You are correct in stating that there are hidden check boxes that can trash the best efforts to get a good profile.
I will be running the tests over the weekend and report back to the forum my findings.
I'm sitting here thinking that even though I have a calibrated NEC monitor how do I know that the printer and the monitor think alike with the same file data? What I'm getting at is that if I have two calibrated mid range quality monitors like a NEC and Samsung sitting next to each other I would bet that the same image file would look slightly different between them. Now say the NEC image matches what I see in the real world but does not match the calibrated printer output and the Samsung does not match the real world image but matches the printout perfectly which one is correct?
On my system the NEC image in either Nikon Capture NX2 or Photoshop CS4 look identical and match what I see in the real world (within gamut limitations) so I would say that is what I want at this stage and forget about the profiled monitor. Now my next goal is to have the printout and soft-proof match that NEC monitor image as closely as possible.
At 03:36 PM 8/28/2009, you wrote:
>>Bob Petruska : First, I'm using Vista Home Premium on a PC. I use Kodak Ultra paper.
OK...
>>"I just turned off the Spyder profiles". poor choice of words that I
used, I changed from letting the particular application manage color
to let printer manage color.
Ahhh...gotcha...
I just wanted to make sure we weren't missing a basic bits of info on your system and to make sure that what can sometimes be hidden glitches were accounted for and it appears that they are...
I read David's suggestion about adjusting the Softproof black and white values...keep us posted on how experimenting with that works out...
Terrie
http://tlbtlb.com/
tlbtlb@mail.com