word “remember” isn’t helpful.
    Nor is the erratically switching between the two methods at its own whim regardless of what the user does.

  • Rick Popham — 7:32 PM on June 09, 2007

    First — thank you, John, for looking into this and asking Dave to comment.
    And thank you, Dave, for finally letting us know officially that this was deliberate…
    Dave, you said you were hired to “improve” and “modernize” the printing code. Forcing Windows users to a default decision made “back in the day” is hardly a modernization, and certainly not an improvement. If you had to “rip out code” and “add code” to make the systems behave the same, why didn’t you do it on the Mac? You had to rewrite the whole damn program to work on the new Intel machines.
    The new “Print” interface IS an improvement, though. Thank you for the color managed previews. A combination of the new interface and the ability to set a printing preference back to the previous “per session” behavior would be wonderful. I hope you consider it.

  • Michael Sullivan — 10:16 PM on June 09, 2007

    Many of the settings in Photoshop are “sticky” — the next time you use the same palette, you have the same settings. This is a useful feature, because Photoshop users tend to do the same thing again and again. The printer interface was like this in CS2 (at least in Windows), but it has apparently been deliberately broken in CS3 in the interest of having code that is more uniform between platforms. Who uses Photoshop, the coders or photographers and graphic designers?
    Please, please, please fix the broken CS3 printer interface. Let users pick a printer and adjust its driver settings and have those selections stick for the Photoshop session unless and until they are deliberately changed. It’s no fun to have to reselect the same printer and make the same driver settings again and again.

  • Dave Polaschek — 9:05 AM on June 12, 2007

    Re: the iPF5000 – Canon needs to make a new plugin for CS3. I hear they’re working on it, but I haven’t heard when it’s supposed to be done.
    Re: Color matching – We’ve done quite a bit of work with the vendors “behind the scenes” on getting the color matching problem solved. Unfortunately, when it is solved, most users won’t notice it. But there is new code in place to make this easier with new drivers, and when you’ve got one of the newer drivers, you’ll notice that you don’t have to go into the driver’s dialog to turn off color matching if you’re letting Photoshop Manage Colors, it’ll just happen automagically. Or if you say “Printer Manages Colors” in Photoshop, the driver will pick up on that, too.
    Re: Saved settings – as I said, we’d hoped to have printing presets in, which would address these complaints. They’re the right way to solve the problem, and we’re still planning on hooking them up. I’m sorry for the pain now, but saving the settings application-wide was holding us back, not just with code that was different between Mac and Windows, but with code that would have had to be different between Tiger and Leopard, and XP and Vista. Could we have maintained that? Probably, but at the cost of not being able to do things like the color matching changes I mentioned above.
    Re: buy QImage and convert it to a plugin – QImage doesn’t support all printers. Would you prefer a Photoshop that worked really well with a dozen printers, or one that works with whatever printer you buy?
    Which brings me to differences in printer drivers – it’s the JOB of printer drivers to hide the difference in printers from applications. We try to make things work the same for the user on all printers and both platforms. But even with drivers from the same company, they don’t always work the same. We’re working with the printer vendors to try and clear some of this up, but it’s a slow process.
    If we head down the rabbit-hole of adding support for each printer driver that has some quirk, especially quirks that are different in different versions of the driver, we’d spend all of our time testing and supporting different models of printers, with no time at all for new features. That would take us back to the day of having to buy a new version of WordStar in order to print to the newfangled laser printer you just bought because the version you have only supports (some) dot-matrix printers. I don’t think any of us want to go there.
    The point of printer drivers is that vendors should hide the differences between printers behind a common interface that applications can call. That’s not to say that printer vendors don’t have a difficult job too, but if we’re going to continue to add new features, we have to work with the common way of working with the printers (and take out code that special-cased the ImageWriter when printing on Mac System 6.0.x – yes, I did that this cycle – sorry if I broke printing to your ImageWriter in the process) today.

  • Barry Pearson — 10:40 AM on June 12, 2007

    Dave Polaschek: the problems faced by Adobe may be interesting, but we have our own problems. We pay Adobe to solve them, and don’t really want to be told why Adobe is failing us.
    Of course it is a good idea to have a strategy to shift detailed responsibility for alignment of printing to the printer drivers. The printer manufacturers know their printers better than Adobe do. And when the manufacturers do their job, Adobe can exploit the fact. But NOT until then!
    What we appear to have with CS3 is REGRESSION, by ADOBE. I am struggling to find a way of getting the centering with my Epson 1290 that I had before (and could even achieve, with a work-around, in CS3-Beta). I’ve wasted lots of time, paper, ink, etc, and still don’t have what I am seeking.
    We are refered to a Technote at:
    http://kb.adobe.com/selfservice/documentLink.do?externalID=kb401810
    But it doesn’t work. Adobe were told some time ago that it didn’t work, but it hasn’t been sorted out.
    Please make sure your paying customers are cushioned from whatever problems you are having with printer manufacturers. Please don’t expose us to their idiosyncrasies until you know they are under control.

  • Joanne Mead — 10:41 AM on June 12, 2007

    I love Photoshop CS3 – it is a pleasure to use. However, on Saturday I bought a new printer (Canon Pixma 9500 Pro) and it doesn’t give me centred prints when I print from Photoshop CS3, whereas my Epson R800 did.
    Yes, having to do the settings each time is a pain, but the advantages are noticeable ie. perfect colour matching and other advantages.
    What is it in the printer driver that needs adjusting, if you don’t mind me asking?

  • Ramón G Castañeda — 11:14 AM on June 12, 2007

    Dave,
    «Re: Color matching – We’ve done quite a bit of work with the vendors “behind the scenes” on getting the color matching problem solved. Unfortunately, when it is solved, most users won’t notice it. But there is new code in place to make this easier with new drivers, and when you’ve got one of the newer drivers, you’ll notice that you don’t have to go into the driver’s dialog to turn off color matching if you’re letting Photoshop Manage Colors, it’ll just happen automagically. Or if you say “Printer Manages Colors” in Photoshop, the driver will pick up on that, too.»
    Thanks. That’s music to my ears.
    Please put pressure on Adobe to revise their “infamous” TechNote about “letting printer manage colors”.

  • Alex — 1:30 PM on June 12, 2007

    It is interesting that Epson, who is one of the most popular and in some circles the best maker of large format printers, has on every occasion and problem area put the blame and responsibility for these issues directly on Adobe. Their technicians have specifically and officially told me Adobe’s unwillingness to cooperate IS the problem. Now most of my problems come from Epson’s attitude on technical support. Adobe has been very good to me, so I tend to lean on the side of Adobe. Dave, you are not helping here. I suppose we could go back to CS2 for production work. We could use CS3′s new capabilities and then use CS2 for the actual production work. I am sure that would send a more appropriate message to the Adobe upper management. That will be my recommendation until and if Adobe comes up with a appropriate update.

  • Joanne Mead — 2:15 PM on June 12, 2007

    If you look on Canon’s US website, the pdf manual is available for the new version of the plug-in that is compatible for CS3, but the software isn’t released yet.
    It can’t be too far off.
    Fingers crossed.

  • Rick Popham — 5:17 PM on June 12, 2007

    Dave,
    You keep saying that the “pain” now will be worth it later. How so? And I’m talking specifically about printing here, because, nice color managed interface notwithstanding, you’ve hosed printing in Windows.
    You mention printing presets as a solution. How are these going to work?
    Will a printing preset let me set a printer in Photoshop and keep sticky settings going for multiple files until I’m done with it?
    Or am I going to have to set up a preset for every combination of paper size, paper type and printer (for multiple printers, papers, and sizes) — then scroll through a list and select a preset for each file before I print?
    Just give us an option to keep the printer settings sticky.
    Please!

  • Michael Hendrickson — 2:40 AM on June 13, 2007

    So, Adobe announces that their software has bugs in printing, and blames this on operating systems/printer drivers? It worked fine in CS2 but won’t work fine in CS3, because ——- what????
    Bottom line is that the final product is the print — no matter whether it’s on paper or on the screen, it’s still some sort of print. Most “prints” are on paper, always have been — even if it’s not “most” (and that’s unlikely), it’s fair to say “a substantial percentage”.
    Technobabble makes for sexy-sounding rhetoric when trying to make excuses, but it really just doesn’t fly. You write software, you want me to buy it, you better make sure it works, that it produces the product you say it will produce. Calling a bug a “change in plan” just doesn’t cut it.
    I’m glad I haven’t “upgraded” yet. I’ll take my time on this one.

  • D. C. Tomick — 9:32 AM on June 13, 2007

    I’m just wondering why I can’t find comments in online forums about anyone printing from InDesign. All the print settings are saved for each document, and the document can be a single photograph. Position of image on the paper can be adjusted (and saved) and any adjustments to the print settings can be saved in an InDesign document preset. So what, if any is the downside to printing from InDesign?

  • Stephen Haynes — 10:36 AM on June 13, 2007

    Dave Polaschek’s suggestion to use an action to record printer preferences is brilliant, awesome, and the perfect answer to my principal complaint, except … it doesn’t work. I recorded an action selecting printer, paper size, and some other factors, then ran the action against a new image. Nothing, nada, zip, no change whatsoever in the print “page setup” settings.
    (Windows XP Pro SP2, CS3 latest release, Epson Pro 4800.)

  • Greg — 12:28 PM on June 13, 2007

    I am sorry that so many people are having trouble – I am on a Mac and I think the printing is working pretty well. The color managed (if that is the right word) preview in the print dialog is interesting. But still – it takes to many tries to get the colors right. Sometimes I just import a file into iPhoto and print it there – almost exactly right, almost everytime. (nice monitor, calibrated system etc). Now, on the other hand, the printing from Lightroom sure is sweet. I can get the page to look however I want – have not tried double sided, however. Plus the color output is better in LR than PS (in printing) but still a little “off”, from time to time. Really is a frustrating thing, this printing business.

  • Dave Polaschek — 1:21 PM on June 13, 2007

    The correct link for the technote is http://www.adobe.com/go/kb402021
    Sorry for the problem with that.
    [Updated above as well. --J.]
    How to get centered prints varies per-printer. You’re going to need to hunt for something like “Minimize Margins” or “Borderless” or “Centered Print” and set that. The technote referenced above gives three ways to do it for Epson printers, but the same steps will work for Canon printers — it’s just that the language in their dialog will be different. Similarly, you can use an Action to apply the setting to other documents or change the printing preferences to make that change permanent for the printer.
    Regarding the TN about let printer manage colors, that’s a suggestion if all else has failed. In most cases, having PS manage the colors will work just fine as long as you turn off the printer’s color matching. But when that doesn’t work, and the printer insists on managing the colors anyhow, it makes some sense to just let it handle the colors.
    For the “settings aren’t saved application-wide anymore”, there isn’t some “magic switch” I can flip to put that back, but there isn’t. This is the result of an architectural change that’s designed to move forward. Actions and changing the defaults are the best solution I can offer today. Sorry.

  • Rick Popham — 3:01 PM on June 13, 2007

    Dave,
    I’ll ask the question again: Move forward to what? You’re the printing guy — where do you see the printing process going in Photoshop?
    We Windows users have paid for our ticket in lost time and efficiency. Where does it take us?
    Rick

  • Rick Popham — 3:52 PM on June 13, 2007

    D.C.,
    “So what, if any is the downside to printing from InDesign?”
    Big downside here: I don’t have InDesign; just Photoshop.

  • Fred Nirque — 7:48 PM on June 13, 2007

    So let me get this straight:
    Adobe decides that printing, which works flawlessly in Ps9 with a myriad of drivers, is in fact “broken”, so they “fix” it to emulate the broken Mac way of doing it, in the process failing to test it with the existing drivers?
    Releasing Ps10, printing is totally screwed with any number of if not all printer drivers, and it is the manufacturers of the printers and drivers who are to blame?
    Man, this is arrogance befitting the best efforts from Microsoft.
    If I read right, the message here is to “Go buy a Mac and stop forcing us to waste time writing the program for you useless Windows users”.
    The “solutions” of workarounds in a so-called upgrade is the sort of thing you’d expect from some Asian backstreet software company, not an established behemoth like Adobe.
    And (refraining from shouting here as the earplugs are apparently in) whatever this unasked for cr@p was “designed” to do, the last description anyone could endow it with is that of a “move forward”. As far as printing photos in a photographers normal, efficient workflow is concerned, this is a backward step of such monumental proportions from Ps9 that it defies description. Even if there is some pretty stuff in there.
    These are paying customers that are being BS’ed to here, not some fawning marketing-type protégés at a board meeting.

  • Phil Brown — 8:15 PM on June 13, 2007

    Dave said: [Regarding the TN about let printer manage colors, that's a suggestion if all else has failed. In most cases, having PS manage the colors will work just fine as long as you turn off the printer's color matching. But when that doesn't work, and the printer insists on managing the colors anyhow, it makes some sense to just let it handle the colors.]
    There’s a simple secret here that makes letting the printer handle colours work.
    The printer driver is almost certainly expecting sRGB data. Some printer drivers have a setting for Adobe RGB but if that’s not set, then it’s going to expect sRGB.
    What that means, is if you have an sRGB file and a properly calibrated monitor and if you soft proof, then sending the plain sRGB tagged data to the printer with the driver set to default settings will give you a very acceptable and similar result. This assumes you are using OEM inks and paper and have set the printer driver for the appropriate paper type.
    It’s not magic, but it’s not well known. It is easy, though :-)
    Having said that, you will achieve better results using a simple colour managed workflow by letter PS manage it and turning it all off in the printer driver, so long as you have a quality ICC profile. Not all printer manufacturers make these easy to obtain and sometimes you’ll need to create or purchase a profile, but for some manufacturers their canned profiles are just fine.
    As to the change in the Windows setup that has removed stickiness of settings, it is annoying. Attempting to emulate printing from OS X is not a forward move. Consider that OS X has a function to nuke all driver installs and completely reset the printing system…well, it’s there for a reason. Printing in OS X is, shall we say, less than ideal. When it works (the vast majority of the time) it works as well as anything, however when it fails it tends to fail catastrophically!
    The default method in Windows to date is one of the better things Windows does. If you make a change to the driver settings via the Control Panel, it’s a global, permanent change. If you do it from an application then it’s sticky for the duration of that session in the application. So simple. So right :-)
    Anyway, just thought to share the reason why “let printer manage” can work just fine and how to ensure it does if that’s your preference.

  • Marc Schoenholz — 9:00 PM on June 13, 2007

    Lots of hype, lots of money and disappointing results!!
    It can’t be emphasized enough: It’s all about the print.
    As far as I am concerned the improvements of CS3 for windows are completely overwhelmed by printing issues that were non-existent in CS2.
    I hope Adobe will immediately fix the issue. And what does the Mac platform have to do with individuals who use CS3 on Windows?

  • Michael Sullivan — 11:02 PM on June 13, 2007

    Dave, the “architectural change” needs to be canned asap, if that’s what it takes. It’s as if an automaker did an architectural change that required that you reinstall the wheels before you shift out of Park, each time. Users have unanimously panned this “feature,” which seriously upsets workflow. (And when I say “unanimously,” I mean that I have not seen a single user comment favorable to this behavior and there have been a huge number of complaints about it on the U2U forum. Why don’t you drop by to discuss it?)
    I greatly appreciate the addition of a color-managed preview to the print dialog, but would be happy to give that up if the CS2 Print with Preview behavior could just be brought back. I suspect many others would agree.

  • Alex — 7:50 AM on June 14, 2007

    Dave, It has just occurred to me that after reading all the input on printing that I owe you a appology. You are now clearly aware of the passion we all have for photoshop. There is no reason for you to go defensive on this. Here is the perfect opportunity for you to show Adobe and all of us CS3 lovers how good you really are. You said they brought you in to modernize PS3 code. Please do. Make it so we are all happy. You can do it. Make photoshop CS3 all that it can be.

  • Richard A. Bloom — 11:41 AM on June 14, 2007

    Please forgive me the possible inappropriateness of the following comment. This “solution” reminds me of the crude joke that was going around second grade some fifty years ago. An unfortunate fellow with a crippled arm implores the Lord: “Please God, make my arm like the other one.” The story ends, as you can probably guess, with the man having two crippled arms.

  • Dave Polaschek — 1:31 PM on June 14, 2007

    Phil, thanks for the detailed explanation I haven’t had the time to give.
    Alex, thanks for the comments.
    To be clear, we can’t “back out” the architectural change. What should be added is some way of setting the application defaults for the Page Setup / Print Settings. I’ve been looking into a number of alternatives, but none of them are going to be instant fixes.
    I’ve tried to explain the why of this multiple times, and maybe I’m just not doing a good job of it, but the simplest version boils down to the fact that we already have per-document settings for Mac, and need to move to them for Vista (not to mention Leopard). It was not possible to “just keep the old behavior around” for XP and still keep all the printing code working correctly on the other platforms.

