Category Archives: Software

New Drivers (finally) Resolve Mac OS X 10.6 Epson 2200 Printing Problems

(IMPORTANT NOTE: I generally do not remove old articles from this web site since search engines and other links tend to point to them. This short article and link to Epson 2200 printer drivers was accurate when it was originally posted, but you should consult current information sources and perhaps contact Epson directly for update information. In all likelihood, based on my past experience, this printer and other older Epson printers will not be supported indefinitely by Epson. For my part, I would not get a 2200 at this point, no matter how cheap it was – and I have not owned a 2200 since perhaps 2010 or so.)

A while back I posted about serious problems with the Epson 2200 printer when used with Apple’s Mac OS X 10.6.x “Snow Leopard” operating system. I won’t recount the whole story here (that’s what links are for!) but the short version is that Epson had not updated their drivers when Apple released the OS update, and then Epson failed to communicate with their customers or update the drivers in a timely fashion – leaving photographers who used several of their printers including the 2200 “high and dry.”

The good news is that Epson did release updated drivers during the past week. The updated driver appears to resolve the very serious printing problems that rendered the 2200 essentially unusable for several months.

Update on the Epson 2200 and Snow Leopard OS 10.6 Problems

Earlier I wrote that installing Snow Leopard on my Macs instantly turned my Epson 2200 printer into a very large paperweight. It is completely unusable for quality printing now. Over the past few days I’ve been working to try to find out what is going on, whether there is a work-around, and what Epson recommends to resolve the issue.

I can now report that…

… the printer still doesn’t work and Epson is completely silent on the whole issue.

If you have a 2200 (or any of several other popular Epson printers of similar vintage) it is my recommendation that you should not upgrade to OS 10.6 Snow Leopard until this is sorted out – or you may well lose the use of your printer.

I’ve summarized some additional information about the situation in a comment that I have added to the original post.


G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer and visual opportunist. His book, “California’s Fall Color: A Photographer’s Guide to Autumn in the Sierra” (Heyday Books) is available directly from him.

G Dan Mitchell: Blog | Bluesky | Mastodon | Substack Notes | Flickr | Email


All media © Copyright G Dan Mitchell and others as indicated. Any use requires advance permission from G Dan Mitchell.

OS X 10. 6 “Snow Leopard” installed – and printer problems ensue.

I was actually on the beta test list for “Snow Leopard,” so I have been using it without problems for a while – but not on the computer I use for my photographic work but rather on a separate laptop. After the very trouble-free experience on the test machine I went ahead and installed in on my photography workstation yesterday.

Today I tried to print. Ouch!

The first problem I encountered was that the Epson 2200 sitting next to my computer no longer appeared in the the printer dialogs in Photoshop. Knowing that Snow Leopard supposedly will add new drivers as needed I tried to use the 10.6 preference panel to add drivers for the 2200. No luck – the system didn’t even see the connected printer.

I finally went to the Epson web site and followed their instructions which include:

  1. Install Rosetta from Apple install disk.
  2. Download the most recent pre-10.6 drivers for my printer and install.
  3. Download and run their updater for drivers under 10.6

Done. Now I can see the printer via its Firewire connection… but not, as far as I can tell, via its USB connection.

So, I fire up Photoshop and try to make a test print using a black and white image. Things seem to be going more or less OK as I work my way through the usual setup and print process: Photoshop manages colors and all. But the print emerges looking very green and way too dark. I attempt to download and reinstall the Epson profile for the Epson Premium Lustre paper I’m using at the moment. Installer downloads… but won’t run.

I do a restart and try the profile installer one more time – still no go. Since the photo was one that I had not previously printed I decide to remove one variable and instead print a color image that I had successfully printed right before installing the update to OS X. Again… very greenish and far too dark.

There is no joy here at the moment…

Update 8/31/09:

  • I will try to continue reporting on my CS4/Epson 2200/Snow Leopard printing issue as I continue to try to understand and resolve it. This may take a while, as I don’t have any urgent printing business to take care of.
  • As a – otherwise very successful – beta tester of Snow Leopard, I should not have allowed my enthusiasm for the new OS and otherwise good experience with it on the test machine to blind me to the standard practice of waiting a while to install on my production machine. Some of us never learn!
  • Other than this issue – serious to me, but probably a non-issue to most – the upgrade has otherwise been positive. One pleasant surprise was that the installation gave me back 125GB of space on my main drive!
  • I welcome any information about the printer issue that you may have. Please either leave a comment or send me an email.

G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer and visual opportunist. His book, “California’s Fall Color: A Photographer’s Guide to Autumn in the Sierra” (Heyday Books) is available directly from him.

