Paul Ozzello <paul.ozzello@...> wrote:
... I'm interested in QTR. If I understand correctly, I need to create a paper profile myself if I want to be able to preview in Photoshop ?
Many use ICCs made with QTR's Create ICC-RGB in order to use PS soft proofing. I don't bother. With B&W, I know the print tones I'm using, and my adjustment curve adjusts for the differences between gray gamma 2.2 that I work in and QTR's straight line printing characteristics. People have their own favorite ways of getting to a screen-print match, for me the relative densities are all I bother to coordinate.
Is a colormunki 'good enough' ?
Many use it. I like the DataColor Spyder. It has a small enough read area that I can get my 21-step test prints on on a letter-size paper horizontally -- allowing a number on one page. I'm not sure of the Color Monki has that small read area. Also, I like the Spyder's text output. I just pull it up in Excel and graph it to see how good the pre-linearized data is. It's also best to view a graph of the Lab A and B values. As photographers we're mostly visually oriented, and those graphs usually are easier for us to relate to than just the numbers by themselves.
I mostly print on matte paper and my preference so far is Epson Hot Press (Bright and Natural) - seems to have the best dMax using standard inks.
It is a very good choice.
Am I better off making my own profiles or finding them online (and if so where ?) Does anyone have a QTR profile for Hot Press Bright ?
With a K3 setup there are probably people on the QTR forum that have profiles that will work. This would be the way to start. After you are comfortable with QTR, you'll probably want to fine tune your hues. That could be part of your own particular style.
I've read so many raving reviews about Imageprint but it costs as much as a piezography conversion.... is it as good as everyone claims ?
I suspect it is very good, but whether it's overkill for B&W is something I can't answer. Others on this list probably use both and can give a good opinion. I like QTR and its very reasonable cost.
Just about to read your pdf :)
>Is it really that simple ? ...
If that comment is referring to QTR, it can be. Start simple. There are lots of nuances that get more complicated, and fine tuning high gamut LM and LC (and maybe Y for warm prints) in a K3 setup can get more difficult. Some people have a lot more trouble with it than others. It probably depends on your background and training.
Paul