  • Rick Popham — 3:32 PM on June 14, 2007

    Dave,
    I’ve taken some time to collect my thoughts on this situation. I can’t presume to speak for all Photoshop /Windows users, but I think I can give you a pretty accurate account of why we’re so upset about the changes to printer setting behavior.
    Adobe started it off by completely blind-siding its’ Photoshop/Windows community. We were all led into the CS3 upgrade expecting a new, streamlined, color managed Print interface that would save us from clicking through the numerous “Print with Preview” windows. Instead, we got totally alien, unexpected, and unwelcome behavior. For weeks we banged our heads against the wall, trying to figure out what was wrong. We wasted time, ink, and paper. We discussed it in a number of threads on the User to User forum. While Adobe employees responded to other concerns on the Windows U-2-U forum, not one of them would fill us in on what had happened. When we searched for help in the knowledgebase, we got infuriatingly obtuse answers: http://www.adobe.com/go/kb401471 Finally, I posted a message on John’s blog asking if he could help — which got you here.
    Now, after years of developing our printing workflows around sensible, expected behavior — and suddenly finding it gone, you started your blog by rolling down your sleeves, dusting off your hands, and saying “There, THAT’S fixed.
    Time to move forward.”
    Well, hold on. I supppose we can understand the need to bring both versions of Photoshop into synch to simplify development. What we can’t understand is why you based this “architecture change” on a design decision
    made “back in the day”. Back in the day, printers were expensive, and most people had only one connected to the computer. A “per document” default setting made sense, because there was only one printer, and it probably only
    printed one size. That is completely untrue today.
    Today, most Photshop users have more than one printer on the computer. Most have a “default” office type printer for mundane printing, and they have a photo printer that they use for — Photoshop! Some of us have MORE than one photo printer in addition to the “default” printer. Knocking us back to a default with each close of file makes absolutly no sense with our current load of printers. Changing our default printer every time we open Photoshop is not a good solution. And writing an action for every combination of printer/paper/paper size that we use today, and then selecting and running an action for every new image is a freakin’ nightmare — especially compared to what we had with Photoshop/Windows BP.
    So we’re upset that you’ve based your changes on an out-dated design. We’re particularly upset that instead of improving the printing system on the Mac to match Windows, you chose to cripple the Windows system and reduce everything to the lowest common denominator. And we’re most upset that we appear to be stuck with these changes, aside from some “moving forward” language.
    I personally feel that we’ve been moved BACK, and I don’t see how you can presume to “move forward” on a foundation that is so disliked. I know that in recent years Adobe has declined to fix anything (even activation!) without getting an upgrade price for it, so we’ll be stuck with this setup for the next 18 months or so. But I hope I’m not disappointed when it comes time to pay the Adobe Tax again. In the meantime, I’ll do all my serious printing from Photoshop BP, which is a PITA, but preferable to the current situation in CS3.
    Rick

  • Phil Brown — 6:59 PM on June 14, 2007

    Dave,
    I think you’ve communicated clearly enough your explanation as to why you’ve changed the system. You felt it necessary in order to deal with future options and requirements under Vista and Leopard.
    What PS Windows users are saying (and I use both Windows and Mac at work), is that we’d much prefer the workflow that existed under Windows XP in that print and page settings remain sticky for the duration of the application session (and, frankly, “until they are changed”).
    Why can’t PS create a simple config somewhere to load in the “last print / page setup settings” when it’s opened? Give the users an option of using that workflow or the standard Mac style (although why you’d want it to reset for each document is beyond me, but perhaps it suits someone) as they prefer.
    From a users perspective, they just want to be able to print and get it right every time and for it to be simple. By making users create actions or manually change print settings each job you’re making it more complex and it *will* result in more mis-prints which means lost media and consumables and time.
    Printing should be no more complex than setting up the preferred settings once and clicking print. If they need changing, change, otherwise rely on them being the same once set.

  • J. Morris — 7:09 PM on June 14, 2007

    As another totally frustrated CS3 user wasting ink and paper trying to get the image to print, it seems the least we can do is widely and loudly notify those non users of these problems. Warn them NOT to purchase a product where your images on the screen are OK but can’t be printed accurately on paper. I’m taking my Epsons elsewhere.

  • Louis A. Williams — 9:03 PM on June 14, 2007

    I sympathize with the challenge of writing computer code, but for my money, Rick Popham’s post gets it exactly right — many documents to print, different printers from which to select. It’s difficult to understand why I, as a Windows user, who bought a Windows version of PS3, need to be concerned about how the program works on other platforms. Adobe’s explanation reminds me of an inside joke among engineers. Any problem in a device that cannot be fixed is described as a “feature.” And if it’s really bad, then it’s a “special feature.”

  • Fred Nirque — 2:43 AM on June 15, 2007

    I also don’t care if Tiger or Leopard or Big Fat Tabby Cat OS is illogical in printing. This is all smokescreen. Software engineers who write the code for a program as complex (and expensive) as Photoshop can’t write code for a few simple options in printing?
    Yeah, right……

  • J. Morris — 9:58 AM on June 15, 2007

    This morning’s news reports that Adobe’s profits for the second quarter set a record for them at 24%. Maybe they’re making their profits from their new art form. Off-center and unintentionally cropped prints from CS3 must be selling well in the art market. Or, CS3 is selling well to a lot of users who never print anything, just like to stare at their monitor screen.

  • Rick Popham — 2:00 PM on June 15, 2007

    “What should be added is some way of setting the application defaults for the Page Setup / Print Settings. I’ve been looking into a number of alternatives, but none of them are going to be instant fixes.”
    Well, I like this kind of talk. You’ve heard what we want and you’re looking into a way to do it. (Not so happy about the “instant fix” thing, though).
    Please pay special attention to Phil Brown’s post: the setup he describes would be perfect. That setup and the new color managed Print interface would be VERY sweet.
    I know that we’ve been venting, so thanks for listening despite that.
    Rick

  • Leigh A. Wax — 3:36 PM on June 15, 2007

    I’m a current CS user planning an upgrade to CS3.
    I’ve been following this issue, but I’m not sure of the nature of the problem.
    With my Epson 1280 I’ve always selected “Maximum”, and “Centered” in the “Printable Area” portion of the Driver, and I’ve always gotten centered images.
    Am I to beleive that will no longer be the case when printing from CS3 ???
    Regards,
    Leigh

  • jim patelli — 10:46 PM on June 17, 2007

    everything worked perfect with win 2000.and PS7.
    Now after 3000$ new comp and tons of RAM..and CS3 and VISTA. nothing works!!!!

  • Ann Shelbourne — 2:54 PM on June 18, 2007

    Double Color Managing CS3? It works a treat!!
    No, I haven’t gone nuts — but doing the following seems to work beautifully to over-ride the damage wrought on CS3 by David Polascheck.
    So my Photoshop CS3 printing Routine to my Epson printer will now be changed to this:
    “Photoshop Manages Color”
    BUT……then:
    PRINT
    … but with these settings:
    “Color Controls”: selected.
    2.2 Gamma
    and a Brightness factor of “2″
    This does work to over-ride the darkening of images that occurs when printing from Photoshop CS3 when using existing CS2 Profiles but does not change the color balance.

  • Steve Gascoigne — 3:06 AM on June 19, 2007

    unfortunately the “workaround” described in the technotes does not work. I have always had my epson driver set to centered and boderless as this kind of made sense as i want centred and borderless prints. Now with cs3 i dont get centred and borderless prints regardless of what settings I use, be it in the driver or cs3. £160 upgrade on something that is not fit for purpose. Would it not make sense to simply put in a “legacy” cs2 printing option in cs3 for us people who have dont want, need or care for how photoshop works on Vista or Macs?

  • J. Ginnetti — 7:12 PM on June 19, 2007

    Windows PSCS3 printing flaw.
    I have an Epson P-440. When I try to print A4 size in landscape mode, Photoshop CS3 does not size the picture properly. It cuts off the top and bottom. If I select re size to fit, the picture gets compressed to an odd size with at least 2 inches of blank paper at the top and bottom.
    If I take the same photo and rotate it 90 degrees in CS3 to be in portrait mode, it prints the picture fine.
    This definitely is a flaw in CS3, in CS2, which fortunately I did not uninstall, the same picture prints fine in landscape mode.
    I am not doing anything wrong- this is a flaw in CS3.
    They better resolve this soon, or there will be a bunch of mad Photographers.
    Please email me if any other people are having a problem with A4 size paper in landscape mode.

  • J. Ginnetti — 7:14 PM on June 19, 2007

    Windows PSCS3 printing flaw.
    I have an Olympus P-440. When I try to print A4 size in landscape mode, Photoshop CS3 does not size the picture properly. It cuts off the top and bottom. If I select re size to fit, the picture gets compressed to an odd size with at least 2 inches of blank paper at the top and bottom.
    If I take the same photo and rotate it 90 degrees in CS3 to be in portrait mode, it prints the picture fine.
    This definitely is a flaw in CS3, in CS2, which fortunately I did not uninstall, the same picture prints fine in landscape mode.
    I am not doing anything wrong- this is a flaw in CS3.
    They better resolve this soon, or there will be a bunch of mad Photographers.
    Please email me if any other people are having a problem with A4 size paper in landscape mode.
    Corrected printer to Olympus P440

  • Steve Andersen — 10:03 AM on June 20, 2007

    Dave, one more voice here to tell you, you’re not listening to the users. I don’t usually spend the time commenting on the short falls of upgraded software. I gripe about it to myself or anyone in earshot, then move on, usually figuring out a work-a-round. I suspect a lot of people do just this. However, this time I went a searching on the ‘net because I could not believe what I was experiencing when it came to printing was even remotely correct. I’m frustrated that I have to uncheck ‘center image’ then check it again each time I print just so it will print the entire image on the sheet. If I do not uncheck then check this setting, the print will start printing the upper left hand corner of the image in the center of the sheet, thus only printing a partial of the image. I experience this on all 4 of my printers (shame on me for having more than one printer). I can’t begin to express how angry I am at your new and improved printing module. Yes, I came up with a work-a-round, but seriously, you’re proud of these improvements?

  • Sal Sessa — 5:16 AM on June 21, 2007

    Well. This is all well and good (the comments and feedback) but what (will be done about it) and when (will it be fixed?)
    What are you guys waiting for?
    Please fix this now.
    ?????

  • Diane Varner — 7:21 AM on June 21, 2007

    Same as Steve (above), I generally find a “work-around” with software problems but for the life of me, I am stumped this time and it’s totally frustrating. I have been printing beautiful prints from my Epson R2400 (MAC-based) for months and am now unable to print anything halfway decent. I have already spent countless hours, paper and ink trying to figure all this out. I’m seriously considering buying a new printer even though this is ridiculous! I spoke with Epson and didn’t have any luck there either. My next step is to try to reload PS CS2 back onto my computer. Does anyone know if this step is feasible or will it totally mess up my computer and existing PS CS3? Any insight would be greatly appreciated!

  • Fred Nirque — 8:06 PM on June 21, 2007

    I’ve never done that, Diane, but past experience with other Adobe programs has shown a preference by them to be installed sequentially, older programs first, newer last.
    Uninstall CS3, re-install CS2 and then reinstall CS3. The two can exist on the same machine just fine, only you won’t be able to have them both open at the same time. With any luck your CS2 prefs will still be there and resuming printing as it should be won’t be a hassle.
    [I don't think it should be necessary to uninstall CS3 before reinstalling CS2. The apps are designed to be wholly separate. --J.]

  • J. Ginnetti — 8:52 PM on June 21, 2007

    Attn: John Nack-
    Please check out the comments in the Adobe Forums regarding this issue. There are 100 entries from users. No happy campers.
    http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx?14@@.3bc3c894/97

  • Dave Polaschek — 6:31 AM on June 22, 2007

    Guys, we’re listening. I’m spending my time working on fixes rather than replying to every comment, though.
    As for when fixes will be available, I just don’t know. I wouldn’t know even if I had every problem fixed today (but I don’t yet). That kind of decision is made a few levels above my pay-grade.

  • Michael Campbell — 7:29 AM on June 22, 2007

    I’d been told by Adobe technical support that CS3s inability to automatically center a picture was a printer issue.
    I contacted Canon technical support, they had me print in one of their applications and the picture centered just fine. They told me it was a Photoshop issue.
    Fortunately, I have CS2 and Qimage for printing; definitely not using CS3.

  • Fred Nirque — 12:41 AM on June 23, 2007

    Thanks for that footnote on my post regarding reinstalling, John – I wasn’t sure so was playing it safe with the suggestion.

  • Ramón G Castañeda — 5:45 PM on June 23, 2007

    Two or more different versions of Photoshop can run simultaneously just fine —at least on a Mac. Just launch the older version first.

  • Fred Nirque — 7:21 AM on June 25, 2007

    No dice on Windows – CS3 won’t open here if CS2 is running.

  • Phil Brown — 9:14 PM on June 25, 2007

    Fred – what specific error or result do you get when attempting this? Could it be a lack of resources (if both CS2 and CS3 are set to the same location for scratch disk and both set to use, say, 75% of available RAM it may be problematic)?
    Can you launch each individually? You could certainly do that with CS2 and CS3 when CS3 was in Beta. Perhaps if you can do that, make sure you change both to have different scratch disks and use perhaps only 40% available RAM initially to see how it goes?
    [I'm not at all surprised that Photoshop would object to having multiple copies running simultaneously. I would be very surprised, however, if you couldn't have two versions *installed* simultaneously & run independently. --J.]

  • Fred Nirque — 11:36 PM on June 25, 2007

    Phil, tried all that on both the desktop and the laptop – no dice: PS10 will not launch if PS9 is running.
    They will run separately, though.

  • Phil Brown — 11:37 PM on June 25, 2007

    OK – I’m at work and, fortunately, we still have 1 Windows box with both installed for support purposes.
    So, yes they can both be installed (CS2 and CS3 Extended) but no, they won’t both run at once (I just tried a heap of configurations with memory and scratch disks). Trying to run the second (doesn’t matter which you run first) simply calls open the window of the first instance of the app you are running, just as if you tried to run 2 x CS2 or 2 x CS3.

  • Ann Shelbourne — 9:58 AM on June 26, 2007

    I can confirm that:
    “Two or more different versions of Photoshop can run simultaneously just fine —at least on a Mac. Just launch the older version first.”
    At least they can on a Mac PPC — I don’t know about the MacIntels.

  • Dave Cooperstein — 7:14 AM on June 27, 2007

    One other problem with the new printing workflow that no one seems to have mention…
    I wrote a bunch of Printing Actions back in CS which allowed me to send multiple prints (through a batch) to a printer on our network. These actions DEPEND on the printer setup being application specific for the entire Photoshop session.
    With the new document specific printer setup, NONE of my actions work.
    And since you can’t save printer settings as part of Actions, I can’t even write new ones to print a file to a printer on our network…..unless I’m using the default printer and its setup.
    It would be great if there was a preference to set print options application wide.
    Just my $.02
    Dave.

  • Robert Tilden — 8:23 AM on June 27, 2007

    Interesting thread… I’ve been having problems with dark prints on my Epson 3800. Thishis morning Epson support sent me an email stating “There are some printing issues using CS3 that Epson is aware of that has
    been reported to Adobe.
    At this time we are currently awaiting for Adobe to address these issues.
    You may want to check their
    forms (Adobe) for all other such discussions.”
    Ha!

  • Michael Talman — 2:06 PM on July 01, 2007

    I’m glad I found this thread – I had experienced this problem when I tried the beta CS3. I figured it was a bug and uninstalled so I could print again in CS2. Now that I know it’s a feature, I have a reason not to upgrade yet, thanks so much! Good luck with the finger pointing. Lightroom is great though.

  • Rick Popham — 2:28 PM on July 03, 2007

    Printing in CS3
    (a Haiku)
    A pleasant photo
    Oh! to print another one
    All is forgotten

  • Michael Broughton — 3:26 AM on July 06, 2007

    I’m trying to calm down before I say something I shouldn’t.
    I am so fustrated with trying to create, center and save custom paper sizes in CS3 I feel like throwing it away and going back to CS2 or looking for another product to replace Adobe all together.
    Plain and simple, Creating and saving custom paper sizes in CS2 was fairly simple and straight forward. I have to have this capability for what I do.
    If I can’t print what I create in CS3 in what ever form or way I choose to, (as I was able to with with CS2) what good is Photoshop CS3. It’s all about the print in the end, at least for me.
    The printing set up in CS3 is simply unacceptable. to justify this by saying it’s some on else’s problem shafts me as the customer.
    IF IT AIN’T BROKE DON’T FIX IT!!!!!!!!
    If Adobe can’t resolve this issue in a simple way go back to the CS2 set up for printing. I need something that will work with me! not against me.
    PLEASE fix this issue.

  • Doug Landrum — 4:22 PM on July 07, 2007

    As for when fixes will be available, I just don’t know. I wouldn’t know even if I had every problem fixed today (but I don’t yet). That kind of decision is made a few levels above my pay-grade.
    Wow, that’s a revelation. Even if the bugs in the Windows print software are “fixed,” then the fix may be withheld. This whole episode is souring me on Photoshop in particular and Adobe in general.
    [I'm not sure where you're getting "withheld" from what Dave wrote. Doing patches (what we call "dot releases") isn't an easy decision. These releases run the risk of breaking things that are already working, and they can be expensive for large customers to deploy and test. That said, obviously no one wants customers to have a bad experience with the software in which they've made a significant investment. We have to find the right balance, and that sometimes means that it's not possible to fix a particular problem right away.
    A further complicating factor in this discussion is that changes in CS3 have revealed some honest to God bugs in printer drivers. I'm well aware of the reasoning that "Things were working -> Adobe changed something -> The new behavior isn't desirable -> Adobe must be at fault," and that if something was working, it wasn't flawed. (We saw this a lot when Photoshop added support for XMP metadata, and various badly written (i.e. non-spec-compliant) metadata editors crashed, mangled files, etc. as a result. Busy newsrooms didn't want to hear that the bugs were in those programs. Photoshop changed, ergo Photoshop did something wrong.)
    The only useful information I can provide at the moment is that we are continuing to work on addressing these issues through a variety of means, including working with other companies in this space. I wish it were possible to make things better overnight, but it's worth taking the time to do the right thing for the long haul. I do apologize that Adobe and the other parties concerned didn't get all our collective ducks in a row on that point prior to the release of CS3. --J.]
    We Windows users should have been given a fair warning – like a screen on installation that says:
    WARNING printing from Photoshop may not behave as you have expected in prior versions. Accept/Reject.

  • Ken Schweizer — 1:06 PM on July 08, 2007

    I’d like to thank everyone who has contributed to this forum and in particular to this thread.
    I am planing to purchase a new platform for my photography needs and thanks to this thread it will not be PS CS3. As someone who is planing to retire and spend time relaxing through photography, I don’t believe CS3 would “foot the bill”.
    Please don’t laugh, but I’m currently using PS 5.5 for Windowz, with Epson 2200 and R200 printers.
    As the cost of a good photographic package is significant, is there one that some of the experts here could recommend for someone on a fixed income? My end results will not be for sale, but rather an effort to bring our family’s past and present likeliness and travels to future generations.
    Thanks
    Ken

  • Danny Raphael — 6:01 PM on July 08, 2007

    John & Dave:
    Although the concerns about and inconveniences of this issue are legit and affect many (including me), take a few moments now and then to review, appreciate and take pride in the many well deserved accolades CS3 has received.
    Then, back to the task at hand. “Keep your eye on the donut, not the hole.” ;-)
    Do keep checking in now and then with comments and updates. They are greatly appreciated.
    [Thanks, Danny; will do. --J.]

  • Rick Popham — 6:13 PM on July 08, 2007

    Ken,
    You’ll probably get more response from the Adobe Photoshop Windows forum, but I’ll give you my 2 cents.
    You can upgrade to CS3 from PS7 or later. Since you’d be coming from PS5.5, you’d have to pay for a new full ver$ion. If I were you, I’d try to find a PS CS2 upgrade that’s still on the shelf somewhere. It’ll be under $200, and you’ll be eligible for upgrades until CS5.
    Failing that, give Elements 5 a try. It’s supposed to be very good.
    Rick

  • santa — 8:24 PM on July 10, 2007

    I just took delivery of CS3 Premium Suite. I’ve burned $50 in print supplies trying to get PS CS3 to print with the reliability of CS on my Epson 2200 from Mac OSX. I can get a decent print but my best effort is still off. I bought directly from Adobe. For now I’ll print from CS and I’ll be returning CS3 if this isn’t corrected within the next month. Fortunately I went into this with eyes wide open. I pity those that expect eaiser or better printing from CS3.

