2005 Photo Print Quality Research US, France, and China

Results & Analysis

August 2005
spencerLAB DIGITAL COLOR LABORATORY
Catherine Fiasconaro, Director
Spencer & Associates Publishing, Ltd.
David R Spencer, President Melville, New York 1.631.367.6655
Table of Contents Executive Summary
Project Objectives Scope Print System Comparison Pairs Summary Results Key Results
Research Methodology Worldwide Results
Executive Summary Project Objectives
Independent quality evaluation of photos printed on various consumer photo printers available in the retail market
Obtain feedback from photo consumers and professional photographers Competitive print systems include inkjet printers, dye-sublimation printers, and lab-processed (silver halide) photos
Discuss quality assessment of photos printed on inkjet printers relative to lab-processed photo prints Demonstrate that printer specifications, such as high DPI or a greater number of ink colors, do not necessarily correlate into better photo quality
Best way to judge photo quality is to actually compare photos
Executive Summary Scope Photographic Print Quality Preference Research
Quantitative Pair-wise Preference Qualitative Quality Attribute Discussion Include Professionals as well as Mainstream Consumer Photographers
Overall Print Quality Preference
Quantitative, Pair-Wise Qualitative Follow-up Five Test Images Target Print systems
HP Photosmart 8750 Professional Photo Printer HP Photosmart 8050 Printer HP Photosmart 385 GoGo Photo Printer
Controlled Viewing Environment
Executive Summary Scope (cont.) International Fielding
US (New York) France (Paris) China (Shanghai)

Analysis

Quantitative Preference By Country By Consumer/Professional
Executive Summary Print System Comparison Pairs
Target Printers HP Photosmart 8750
Comparison Printers/Print Systems France
Canon i9950 Epson Stylus Photo R2400 Epson Stylus Photo R1800 Kodak EasyShare Gallery (Ofoto) Canon Pixma iP5000 Canon Pixma iP6000D Lexmark P915 Epson Stylus Photo R320 HP Photosmart 8050 (Kodak Ultima Paper) Kodak EasyShare Gallery (Ofoto) Canon Selphy DS700 Lexmark P315 Epson Picture Mate Deluxe Kodak EasyShare Plus Kodak EasyShare Gallery (Ofoto)

HP Photosmart 8050

HP Photosmart 385
Canon i9900 Epson Stylus Photo R2400 Epson Stylus Photo R1800 Kodak EasyShare Gallery (Ofoto) Canon Pixma iP5000 Canon Pixma iP6000D Dell AIO 962 Epson Stylus Photo R320 HP Photosmart 8050 (Kodak Ultima Paper) Kodak EasyShare Gallery (Ofoto) Canon Selphy DS700 Dell Photo Printer 540 Epson Picture Mate Deluxe Kodak EasyShare Plus Kodak EasyShare Gallery (Ofoto)
Canon i9950 Epson Stylus Photo R2400 Epson Stylus Photo R1800 Lepal (Kodak Royal Paper) Canon Pixma iP5000 Canon Pixma iP4000 Lexmark P915 Epson Stylus Photo R310 HP Photosmart 8050 (Kodak Ultima Paper) Lepal (Kodak Royal Paper) Canon Selphy DS700 Lexmark P315 Epson Picture Mate 500 Kodak EasyShare Plus Lepal (Kodak Royal Paper)
Unless otherwise noted, manufacturers recommended 4x6 (10x15cm) media was used Printer settings of default for the selected media were used and black & white image used 'grayscale' option, where possible All photos were printed through Windows Photo Printing Wizard; however, since the Lexmark P315 does not support printing via PC, prints were obtained using a Compact Flash card
Executive Summary Summary Results
Print System Target Competitive
Canon i9900 Canon i9950 Epson R2400 Epson R1800 Kodak (Ofoto/AgX) Canon iP5000 Canon iP6000
55% X 65% 81% 58% 70% 56% X 58% X 51% X 55% 70% 79% 88% X 80% X 89% 66%

France

X 52% 67% 68% 65% 66% 56% X X 75% 51% X 67% 65% 75% X 76% 69% X 84% 65%
X 60% 73% 70% 85% 75% X 65% X 84% X 68% 65% 86% 86% X 82% X 56% 90% 84%

Worldwide

55% 56% 68% 73% 70% 70% 56% 65% 58% 79% 51% 68% 62% 74% 80% 88% 79% 75% 56% 88% 72%

