Digital BW, The Print

I print with QTR & UT2 on an Epson 1280 (CIS). I have a spyder2 for 
monitor calibration but nothing for profile creation or linearization.

My monitor is an el-cheapo (ie. TN panel) LG Wide Screen. I find it 
lacking in shadow details and have trouble when running low brightness 
levels (getting colour casts on screen). Prints tend to be a fair bit 
darker than on screen...it's hard to make adjustments with predictable 
output results.

I'm thinking I'd be better off with a good quality monitor (ie. an IPS 
panel) for more consistent viewing angles and better shadow details, 
etc.

But, a densitometer/print profiler maker/screen calibrator like the 
ColorMunki sounds like it could really help me.

Which would be a better bang for the buck?

Thanks,

Mike.

But, a densitometer/print profiler maker/screen calibrator like the 
ColorMunki sounds like it could really help me.

Take a careful look at both the display calibration features and the printer profiling features of the CMunki before committing to it. And compare that feature set to what you'd get in Spyder3Studio... 


C. David Tobie
Product Technology Manager
ColorVision, Inc.
CDTobie@...
www.colorvision.com





 





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

On 24/07/2008 tornadokc247 wrote:
> Which would be a better bang for the buck?

I'd definitely go for a better screen that you can profile more accurately 
with your existing Spyder2. Then at least you will know the files are 
right, and any remaining issues are with the print colour management. At 
present you're editing blind, have too many variables.
-- 
Regards

Tony Sleep
http://tonysleep.co.uk

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, CDTobie@... 
wrote:
> Take a careful look at both the display calibration features and 
the printer profiling features of the CMunki before committing to it. 
And compare that feature set to what you'd get in Spyder3Studio... 
> 
> 


From the Xrite website:
"New RGB and CMYK printer profiling technology delivers a high 
quality printer profile. Simply scan one test chart of only 50 
patches and ColorMunki calculates an interim profile having learned 
how your printer behaves with these colors. It then produces a second 
chart of 50 patches that perfects your profile once you scan it. 
ColorMunki is so smart it even has the ability to optimize your 
profile based on images for specific colors, black & white, and flesh 
tones for example"

Oh great, another "What were they thinking" moment! This reflects 
back to when I tried that STUPID eye1 Design package that GMB sold. 
Unless the so simple a simian could operate Munki can run in a more 
expanded patch mode, run from it! As fast as you can! Yes I'm sure 
the software has matured such that it will make a profile that isn't 
totally ugly, but with only 50 patches it is still rough at best, and 
only decent on printers that are really linear. WHat it is trying to 
do is get a rough linearization curve with the first 50 patches, then 
make the profile off the second target. I'm sure this approach works 
better than the Design (sl)easyRGB did, but your money would be 
better spent on a higher functioning unit.

If you display is in question, then you should probably buy a better 
display and start there.

I think I'm going to send Xrite an email about the munki after I 
research it a little more. I wrote back and forth about the Design 2 
(or so) years ago, I guess they didn't listen. When I talked to GMB 
about the Design they pretty much told me it was just to sell the 
spectro for people to use with other software, which is the only way 
it worked properly. Again, I'm sure the linearization step goes a 
long way to fixing the problems with the small patch count targets, 
but I doubt it is worth the cash.

Guys, is there a recommendation for a good AGP video card for Photoshop? I would like something that refreshes fast.
I have been looking at Nvidia but have no clues.
Thanks.
Pierre-Olivier

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

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Le Globe 
Trotteur" <unglobetrotteur@...> wrote:
>
> Guys, is there a recommendation for a good AGP video card for 
Photoshop? I would like something that refreshes fast.
> I have been looking at Nvidia but have no clues.
> Thanks.
> Pierre-Olivier
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Just about anything that works well for gaming should be fine. Matrox 
used to make cards that were designed to handle 2D imagery like 
Photoshop and CAD, but I don't know if they still do. ALl the 3D 
processing is kind of a waste unless Adobe is starting to harness the 
GPU for tasks.

AGP is getting harder to find new, you might need to buy a used card, 
which means you can probably afford even more onboard memory. Anyway 
Nvidia are decent, I think the Intel Mac Pro machine we put in last 
summer are Nvidia cards (but PCIx).

> From: Le Globe Trotteur
>
> Guys, is there a recommendation for a good AGP video card for
> Photoshop? I would like something that refreshes fast.
> I have been looking at Nvidia but have no clues.

Both NVidia and ATI make good chipsets, but NVidia's utilities for managing
the display seem better organized and less buggy to me. However, NVidia just
sells chips, so you have to buy the board from some other company, and there
are lots of them. This means you have to decide what chip you want, how much
memory, and what interfaces, and then check everyone's specs.

Greg pointed out that 3D is useless for Photoshop, but even if you don't do
gaming, if you play with Google Earth as much as I do, a reasonably fast 3D
card will still be worthwhile, although you don't need anything
top-of-the-line.

--

Ciao,               Paul D. DeRocco
Paul                mailto:pderocco@...