  • Ted — 8:42 AM on July 11, 2007

    I installed PsCS3 last weekend. The test prints I made on my Epson 1280 were correctly rendered and correctly centered. However, as others have noted, after each print the dialogue box reset itself to my default laser printer. I had to manually reset the printer to the Epson, and then manually reset the everything in the printer driver, which had reverted to its own defaults.
    It’s definitely not convenient, and I don’t understand why Adobe’s designers have decided this is the “correct” behavior. But I’m sure they have their reasons for it, and those reasons take precedence over what mere users might want. They know best. I am sufficiently grateful that I am able to get good prints, despite the small additional effort of manually resetting everything each time. It’s a small price to pay for all the wonderful improvements in CS3.
    I think the best approach for us users is simply to condition ourselves to manually resetting all the print settings before each print. Do it enough times and it becomes automatic and stress-free. It’s much easier that way, and certainly healthier than getting upset or spending time complaining about it. Adobe’s management knows that Photoshop has no serious competition, so they can do what’s most convenient for them.
    Of course, if you’re sufficiently upset and have sufficient technical expertise, you can always channel your anger into something constructive and creative, such as improving GIMP’s open-source code to make it a serious competitor to Photoshop. Somehow I don’t think that will happen any time soon.

  • Fred Nirque — 3:28 PM on July 11, 2007

    Ted, if every print has the same parameters and is printed on the same printer then resetting can indeed become a conditioned response – until you try to juggle text printing with cut paper and roll paper photographic prints on three separate printers at the same time.
    Good luck and only good luck would see a mistake-free printing session in that case. That printing scenario is not fantasy, either – it happens all the time around here…..
    Sure CS3 has many improvements and great features (particularly Bridge 2 & ACR 4), but as you will find out with use of CS3, printing is not the only dumb anti-workflow inclusion – the program is littered with such unexplained and silly, nonsensical changes (though none as crippling as this one).

  • P. Boone — 5:00 PM on July 11, 2007

    I upgraded to Photoshop CS3 Extended (NO manual provided) and just today tried to get a decent print from my brand new Epson R2400 K3 printer.
    I’m on a disability income. This is a huge investment for me — especially when the resulting prints are worthless. They are in fact, nothing more than a total waste of ink and paper.
    I’m using Win XP Pro. My computer is calibrated with a Gretag MacBeth Eye One. I have my color management settings set up per Ian Lyons’ excellent instructions on his website. Followed his instructions for Printing scenario 2, CS3 Color Printing Management. I made sure color management was turned OFF in the printer dialog.
    I don’t know what else to do to get this to work correctly. To say that I’m disappointed with Adobe’s latest version would be a gross understatement.
    I saw Bob Levine’s comment that one can get a refund on PS CS 3 for 30 days. For me it’s too late for that.
    Besides, I don’t want my money back. I want Photoshop to continue to be the Professional Quality program we users have come to expect.
    Patrice

  • Ramón G Castañeda — 11:44 PM on July 11, 2007

    This is just an attempt to direct the attention of both John and Dave to a specific post in the Photoshop Macintosh forum dealing with the discrepancy and contradictions in Adobe documents on printing out of CS3.
    http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx?14@@.3bc3db82/65
    Adobe should really take a stand on that evidently erroneous TechNote, which contradicts their own videos, tutorials and reality.
    Thanks in advance.
    Please note how I was able to solve my CS3 printing issues as described in that long thread.

  • Dave Polaschek — 7:45 AM on July 12, 2007

    Patrice Boone, the problem you’re seeing is that the printer is still attempting to manage the colors, even though you’re telling it not to. That’s why we wrote the KnowledgeBase article at http://kb.adobe.com/selfservice/viewContent.do?externalId=kb400878
    The solution is to use scenario 1 from Ian Lyons’ page, or let the printer manage the colors.

  • Ann Shelbourne — 9:27 AM on July 12, 2007

    Dave:
    That Tech Note of yours seems to be causing more problems than it solves for most people!
    The real problem is that you broke what used to work and, apparently, have no idea how to go about repairing the damage that you have wrought.
    Perhaps Adobe needs to bring someone on board who does?!

  • P. Boone — 10:03 PM on July 12, 2007

    Dave Polaschek,
    Thank you for your reply. I’ve just checked out your link. Sorry, that option is no option. I’ve tried that and it looks like this
    It should look like this ( I realize the costume looks a bit strange, I’ve painted it on in Photoshop. I’ll do better when I turn this concept into a painting.)
    I also tried with Ann’s suggestion of adding lightness +2 to the image with a gamma setting of 2.2. It still looked awful. I went as high as +15 in lightness and it still looked awful.
    Besides, I bought the full version of Photoshop 5.5 all these years ago because of one single feature – COLOR MANAGEMENT. I was told at a pro photo lab that they didn’t need ‘picky’ customers who wanted the color right. The best they could do was give me prints with brown shadows in a child’s delicate pink dress, so I bought a computer and Photoshop and have been successfully printing my own work ever since.
    I’m the person who figured out how to get Photoshop to recognize the name of the profile that was created when we ran Adobe Gamma way back then, on version 5.5, and my good friend Ian L made it well known in the forums and on his site.
    To be told now to let the printer manage color just isn’t good enough.
    I’ve figured out that I had an improper printer installation. In the file folder where the Epson paper profiles should have been, only the Photoshop Color Settings Preferences Work Spaces were there. Things like Adobe 1998, Apple RGB, Colormatch RGB, sRGB, SWOP, the Kodak files, etc. Dozens of them, but no Epson paper profiles.
    I’ve uninstalled my printer and re-installed it and now have made a single print on Epson HW matte paper that is acceptable. Not great, still too green, but not ghastly. I had assumed that I probably needed to recalibrate my monitor before making more prints. Now with your suggested fix, I wonder.
    I don’t want to be unkind, but reading that the ‘fix’ is to forget about Color Management in Photoshop and let the printer handle it really makes me laugh. Back to PS 5? I sure hope not!
    Patrice

  • Fred Nirque — 5:22 AM on July 13, 2007

    Hold the phone.
    This is now getting stupid…..
    With regard to that Tech note “solution”:
    Are you fair dinkum telling me that the brilliant new CS3 printing module is so fouled up that Photoshop no longer knows how to tell the printer that it is managing colour??? And that this is the fault of the Epson driver???
    Was any testing done on any existing Windows drivers before releasing CS3?
    No, I must be hallucinating or something. This surely is not for real.

  • Dave Polaschek — 7:47 AM on July 13, 2007

    Patrice,
    I’ve figured out that I had an improper printer installation. In the file folder where the Epson paper profiles should have been, only the Photoshop Color Settings Preferences Work Spaces were there.
    Thanks for that information. I haven’t heard of the Epson profiles disappearing before, and thanks for having the patience to actually dig into the problem further. Missing profiles would certainly cause a problem with color correction. We’ll investigate that further.
    The fix mentioned in the technote is not to “forget” color management. When you select “Let Printer Manage Colors”, photoshop still sends the document’s color profile to the printer, but relies on the printer to convert it to whatever colors the printer driver wants to print.
    When we encounter a driver which insists on managing the color, even when we tell it not to (in the print job), and you tell it not to (in the print dialog), doesn’t it seem reasonable to just let the driver do its thing, since it’s going to in any case?

  • P. Boone — 3:11 PM on July 13, 2007

    >When we encounter a driver which insists on managing the color, even when we tell it not to (in the print job), and you tell it not to (in the print dialog), doesn’t it seem reasonable to just let the driver do its thing, since it’s going to in any case?
    Dave,
    This redundancy reminds me of another question I’ve had — It seems that in the past I selected my Epson 1270 Printer in an initial setup and then only selected the specific paper in the Print Properties dialog.
    Could this double selection of the paper/paper profile be part of the problem?
    Also, I do not have the option to select “Plain paper.” In the past when I’ve printed something specifically to be used as a painter’s reference, I’ve often printed on plain paper and the quality has been good enough for that purpose.
    It seems strange that all the choices no longer exist.
    thanks,
    Patrice

  • Ann Shelbourne — 3:11 PM on July 13, 2007

    Dave:
    So how do you explain the fact that CS2 was able to override exactly the same Printer Driver (and prevent it from “doing its thing”) while your ship-wrecked CS3 has lost that ability?
    [Do me a favor, Ann, and lose the attitude. I appreciate that people are having problems, and that's why Dave and other people are working to solve them. Please display some civility if you'd like to continue participating in the conversation here. --J.]

  • Fred Nirque — 5:31 AM on July 14, 2007

    John, it’s not an attitude thing – just a deep frustration by those of us who try to earn a living using Photoshop to produce our product being totally frustrated by the way Ps10 (which has so many other really good features) being totally hamstrung by the way it handles printing, particularly compared with the easy, logical and accurate way its predecessor handled that side of things.
    I was one of those who helped Patrice find answers to problems with her new Epson R2400 printer installation, and it really wasn’t rocket science – but as she was using Ps10 her problems were multiplied and made obscure before she even began. In Ps9 she would have been able to work things out relatively easily.
    That there still seems to be little acknowledgment and even less progress in changing the situation is bound to lead to outbursts – this is directly affecting the working efficiency and income of many, many people. It was not something that was expected nor asked for, either.
    That this avenue for comment is open gives us small hope, and is appreciated.

  • Kirk Dickinson — 7:33 AM on July 14, 2007

    Creating an Action for your print preferences is a really good idea. Unfortunately IT DOESN’T WORK!
    A little message pops up that says: “Some page setup settings cannot be recorded in actions. Defaults in effect when the action is played back will be used.”
    The Defaults that it chooses to use are almost assuredly wrong, and you have a ruined print.
    Thanks,
    Kirk

  • P. Boone — 10:48 AM on July 14, 2007

    Yesterday I wrote two posts, I see only the 2nd one posted. (Hi, Fred!)
    In the first I said that accolades for figuring out that my printer paper profiles deserved to go to the members of the Jubilee and the Adobe Forums…
    I also noted that the new built in color managed preview isn’t exactly correct either, as one can see by checking out the link (hope it works this time — the last one will work if the empty space is deleted from the text line).
    While the preview shows that the print will be lighter than the image on my monitor, he resulting print is actually darker than it appears on my monitor using Ian’s version 2, that is, Photoshop managing colors with ICM and No color management checked.
    A second print done with the printer managing colors, Ian’s version 1, is lighter, but does not have the dynamic range it should have.
    Of the two, the Photoshop managed is better, but both are too dark, too dull and lifeless.
    I also wrote yesterday that I think the reason I missed getting the printer paper profiles the first time I installed the printer is because I initially did not install the Epson RAW plugin because I wanted to use Adobe RAW. I also did not go to the Epson “Color Management” section on the first printer install, but did the 2nd time, and that took me to an Epson web page where I was able to download and install (drivers?) for glossy, matte, and artists’ papers. (And I wonder what is supposed to happen for all the people who do not connect their computers to the internet!)
    I’ve found that in addition to not having Plain Paper, I do not have any of the Epson Ink Jet papers, OR the Brilliant White Watercolor Paper, which disappoints because I’ve just purchased a minimum order of 50 individually cut sheets at a premium price – Epson does not offer this paper in sheets or on a roll that fits the R2400.
    If I can be of any further help, please let me know, and thanks for looking into these issues,
    Patrice

  • Roseanne — 1:39 PM on July 14, 2007

    Does saving as a Photoshop PDF (with appropriate compession/color settings) and printing from Acrobat (or the free Reader) help with centering and/or color management issues?
    How does the PDF Print Engine fit into the big picture?
    Roseanne in NJ

  • Rick Popham — 8:39 AM on July 15, 2007

    Patrice,
    The print preview that you’ve linked to is NOT the new Adobe color managed preview. Rather, it’s the print preview generated by the Epson print driver. The Epson preview has never been color managed (at least I’ve never seen an Epson preview match my monitor), and is mostly intended to check the position of the image on the page.
    When you “Print” from PS CS3, and the new “Print” dialog window opens, it is THAT preview that is color managed. If you have the “Match Colors” button checked, you can see the results when you pick the various paper profiles — now that you have them 8-).
    I don’t have an Epson 2400, but when I installed the drivers for my R1800 and 3800, both installed the basic Epson paper profiles in the proper folder. Both included profiles for the Watercolor paper and Epsons Photo Quality Inkjet paper. There is no profile for plain paper (does Epson even make a plain paper?) When Epson makes improved paper profiles available for download, these install alongside the basic profiles and do not replace them.
    I wonder if you could link me to the other forum thread you mentioned so I could read through it, because I’m confused by some of the installation options you’ve mentioned. I’ve never encountered an Epson RAW plugin, for example, and wouldn’t expect to unless I was installing software for an Epson camera.
    Reading through this thread again, the thing that amazes me, given the interdependency between the OS, PS, and the various printer drivers, is that any of this stuff works at all. Thanks, John, for making this forum available; and Dave, for entering hostile territory 8-).
    Rick

  • Doug Landrum — 2:52 PM on July 15, 2007

    Thanks, J. for your comment on my post telling me the complexity of improving the printing experience and the reasons for potentially withholding “fixes.”
    Notwithstanding some of the in artful communications in this forum, I am most appreciative of Adobe people communicating with we users.
    CS3 is a wonderful improvement in many respects. Please get us a fix for the printer issues as soon as you are able.
    [I promise we will. Believe me, no one feels lousier than we do when something doesn't work well, especially as we've been wanting for a long time to improve the print experience.. --J.]

  • P. Boone — 7:38 AM on July 17, 2007

    >The Epson preview has never been color managed (at least I’ve never seen an Epson preview match my monitor), and is mostly intended to check the position of the image on the page.
    Yes, that’s how I’ve always used it. Thought I read somewhere that the print preview in PS CS3 is now color managed.
    >When you “Print” from PS CS3, and the new “Print” dialog window opens, it is THAT preview that is color managed. If you have the “Match Colors” button checked, you can see the results when you pick the various paper profiles — now that you have them 8-).
    Aha! Makes sense — except of course, if we let the Printer manage colors…
    I had never heard of Epson RAW. That’s why I stopped right there on the first installation. Research reveals that it only works with certain digital cameras. My camera is not listed and the program will not open my RAW files, only my jpegs. I’ve deleted the program.
    >There is no profile for plain paper (does Epson even make a plain paper?)
    No. I’ve used an ultra bright, heavyweight ink jet typing paper for drawing and painting references in the past and always used the plain paper selection. It used to work well enough for that purpose.
    >I wonder if you could link me to the other forum thread you mentioned so I could read through it, because I’m confused by some of the installation options you’ve mentioned.
    With pleasure. Please email me at patriceb(at)patriceart(dot)com and I’ll send you an invitation to join us.
    thank you,
    Patrice

  • tmalcom — 11:12 AM on July 17, 2007

    So what it really comes down to is that Adobe and Dave Polaschek decided was to rip out the working print engine because it worked now, but didn’t match up with the Mac version. They were going to put in print profiles, but didn’t get around to it, thus ensuring that their customers (you know, the people who buy Photoshop so Adobe executives can get richer) will be forced to buy the next version in order to have printing that actually works.
    [No, they won't. --J.]
    In the meantime, it’s just too bad if printing doesn’t work. It makes the codebase cleaner and easier to maintain, thus saving more money to enrich the Adobe executives. Pure genius!

  • P. Boone — 12:25 PM on July 17, 2007

    tmalcom,
    Please open Photoshop and take a look at your splash screen. You’ll find the names of Dave Polaschek and John Nack listed.
    I’m pretty sure they, as creators of Photoshop, are both listening and even providing this venue for the very fact that they DO care.
    I have no doubt that they are working with all their might, so they can be enriched by their own next paycheck, as logic tells me that the customer base will in fact, not upgrade to the next version to get printing that works. They’ll stick with the last one which works, and that’s the last thing Dave, John, or Chris Cox (who’s been taking some undeserved pot shots too) want.
    Now, please don’t get me wrong… I have no doubt that these guys are geniuses. Wish I was one too!
    Until that happens, I’ll be eagerly waiting for the dot release! (smile!)
    Patrice

  • David — 12:54 PM on July 17, 2007

    If I am interpreting the comments from Adobe (John and Dave, in particular) in this LONG string of responses it seems clear that Adobe is well aware that a mistake was made and the mistake will be corrected, for FREE, as a patch. I hope this occurs soon because I will not update to PSCS3 until that patch is released. I am waiting, impatiently, for that patch (hint, hint).
    Keep up the good work, John.

  • Rick Popham — 4:33 PM on July 17, 2007

    Patrice,
    I’ll contact you to continue this discussion on your other forum, but I’d like to address some of the confusion here.
    I agree that your basic profiles are missing because you interrupted the installation of the printer software from the disc. The updated drivers from Epson do not install these basic profiles (I downloaded and installed the R2400 driver to see). Frankly, if I were you, I’d start from scratch and let the disc run its’ course. That way you would get the profiles for the watercolor paper and the photo quality inkjet paper.
    The Epson RAW thing is just a utility to print directly from RAW files, not a RAW converter plugin. I have apparently installed this with my R1800 and never knew it was there. If it does somehow interfere with ACR, simply remove it from the plugin folder.
    tmalcom,
    Adobe is not responsible for putting in print profiles. These are provided by printer manufacturers for use with their branded papers. Third party paper manufacturers (Crane, Hahnemuhle, etc) will also provide profiles for specific printers.
    I began posting here as a pissed off customer, mostly because I was afraid that the printing behavior changes were set in stone. But they’ve taken a lot of heat, have listened to us, and are working on the problems. As anxious as I am for a fix, I’d like to see them take the time to get it right — so we don’t have to go through this again in the future.