G Dan Mitchell: Blog | Bluesky | Mastodon | Substack Notes | Flickr | Email


All media © Copyright G Dan Mitchell and others as indicated. Any use requires advance permission from G Dan Mitchell.

A Test: Correcting Perspective in Post-Processing

Earlier today I saw a post in which the author stated that correcting for perspective in post-processing would lead to serious problems:

There is quite a bit of loss in image definition if you do a significant amount of correction for converging verticals in an image editor. You can get far better results with a view camera or a tilt/shift lens. If you only photograph for the web, then maybe the image editor approach is ok, but for reasonably large prints?

While that point of view is widely held and often repeated, in my experience a blanket statement like this is not totally correct – it may come down to the definition of “significant.” I find that in many cases the degradation of the image is so small as to be insignificant or even invisible at 100% magnification, and it is most often completely invisible even in fairly good size prints. (This is not to suggest that those making severe corrections, in architectural photography for example, would not be better served by using a tilt/shift DSLR lens or a MF or LF system.)

Rather than just accepting statements like this, I like to test them. In the past I’ve tested and written about the option of correcting for lens distortions in post- processing: A Test: Correcting Lens Distortion in Post Processing. Here I want to extend this concept to using post-processing techniques for the correction of perspective distortion and for leveling the image.

The photograph I’ll use was shot handheld using a full-frame Canon 5D with the EF 35mm f/2 lens, one of my favorites for street photography. First a small version of the final photograph:


Borch’s Iron Works and Machine Shop – old metal shop building in the downtown area of San Jose, California. © Copyright G Dan Mitchell – all rights reserved.

Next is the same image with the same post-processing, except that the corrections to horizontal alignment and perspective have been left out:


Borch’s Iron Works and Machine Shop – old metal shop building in the downtown area of San Jose, California. Uncorrected version. © Copyright G Dan Mitchell – all rights reserved.

Yup, that’s what happens when you shoot street and shoot handheld. ;-)

In this example we can clearly see several problems that need fixing. First, the image is not level – it tilts down to the right. Second, the vertical lines begin to converge toward the top of the image. Third, since the camera’s sensor was not perfectly parallel to the building wall, the right side of the building recedes and gets smaller as the horizontal lines become closer together toward the right edge.

In my view, the uncorrected version of this photograph is not usable. On the other hand, I’m not likely to start doing street photography with a tripod and a tilt shift lens any time soon! Correction in post seems to be a reasonable option. (And, to cut to the chase, the corrected version seen above really does make a nice print.)

The next image includes two versions of roughly the same section of the photograph at 100% magnification. The crops come from the lower left area of the full image and include the conduit on the wall in the area in full sun. I could have used a section from all the way in the corner, but given the low contrast in that area the difference between the samples would be even harder to see – so I’ll stick with the section where the conduit provides a more visible contrast and frame of reference. Depending on your monitor, this resolution is equivalent to looking at a small section from a print that would be perhaps 50″ or 60″ wide. (Hint: that would be a very big print for a DSLR original – significantly larger than almost anyone ever produces! Made many 60″ x 40″ prints recently?)


100% magnification from lower left area of ‘Borch’s Iron Works and Machine Shop’ – two versions. © Copyright G Dan Mitchell – all rights reserved.

I believe that if you know what to look for and you  inspect this 100% crop very closely you can detect a small difference in the “sharpness” of the two photographs – but it is quite subtle even when viewed at 100%. In practical terms, however, this tiny effect that is just barely visible under close inspection at 100% in side-by-side comparisons on the screen is entirely insignificant in a print. Even with a very close inspection it would be quite invisible in a print of, say, 18″ x 24″ and probably even larger. Bottom line: Both would produce very sharp prints at very large sizes and essentially no one would comment that one is sharper than the other… though quite a few might notice that the corrected image looks a whole lot less distorted in the spatial sense.

Note: Article text edited/updated for clarity on 4/27/13.

This reinforces my belief that any degradation to the image quality that occurs when lens distortion, perspective, and/or horizontal level are corrected carefully during the post-processing stage can be very minimal and in the majority of situations will be invisible in prints.


G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer and visual opportunist. His book, “California’s Fall Color: A Photographer’s Guide to Autumn in the Sierra” is available from Heyday Books and Amazon.

Blog | About | Flickr | FacebookEmail

Links to Articles, Sales and Licensing, my Sierra Nevada Fall Color book, Contact Information.


All media © Copyright G Dan Mitchell and others as indicated. Any use requires advance permission from G Dan Mitchell.