Consumer Professional

54% X 68% 80% 55% 73% 53% X 55% X 53% X 55% 71% 76% 87% X 79% X 90% 67% HP Win 57% X 58% 84% 63% 65% 61% X 63% X 47% X 53% 67% 84% 91% X 82% X 87% 65%
X 50% 69% 68% 68% 69% 51% X X 76% 50% X 65% 66% 75% X 78% 70% X 85% 65% Comparable X 55% 64% 70% 60% 60% 65% X X 73% 53% X 71% 65% 76% X 74% 68% X 82% 63%
X 60% 70% 68% 86% 73% X 63% X 81% X 70% 60% 85% 85% X 81% X 52% 87% 82% HP Loss X 60% 78% 74% 83% 79% X 68% X 89% X 66% 74% 88% 88% X 83% X 63% 95% 88%
54% 55% 69% 72% 70% 72% 52% 63% 55% 79% 51% 70% 60% 74% 79% 87% 79% 74% 52% 87% 71% 57% 58% 67% 76% 69% 68% 63% 68% 63% 81% 50% 66% 66% 73% 82% 91% 79% 75% 63% 88% 72%

HP Photosmart 8750

Canon iP4000 Dell 962 Lexmark P915 Epson R320 Epson R310 Kodak Ultima Paper Kodak (Ofoto/AgX) Canon DS700
Dell 540 Lexmark P315 Epson Picture Mate Deluxe Epson Picture Mate 500 Kodak Easy Share Plus Kodak (Ofoto/AgX)
Percentages represent number of times target print system chosen over competitor Red/Blue tinted percentages are Statistically Significant (2-tailed 95% Confidence: <2.5% or >97.5%)
Executive Summary Key Results
Congratulations! Its really evolving

Overall

The quality of photos printed on HP printers is as good as or better than conventionally-processed photos Majority of respondents expect inkjet printers to produce high quality photos

French Consumer

Inkjet photo quality has reached, and in many cases even exceeded, the quality of conventionallyprocessed AgX photos
Professional Photographer and Consumer preferences were generally similar
Printer-Specific Worldwide Results
Preferred over Canon i9950, Epson R1800 & R2400, and AgX prints Comparable to Canon i9900
Surprised? No, we know we can get inkjet pictures that are better than conventional
Preferred over Canon iP5000, iP6000& iP4000, Dell 962, Lexmark P915, Epson R310, and AgX Comparable to Epson R320 Photos printed on HP photo paper preferred more than those on Kodak Ultima photo paper

Preferred over all competitors: Canon DS700, Dell 540, Lexmark P315, Epson Picture Mate Deluxe & Picture Mate 500, Kodak Easy Share Plus, and AgX
You guys got some good printers

(re: HP) US Consumer

Table of Contents Executive Summary Research Methodology
Project Dimensions Photographic Test Images Controls and Blinds Fielding Venues Participant Demographics Statistical Analysis

Worldwide Results

Methodology Project Dimensions
Methodology Photographic Test Images Test Images

Five test images

Image Sourcing

spencerLAB and HP

Each image printed through each of the Target and Competitive print systems
All print systems used a single original digital file for each image Multiple copies printed at the same time with the same consumables, if possible All print systems assumed to be representative Prints allowed to dry at least 24 hours, then stored in archival sleeves, light shielded
4x6" prints pair-mounted in neutral matting with white opaque backing
Each pair had an HP product paired with a competitors product of similar class
Test consisted of five images printed on the Target printer and Competitive printers; Competitors were only tested against the Target printer, not each other.
Methodology Photographic Test Images (cont.) Boy Black-and-White
Young male skin tones with high dynamic range, highlight and shadow detail

Girl in Brocade

Female in brocade dress with piano; skin and hair tones, dress and piano detail and color
Baby boy in multicolor outfit on couch; consumer digital camera shot

Paint Can

Paint roller tray with paint can on bench; strong red with natural metallic and wood

Outdoor

Sky and grass with shrubs and building details
Methodology Controls and Blinds Controlled Viewing Environment
Six ViewStations Randomized Viewing
Pseudo-random ViewStation Sequence different for each participant per session Random photo-pair sequence randomized for each participant All prints were identified solely by an arbitrary code

Viewing Environment

Controlled lighting (4700K halogen), near-neutral surrounding Black-surfaced ViewStations, white placemats, white cotton gloves
Quantitative Pair-wise Preference
Each participant asked to judge preferred overall print quality of each pair
Qualitative Quality Attribute Discussion
Participants were asked why they preferred one over the other Some general discussion about printing attitudes
Methodology Fielding Venues

Test Venues

United States (New York) France (Paris) China (Shanghai)