  • Bonnie Jacobs — 11:07 AM on July 18, 2007

    I am on a NON-intel Mac G5 quad (OS 10.4.10) using an Epson R380 printer.
    I too have been struggling with print quality for several weeks, going thru a lot of paper & ink. After 2 weeks of playing, I could get my Epson to print out fine on luster paper, but all prints on glossy paper were still a muddy magenta mess.
    Ian Lyons, Ann Shelborne, Ramón & Fred N. have all been trying to help me sort this out. You can follow this here: http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.3bc3db82/111 as well as in the forum that Patrice mentioned.
    Today more out of frustration… I trashed all the Epson items for my R380 from my computer & did a complete reinstall of the print driver (downloaded a fresh one from the Epson website). I then deleted the old reference in my printer setup & readded it.
    Then I first went to page setup & choose my printer & paper size.
    First I followed Ramón’s screen shoots (choosing my own printer & paper profiles) with no colour management in the last dialog box… The prints came out with the correct colour (no magenta), but were just a tad bit muddy.
    So then I followed Ann’s screen shots (see the Adobe forum link posted above).. choosing my own printer & paper profiles (see my screen shots link to screen shots )… and whoa!!!!! It actually printed on glossy paper!!
    So I am thinking… when I installed CS3.. did it overwrite something that originally installed when I installed my printer… and by reinstalling the Epson software, did this correct the problem???

  • P. Boone — 12:58 PM on July 18, 2007

    Hi Rick,
    I wouldn’t say that I interrupted the printer installation the first time around. It told me that it was installed…I just didn’t go further and install Epson RAW, Monaco Ezcolor, nik Color Efex Pro 2.0 Sample filters or the Epson Premium ICC Profiles.
    I don’t remember having to choose to select paper profiles as being an option with an Epson printer installation before, and this is my 4th Epson printer. Also, first time around, I had zero paper profiles, not even basic ones. Photoshop’s color working space files were in that folder instead.
    The 2nd printer install I did install the Premium ICC profiles and Epson RAW, but not the other plugins. I’ve since deleted Epson RAW.
    I’ve made some tests with Photoshop CS. Thankfully, I know now, 18 prints and almost half of my ink later, that the printer itself is OK. I have one good print. The Photoshop CS one.
    Then when I switched back to CS3 I began running into the truncation, centering problem for the first time!
    I stopped when I saw the Epson preview, closed everything, went back again to try to set up the paper size, etc., correctly and did not find a place to. I made the print to see what would happen, and although the full size image showed in the Photoshop preview, the image did print more narrow, and with the top of the sail and sky cut off.
    I came back here and went through Dave’s ‘off centering fix’ and found that I do not have the ability to select ‘centered’ on any of the 3 methods. no options on Page Layout Tab .
    I kept working on it, tried to print again, and find that my Epson preview indicates the image is shrinking even further!

    Bonnie,
    Good to hear that you’ve had some good results. In my case the printer was installed after PS CS3.
    I’m probably going to uninstall the printer again and re-install. Maybe I’ll get the watercolor profiles this time! I’m going to check that file folder in between deletion and installation to see if the Photoshop color spaces are removed along with the printer paper profiles.
    Patrice

  • Will Stoneham — 4:57 PM on July 18, 2007

    I too have experienced these print issues and have watched this blog closely. Thank you, John and Dave, for listening to all of us.
    I too am one of the many that use PSCS3 daily and am also frustrated by the new print features. We’ve had to do quite a bit of rethinking our print process in order to get the results we did in PSCS2. Our big issues comes with printing poster sized prints (24×36, 27×40, etc.) we do many of these weekly and it took us a few weeks to finally get everything to size out somewhat correctly.
    While this is obviously a huge issue, I and others are experiencing another bug that might be related to this new printing system. When I first upgraded I couldn’t open any more than one image without PS crashing. If I tried to open multiple images at once: CRASH.
    I found out through the forums that I had to set my default printer SYSTEM WIDE to Adobe PDF. That’s a fairly large hassle when you just want to “fire and forget” print in any program other than Photoshop. This workaround fixed the problem but now I have to ALWAYS find and select my favorite printer in any other program just so that PSCS3 will work properly. Is this related to the new print feature?

  • Bonnie Jacobs — 5:32 PM on July 18, 2007

    Thanks Patrice– good results, yes.. but not great. Printing out of CS2 still provides better prints without all the frustration. So my major jobs will be taken into CS2 for printing. I have already used way too much paper & ink on trying to sort thru this mess.

  • Dave Polaschek — 7:29 AM on July 19, 2007

    Will,
    If you’re crashing every time you open multiple documents with a driver, please make sure you file a bug report (I think http://www.adobe.com/go/supportportal/ is the place to start) and let us know what driver it is (including the version number).
    It’s probably worth reinstalling the driver, or upgrading to the latest version if you’re not already current.

  • Will Stoneham — 4:30 AM on July 20, 2007

    Dave,
    Thanks! That was the issue. We work in an office that uses all different models of printers, but all leased from the same manufacturer (Ricoh/Gestetner). All of the Drivers were PCL so once the Post Script drivers were installed PSCS3 worked fine. However, Photoshop never gave me a driver error message when it failed. It just simply failed.
    It is interesting that the PCL drivers would affect PSCS3 so negatively when they had no effect on PSCS2.
    Also of interest is that these drivers don’t negatively affect actual printing in Photoshop. They cause Photoshop to completely crash when opening multiple files. Again I wonder if it is tied into the new print feature.
    Regardless, all is well now, and I will report my findings to the link you gave me. Thanks to all!

  • Greg — 6:45 AM on July 20, 2007

    I hope that I can get some help here. I have searched around looking for an answer for my problem, but have not found a fix. I occasionally have a file that refuses to print, rather I get pages and pages of code from my laser printer (doesn’t seem to matter which one). But I cannot duplicate the situation – I just get surprised by it. The file in question has smart object, type, layer sets, layer effects – all the usual stuff. Any wisdom?

  • P. Boone — 8:51 AM on July 20, 2007

    Gary Chisholm, your email bounced back.
    To John and Dave and other Adobe Engineers,
    While I’m whining, I’d like to express my dismay that the palette well no longer exists. Health problems lead me to use my laptop in bed most of the time and it’s a real pain.
    Also, I drooled over the ‘windowshade?’ feature, where one could work on the lower part of an image by moving the majority of an image ‘up’ higher than the monitor screen. I’m so disappointed that feature does not exist in CS3.
    I’ve actually started looking for CS2. Adobe no longer sells it. It’s running around $250 on Ebay. A bit high for something that may or may not be legit.
    Any possibility these features can be ‘reinserted’ into CS3?
    [No, there are no plans to change CS3. We made some tradeoffs, and in CS4 we plan to continue to improve the palette/panel-management system to provide the remaining good things that were present in the old one. --J.]
    thanks,
    Patrice

  • P. Boone — 12:01 PM on July 20, 2007

    Thanks for your reply.

  • Ann Shelbourne — 6:23 PM on July 20, 2007

    >where one could work on the lower part of an image by moving the majority of an image ‘up’ higher than the monitor screen.
    Patrice:
    Have you tried using “Full Screen Mode with Menu Bar” Screen Mode?
    That gives you back the ability to move the entire image freely all over the screen.
    Look for it in your View menu/Screen Mode/.

  • P. Boone — 7:47 PM on July 20, 2007

    I’ve tried it now!
    Thank you, Ann!

  • mgb jay — 1:01 AM on July 24, 2007

    CS4…that is rich…given the corporate arrogance regarding all the reasons that this problem cannot just be fixed within one intensive month of “coding” @ company expense is beyond belief.
    Personally, having purchased another upgrade to CS3 (@ $200.00 out of my own pocket), and suffering with the malady of seriously DARK and UNACCEPTABLE prints, while trying to produce 24 images for an upcoming exhibit, I have read this entire thread through 3 times, looking for a solution… and the ass-kissing on the part of end users that I find here is just appalling…
    …What needs to be done here is that ADOBE concentrate the brunt of its’ programmers attention to this problem and just damn well fix it!
    MILLIONS (that would be millions with an M) of hard-earned dollars have been handed over to the company (ADOBE) by thousands of end users for the use of their product…and it is a product that fails while making the attempt to produce the ONLY result that matters…the final print.
    THERE ARE NO GOOD REASONS FOR ACCEPTING THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOUR.
    If you (ADOBE)have ANY expectation of EVER selling even ONE COPY of CS4, you had better fix and apologize for the costs that the ill-conceived and badly executed problems that you pushed on your unsuspecting loyal customer base for CS3 has had to endure. (Have you even considered the expenses that you have visited upon that customer base in terms of WASTED PAPER AND INK) over and above the cost of the upgrade ???????????
    I find any conciliatory posture on the part of the customer base (and in this thread there are numerous pleadings for “understanding” the inherent difficulties in finding such a solution) unacceptable, and its’ advocacy for such, a product on the part of said base, an inculcated willingness to “forgive”, a grossly misplaced and inappropriate result of political correctness run amok.
    WE the END USERS should find NO TOLERANCE for this problem whatsoever.
    I am sure that I will take a lot of flack for this position; I can handle it!
    Being told that we have to W A I T for a fix that cannot be forthcoming because of “blah, blah, blah” is corporate B.S.
    We are NOT mushrooms in a basement!
    This is not a question of getting our hard-earned money for a faulty product returned to us – it is a question of trusting the company with which we invest said money for, for a product that works as advertised, and has come to be expected!
    If the end product is not ready for the market place, work on it until it is…DO NOT foist it upon an unsuspecting customer base to facilitate the income stream that will ultimately come to support the R&D for the next iteration, i.e., CS4.
    We deserve better than that!

  • Alex — 7:42 AM on July 25, 2007

    John,
    I have defended your position(Adobe) in this matter from the beginning. I have tried every possible way to work around the printing workflow that is CS3 and can not. I am starting to get busy, thank god. and have no time for any of this foolishness. I have shifted back over to CS2, and put my plans for upgrading the computers to keep the speed current with the memory hog that CS3 is. Many others will find themselves doing this out of necessity. This stops spending in the computer sector. It stops jobs from being created. It stops future Adobe sales. In effect Adobe is part of the problem of our economy, instead of the solution. THAT is not good John and may have reprecusions way beyond this place and time.

  • Phil Brown — 5:32 PM on July 25, 2007

    I think some clarification here would be useful, perhaps from Dave if not from John?.
    There appear to be two distinct issues being discussed.
    1. Printing workflow. There’s no question that this is less than ideal on the Windows side now (it’s less than ideal on the Mac side, but it’s the same as it ever was which lessens the impact as it’s not perceived as a loss). The impact here is one of time which ultimately is the most valuable commodity that any of us have.
    2. Print quality. Be it colour mangement issues, print positioning issues or mis-prints resulting from the change in workflow. To be perfectly honest, we haven’t seen any problems with colour management or positioning when an appropriate workflow is in place and the user understands how to setup their driver. Mis-prints although producing category 2 failures obviously have their roots in category 1.
    John, perhaps it’s time to address this in a clear message in a new posting or a technical bulletin aimed at both ends of the technical ability scale?
    Although the internet typically attracts most of the complaints and very few of the praises (and so gives a distorted impression of the situation), I can say from my perspective we do have a signficant number of people who are confused and unhappy as a result.
    Some central direction from Adobe that is then suitably supported by the other parties in the industry (printer manufacturers in regard to their drivers, 3rd party media manufacturers in regard to ICC profiles, etc) would be valuable, imho.

  • Phil Brown — 1:36 AM on July 26, 2007

    To clarify, Adobe are giving direction and we know they’re working with printer vendors and others, but on this very specific issue is where I’m suggesting targetting immediately and in a public manner (blog etc).
    Actually, I know Adobe Labs have a Wiki, but perhaps a more general Adobe Wiki would be useful? There’s an enourmous amount of knowledge out there to tap into for everyone’s benefit.

  • Michael Morrison — 7:21 PM on July 26, 2007

    Hello,
    Just to add that I have begun having color management issues with CS3 as well. I have an intel Mac, 10.4.10, and an iPF5000 with driver v. 1.25 (8-bit driver, not plug-in).
    I have what appears to be idiosyncratic failures to remember to color manage or not to color manage. When there is a failure, prints are dark green/yellow. I print using “photoshop manages color”, custom profiles that I make with Color Match, an Eye One Pro, and Bill Atkinson targets.
    The softproofs always look correct, and sometimes, the prints are correct too. I set the print dialog, and set it again. Sometimes its a go, sometimes not. So far, it seems like a something sticking or not sticking issue. I have similar issues in LR 1.1 printing. CS3 had been immune until recently. Is it because I fired up CS2 to confirm how a dialog box looked for a client? First time I ran CS2 since installing CS3. . . In any event I am still troubleshooting, but it sounds familiar enough to other reports here to warrant adding mine at this point.
    Monitor is carefully profiled with ColorEyes to D65, L*, and about 100 cd.
    I like the CS3 print dialog box much better than CS2. Color management predictability is my concern. . .
    Thanks,
    Michael Morrison

  • P. Boone — 8:15 PM on July 26, 2007

    Phil Brown said:
    >To be perfectly honest, we haven’t seen any problems with colour management or positioning when an appropriate workflow is in place and the user understands how to setup their driver.
    That’s some of the best news re: printing in CS3 I’ve heard yet!
    Perhaps you’d like to share your successful method(s) with us.
    Patrice

  • Phil Brown — 8:40 PM on July 26, 2007

    Obviously there’s a myriad of variables when it comes to printing, but across the range of the current Epson K3 printers the following generically works:
    1. Calibrated Eizo Monitors (appropriate to the viewing conditions) – any properly calibrated, quality monitor should be great, we just prefer Eizo.
    2. Epson’s canned paper profiles for the appropriate stock being used. Custom profiles should be fine, so long as whoever made the profiles knows what they’re doing of course.
    3. Driver set to default with colour management turned off (off – no color management)
    4. Soft proof
    5. Print with Photoshop manages colours, appropriate ICC profile for the stock, either perceptual or relative colorimetric intent depending on all the usual factors, black point compensation (there’s no need to ever turn it off for Epson printers)
    I prefer not to scale images but to rather have them the right size first but it’s a matter of choice. With the driver set to default there’s no centering issues on the Windows side so far (from 17″ up to 44″) but there are so many variables/options here that there may well be combinations that aren’t so good.
    I know – you’ll read that and think “there’s nothing out of the ordinary” and you’d be right. It’s the same basic workflow as always. Typically I see problems when people apply special tweaks and adjustments and such instead of keeping it vanilla and simple.
    The issue at the moment is the lack of sticky settings and the risk of that causing something to go awry but anyone from the Mac side will be used to that anyway.
    If this is not working, then I would suggest going back to basics. Use a canned profile, OEM stock (whether it’s Epson, Canon, HP or whatever brand you’re using) with the driver at default.
    Make sure you have no banding issues in a nozzle/head test etc. Then introduce, one by one, the non-vanilla aspects of your workflow and see where it breaks.

  • Ann Shelbourne — 10:34 AM on July 27, 2007

    It’s not quite so simple as that, Phil.
    My Epson 1270 produces darker prints when printing from CS3 than it does from CS2 if I use the SAME profiles and settings in both instances.
    I have stopped worrying about it personally because I have figured-out a very unorthodox work-around.
    If I use my own contrived kludge (involving DOUBLE color management!) when printing from CS3, I CAN get prints which match normally printed CS2 prints.
    Unfortunately, many other people are continuing to have problems.

  • Phil Brown — 4:38 PM on July 27, 2007

    Hi Ann,
    When you say the same profiles and settings, you’re not confirming the other points that I raised regarding default settings, genuine media and ink, canned profiles and if the settings were as per what I suggested.
    The only effective way of troubleshooting this is to return to the most default, standard and plain setup possible and then introduce variables until it breaks. Then you can decide whether you really need those variables or whether they need changes or updates.
    For work and personal use, though, I find no reason to vary from that plain, simple setup.
    Obvioiusly it’s not easy giving specific troubleshooting help via this blog but I can absolutely confirm that colour management in CS3 works (and, no, I don’t work for Adobe in any capacity). I have no doubt people are having problems or they wouldn’t be saying so, but the problem can’t lie in CS3 or no one would be able to use the standard workflow and most definitely most are with success.
    Where there is a problem, imho, is with changes that can cause the workflow to change, to be interupted and so on – I’ve commented on that more than enough already.

  • Ann Shelbourne — 9:02 PM on July 27, 2007

    Phil:
    I started with the Default set-up which was the way I always work in CS2.
    The problem is that that no longer works in CS3.
    CS3 unfortunately produces darker prints than CS2.
    That is why, after much experimentation (and the waste of a lot of paper, ink and time too!) I evolved the set-up which I now use when printing from CS3.
    Using my unorthodox kludge, I can now consistently match the CS3 prints to those I make in the standard way in CS2 from the same files.

  • Doug Landrum — 12:22 PM on July 28, 2007

    Phil Brown says:
    To be perfectly honest, we haven’t seen any problems with colour management or positioning when an appropriate workflow is in place and the user understands how to setup their driver.
    Phil, I have solved my positioning problem with my Epson but I cannot get my Canon iP6000D to center an image on 8-1/2 X 11 paper printing from CS3 – something that was a snap in PS2. I have had no problem with color management. Canon cannot tell me how to solve the problem.

  • DIANA KASSIR — 3:37 PM on July 28, 2007

    Hello,
    If I could just get the box with
    “Match Print Colors” to stay UNCHECKED,
    I think I could then get a print that matches my image in PSCS3.

  • Kevin Keefer — 8:40 PM on July 29, 2007

    For others who have been struggling with a Epson R2400 and CS3, I tried Ann Shelbourne’s “Double Color Management” and it worked really really well. Question for Phil Brown on July 26, are you working in sRGB or Adobe RGB 1998? Just curious, because I am in sRGB and have been trying the “canned profiles” and trying to keep it simple, but Ann’s recommendation gets closer than anything I have tried since having CS3. By the way I am on MAC operating system, with MAC monitors. This is a helpful forum, thank you John for having it.

  • Phil Brown — 10:39 PM on July 29, 2007

    Hi Kevin,
    I work in a variety of colour spaces, sRGB, Adobe RGB (1998), Pro Photo and I’ve been looking at LStar-RGB recently. Depends on the image and what I want to do with it.
    To Kevin and Ann – what sort of calibration of your monitor have you done and what lighting conditions are you viewing the montitors and the prints?
    In the case of Ann’s 1270, are you waiting at least 60 minutes before looking at the prints and in the case of Kevin’s 2400 at least 10 minutes?

  • Kevin Keefer — 9:27 AM on July 30, 2007

    Thank you Phil for your comments. I use Spyder Pro Calibration, although I have been kind of lazy the last few months. I do not have any direct light on my monitors when viewing, and I have the brightness down 30%. My prints, (ie. 8×10), with high speed turned off are less than 10 minutes. I am going to keep testing Ann’s configuration on a variety of images later tonight to see if the set up has a limited range of accuracy.

