Digital BW, The Print

I have noted that sometimes on my epson 2200 that after I have made all my
settings in lightroom....I still have to change them again in the Epson
Printer Properties dialog.  I also notice this with Photoshop CS3 which I
believe is the same engine.
 
Good Luck
 
Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Geoffrey
Meadowcroft
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 7:14 AM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Re: Lightroom



Eric (and others)

I am still struggling to get Lightroom to print properly.
I have just made a print from PS7, Imported the file in its final 
(print) form to lightroom, where it looks, on screen exactly as it did 
in PS7.
I have set my print settings the same as in PS7, i.e. same print 
profile, perceptual,(there is no choice of black point comp. on/off), 
same presets (semigloss paper, best photo, no color adjustment), but 
still it prints much darker.
I am wondering if somehow I am getting the printer/paper profile applied 
twice?

Can anyone suggest what else I try?

BTW Why are Adobe so utterly useless when it comes to customer support? 
Has anyone EVER got a reply to a support question?

Geoff

Eric Neilsen wrote:
>
> Geoff, Have you tried printing the same image from within LR and after
> processing in PS? Making sure to have all the setting the same? 
> Perceptual,
> or Relative, Black point, etc? I have had mixed results and I put it on me
> for missing a check box or something. I used the layout tool add a graphic
> with my business logo on a print and they came out looking fine. I also
> tried a contact sheet and it came out looking like sh%^&^. I did go back
> in and see that I had missed a check box and the next batch looked much
> closer. I use Qimage for much of my output and many images get lots of
> layers and adjustments so the printing out of LR is not a deal breaker to
> me. If I was doing more table top work that was all done in front of the
> camera maybe, but so much work is done behind the camera that going 
> back to
> LR seems somewhat pointless.
>
>
> 



 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]