198 Participants

66 participants in each venue
11 mini-group sessions 6 participants each
42 Mainstream Consumers and 24 Professional Photographers
7 Consumer mini-group sessions, 4 for Professionals
Methodology Participant Demographics Participants
64% Consumers (126) who regularly take photos
Currently own and use a camera (film and/or digital) Have at least 5 rolls of AgX film developed per year and/or get prints of at least 8 digital photos a month Have perfect vision (natural or with corrected lenses) and are not colorblind Do not work in
Design/manufacture of scanners, photographic equipment, or printers Advertising Public Relations, Market Research
36% Professional Photographers (72)
Earn money from their photos In addition, develop at least 8 rolls of AgX film per year and/or gets prints of at least 20 digital photos a month

General

56% Male / 44% Female Age
Graphs by Country and by Professional/Consumer follow
Methodology Participant Demographics: Age
Participant Demographics Professionals / Consumers: Age
Methodology Statistical Analysis Target-Competitive Printer Pairs
Preference for Target compared with preference for Competitive printer

Statistical Significance

Calculated at 2-tailed 95% Confidence level
Participant preference responses aggregated over all images
For every pair separately for each Country For every pair separately for Consumers and Professionals For every pair separately for all participants worldwide

Preference Ratios

Participant preference responses calculated over all images
For every pair separately for all participants worldwide
Table of Contents Executive Summary Research Methodology Worldwide Results
Results by Target Printer
HP Photosmart 8750 Professional Photo Printer HP Photosmart 8050 Printer
Media Comparison: HP Premium Plus Photo Paper vs. Kodak Ultima Paper
HP Photosmart 385 GoGo Photo Printer
HP Photosmart 8750 Overall Comparison

Ratio of Preference

HP Preferred

Equally Preferred

Competitor Preferred
Yellow bars are not statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. Test consisted of five images printed on the Target printer and Competitive printers; Competitors were only tested against the Target printer, not each other.

HP Win

Comparable

Competitor Win

Observations HP Photosmart 8750
Worldwide, prints from the HP Photosmart 8750 were preferred more often* than those from
conventional (silver-halide, or AgX) processing the Epson Stylus Photo R1800 the Epson Stylus Photo R2400 the Canon i9950 (France/China)
US results against the Canon i9900 showed similar preference
That is slamming, that is nice
(fact that it was inkjet) French Professional Complete Black & White, I think its great!
(HP) Blows away Competitor (AgX) in general

US Professional

* preferred more often => statistically significant at the 95% Confidence Level (two-tail)
HP Photosmart 8050 Overall Comparison
Observations HP Photosmart 8050 Worldwide, prints from the HP Photosmart 8050 were preferred more often than those from
conventional (silver-halide) processing the Canon iP5000 the Canon iP4000 (China) the Canon iP6000 (US/France) the Dell 962 (US) the Lexmark P915 (France/China) the Epson R310 (China)
Results for the Epson R320 (US/France) were comparable

The color is vivid.

We have [now] evaluated lots of photos; this is quite close to the benchmark
Chinese Professional French Consumer No reason to take photos to a lab anymore

Bravo for quality

Worldwide Results Media Comparison
Worldwide, prints from the HP Photosmart 8050 on HP Premium Plus Photo Paper were preferred more often than those on

the Kodak Ultima Paper

Incredible
(re:HP paper; fact that only paper was different)

French Professional

HP Photosmart 385 Overall Comparison
Observations HP Photosmart 385 Worldwide, prints from the HP Photosmart 385 were preferred more often than those from
conventional (silver-halide) processing
HP Photosmart 385 prints were preferred over conventional processing in every country
the Canon DS700 the Dell 540 (US) the Lexmark P315 (France/China)
French Professional Touches me most because of brilliance
the Epson Picture Mate Deluxe (US/France) the Epson Picture Mate 500 (China) by Professionals
Professionals preferred HP Photosmart 385, but Consumers' had similar preference
the Kodak Easy Share Plus
HP Photosmart 385 prints were preferred in every country

No contest

(with Competitor)

The Winner!

US Consumer
Thank You The spencerLAB Project Team

Project Leader

David R Spencer, president

Associate Project Leader

Catherine Fiasconaro, director of spencerLAB

Project Administrator

Jennifer Piano, manager

Project Analysis

Vikaas Gupta, color engineer Vishal Sahay, laboratory engineer

Support

Marc Spencer, associate Jesse Glacken, lab technician Vicki Deng and Cheng Hau Tong, interns Riza Oracion, assistant

info@spencer.com

Copyright 2005 Spencer & Associates Publishing, Ltd. Research conducted by the SpencerLab Digital Color Laboratory, under the sponsorship of Hewlett-Packard Company. Results and analyses in this report are based upon testing procedures developed and implemented by SpencerLab in our continuing commitment to accuracy and integrity, and are based upon our best knowledge at the time of publication. Although this research was sponsored, as an independent test laboratory with a broad base of industry clients, SpencerLab believes that this report maintains its reputation for the integrity of its test procedures and analyses.