  • Ann Shelbourne — 10:04 AM on July 30, 2007

    Phil:
    I use a LaCie electron 22 blue III CRT monitor with a laCie Blue Eye calibrator.
    This is the same set-up that I have been using for the last four years with both CS2 and CS3.
    The real point is that printing from CS3 is producing different (darker) results from printing the same file on the same equipment, on the same substrates; and with identical Profiles and Photoshop CMM settings.
    The only way that i have found to get CS3 output to MATCH that from CS2 is by using my “Double Color Management” routine which is proving entirely reliable and consistent with all files.

  • Bonnie Jacobs — 5:18 PM on July 30, 2007

    I too am using the same “Double Color Management” routine as she describes above… it is the ONLY way that CS3 will print something useable.
    I never had these issue with CS2.. and can still print perfectly out of CS2 without jumping thru hoops like I must in CS3.

  • Phil Brown — 8:35 PM on July 30, 2007

    Without actually being able to look over your shoulder, the only thing I can think of now is that because CS3 loses the stickiness of printer settings (whereas CS2 doesn’t) that your CS2 workflow isn’t translating to CS3 in so much as your settings are dropping and hence the “double colour management” is really just single colour management done by the driver.
    I’m sorry I couldn’t be of more assistance, but I can confirm again that CS3 colour management does work.

  • John Nack — 6:52 PM on July 31, 2007

    Hey folks,
    I wanted to let you know that I’m about to head out on vacation, so I probably won’t be able to approve comments made here between midday Aug. 1 & Aug. 11. If I get a chance to connect during my break, I’ll push comments live, but I’m trying to be good and stay off the dang computer. ;-)
    J.

  • DIANA KASSIR — 5:03 PM on August 03, 2007

    Hi,
    It is a relief to actually be able to communicate about this. I tried Epson (for my 3800) but no luck with them.
    1. Would someone (Anne Shelbourne) write out the steps and particulars of your “Double-Colour Deal”, please?
    I tend to use Prophoto and different rendering intents,
    so not sure of what to do to be able to keep my choices, and tired of wasting time & ink…
    2. Has anyone found any cures to stop the cropping of the image.
    I do use custom paper sizes?
    I can’t imagine havinging to jump back and forth between PS3 and PS2 all the time.
    I’m so nitpicky with my colors already, that this may just drive me over the edge!
    Thank you ,
    Diana

  • DIANA KASSIR — 5:03 PM on August 03, 2007

    Hi,
    It is a relief to actually be able to communicate about this. I tried Epson (for my 3800) but no luck with them.
    1. Would someone (Anne Shelbourne) write out the steps and particulars of your “Double-Colour Deal”, please?
    I tend to use Prophoto and different rendering intents,
    so not sure of what to do to be able to keep my choices, and tired of wasting time & ink…
    2. Has anyone found any cures to stop the cropping of the image.
    I do use custom paper sizes?
    I can’t imagine havinging to jump back and forth between PS3 and PS2 all the time.
    I’m so nitpicky with my colors already, that this may just drive me over the edge!
    Thank you ,
    Diana

  • DIANA KASSIR — 4:18 PM on August 06, 2007

    btw
    I forgot to mention that
    I’m on Macintosh 10.4.10
    with a profiled Cinema Screen
    using (mostly – but sometimes other)
    Epson profiles.
    …and, of course soft-proofing in PSCS3.
    besides the edges getting cropped off.
    dark images, and trouble with GREENS
    especially
    Thanx!

  • Fred Nirque — 1:42 AM on August 07, 2007

    More fool me. I got lazy and tried to print with CS3 again.
    Mind-numbing series of clicks & windows to get the right printer and right settings.
    Well, sort of.
    First print was truncated.
    More clicks, windows, plus run through the whole lot again to make sure everything is right.
    Second print – dark as all getout, bearing no relationship to the soft-proof view, CS3′s preview view, or any other imaginable view, or even what I’d have expected if the printer had suddenly decided to manage colour itself (which according to the print window it hadn’t). I have no idea or clue as to why the print was so dark.
    Launched CS2, a few clicks to confirm same settings, profile etc – and one perfect print straight away. Same file and settings exactly as Cs3.
    No wasted paper or ink with CS2, though CS3 now owes me two more A3+ sheets and the ink used to print them.
    Epson R2400, LATEST DRIVER (post CS3) – man, this CS3 printing is really messed up. The inconsistency is downright scary.
    And still not even a whisper of a fix.
    I’ve got an exhibition to print on the Epson 7800 next week involving panoramas on canvas up to 9′ long, and no way am I letting CS3 anywhere near that. Things are stressful enough in this game without a dodgy app adding even more stress.

  • Bob Tilden — 9:12 AM on August 08, 2007

    I’ve been having a lot of trouble getting my Epson 3800 to play nicely with CS3 and/or Lightroom. I purchased the 3800 some months ago. It has had all of its updates. The computer I run photoshop on is a new dual core XP based system. CS3 was installed first thing- no older Adobe software on the box. CS3 has all of its updates as well. Monitors are calibrated
    Normally I work on my images in the ProPhoto color space, and have printed them out using the Photoshop driver with the appropriate paper profiles. I turn off the printer color management when I do this. This process has worked fine for several years- I had an 1270 prior to purchasing the 3800.
    When I received the 3800 I began the struggle with getting acceptable color prints. Prints were dark- not fine tuning dark, but major problem, 2 stops dark. So I applied a curve to images before printing to lighten the midtones. This worked after a fashion, but this was not a solution in my mind. Unedited images that printed fine on the 1270 were quite dark on the 3800 as well.
    I contacted Epson in June and they replied with a note which stated:
    “There are some printing issues using CS3 that Epson is aware of that has been reported to Adobe. At this time we are currently awaiting for Adobe to address these issues. You may want to check their forms (Adobe) for all other such discussions.”
    I’ve checked the forums as they suggested, with no luck. Adobe referred me to a knowlegebase page that didn’t address my particular issue.
    I set out to try various permutations of profiles to see what effect, if any, the combinations have. I found one combination that is -very- close to generating a consistently good print. The image -must- be in the sRGB space. Color management -must- be done by the printer. Printer color space -must- be Adobe RGB.
    Lightroom has the same problems, but you really can’t change the profile that Lightroom sends to the printer. According to the documentation it always sends ProPhoto (it does colorspace changes if you’re exporting a file) and the printed images are always dark.
    The software problem seems to be in translating the image color space to one the printer uses. I assume that this should be done automatically by PhotoShop or the Epson driver but this does not seem to be happening in my case.
    Help! Anyone have any insights?

  • Doug Reynolds — 12:21 PM on August 08, 2007

    I thought printing from Photoshop couldn’t be as difficult as everyone was saying – but it turns out… IT IS.
    Seeing as I just sprung 2,500 bucks for Master Collection, I thought I could at least get it to print properly to Acrobat as a workaround – but apparently not; per job paper sizes just won’t take… Come on guys; this is a horrific situation that needs sorting soon.
    Oh – I particularly like the way PhotoShop crashes every time I try to “Page Setup” to my networked colour laser :-(
    I feel like ‘The Fly’… “Heeelp Meee…”
    (I work next door to your Dublin office, so they can come and feel my pain if they want ;-) )

  • Sus_Live — 2:01 AM on August 10, 2007

    Hi everyone,
    I’ve been trying to print from CS3 (any program) on my epson R1800 without any luck! It prints fine as long as I’m printing on plain paper but it doesn’t allow me go to PrintSetting to change the quality of the paper crossing a line along the option.
    The funny thing is that I’ve got CS2 on the same computer (intel iMac a few days old) and it works just fine. Does anyone know why this is happening? When I’m on CS3 a message says “this panel is not compatible with your computer…” if it is not compatible WHY is working with CS2 then?
    Also, There are several drivers for intel macs on the Espon website.. WHICH one is the one? I’ve download a lot of them but still not working..
    HELP please.. I’m going mental.. soon.. ish..
    Sus
    pd. who said that macs are far much easier to use than a pc? oh dear!

  • James Hayward — 11:12 AM on August 14, 2007

    After reading and re-reading all of these posts, the forums @ Adobe and everywhere Google can find pertaining to Epson and Adobe CS3 I have yet to get an accurate print.
    I have gone through a box of paper, a ton of ink on my brand new Epson R2400 and I have nothing but dark prints from Photoshop CS3 and Lightroom to show from my time and effort, let alone cost. Where was the due diligence when it came to software testing before releasing these applications.
    One would think that the most popular printer company’s offerings and the most popular photo-editing application might be tested thoroughly together before being offered for sale.
    I guess it is back to CS2. Great… Glad I was an early adopter with CS3. I can’t believe how irresponsible it is of Adobe to not formally address this, man-up and take some responsibility. Yet another example of the horrible turn that this industry has taken when it comes to making quality products, and servicing the people who pay to keep their companies afloat.
    I am truly disappointed. Is there any light at the end of this tunnel? Bueller?

  • Paul Stachelek — 2:04 PM on August 15, 2007

    One of the things that bugged me for a while with the “Print…” dialog box in APCCS3 (WINDOWS) was the “Page Setup” button. When I clicked it, I would launch the Epson Properties dialog box; whatever made me think that when I clicked something labelled “Page Setup” that it would bring me to something other than the Page Setup dialog box??? Anyway, it’s kind of a work-around to set up the Page Setup box without really going into it. When you make your choices by choosing various tabs in the Properties dialog box, the changes (size, media source, paper type, etc.) are reflected in the Page Setup without you really never having gone there. The important tabs for me are the Main and the Paper tabs. Once you have made your choices here, Page Setup is setup and you need to put the paper in the right slot in your printer (if that is a choice…I have an Epson 3800 and depending on media I might have to use a special paper source slot on the printer).
    The other issue I see addressed on these pages is the centering issue. For the 3800 just make sure the Center checkbox is checked in the “Print…” dialog box and that you have selected the correct paper size (Properties > Paper tab)and it prints in the center. If the image dimensions are larger than the paper size, you will only get part of the image (maybe this is what I keep reading about unintentional “cropping” of the image). However, I used to have an Epson 4000 (and the 4800 may work this way too), the way that you get the print centered is to check the Center box in the “Print…” dialog and in the Paper tab in Properties, there was another Center box. If both of these were checked, the print will be centered.(I print full-frame 6×9 inch images centered on Letter size). Hope some of this helps. I’ve only printed a few pieces with CS3, but I’ve had good luck (except for the semantics).

  • DIANA KASSIR — 4:08 PM on August 16, 2007

    Paul wrote:
    >the way that you get the print centered >is to check the Center box in the >”Print…” dialog
    Thank you,
    I am a professional, which means I need to have choices.
    I am on the 3800 with Mac 10.4.10.
    I NEVER want my prints centered.
    For Example:
    I leave a large border on one side (to mount in my portfolio).
    Or I just want the bottom border bigger, for aesthetic reasons.
    Also, if I want to print out a 4″ x 6.25″
    (or whatever size) sample size,
    without making another copy of the image, and having to shrink it down
    I should be able to do that.
    My paper size is always larger than the size that I choose to print out.
    But the image gets cropped, randomly.
    Then the next time, it gets cropped differently.
    I never had this problem with CS2.
    Glad you’ve had good luck,
    but these problems
    are far too rampant, and here,
    I am spending yet MORE time trying to salvage for answers!

  • P. Boone — 6:41 AM on August 17, 2007

    >The other issue I see addressed on these pages is the centering issue. For the 3800 just make sure the Center checkbox is checked in the “Print…” dialog box and that you have selected the correct paper size (Properties > Paper tab)and it prints in the center. If the image dimensions are larger than the paper size, you will only get part of the image (maybe this is what I keep reading about unintentional “cropping” of the image).
    Paul,
    In the beginning I did not have the truncated image, centering problem.
    Once it began, I did have the ‘center image’ checkbox checked, and I was printing an image that had previously printed on 8.5 x 11 inch paper correctly – at least in terms of size and placement.
    Once the non-centered, truncated problem began, only a portion of the image was printed, and in the upper left corner of the paper.
    Each time I re-printed after that, a smaller and smaller amount of the image was printed. Each time, what was printed was in the upper left corner, not centered.
    Adobe’s fix is a joke. As I’ve mentioned earlier, the checkboxes they tell me to check do not exist in my print dialog pages.
    Patrice

  • Ann Shelbourne — 9:56 AM on August 17, 2007

    We still have heard nothing from Adobe concerning a fix for this Printing snafu.
    Just a little re-assurance that you are actually working on a solution; and some sort of estimate of how much longer we might have to wait for a Patch; would go a long way to pacify a lot of very distressed and angry CS3 customers.
    Please can we have your assurance that Adobe do intend to fix the problem before the advent of CS4?
    [I don't have a very useful status update to provide at the moment, but I can tell you that we're working to make things right. I wish it were possible to do more quickly, and on behalf of everyone on the team, I'm sorry that the current situation has caused pain and lost time/materials. I'll share more info as it becomes available. --J.]

  • Ann Shelbourne — 5:43 PM on August 17, 2007

    John:
    Thank you for letting us know that you are continuing to work on the problem.
    What seems to be happening on my Epson 1270 is that the Paper Profiles (which work perfectly when printing RGB files with CS2) cause too much black ink to be emitted when printing the same file from the CS3 applications.
    Do, please, continue to keep us updated on your progress.

  • Paul Stachelek — 8:23 AM on August 18, 2007

    “Are there some older printer drivers that aren’t going to work as well this way? Almost certainly. But we’ve got to look forward. There are a ton of neat things we can do on Vista and Leopard. But we can’t take advantage of the new technologies if we’re spending all of our time working on incompatibilities with drivers that were written last century”.
    Since I have not experienced the printing issues mentioned above…I’m thinking my operating system (just upgraded to Vista, my printer and print driver (3800) are compatible with the changes made in CS3.
    I don’t doubt there are issues, I read the Adobe tech note on centering images and John’s latest post above affirms that “we’re working to make things right”, which suggests that something is wrong (in some situations).
    I guess I will have to try non-centered images. I usually window mat my final prints, so I like to have that protective border equally around the edges of the print. But, I can understand making a portfolio or book or cards and having the image positioned off-center for aesthetic or practical reasons. After reading these posts, I’m almost afraid to change my settings (if it works don’t fix it).
    I teach photography at a community college on both platforms. The IT department upgraded to CS3…so I’m very curious about what kind of performance we are going to experience. We print on 4800′s and, once again, most of the software and drivers are current. We start Aug 20th and it will take a while to get up and printing, but I’ll post my experiences. This will be interesting (hopefully not frustrating) to see what happens in a group/communal printing environment where the printers are networked (which always seems to bring up issues).

  • Gloria Wilson — 8:02 PM on August 19, 2007

    Please do post experiences, Paul. I am a lab tech for a community college on macs. We’ve got 3800′s, 7800′s and a 4000. These are networked, and we are using CS3 and Lightroom. And Imageprint. Should be interesting!

  • Norman O — 2:17 AM on August 21, 2007

    Reading Paul’s comment, I take it that every time Adobe do an upgrade we all have to invest in the latest windows platform (currently Vista) and also invest in the latest printer on the market to enable us to operate.
    That would be OK if only we all had deep pockets and could afford such measures.
    My platform is Windows XP and my printer an Epson 1270, tho a little old in the tooth, has served me very well up till now.
    I dread the thought that every time a new piece of software appears on the market that I should have to change everything and have to spend a few thousand dollars to keep in touch. My current configuration surely can’t be classed as the last century so whats happened to a little backward computability?
    There are thousands of of users out here with similar setups on their computers to mine and quite happy using them.
    So come on let Adobe fix it for us mere mortals.

  • Val — 7:14 PM on August 21, 2007

    This worked for me and my “Little 1280 That Could” after much frustration and wasted materials. I’m using CS3 and Vista OS.
    After opening file using any working space, go to View.
    1. Check Proof Colors.
    2. Go to Proof Set-Up/Custom, this will bring up a dialogue box. At this point you will see the GREEN MONSTER.
    3. Choose your paper profile.
    4. Uncheck “Preserve RGB#s. Presto, color cast is gone.
    5.Check “Simulate Paper Color”.
    Go to Print Dialogue,
    1. At Proof, choose your printer/paper profile.
    2. In Color Handling/ Management, let Photoshop manage color. Yes, let PS go for it.
    3. At Printer Profile, enter your printer/paper profile.
    4. At Rendering Intent, Perceptual.
    5. At Proof Setup, Current Custom Setup.
    6. Printing Preferences, No Color Adjustment or Management
    I tried several combinations of this formula. The critical step appears to be to uncheck “Preserve RGB#s” at Proof Setup. Anyone, please verify.

  • Paul Stachelek — 10:07 PM on August 21, 2007

    I tell my classes that if they were a photographer starting out in 1965 and had capital investment enough to purchase good quality small, medium, large format camera equipment, lighting, stands, tripods, etc., they could have made a living using most of that equipment until 1995…thirty years…and retired. It’s just not the same today…and the start-up costs today for a young photographer are ugly.
    It’s hard for practioners to accept but, the technology is evolving and until (if) it gets to a plateau (and this could be market driven)we are pawns to the technology…and this isn’t the first time.
    Consider what it was like if you were an experienced daguerreotypist and had a successful studio from 1840 to 1850 (ten years) and then the wet plate process just ate you up? Maybe you were not young and didn’t want to learn all the technical considerations, nor spend the money necessary to convert. You could hang in there…maybe until the 1860′s…but you were a goner.
    We still teach film at my school…but market conditions will dictate what products are available to our students…and the writing is on the wall (and has been). We have to adjust the curriculum.
    What’s my point? The medium is evolving…and like it or not…the inkjet products of five years ago are inferior to the products of today…sad, but (IMHO) true. I look back on images that I printed on my P2000 (metamerism and all), and just accept it. I don’t want to go back and make new prints…guess you could call the earlier ones “vintage pigment prints” (ha). I want to make new images with new products and new technology until I can’t make them anymore.
    The 1270 and 1280 (which I owned), are dye inks. Make one of these and put it on the dashboard of your car and drive around with it for a couple of weeks and compare it to one you kept under dark storage. Sorry…this is not a quality product. You may like the image…but the ink is not of the highest quality (not to mention the cheap paper it might have been printed on). Reality check.
    I know some of you are not going to like what I’ve written, but I’ve gone through all of this transformation as well. The technology is evolving and it costs dough to keep up and I don’t think you can blame the manufacturers for not accommodating outdated technology…they have a bottom line…and there ain’t enough in it for antiquated inkjet printers. Photography has never been inexpensive.
    There are alternatives. Forget about making prints at home. Many well known photographers never printed because they were too busy in the field making images. Send your digital files to CostCo (Price Club whatever you have). You can get a Fuji Crystal Archive paper silver print from your digital file for $1.98…yup (sorry Epson).
    Get a website and post electronically. How many images can you put on a website??? What is important here…the image or the process???
    I never liked darkroom geeks who used exotic formulas to produce mediocre images. I look at images. You can impress me either on paper or electronically. If I like your image and want a copy…I’ll pay you to have a high quality one made…you don’t have to make it.
    If you want to make prints just because you like to make prints of what you photographed…then you have to go with whatever you can afford…and update as often as you economically can afford…but don’t expect the manufacturers to accomodate you. They have bigger fish to fry.
    This is probably not the answer some are looking for…but…just thought I would contribute another way of historically looking at the problem that we all face.