EVGA makes good cards (Nvidia based). They are a consumer oriented company as opposed to Nvidia who deals with the industry primarily. Look at their site

Barry S.

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Le Globe Trotteur 
  To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 12:19 PM
  Subject: [Digital BW] OT: Video Card


  Guys, is there a recommendation for a good AGP video card for Photoshop? I would like something that refreshes fast.
  I have been looking at Nvidia but have no clues.
  Thanks.
  Pierre-Olivier

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



   

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

Thanks Tony...this is the the way I was leaning.

And thanks for not hijacking the thread ;-)

Mike.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, Tony Sleep 
<TonySleep@...> wrote:
>
> On 24/07/2008 tornadokc247 wrote:
> > Which would be a better bang for the buck?
> 
> I'd definitely go for a better screen that you can profile more 
accurately 
> with your existing Spyder2. Then at least you will know the files are 
> right, and any remaining issues are with the print colour management. 
At 

> present you're editing blind, have too many variables.
> -- 
> Regards
> 
> Tony Sleep
> http://tonysleep.co.uk
>

This thread suggests CM is very useful for B&W & linearization/icc 
creation via QTR:

<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint/messa
ge/91672>


Mike.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Greg" 
<dfaprinting@...> wrote:
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, CDTobie@ 
> wrote:
> > Take a careful look at both the display calibration features and 
> the printer profiling features of the CMunki before committing to 
it. 
> And compare that feature set to what you'd get in Spyder3Studio... 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> From the Xrite website:
> "New RGB and CMYK printer profiling technology delivers a high 
> quality printer profile. Simply scan one test chart of only 50 
> patches and ColorMunki calculates an interim profile having learned 
> how your printer behaves with these colors. It then produces a 
second 
> chart of 50 patches that perfects your profile once you scan it. 
> ColorMunki is so smart it even has the ability to optimize your 
> profile based on images for specific colors, black & white, and 
flesh 
> tones for example"
> 
> Oh great, another "What were they thinking" moment! This reflects 
> back to when I tried that STUPID eye1 Design package that GMB sold. 
> Unless the so simple a simian could operate Munki can run in a more 
> expanded patch mode, run from it! As fast as you can! Yes I'm sure 
> the software has matured such that it will make a profile that 
isn't 
> totally ugly, but with only 50 patches it is still rough at best, 
and 
> only decent on printers that are really linear. WHat it is trying 
to 
> do is get a rough linearization curve with the first 50 patches, 
then 
> make the profile off the second target. I'm sure this approach 
works 
> better than the Design (sl)easyRGB did, but your money would be 
> better spent on a higher functioning unit.
> 
> If you display is in question, then you should probably buy a 
better 
> display and start there.
> 
> I think I'm going to send Xrite an email about the munki after I 
> research it a little more. I wrote back and forth about the Design 
2 
> (or so) years ago, I guess they didn't listen. When I talked to GMB 
> about the Design they pretty much told me it was just to sell the 
> spectro for people to use with other software, which is the only 
way 

> it worked properly. Again, I'm sure the linearization step goes a 
> long way to fixing the problems with the small patch count targets, 
> but I doubt it is worth the cash.
>

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "tornadokc247"
<mdobbs@...> wrote:

> And thanks for not hijacking the thread ;-)
> 
> Mike.
> 


Well... Pardon me for trying to explain why the Munki would not be a
good choice. I'll just go back to ignoring questions from people I
don't know.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Le Globe 
Trotteur" <unglobetrotteur@...> wrote:
>
> Guys, is there a recommendation for a good AGP video card for 
Photoshop? I would like something that refreshes fast.
> I have been looking at Nvidia but have no clues.
> Thanks.
> Pierre-Olivier
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
After some research I found that one of the best video cards is matrox 
Parhelia APVe. It's designed for 2D. Most cards are for 3D gaming.

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "viewcam43" 
<dsullivanart@...> wrote:
> >
> After some research I found that one of the best video cards is 
matrox 
> Parhelia APVe. It's designed for 2D. Most cards are for 3D gaming.
>

Indeed several years ago Matrox used to the brand of choice for high 
end 2D display functions. As such it was a major brand at the time. 
However, they have had difficulties to keep up with ATI and NVidia that 
indeed focus on 3D, but now offer a very good 2D function as well. The 
Matrox Parhelia cards are still a very good choice if you want to hook 
up three displays next to one another.

Otherwise I would consider them too expensive and rather go for a 
midrange (or perhaps even on the lower end) 3D card. 

Joost

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Greg" 
<dfaprinting@...> wrote:
>
> --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "tornadokc247"
> <mdobbs@> wrote:
> 
> > And thanks for not hijacking the thread ;-)
> > 
> > Mike.
> > 
> 
> 
> Well... Pardon me for trying to explain why the Munki would not be a
> good choice. I'll just go back to ignoring questions from people I
> don't know.
>


On the contrary, I thought your first reply was completely on topic 
and I responded to it with a followup.

Then the thread became something about video cards...even had "OT" in 
the subject. That's what I was refering to as the hijack. 

Sorry to put you off...not my intent.

Mike.