Datacolor User to User Support Group.

After spending all night I have decided that the newer Canon PXIMA PRO
9000 Mark II 8 color printer is the way that I'm going to go
This is a dye printer. Haven't tested the Mark II but I never liked the first version; its grays are not at all stable, and turn terrible colors under differing light sources. The 9500's pigment inks, on the other hand, are great, though the printer is slower, due to the pigments.


C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
Datacolor
CDTobie@...
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3


-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Petruska <petruska@...>
To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, Aug 19, 2009 5:31 pm
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with Spyder3Print














        














Rolin,


Thanks for the reply.? I was trying to imply in my original post
that I have done everything that you listed.? I do have my NEC
monitor calibrated with the I1D2 calibrator and my NEC is internally
hardware profiled.? I would say that it is very close to being right
one matching the real world.? I use Spyder3Print to calibrate my
printers. I also use color management aware Nikon Capture NX2 and
CS4.? And I did read that "book"!?? 


What I was getting at is to buy the latest printer that will give will
generate printer profiles more accurately than what I'm getting now from
my Canon I950 6 color printer.


After spending all night I have decided that the newer Canon PXIMA PRO
9000 Mark II 8 color printer is the way that I'm going to go.?
Hopefully my Spyder3Print profiles will be more accurate with the
additional 2 colors and will reduce my profile tweaking time do to days
not weeks!





Bob P.







At 01:57 PM 8/19/2009, you wrote:


? 


--- In

datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com, Bob Petruska <petruska@...>
wrote:

>

> I currently have a Canon I950 photo printer that I'm very happy with


> the printout image quality, but it never really matches the monitor


> to where I'm extremely happy. I use Spyder3Print for printer 

> calibration. My NEC monitor is calibrated and the image on it looks


> extremely close to what I see in the real world. The Canon I950 is


> a 6 color dye based ink printer. It is starting to give me some


> trouble and looks like it is time to find a replacement.

> 

> So my question is what is the best printer out there for photography


> work that will match my monitor as close as possible using 

> Spyder3Print for printer calibration? Thus I would like to print my


> targets, scan them in, and be as close as possible to the screen


> colors. I really don't want to spend months of printing and adding


> brightness and contrast to printer profiles as I have done that with


> the Canon I950 and I consumed a ton of ink and paper until I got it
close.

> 

> I don't want to spend more than $500 - 700 if possible. I only do
8X10s max.


Basically what is needed is 1) a monitor that has been color calibrated
to some a standard, 2) printer color profiles that are for the particular
printer, ink and paper combination you want to use and 3) an application
that allows you to manipulate and print your images in a color managed
environment (such as Photoshop). 


If the monitor is not calibrated to a standard value and maintained at
the standard, then the ability to see the image as it is going to look
when printed is not possible. There are different standards that people
maintain works the best for this but, at least for PCs, the basic one
seems to be using a gamma of 2.2 and a color tempature of 6500 Kelvin.
The brigtness needed depends on the working environment - I am finding
that 100cd/m2 works for me. I use the Spyder3 Elite package to profile
the monitor but have recently started to use only the colorimeter with
the Eiso profiling software for my Eiso monitor. 


You will need to run an application that supports color management and
allows for "soft proofing" using profile created for the output
printer, ink and paper combination. The match will be close but never
perfect. Depending on the printer, ink and paper you use, you will find
that you have to make adjustments to an image that looks great on the
screen in order to make it look that way on a print. For example, I have
an Epson SP4000 and I print on a non brightened,matte paper. I find that
I have to add some extra "punch" to the image to compensate for
this combination - up the brightness, contrast and, in some cases, the
color saturation. I use Photoshop CS4 to do my work and print directly
from it.


I use the PrintFix Pro product to create custom profiles for my printer,
ink and paper combinations. The paper vendor offers profiles for the
SP4000 printer but I decided to create my own to get better control as
while generic profiles will work, ones built specifically for your
printer will work the best. I haven't (yet) done it but I really should
rebuild the profiles for each new batch of paper I get from the vendor if
I want to be 100% sure.


I also have an Epson PictureMate for doing snapshots (4x6). I use a
generic profile for the paper with it and have had good luck. The
particular paper/ink used with it requires very little changes to account
for the paper/ink as opposed to the viewed image; in fact, there are
usually no changes.


One other thing. Your print viewing environment can drastically effect
how the print looks. Normal color management is setup for daylight
viewing where as most indoor lighting is not daylight. I have an
OTT-Light that does a good job of letting me see what the print will look
like under daylight as opposed to the incandesent lights in my work
area.


So, the net is, in my opinion, you buy a good printer, find a paper you
like and then get the monitor profiled to a standard and get profiles for
the printer, ink and paper and it should work.


Some time back, I bought the book "Real World Color Management"
(2nd Edition) by Bruce Fraser, Chris Murphy and Fred Bunting to try to
understand color management. I happen to think it is one of the best
books out there on the subject.


I hope this helps,

Rollin