  • Phil Brown — 11:38 PM on August 21, 2007

    Correct – you never want to preserve RGB#s for this sort of printing.

  • kay wah — 5:58 PM on August 22, 2007

    Paul – clients are not asking for online only and I can’t hang my pictures on the wall if I don’t print them (at least not without a significant cost outlay) Event things we send to the commercial printers we often print out on calibrated printers at the office to make sure that we are close to what will come back. Besides, this is not a case of technology moving forward but rather a serious bug introduced into what was working before. How this slipped through the beta testing and release is surprising.
    A workable temp solution would be for Adobe to make the Indesign trial valid for the next 3 months so that people could bring their PS work into InDesign and print from there.

  • P. Boone — 12:08 AM on August 23, 2007

    Paul,
    I’m delighted to hear that you haven’t had problems. It gives me hope that there is hope.
    But your suggestion that everyone who IS having problems is just using old, outdated technology just doesn’t fly.
    I built my current computer earlier in this year. Yes, not only this century, this year. It’s a fast, dual core processor.
    Granted, I am using XP Pro, but I’m sure I have a coupon around here somewhere for a free upgrade to VISTA. It’s just that I’m not convinced that I want to.
    I’ve upgraded to Photoshop CS3 Extended. It’s not like I went the cheap route.
    And although my NEW printer, the Epson R2400 is a small one, (I have my larger prints made at a local, pro lab), it does use Epson’s latest K3 inks, and the drivers I am using are directly from Epson’s site and were downloaded quite recently, in fact, during the course of this conversation on this blog. (Thank You, John Nack!)
    Granted, it would be interesting to know if ALL people who are using VISTA are not having problems.
    But to suggest that everyone ought to be expected to be there in order to be able to make a decent print from the world’s leading professional photo editing program is just…
    plain silly.
    Patrice

  • Fred Nirque — 2:17 AM on August 23, 2007

    Paul, with all due respect, what you wrote is the most irrelevant BS I’ve read in a long time.
    This thread is about CS3/PS10′s inability to deal with printing as CS2/Ps9 was able to do. Not whether we should be sending our prints for someone else who runs a lab to do them because we’re cretins and can’t figure things fore ourselves.
    Again, with all due respect, some of the respondents here have been professionals in this medium for decades, have kept pace with technology, and many know a damn sight more about printing than many operators in these labs (CostCo? -you jest – please tell me you jest?) will know for decades to come, if ever.
    They’re reporting a problem with the software, not their inability to use it or understand what they’re doing.
    Some of us actually sell our prints for people to hang on their walls. Telling them to go look at it on a website ain’t going to cut the mustard, nor make money. More to the point, current technology actually allows us to once more print our own colour prints, and some of us do that extremely well when the software works properly.
    Finally, and consider this in bold, underlined and in italics – Epson’s 7800 and 2400 (the two printers that concern me) are not
    outdated technology.
    That really was some of the most sanctimonious writing I’ve seen for ages, but I admire your nerve in posting it.
    Maybe you should now read all the posts here properly and see why I wrote this.

  • Steve — 10:30 AM on August 23, 2007

    Well, I’ve read every single post to this forum and can tell you I am glad I did not spend anything until I did!
    I own a photography studio and printing IS my bread and butter! Thank you all for pointing out that I can wait to invest thousands on my work stations and print stations. As for me and my staff, we going to continue to work with what is not broke, CS2.
    Do I like the cool new features? Yep…
    Can I afford the loss in income? Not a chance!
    Business is so hard to get now (everyone is a “pro” photographer) that a drop in income can shut business’s down. Does Adobe understand some of us are fighting to survive in a tough market? We buy pro software to go with pro gear to get pro results!! Predictable and repeatable means something out here in the real world.
    Guess we should keep reading the forums and wait to see someone post an “It’s fixed” thread.
    oh and did I see that PSCS4 is in the works…hummm

  • Richard Bracegirdle — 3:39 PM on August 23, 2007

    I have had printing problems between CS3 and my Konica Minolta 2300W laser printer since day 1. The printer worked fine in CS2. Now – I have to revert to CS2 to print anything at all created in CS3. Not good Adobe !! The image is wrongly orientated plus it is stretched and cannot be scaled. When ARE you going to FIX this please ?? I have been looking for a solution for 3 months now and no, I’m not going to change my 2300W !! You have NO idea how frustrating this is, I don’t expect these sort of things from a product like Photoshop !! It’s not going forward – it’s a backwards progression !!

  • Norman O — 2:36 AM on August 24, 2007

    Paul, thanks for your latest posting, I can now say I have truly been put down and in my place.
    My comments are “sheer snobbish arrogance” to say that many of us are still using rubbish equipment and outdated software beggars belief, nowhere do you say the programmers should accept the responsibility and address the the problems we are all seem to be having in printing with CS3

  • Ramón G Castañeda — 12:40 PM on August 24, 2007

    It’s very disheartening that someone with the attitude and beliefs Paul has espoused here is teaching at any institution, especially one receiving tax payer support.
    On July 11, I already provided a link to the thread in which I recounted how I solved my printing issues without having to spend a penny, upgrade any hardware or software or print outside of Photoshop.

  • Dianna Allen — 10:44 AM on August 25, 2007

    Well So much for progress right. I too would go back to using CS2 for production but there is one other problem that the CS3 upgrade has caused that has not been mentioned here.
    After upgrading and finding I could not print edge to edge on my EPSON 4800 (ex: a 16×20 on 16″ roll paper)I went back to CS2 to print. Works like a charm for sizes like that on a single print. When I tried to print (in CS2 because of the centering/cropping issue) a “Picture Package” the prints in the picture package layout now have a black “image file name” slapped right through the middle of it. That definitely won’t work. Maybe Adobe can purchase the QImage software and give it to all its CS3 users to put another bandaid on the problem.

  • Dianna Allen — 6:04 PM on August 25, 2007

    Paul’s last thread response is just plain…..excuse me … stupid. I can’t believe he is a teacher.
    [Let's stay away from ad hominem attacks, please. I reserve the right to reject comments that continue in that vein. Instead, let's keep the conversation about printing. --Thanks, J.]

  • Randall O. — 9:52 PM on August 25, 2007

    I’ve used Photoshop since the first version. Adobe has always tried to represent this program as the professional printer’s and photographer’s tool. Every version since about version 3 or 4 had apparently finessed whatever printer you connected, to allow for predictable printing. Suddenly, in CS3, Adobe quietly took this away, and now there are innumerable professionals out here to scrambling – trying to get decent printed results from PS CS3. This is a futile endeavor. Adobe gave no warning of this change. It is unforgivable that we were sold a program that touts many new features, but makes no mention that it is absolutely unusable unless all of the printer manufacturers completely rewrite their drivers. This means that the program is incapable of doing the main work that it was billed as being able to do for those of us who depend upon it. I’ve used a very popular (among professional photographers) Canon i960 for several years, with predictable results. Now, CS3 prints every print about 30% too light without adjustment (and this puts color calibrators way out of the range in which they can control without losing gamut and/or tonality). Switching back to CS2 instantly solves the problem, using EXACTLY the same settings. To try to solve the problem, we even purchased brand new Canon printers and installed the latest updated drivers for them. Still, the SAME PROBLEM – 30% too light in CS3, but perfect from CS2. We try to “keep current” with the latest version of Photoshop, so that we can have the great new features, BUT THIS IS NOT THE PROGRAM WE WERE PROMISED. Adobe has let us down in a big way, with no notice or mention of these problems before taking our money. In fact, I used the Beta version of the program, and EVEN THE CS3 BETA PRINTED PERFECTLY – BUT NOT THE RELEASE VERSION!!
    I am pleading with you, Adobe. Please fix Photoshop, so that we professionals can use the program in the way in which you have always purported: Photoshop MUST be able to print predictably with the SAME printers we have been using, and you cannot take back a VITAL feature that you have addicted us to. We have purchased your software (multiple times) and also purchased complete set-ups of hardware (computers and printers) based on Photoshop’s capabilities, and you CANNOT just ask us to scrap it all – and without the slightest warning that we have to do so to use the program as we have been doing!
    So, Adobe: FIX PHOTOSHOP’s Printing Capabilities to their previous (working predictably) capabilities. And do it NOW.
    Randall O.
    Dallas

  • Fred Nirque — 7:44 AM on August 26, 2007

    And another one bites the dust.
    By now I’m really (as opposed to cynically) wondering what on Earth is going on with this. It’s been going on for months now, and there is still nothing of a fix, modification or explanation forthcoming.
    Time is well past to extract the digit, guys – there are people out here hurting financially (and maybe physically) because of this. It’s about time for some information beyond “we’re working on it” platitudes.

  • Dianna Allen — 10:30 AM on August 26, 2007

    Sorry Jack, but those comments from him were just so “NOT”. Don’t usually attack like that won’t do it again :>(
    [Understood; my comment was more a reminder directed to everyone generally. --J.]

  • J Morris — 10:42 AM on August 26, 2007

    Has Dave P. been terminated? Thought he was the “expert” brought in to “repair” the CS3 code. Why haven’t we heard from him or SOMEBODY from Adobe re: the printing problem. I had quit using CS3 and went back to older Adobe PS so I could at least print images I must have. Maybe I’ll try to return my CS3 to Adobe for credit – that’ll be lotsa wasted effort but no more than what I’ve spent trying to get a correct print. I came back here to see what the status of the CS3 fiasco is, and not surprised at a corporation keeping their dedicated customers hanging without even a word of what to expect. Even with my Adobe investment I’m ready to jump to another photo editing program that can be trusted – and some excellent ones are out there cause I’ve been looking. Sorry, but I’ve lost faith in Adobe as a company that stands behind their product, and I’m spreading that word as much as I can.
    [We continue to work closely with the various companies (printer vendors, OS vendors) involved in the overall printing experience. We will make printing work as you want it to work in CS3. The fact that we haven't yet been able to issue an update does not mean that nothing is happening. --J.]

  • John Joslin — 3:05 AM on August 27, 2007

    Never mind “the overall printing experience” — just put the CS2 print process back!

  • Norman O — 3:33 AM on August 27, 2007

    John:
    I have two home printers an Epson R800 and a 1290, and neither of them can I get to work satisfactorily with CS3 so I have to revert to CS2 to print, and have with some impatience been waiting for Adobe to come up with a fix.
    But having read one article it begs me to ask the question:-Is it true, as Paul Stachelek intimated in a previous thread that manufacturers and programmers like Adobe “have got bigger fish to fry” and that we the small fry (possibly the main income source for Adobe) with older printers etc are to be left high and dry and out of the equation without the possibility of any fix or update forthcoming for us? because if that is the case please inform us now and then at least we can decide whether or not to move on to pastures new and maybe consider a different editing and or print program.

  • Fred Nirque — 7:52 AM on August 27, 2007

    Oh heck. It all came home this afternoon when I had 84 separate A4 files to print on the R2400.
    Try that in CS3 and you’re in for a day of going prematurely white/bald.
    All that was involved with CS2 was setting up the first file, then hitting ctrl+P for each subsequent file. Took a few minutes, then the printer spent the next few hours printing all those spooled high quality A4 photographs without losing so much as one print. Way to go.
    No way that would or could happen with CS3.

  • Joe Brown — 6:27 PM on August 27, 2007

    Wow, this thread reads like the transcript of a joint bipolar/anger management group therapy session! Maybe that’s because Adobe, with its usual low level of communication with customers, seems hell-bent on making Microsoft only the second-most-hated company in the world. :-)
    Norman O: Maybe what Jack wrote yesterday wasn’t posted until after your latest post, but it’s REALLY good news because it is the first solid commitment from Adobe on this fiasco. Jack wrote: “We will make printing work as you want it to work in CS3.”
    John Joslin: It ain’t going back! As Dave Polaschek said here on June 14, it cannot come back. So pray for a quick fix!
    Norman O & Fred Nirque: The things you and many others are having problems with are not problems for me, either with my Epson 1280 or my new Epson R2400. I have had minimal pain in getting perfect prints from either machine. I’m not saying that to taunt anyone, but to offer a ray of hope.
    The biggest problem I had was the annoyance of making sure I had all the right settings selected when I switched from printing color to printing B&W, the latter being best done by letting the R2400 manage color. The solution is simple enough, so let me go through my setup. Much of what I will write has been covered before, but maybe something I say will prove to be the solution for many. These notes are for the R2400, but settings for other Epson printers should be similar.
    FOR COLOR PRINTING
    In the R2400 Printing Preferences dialog:
    In the lower right corner, select the Advanced screen
    On the Main tab, in the Paper & Quality Options:
    Use appropriate settings for your paper size and type
    Orientation:
    Portrait (because most of my prints are oriented that way)
    Print Options:
    Only Print Preview is checked
    NOTE: Print Preview saves me a lot of paper, ink and time, so I normally leave it checked. But when printing more than a couple of images, I turn it off so I can stack the jobs up in the print queue and go for lunch.
    Color Management:
    Select the ICM radio button
    Check the Off (No Color Adjustment) box just below that
    Click the Save Setting button, give the settings a name (mine is No Color Mgmnt)
    FOR B&W PRINTING
    (All settings in left column are the same as for color printing)
    Color Management:
    Select the Advanced B&W Photo button (available only if quality is set to Best Photo or Photo RPM)
    Click the Settings button
    Change Tone from Darker to Normal, click Ok (personal choice – I prefer Normal)
    Click Save Setting, give it a name (mine is Advanced B&W)
    I also created another setting in which I select Plain Paper and turn High Speed on, select ICM, check the Off box, and save the setting as Plain Paper.
    When I print from Photoshop, I can now choose from No Color Mgmnt, Advanced B&W, or Plain Paper. There’s nothing magic in any of the settings I have listed. More important than the details I selected is the fact that I have created those canned settings.
    THE PHOTOSHOP CS3 SETTINGS
    Before pressing Ctrl-P to get to the Print dialog, I always use Image>Image Size (Ctrl-Alt-I) to preset the output image size. I then save a copy of the image with its size in the filename. Sizing in Photoshop lets me avoid scaling in the Print dialog. That workflow makes it easy to print more copies of the image later at exactly the same size.
    After pressing Ctrl-P, the Center Image box is checked, along with the Portrait/Landscape setting. CS3 remembers those settings globally, not for each printer installed. (Each of my printers can remember its own Portrait/Landscape setting, so hopefully there is a way for Photoshop to extract that data from the printer driver.) I also have checked the Match Print Colors and Show Bounding Box.
    COLOR PRINTS
    On the right side of the dialog, I select Color Management, the Document radio button, Photoshop Manages Colors, Printer Profile = EpsonR2400Gloss-Luster (for my printer/paper combo), Relative Colorimetric, Black Point Compensation.
    B&W PRINTS I just select Printer Manages Colors. No other changes are needed.)
    Before clicking Print, I click Page Setup and make sure the appropriate setting is selected (typically either No Color Mgmnt or Advanced B&W). I only have to verify the setting for the first print, as it always stays set until I change it.
    I also tried the tip earlier in this thread about doing View>Proof Setup, but it made absolutely no difference in my prints.
    The only other issue I haven’t talked about is getting the colors and density right. When I set up my R2400 a couple of weeks ago, the first print was just a bit off color and a bit too dark. Not terribly so, but not acceptable, either. That may be because I use Ilford’s Printasia paper, not Epson paper. Or who knows, maybe the paper has nothing to do with it.
    No problem, because I fixed it the same way I dialed in the colors of my 1280. I have a Colorvision Spyder2 Suite colorimeter, and it came with a program called PrintFix Plus, that can modify printer profiles to suit. Basically, you make a print and decide which color and density corrections it needs (fairly easy for me because of my years of darkroom experience). Then, with PrintFix Plus, you crank in your correction guesstimates and make another print. Repeat that cycle until the print closely matches the monitor. My fourth test print was dead on, and all my “real” prints look beautiful.
    Unfortunately, Colorvision does not sell PrintFix Plus. You have to buy PrintFix Pro for about $400. Or, for about $120, you can buy the Spyder2 Suite, which includes the colorimeter and PrintFix Plus. The program has a very clunky user interface, and the process takes some time, but it is a good poor man’s way to fine-tune a printer profile to near perfection.
    To be sure, the interface between CS3 and printers is broken and is causing problems. But since I set up custom settings in my printer dialog, and do sensible things in Photoshop, and have used PrintFix Plus to tweak my printer profile, my prints are consistently excellent.
    I apologize for prattling on so, but I think it’s about as good as anyone else’s prattle. :-)
    And who knows, maybe something I wrote will cause some of you to shout Eureka! from the hilltops. Or not.

  • Chris S — 6:19 PM on August 28, 2007

    I too am glad this conversation has gotten alot of air…there’s alot of good input above (thanks for the detailed info in your “prattling”), and i just hope Adobe does something soon with it–as for the printing, I dislike printing from CS3 so much, I just print from CS2. It’s a pain, but worth the ink & paper saved, trying to get CS3 to do what I want.

