Way OT - PCL5 or PCL6 drivers?

musicvid10 wrote on 11/22/2008, 7:13 AM
I was given an older, but good full-size network laser printer (4500n), and after giving it a new drum and thorough calibration it works like a dream.
I print to it using both wired and wireless network connections, and when I installed it on my Vista laptop, the PCL5 drivers automatically installed. I've always used PCL6 on my wired XP desktop assuming that newer is better, so now I'm curious.
The advice on the internet is unusually vague ("use the best driver for the job") or overly technical, so I'm wondering if anyone here has a handle on this.
Most of my printing is directly from hi-res jpegs (camera stills), as well as color brochures, program covers, presentation pieces, etc. from PDF files.

Comments

blink3times wrote on 11/22/2008, 7:17 AM
Sorry, not an answer for you... but more a question to you:

I for the most part have avoided laser printers because it is said that inkjet printers do a better job with photos. Any truth to this?
musicvid10 wrote on 11/22/2008, 8:33 AM
Not in my experience. Even the highest resolution inkjet printers have some ink bleed, even on good quality "photo" paper. And everyone has received an inkjet-printed photo greeting card and watched the image disappear when a few drops of water were spilled on it . . .

The one thing to be aware of is the paper surface when printing high-quality photos on a laserjet. You need good "color copy" grade paper or stock to match the surface texture of the toner. It's a little disconcerting to see a matte toner image with glossy whites showing through, so it's really not possible to print a glossy laserjet image; which is why I think many consumers prefer glossy inkjet pictures, because they emulate traditional lab-produced prints and may look sharper, at least until they get wet . . .
johnmeyer wrote on 11/22/2008, 8:44 AM
As some of you know, I ran a desktop publishing company back in the 1980s.

PCL (printer command language) is the underlying firmware for HP laser printers. Newer versions support new features, but you can drive a newer printer with the older PCL. There were things in the original PCL, like printing white text on a black background, which were not supported. I am certain, without actually knowing, that somewhere along the line this got updated.

Like most software and firmware, 99% of all the problems and features were incorporated long ago, and most of the new stuff is not only trivial, but in many cases stuff you don't need or want (like technology to make sure you have ownership rights to the font you are using ...).

So I wouldn't lose any sleep about using an older driver.

As to photos on a laser printer, that used to be true because early laser printers, most of which used the Canon marking engines, used a single-size dot. Without the ability to modulate either the size of the dot (such as done in traditional half-toning) or to move it from the 300x300 grid used in the early printers, photos looked even worse than what you saw in newspapers. I used to be involved with LaserMaster, a company which pioneered a process for modifying dot size ("turbo-res") and it made a huge difference with photos (and made text look much better. That technology or its equivalent has long been in all laser printers. However, if you want photo-quality prints, the ink-jet is still the way to go.


musicvid10 wrote on 11/22/2008, 9:22 AM
The other thing to consider if you are keeping a photo printer at home is the frequency of use. If, like many people, you fire it up 3 - 4 times a year, you already know what happens to inkjet cartridges when they sit for a few months. They clog, you try to clean them, and end up replacing them for a lot of extra $$.

OTOH, laserjet toner cartridges last until they're empty, even if that's years from now. And if you're doing higher-volume work, I still think the average per-print cost of toner vs. ink is lower, please correct me if I'm wrong.

Also, inkjets are water-based phenylenediamine dyes as are color photo developers, and like conventional lab-produced prints they will fade over time and in sunlight, regardless of marketing claims made (I was working in the industry when Kodak introduced their "100 Year Prints" that faded even faster than their predecessors). Although not totally immune from fading, dry-toner technology appears to be more resistant to these effects.

Just a personal note, I can't keep an inkjet printer in my home because of an allergic hypersensitivity to the inks, an occupational condition resulting from too many years of exposure to color photo developers.

That all being said, I invite further comments on my OQ about PCL5 and PCL6 printer drivers. Thanks for bringing this subtopic up though, Blink.
blink3times wrote on 11/22/2008, 9:33 AM
"That all being said, I invite further comments on my OQ about PCL5 and PCL6 printer drivers. Thanks for bringing this subtopic up though, Blink."