  • Ramón G Castañeda — 11:03 PM on August 28, 2007

    Joe Brown,
    Maybe I missed this somewhere in your long post; but are you on a Macintosh or on Windows?
    On my Mac, I have been getting fine prints out of my Epson 2200, also by having Photoshop determine the colors and selecting No Color Adjustment in the Epson driver. No tweaking of good custom profiles is necessary.
    I do have to set the profiles for Soft Proofing and for Document separately, in a two-step process, in the Print dialog box. Soft Proofing should not interfere with printing, but in this version of Photoshop, David Polaschek and his team have managed to make it interfere with the actual printing.
    If I try to ignore the Soft Proofing settings and go with the default, my prints are ruined.
    My getting good prints is a good thing of course, but both your experience and mine prove that the “infamous Adobe TechNote”, the authorship of which Dave Polaschek has acknowledged here if I remember correctly, is dead wrong. It contradicts reality, and it contradicts all other Adobe advice in their PDF and video tutorials.
    It borders on the criminal that Dave Polaschek and Adobe have not taken a position on this nonsense despite having had their attention drawn to the issue.
    What Adobe has now amounts to nothing less than a frontal contradiction of its own advice, of the advice of all pros in the field, and of reality itself, yet they refuse to acknowledge it and they seem oblivious to the confusion.
    In the past, serious printing bugs have been fixed in a matter of a day or two (e.g.: Photoshop 9.0.2 for the Macintosh). This mess continues months after it was first reported.
    Perhaps the higher ups in the Photoshop team should devote more time and effort to the fixing of the printing fiasco and a little less time maintaining what in the end turns out to be a largely irrelevant blog and eating ham sandwiches in Ireland
    [Thoughtful and constructive, Ramón. Thanks. Thanks for making and attempt to share the joys of photography and travel so rewarding. --J.]
    —at least until they straighten this mess out.
    Nothing personal against anybody, but the buck has to stop somewhere meaningful.

  • Joe Brown — 4:13 PM on August 29, 2007

    Ramón, I should have mentioned that I use Windows XP SP2. But it is clear from other posts here that both the PC and the mac platforms are exhibiting bizarre problems.
    That is why I wrote in such detail earlier. There are many details involved in configuring Photoshop with a printer. Miss (or misinterpret) just one step and the printer spits out garbage. I am fortunate that everything works very well for me. If people with an Epson R2400 printer painstakingly follow my setup and still experience weirdness, then obviously the problem lies outside the parameters I enumerated, and the hapless Adobe troubleshooters who are burdened with fixing this train wreck can focus their efforts elsewhere. I am just trying to help nail down as many variables as possible. Then hopefully the Adobe twidgets, who have a much bigger picture of this nemesis than do any of us individuals, will be able to zone in on the troll lurking under the bridge.
    No tweaking of good custom profiles is necessary.
    I can’t argue with that logic, Ramón. By definition, custom profiles are already tweaked. I started with the very latest box-stock R2400 drivers for Win XP (currently at version 5.5dA, available from http://tinyurl.com/3x69vt) and Premium Profiles (available from http://tinyurl.com/yrwumc) and tweaked the profile I need. Thus, I now have a custom profile. As such, of course, it needs no tweaking, as that would constitute circular logic. [:-)
    I don’t recall reading that anyone is using the 64-bit version of XP or Vista, but if so, they may want to visit the first link in the paragraph above. On 27 August, Epson released a new driver for those OS versions.
    Regarding the tech note you mentioned in your short post, any advice to let the printer manage colors is patently absurd, and its author should be flogged with an old SCSI cable! One valid condition would be when printing monochrome on a printer using the Epson Ultrachrome K3 inkset.
    [Thoughtful and constructive, Ramón. Thanks. --J.]
    Hmm, Jack. Do I detect the sound of a tongue in cheek? [:-)

  • Ramón G Castañeda — 8:45 PM on August 29, 2007

    Joe,
    Regarding the tech note you mentioned in your short post, any advice to let the printer manage colors is patently absurd…
    In the context of its being a TechNote on the Adobe site, I would call it downright disgraceful, not just absurd.

  • Greg Cartwright — 5:54 PM on August 30, 2007

    Finally a thread that seems to be on the right path about holding ADOBE accountable for their newly higher priced software. This said I have had no trouble with PS CS3 printing on a mac Epson Photo R2400:
    Let photoshop control, custom profiles, Printer OFF etc.
    My problem lies with InDesign and Illustrator CS3 printing. The prints are over saturated and totally unusable, when it decides to print!
    ADOBE it is time to face up and get an update out ASAP

  • Paul Stachelek — 10:12 PM on August 30, 2007

    My experiences with using XPSP2 and an Epson 4800 in a networked environment indicate that the print does not center mechanically when the Center box is checked. Rather, it centers somewhat optically (slightly more space on the bottom than at the top). This is demonstrated in the preview window of the Print dialog box (if you look close enough). If I move the image around in the preview window and print…it is close to where I positioned it on the paper (I measured to the 1/10 of an inch). I have not yet tried to center the print mechanically by unchecking the Center box and adjusting the Top and Left positions.
    When I printed with CS2 and XPSP2,with the Epson 4000 and the 4800 it was necessary to check both the Center box in the “Print with Preview” and check the Center box in the Properties “Paper” tab in order for the print to be in the mechanical center of the paper. When I tried this in CS3, the preview showed the image in the mechanical center of the paper yet it printed in the top right portion of the paper…way off. I did not experience truncating or any density or color balance shifts. We are running the most recent driver and firmware.
    I haven’t worked yet on the Mac in a networked environment, but will shortly.
    I am still having success with image positioning with Vista (although I am frustrated with this upgrade for other reasons), and my Epson 3800. The image is in the mechanical center of the paper (when the Center box in the Print dialog box is checked) and I can move the image around on the paper with anticipated results.

  • Joe Brown — 9:15 AM on August 31, 2007

    Chris S: It may be helpful if you could add to the prattle with your specifics, such as OS, printer type and driver version, color management measures you have taken, the source of your printer profiles, whether you have problems with centering, truncation, bad color, (or all three), which versions of Photoshop are installed, etc.
    To all: Back on 18 July, Patrice Boone reported that her centering and truncation problems started after going back to CS3. This got me wondering whether that problem is somehow related to having both CS2 and CS3 installed, as I suspect most of you still do. I know, having multiple versions of CSx on a computer should not be a problem, but we’re all grasping at straws here, so not one cow remains sacred.
    For me, centering works perfectly, and I have never seen a truncation problem. Could that be because I use CS3 exclusively and no longer even have CS2 on my computer?

  • Ramón G Castañeda — 3:55 PM on September 01, 2007

    Joe,
    Centering works fine on my Epson 2200, and I have Photoshop 7.0.1, 8, 9.0.2 and 10 installed on my Mac, OS X 10.4.10.
    I can even run two different versions of Photoshop simultaneously, not that I normally would want to do that; all I have to do is launch the older version first. Scratch disks are on different volumes.

  • P. Boone — 1:11 PM on September 02, 2007

    FWIW, That’s CS 3 to CS and back again.
    I’m glad to hear that a promise to fix CS3 printing is in the works.
    But I’m disappointed to hear that the trial of CS3 worked and the actual product doesn’t.
    I went for the Extended version because I may not be in a position to upgrade again since I’m no longer able to work. That it, while I really, really wanted CS2 I could not justify it, and when I bought CS3 Extended there’s this, and now I know that when CS4 comes out, using the 30 day trial won’t necessarily mean that it will work right, so I do truly hope Adobe gets it right before then.
    Patrice

  • Sue — 10:58 AM on September 06, 2007

    I was just about to buy CS3 after reading all this you have just lost a customer.

  • Randall — 4:36 AM on September 07, 2007

    I just wanted to supplement a previous post about having to go back to CS2. I did not post that I was using an Intel Mac. I have just printed over 200 prints using CS2, when I would have so much preferred to be working with the promised speed of CS3. It is much faster, and I had started to become addicted to the new features. But no, I had to resort to CS2 for every image in this very large job – adding adjustment layers, doing retouching, and color balancing with the slow CS2. It is forced to work through the Rosetta translator on the Intel Macs, but its printing is exactly the same predictable quality that I had on my previous (non-Intel) Mac. Please, Adobe, give us a time-frame that we might begin to look for a fix on this printing problem. My work is 30% slower with the Rosetta translation, but my wasted paper and time were even worse if I used CS3. This is not a compromise I should have to make. And, again, there was no prior warning that CS3 would require an infinitely large “learning curve” to simply get usable prints with my same (and other, newer) printers. Call me impatient, but I expect my new CS3 program to work from the first moment, and that is months in the past now. Please fix it, and fix it now.
    Randall

  • marc — 5:21 PM on September 13, 2007

    My brother-in-law is a Mac only personality. I helped him set up some epson printers on his system and couldn’t believe the amount of time he wasted checking his settings three or four times for every print. “In the windows world”, I told him “you could rely on your settings staying the same.” I find it unbelievable that we are all in that ‘three times a charm world now.’ I would think Adobe would be humiliated knowing that all their loyal customers aren’t overjoyed with the newest line. The other day I was moving my cs2 ad cs3 to another machine after a rebuild and the lady in charge of giving me the code actually said “Why are you installing CS2 and CS3 on the same machine?” She’ll never get it because she doesn’t use the software. I think the same can be said of the programmers of CS3.

  • marc — 9:36 AM on September 15, 2007

    Mr. Paul Stachecek, Perhaps being a teacher at a commutity college gives you the right to teach everyone you come in contact with. Remember you are still teaching film which gives you no right to speak here. As a professioal photographer all of the profits are in printing. You should stick to something you know.

  • marc — 11:01 AM on September 15, 2007

    Please excuse my outburst. All other issues aside, the cornerstone seems to be that photoshop no longer remembers previous settings(a workflow must have!). We’ve been told that we can’t go back. I’ve heard this before with Nikon. A completely separate issue is that last years model of camera (DX1 ~$5000) can not be used with Vista. I was told by Nikon who say they have no intention of making these obsolite cameras compatible because it is a hardware issue. I have since replaced vista with xp and viola! The camera works fine. So where’s the hardware problem? And why can’t Adobe go back? If they won’t listen then maybe we should all stop using vista, DX2, CS3 and any other product that forces us in a direction we don’t want to go. It should be the consumer that drives the manafacturers forward.

  • Joe Brown — 6:57 PM on September 17, 2007

    When I finish working on an image, many times I save it, then immediately print it. When I then close the file, why does CS3 ask whether I want to save it again? While you guys are overhauling the monster printing problems, could you please take care of this little annoyance?
    [I hear what you're saying, but this behavior is by design, as printer settings are settings in the file (much like Save for Web settings). --J.]

  • Randall — 7:06 PM on September 17, 2007

    I just want to urge all photo professionals to AVOID PURCHASING CS3 until Adobe provides a complete fix, or at least give us a date (must be very, very soon) when the printing problem will be fixed. I can’t speak for PC users, but I am unable to use any of my Macs (Intel or G4) for printing with CS3. – If you are contemplating buying Photoshop CS3, I urge you NOT to do so until this problem is fixed. If you do not print your work, then you may not be affected. If you value being able to print with any predictability, then you do NOT want to even think about using CS3. EVERY DAY I have to deal with the slow (on Intel Macs) CS2 so that I can print my work. I strongly begrudge Adobe for not coming forward with a fix for this. I purchased an Intel Mac because of the promised speed, and because the CS3 upgrade was promised for it. This is NOT an upgrade, and it was not what Adobe promised us. Beware CS3. Adobe, are you sleeping, or just ignoring us, the long-time, previously faithful users of Photoshop? I’m now seriously looking for alternatives to Photoshop.
    - Randall

  • Joe Brown — 6:42 AM on September 18, 2007

    [I hear what you're saying, but this behavior is by design, as printer settings are settings in the file (much like Save for Web settings). --J.]
    Let me ask a question to verify that I have this right.
    Are you saying that someone purposely designed the product such that printing an image (file) triggers the notion that the unaltered file needs saving again?
    [It isn't unaltered: you've applied print settings, and presumably you want those remembered the next time you print the file. Therefore Photoshop asks whether you want to save them. If you don't want to save them, don't save them. --J.]
    If so, I respectfully request that you ask that all 2-digit-IQ personnel be replaced with 3-digit-IQ personnel.
    [Wow... That's respectful? --J.]

  • Joe Brown — 7:44 AM on September 18, 2007

    [Wow... That's respectful? --J.]
    Considering the answers we’re getting, that’s about all the respect I can muster!
    C’mon, cut the crap. You have attempted to make an art form of ignoring and/or evading direct questions, but that won’t fly with me. Admit that it’s a boneheaded design, and commit to changing the design.
    [As far as I know, it's been that way for 17 years on the Mac side. You're the first I've heard complain about it. Your big complaint, as far as I can tell, is that when prompted to save your print settings, you have to choose yes or no. You would, I believe, prefer that the next time you opened the file (on your machine or another), Photoshop got amnesia about the print settings you used, yet you're unwilling to hit "No" when saving in order to achieve that result.
    Having said all this, there's a good case to be made for enabling one to save printing presets. That wasn't in the cards this time. As to whether or not to ask users whether their printing settings should be saved & made portable in a file, maybe we should add a "Don't Show Again" option to that dialog. As I say, though, you're the only person I've heard having a problem hitting "No" when prompted to save changes. --J.]
    Otherwise, explain how the status quo is in any way logical. Specifically, why should the program be designed to think that printing a file requires re-saving it?
    [As discussed, re-saving isn't required. If it were, you wouldn't be given a choice. --J.]

  • stuart — 9:09 AM on September 18, 2007

    i feel some comfort knowing others are hating this print dialog setup.
    night. mare.
    ugh

  • Joe Brown — 12:40 PM on September 18, 2007

    I was not clear enough, so let me say it a different way. I’m not talking about saving the print settings; I’m talking about saving the file.
    Try this: edit an image file, save the file to the disk drive, print the file. When you close the file, PS3 suggests saving the file once more. That is redundant (and superfluous too). [:-)
    Something in the process of printing is telling PS3 that the file has changed and needs to be saved. That should not happen. See?
    [No, because the print settings go *in* the file. --J.]

  • James Hayward — 7:02 PM on September 23, 2007

    Has any headway been made on this issue? My brand new Epson 2400 is now sporting a fine layer of dust from lack of use. (Yes I do clean my house and have an air filter in my office ;)
    Has Adobe formally addressed this issue and set a date for a fix yet?
    I can’t believe how long this is taking. It has been more than 5 months now. This is ridiculous |riˈdikyələs| adjective deserving or inviting derision or mockery; absurd : when you realize how ridiculous these scenarios are, you will have to laugh. See note at absurd . DERIVATIVES ridiculousness noun ORIGIN mid 16th cent.: from Latin ridiculosus, from ridiculus ‘laughable’

  • AJ — 10:26 PM on September 23, 2007

    I just had the “pleasure” of trying to print something on CS3, and found that nothing could be centered properly. Luckily, I didn’t uninstall CS2. I went back to that and printed, and all was perfect. Needless to say, I uninstalled CS3 immediately.
    Then I found this forum, and was appalled by Adobe claiming that they “fixed” the printing function by setting us back 10+ years???
    I didn’t spend $1600.00 for this garbage. I want it fixed, and fixed right now.

  • Matt — 8:28 PM on September 26, 2007

    Just a note that I have been scraping along with printing on CS3 by letting printer control colors. Printer – Epson R1800 on Vista.
    Been using PhotoShop since the days of 1.0 and at this point 10.0 WILL be the last until I can see that better QA testing is being done.

  • Ryan — 5:25 PM on October 01, 2007

    Hey Matt, what settings are you using when you let the printer control colors? Epson Vivid, Epson Standard, Adobe RGB, ColorSync, Off? I have not been able to find one that works, although I haven’t tried all possible combinations yet.

  • Chris Joyce — 7:47 AM on October 02, 2007

    John (Nack), you are a well respected spokesperson for your flagship. I feel the more I read and digest the responses to your customers concerns (be it the vocal few), the silent majority are left to fend for themselves, literally. You have a tremendous amount of respect equity. I believe you are losing serious amounts of that equity due to the lack of a defined timeline to resolution. Real dollars are at stake.
    I, for one, am holding back on going forward with any upgrades on any Adobe/Macro product until, from what I see, is a fundamental, stop the presses, our customers can’t even get a tangible asset, problem.
    The number of responses on this blog are absolutely staggering (minus the OT) and they sincerely point to a need to get to resolution.
    I am not one to throw the baby out with the water. But 4 months of development time, with your resources, is an eternity.
    I don’t really care about the MAC user experience. I never have. All I have is my user experience, and I do care deeply about that. Right now, my experience with this version really, really, really pisses me off to another stratosphere, every time I have to close CS3 and open my psd in CS2 for the sole purpose of getting a tangible asset for my clients.
    I will always have respect for you for even allowing this dialogue. I just wish someone would do something with this dialogue and convert it to action that can be verifiable and usable. The fustration is real and right now it dominates any thought process I have about the Adobe Corporation and their abilty to reslove an issue it clearly, demonstrably, and intentionally created.
    [Thanks for the feedback, Chris. I get your frustration--honest. And we are working changes that will make things better. I just haven't shouted that from the rooftops yet. Printing is a complex area that touches myriad drivers & OS configurations from multiple companies. Making changes in this area is consequently not something Adobe can do quickly on its own, lest we inadvertantly make things worse. But we *are* making improvements, and you can expect to see them soon. --J.]

  • Phil Brown — 5:07 AM on October 03, 2007

    By the way, for Windows users who weren’t aware there is a work-around for the CS3 behaviour of not remembering printer settings during a sessions.
    Trust me, I needed this the last couple of days as I ran out just over a 100 prints for a national photojournalism awards night!
    It’s pretty easy. Just go into Start, Settings, Printers & Faxes (or just Start, Printers & Faxes if you have your start bar configured XP default) and go into your printing preferences and set it the way you want it for you print session. When you open the driver from PS CS3, those settings will now be set.
    When you change the batch you’re working on and need something different, repeat the process to “lock it in” as it were.
    If you’re just swapping from portrait to landscape but want the other settings to remain the same, you can just make that quick adjustment when the driver dialogue pops up within CS3 – no need to change the default behaviour.
    By the way, I did those 100 prints, using CS3 under XP SP2 on an Epson Pro 3800 on 17″x22″ with an image centered with a maximum length of 445mm (unconstrained width) with a black background and set to borderless to give me a centered image on a black page (as required by the folks doing the awards).
    Using a standard colour managed workflow, all images were colour correct to my calibrated Eizo monitor and all images were centered.
    Borderless was set to auto-expand.
    That may help some folks in the meantime to getting back a faster workflow.
    That trick is also useful for actions when you want to tie in print settings but the actions can’t record all of them – if it’s just for some batch processing, change the default driver settings as described above and don’t worry about print settings in your action (other than to actually print! :-)

  • Phil Brown — 3:18 AM on October 04, 2007

    Oh, and for the record, just repeated the same 100 prints on an Epson 11880 24″ roll with border (minimum) and it was colour perfect and centred.
    I still can not recreate the issues with colour and centering that people have mentioned with CS3 (I wish I could – then I might be able to offer some help :(

  • Dianna Allen — 8:29 AM on October 05, 2007

    Hey Jack, any ideas on whether the picture package option in CS2 will be corrected not to put the file name in the middle of the image if your create the picture package in CS2 versus CS3. Sometimes I just forget I need to do it in CS3 and after closing CS3 to print getting really frustrating to have to reclose CS2 create the picture package in CS3 and then print it in CS2. This only started happening after installing CS3.
    Thanks

  • Matt — 9:47 AM on October 05, 2007

    Ryan I used Epson Standard and got decent prints

  • James Hayward — 2:21 PM on October 08, 2007

    “But we *are* making improvements, and you can expect to see them soon. –J.”
    Hello John,
    Any idea on how *soon* ? Something solid would sure help those of us still having problems cope a bit better. I love Adobe products and just want to use mine.
    Have peace,
    James

  • Kevin Keefer — 5:30 AM on October 12, 2007

    I was just at a short seminar put on by Canon and George Lepp, (Print Master). I knew some of it would be sales oriented. Anyway, I was actually impressed with Canon’s new printers. I believe they will rival Epson and this may solve printing problems with CS3 by having profiles that actually work.

  • Marna — 3:12 PM on October 13, 2007

    So…. I’ve returned to this blog to see if anyone knew when Adobe would correct the printing nightmare in CS3. I attended the NAPP Photoshop World in September – Adobe was trying to sell CS3 like mad, but alas only salespeople .. no one there even knew there was an issue!
    Hello, Adobe!! for those of us who make our living PRINTING as well as using this great product when will this be fixed?? I print multiple sizes and various quantities – it is painful to work an image in CS3 then have to close and go back to CS2 to print. Hard to believe that such sophisticated minds that could create CS3 could be so oblivious to the needs of much of it’s users.
    WHEN WILL THE FIX FOR PRINTING FROM CS3 BE DONE??? PLEASE !!!!!!
    [Did you see this post? --J.]

  • Ryan — 8:45 PM on October 16, 2007

    Matt – I did some experimenting and found out that your Adobe Standard setting actually works great for images printed in the sRGB color space. But in Adobe RGB 1998, doesn’t work so well. Are you consistently using sRGB? I’ve been trying to do my editing in Adobe RGB thinking it is the better color space, but ironically sRGB seems to be the only way I’m getting decent prints (when the printer manages color). Photoshop managing the colors has been all but worthless thus far, so maybe I’ll change my workflow to sRGB and just have the printer driver do all the work.

  • David Chauvin — 3:34 PM on October 18, 2007

    I’m still waiting on a fix from SOMEONE. I’ve tried every suggestion I can find on the web to get centered prints from CS3 on my Epson 2400. It’s a royal pain to have to open CS every time I want to print something. Epson blames Adobe and Adobe passes the buck back to Epson. I’ve read the explanations but it all sound very hollow when CS can still print flawlessly.
    David

  • Glenn — 5:24 PM on October 20, 2007

    HI,
    I’ve recently upgraded from the original Photoshop CS version to the CS3 version. Printing from Photoshop CS to my Epson 4800 was a breeze. I had good colour matching. Now, I’ve setup the color management in PhotoShop CS3 and I can’t get any prints to come out worth a pinch. I know exactly what I’m doing, as I’m a certified PhotoShop Expert for PhotoShop CS. So, my question is what’s up. I know it’s not the printer because when I print from Aperture or from my older version of PhotoShop, I get wonderful prints. Tell me it’s not me that’s messing up, or provide some help. Thanks in advance.
    [Please see this story. --J.]

  • Matt — 8:54 PM on October 23, 2007

    Ryan – yes I have to use sRGB when I do the printing and the printer is in charge.
    Weather is turning colder and nights are getting longer. If Adobe does not step up to the plate soon I think it is time to make use of the longer winter nights to look for alernatives. Photoshop CS4 is a no-go in my book right now.

  • Rick — 1:25 PM on November 10, 2007

    Hello all — having tortured myself trying to print to an Epson 4800 from CS3 both from a Mac and XP, this thread has provided some relief… and disappointment. No fix yet (checked the update page). I won’t buy CS4. It should be given to me free IF the printer code (centering, color mgmt, et al) is fixed. This whole thing reminds me of Photoshop 5.5, some pretty lame changes happened in that version that caused an uproar as well. I would hate to leave Photoshop behind, but I need professional quality prints. FWIW.
    [We're almost there--really. Stay tuned. And sorry for the delay. --J.]

  • J,Morris — 12:11 PM on November 13, 2007

    With a new CEO at Adobe maybe we should collectively petition for a CS3 fix so we can print our images like we were able to do with earlier CS versions. Six months, or more, is almost enough time to bring out CS4 which I certainly won’t purchase, and I suspect many, many, others won’t either. What really angers me most is the lack of any direct word from Adobe to the CS3 purchasers that they’re sorry for the problem, that they understand our frustration, and that they share our concern as they seriously tackle the situation. It would be a refreshing change to be treated like customers who are appreciated.
    [We *are* sorry, both that these problems have existed and that they've taken time to fix. I said so when I posted a follow-up with an offer to use updated code last month. In any case, the printing fix will arrive this week. --J.]

  • Fred Nirque — 9:04 PM on November 13, 2007

    My, my, what a change in attitude.
    See, we’re all able to learn from our mistakes.
    It’s one thing to make a child take his cod-liver oil, quite another to suggest that the people who are ultimately paying Adobe’s employees wages – the customers – should shut up and take their medicine and get used to it (I’m referring to Dave’s sanctimonious and unbelievably arrogant analogy in the original post).
    I just hope this “fix” works better than the original “fix” to a problem that didn’t exist in the first place.
    And let’s not lose sight of the fact that is exactly what it was.

  • Chris Maxwell — 12:41 AM on December 29, 2007

    I was having an awful time printing with cs3 but all is well. It seems with the Windows version if one has the photoshop scratch drive set to the same drive where windows spools print jobs it causes printing chaos. Setting the scratch drive to a different drive fixes the printing problem at least in my case. I use Windows XP Pro with SP2 and an Epson R1800.

  • Sonny Hamauchi — 2:04 PM on March 06, 2008

    Dave-
    I’m not that experienced with all the “lingo” that is being thrown around even though I have been using Photoshop for quite a few years, but I’ll tell you this — all I want is to be able to print my photos which has been impossible on my Epson 2200 since I upgraded to CS3 Extended, Lightroom and Windows Vista on my new computer. I have plenty of RAM, plenty of hard drive etc, but no Photos. I have downloaded upgraded drivers for the 2200 and I have tried to let Photoshop manage my colors as suggested by Adobe, but no go and today I totally lost connection from the printer and had to download everything again. Also, since I installed Lightroom I now get Postscript error messages which I never got before. I am really angry that I have spent all this money (I’m only a working stiff)just to realize that I can’t print a blessed thing. I’m especially annoyed that you say it is the manufacturers responsibility when it clearly is yours. I don’t know about other people but I can’t afford to go MAC but I can afford to go to Corel. I don’t have hours upon hours to waste on trying to figure your gobblygook out.

  • Dave Polaschek — 8:32 AM on March 07, 2008

    Sonny,
    I’m sorry you’re having problems, but it sounds like you have more problems than anything caused by just Photoshop or Lightroom. Neither application should generate any PostScript when printing to an Epson 2200, so it sounds like there’s something else getting involved.
    Beyond that, our technical support group should be able to help you out. http://www.adobe.com/support/contact/ is the place to start.

  • Jan VanderPutten — 10:53 AM on March 13, 2008

    Went from CS2 to CS3 a few days ago. Trying to print on either Epson C88 or 1280 is not happening because all of a sudden I have no Print Settings (that is literally crossed out) and I cannot choose the type of paper (matte, glossy, etc) I’m using, so all the photos come out looking like garbage. I’m going back to CS2 – I have no ‘centering’ problems, though…

  • Nostradamus — 8:48 AM on March 14, 2008

    Gads, what nightmares you folks endure! Get a Mac! (For some of you, I would also add get a clue.)

  • Dave Polaschek — 11:32 AM on March 14, 2008

    Jan, http://kb.adobe.com/selfservice/viewContent.do?externalId=kb402022
    [Thanks, Dave. --J.]

  • Yves Rubin — 9:27 PM on March 16, 2008

    I haven’t been able to find any fix for the prints being too dark when using CS3 with the Epson driver (either Epson 3800 or 4000). Is there any news about a coming fix, it looks like it was promised long ago. CS3 10.0.1 does not fix this.

  • Alan — 8:00 AM on March 19, 2008

    Hello John & Dave,
    I want to add my 2 cents on the issues regarding network printing to HP LJ families printers from PS CS3 on Intel macs (the “garbage sheets” issue), maybe you can find them of some use..
    Looking at the postscript code generated from PS-CS3 looks like it simply doesn’t include in the header the line “%%BoundingBox:”..
    You can read all of my tests here:
    http://www.adobeforums.com/webx?50@@.3bc47348
    Thanks for the attention and Happy Easter to everyone!

  • Simon — 1:24 AM on March 28, 2008

    CS3 10.0.1 printing was fine to my HP L7680 (wired network)using XP SP2 and Vista until I installed SP1 on my Vista system. Now I’m having a nightmare. Printing in general works fine, even from CS3, however whenever I try to print borderless to 10×15 photo paper the print spooler hangs. The only way to get rid of the job is to kill the spooler and delete the spooled files by hand.
    Is this a reoccurance of the old borderless issues that were fixed in 10.0.1, or is it something new caused by Vista SP1?
    Help!! Tearing my hair out!!!

  • diana whiting — 7:14 AM on April 03, 2008

    I have just bought the R2400 and have a dual processor G5 running on tiger 4.11 and am using CS3. I can not get my photographs to appear centered or where ever they have been created in a document. It has been a frustrating experience with Epson { about 10 hours on the phone now and no answer] and given that this is an older problem I can’t believe they don’t have information on how to fix it. I find these blogs helpful, but every one drifts off without the solution. Anyone?

  • johnk — 3:57 PM on April 09, 2008

    I currently have 3 work stations connected to the Epson 11880. I have to say CS3 does print dark, however if you print a 9.18 target or such using photoshops dialog box, and profile it, it will compensate for the darkness. Then again the profile will only work when printing on PSCS3.
    Now only if it was that simple. After printing correctly for a while, Photoshop will decide to print light again and throw everything off again.
    Currently, I do not know how, it’s more like a miracle or magic, I have two work stations printing perfectly. No dark prints and working like a champ. However, I can’t get one of my machines to print the same. I tried all the steps I did with the other units, and even did a full uninstall and install of the OS, PS, Drivers, etc….
    For some reason if you have redundant drivers of the printers, lets say 4 or more, and you install using the 4th install, it seems to work.

  • Howard M Berger — 5:58 AM on April 12, 2008

    After all the criticim about the technical note on how to remove the green cast when printing on an Epson 2100 using CS3 the note is still present!!
    Does Adobe still support this fix or not?
    I hyave not seen any comment on this problem in the last months. Has the problem been fixed for other users. A Google search update also does not provide a recent solution. I still have it!!!!
    Please help

  • h van eekeren — 11:57 AM on May 03, 2008

    Printing with the CS2 you are restricted to 32.000 pixels. The CS3 can go larger but there is still a bug in the printer driver. As far as I know Adobe will fix this in the next version. Has anyone info?

  • Harry Frank — 10:03 AM on June 01, 2008

    I am using PS CS3 (latest updates) with an Epson R1800 printer, and I have the same centering problems as everyone else describes in this thread–even though I have tried the various work-arounds suggested. I would go back to CS2, but it can’t bring up my RAW images shot with my Nikon D300. Does anyone know if at this date Adobe has done anything to give us the more sensible print management we enjoyed with CS2?

  • John — 12:13 PM on June 24, 2008

    I have been having trouble with dark prints. My fix was simply luminance of my lcd monitor, try setting a luminance of around 90-120 for me it seems 90 is just about right with my syncmaster 940MW. Just try it, you never know!

  • Luvuyo — 1:09 AM on October 18, 2010

    Hi John. I’m using Adobe Photoshop CS3 to print to a Zebra p330i PVC Printer. Everytime I print the printer doesn’t respond i.e. it doesn’t print at all. Is there a specific file that I need to download cause it was printing on CS2.

  • Amanda — 2:03 PM on December 05, 2010

    I am using adobe photoshop 7 and until recently was able to print with my printer without any trouble. Just replaced my older printer with a photoshop premium c309a. Now the left side of the image is cut off and there is about an inch margin on the right. I have tried everything in photoshop that I can think of including borderless printing but still get the same result. Hp of course states that it is the settings in the program that i am using that is causing this. any ideas how to fix this? additionally I have read that there have been lots of issues between adobe and printers. Can someone recommend a printer that produces semi professional prints that doesn’t have these issues with adobe products. Please email me at partyponies@mtaonline.net

    Thanks,
    Amanda

  • Al — 7:53 AM on September 04, 2011

    I’m getting error code 88 (from the Canon Pro9500 series print monitor window) when attempting to print on an A3Plus art paper (Hahnemuehle William Turner), even though I have the paper size set correctly (in the Photoshop Print Dialog, Print Settings) to “Art A3+ (Margin 35)”. (I realize this thread goes back some time.)

    (Furthermore – though most of the following options probably have nothing to do with the problem, and are probably the correct or allowable settings anyway – I’m using Canon Color Matching; Media Type: “Fine Art Museum Etching”; Paper Source: Front Tray; Print Quality: High; and am printing in color, not grayscale. Color Options are all left set at zero.)

    I’m printing from Photoshop CS5 Extended, Version 12.0 x64, using an iMac with MacOSX10.6.8. The Canon Printer Driver is “Pro9500 Driver – CUPS Version 10.51.2.0”, recently installed (or re-installed) just the other day when I was trying to deal with this problem (I didn’t check the CUPS version before reinstalling the driver, so I don’t know if this could be relevant).

    (I also attempted to print by setting, in Paper Handling, “Scale to fit paper size”, with Destination Paper Size set also to the suggested Art A3+ (Margin 35), although I never had to do this in the past, and so I don’t suppose it matters. Still, this did not help.)

    I had the same problem attempting to print on an A4 art paper, as one is supposed to do, using front loading and the paper size set to Art A4 (Margin 35), with Media Type set to “Fine Art Premium Matte” (it was a matte art paper). No go; I got error 88. I was able to print on the same sheet by setting “Matte Photo Paper” (while still using Front Loading), but this is not the media type one should use for such a paper.

    In the past few years I have printed 8-bit files, in both AdobeRGB and sRGB, on A4 and A3Plus art papers, in both color and grayscale, always using the art margin settings, without any such difficulties. Typically I use Color Management by Printer, or “Canon Color Matching” (though I experimented with the use of dedicated paper profiles and Color Management by Photoshop). Lately I’m trying to print 16-bit files, generally Photoshop PSD or TIFF, with a document profiles of sRGB, AdobeRGB, or ProPhotoRGB. Of course I tried several times to print from an 8-bit file, and once using Color Management by Photoshop, but got error 88 just the same.

    Does anyone know how to resolve this problem?

    [1 - Update to Photoshop 12.0.4.
    2 - Delete printer & reinstall with drivers downloaded from Canon. 10.51.2.0 looks like the most recent version, but if you had a previous version installed, deleting the printer first will get rid of any old preferences that might be screwing things up.
    3 - If that doesn't work, contact Canon. The Error 88 is one of their errors, so there's not much more help we can offer. --J.]

  • Al — 8:29 AM on October 13, 2011

    Thanks, John. Sorry it’s more than a month since my post; I’ve been occupied a good bit with this problem. I will try your suggestions. I’ve been through a long communication with Canon which has led to the conclusion that something is wrong with my copy of CS5 which causes the Error 88 in the Canon driver. One indication of this is that I was able to print from Preview without getting error 88. A stronger indication is that I was able to print from Photoshop CS5, using my wife’s iMac, without getting the error 88! Hers is a year newer, and the 20” instead of the 27” screen, but it has the same OS (10.6.8) and the same edition of CS5. On the other hand, attempting to print from Adobe Acrobat (Pro 9.3.0), I still got error 88.

    I suspected that maybe there was a problem with keeping my old Photoshop CS on the computer as some sort of backup – I used to print with CS and CS2 using the Pixma, and got no such error. (And I’m the sort of person who just likes to keep things.) But the interfaces were all a little different, and so I decided it was best to stick with the latest. Anyway, I got rid of the old CS – though first I did a test, and it also gave me error 88! – but that didn’t help matters either. (Strange, if CS5 creates a problem, that CS should do the same.)

    I also tried what you suggested about reinstalling the driver (first getting rid of the BJPrinters folder and the BJExtDDI.cfm file, as I’ve found out elsewhere how to do), but that hasn’t helped me. Before doing any of this, I also got rid of my presets in the Print Dialog (20-25 of them), incase there was something buggy in there, but neither did this help.

    In all cases the different Canon drivers used – the 10.51.2.0 or the 10.26.00 – did not seem to affect things. Sorry if all this is a little inconclusive.

    My next step is to reinstall CS5, which I don’t feel up to myself (though for most people it’s probably a joke), and have a techy friend do it for me. But I am still mystified by all this, and wish it were still practical to make BW prints in the darkroom in trays the way I used to. (Then I didn’t depend on anyone else’s expertise just to work.)

    The only other thing I wish to say is how frustrated I’ve been (like many other people, it seems) with the Canon Support Center in the course of all this. Communicating by email, I got mostly inattentive answers from people who didn’t seem to have read my messages well, and who gave me mainly very unhelpful suggestions – it seemed they didn’t have the foggiest notion of the answer to the error 88 problem, but were unwilling to admit it. I persisted in my questioning – I’m sure I was a nuisance for them – and three times I was “promoted” to the next level of support. (It started to seem a bit like Dungeons and Dragons.) At last I was put in touch with a well-informed person who spoke to me at some length by phone, two or three times, while I carried out the tests he suggested (or while I reported back to him about the tests I’d done). It was only through his help that I arrived at my present, only moderately confused state. It’s true (apparently) that at the end it’s not a problem of the Canon driver, as I suspected (because the error was manifested there, not in Photoshop). But I’ve noticed the Support people are very quick to wash Canon’s hands of anything to do with a problem if they can. But these days, integration between programs is more crucial than ever, and Canon ought to know as well as anyone what the possible problems are, and be ready to share the information with Canon users.

    It’s not the first time I’ve had to practically get apoplectic in my emails to get any serious attention from Canon Consumer Support. And it’s a shame, because I like the Pixma very much. If I hear about another pigment inkjet printer, I’ll give it serious consideration.

Copyright © 2014 Adobe Systems Incorporated. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy and Cookies (Updated)