Sorry Music... I'm just going to be a bit selfish for one more question then I promise to give you your thread back!

Do they make laser printers that do disks?
musicvid10 wrote on 11/22/2008, 9:40 AM
Dunno about that one, Blink. I just know that laserjet-printed disc labels aren't going to run if they get a little beer on them . . .
johnmeyer wrote on 11/22/2008, 10:16 AM
Do they make laser printers that do disks? Only if you want melted discs. A laser printer uses high voltage and a laser beam to plant an electric charge on the paper. Plastic dust is sprayed across the page and it gets attracted to the charge. It is then melted into place by a very high temperature "fuser." Guess what else is plastic besides the toner? CD, DVD, and BD discs. So, I don't think this technology will work (except by printing on a paper label and then gluing that to the disc, which IMHO is not a good idea).

And, I thought I DID answer the question on the PCL driver. The short version: it won't matter which driver you use.
blink3times wrote on 11/22/2008, 10:33 AM
Maybe if I use a garden hose to keep the disk cool during the process? :)
Larry Clifford wrote on 11/22/2008, 12:34 PM
I have a used HP 4100 B/W at home and I think it is great.

I print primarily text and some B/W pictures. The use is definitely low volume.

I use official HP cartridges, model C8061X. No refils, no OEM.

I started a new toner cartridge in 3/2004. About 10,000 pages later I replaced it.

I also do not replace a cartridge just because the printer tells me. I wait until the print quality degrades.

I will very likely buy an HP color laser printer when this one quits. Just be sure there are separate toner cartridges for each color. It is very expensive to have to replace a color cartgridge just because the black has been used up.

I also bought an HP Officejet Pro K7680 All-in-One printer in 8/2007. I like it very much. It came with an HP PC from Office Depot.

It is used very seldom. There is probably less than 50 pages in that time. The point I want to make her is the ink jets have never clogged.

I worked on PCs professionally in the late 1990's and early 2000's. Back then the ink jet printers would definitely clog. I hated them and would not use them. I guess things have improved.

Larry
johnmeyer wrote on 11/22/2008, 12:49 PM
The heads in my horrible, awful, Epson R260 clog all the time. Even if they don't, if you don't use it for 24 hours, it goes through a cleaning cycle that consumes HUGE amounts of ink.

By contrast, I have two HP Photosmart P1000 printers and an HP Deskjet 855C. The 855 I bought over ten years ago. It is turned on 24/7, attached to a network print router, and sometimes doesn't print for a week. I have never once had a head clog and the cartridges last FOREVER.

So, the moral of the story is that properly designed inkjet printers can be reliable, and don't get clogged heads (unless you don't print for a month or more, at which point they definitely will dry up).

Oh, an the toner cartridge in an old Canon-based LX printer (HP sold these as the IIP) did go bad just sitting there. I brought this printer out of the close after eight years, and the cartridge is no longer good. So, they don't last forever, although they usually last a very long time.
MarkWWW wrote on 11/23/2008, 5:23 AM
I don't know about the 4500n specifically but at work we I have a 4650dn which is a later model but using substantially the same technology I think.

All the PCs that print to it are set up with both the PCL5 and PCL6 drivers available and the PCL6 as the default driver. I've never found any need to try the PCL5 driver - the PCL6 driver has never given us any trouble.

Mark
musicvid10 wrote on 11/25/2008, 9:48 PM
Thanks for replies to my original question.

Well, it turns out that there is a difference between the PCL5 and PCL6 drivers on my 4500n, and it is huge!

On graphics and even on font colors with a significant cyan content, it is underprinted significantly on the PCL5 drivers, sometimes rendering mostly the magenta content in a blue scene or #0000FF font color. IOW, pure crap.

The PCL6 drivers print everything from pure cyan to magenta/blue as I would expect, so that's what my Vista laptop is going to use from now on.

My printer is internally calibrated to within a gnat's a** because I am a color perfectionist, having spent nearly two decades in industrial photofinishing.

This incorrect rendition of cyan with the PCL5 is the same whether the source is .jpg, .pdf, or just colored text; IOW, it's the drivers, not the source. I have never had results like that with the PCL6 drivers that have been on my desktop machine since day one.