Datacolor User to User Support Group.

>>>The point of my story is that on a whim I asked friend to lend me his
>Colomunki Photo. To my surprise the first profile which took only a
>few minutes was spot on, or a least as good as the Spyder profiles
>which were taking me a couple of hours per profile using multiple
>sheets of paper with all the adjustments. 
>
>
>Then there is something wrong in your process that is not happening with your Munki profiles, but is with your Spyder profiles. When I use both side by side the results are very similar initially, except for clogged shadows from the Munki at some intents, and more precise color detail from the Spyder if the printer is not linear (say a color laser...). So finding out where to error in your Spyder workflow lies, most likely in target printing, shoud solve the problem. 
>
>
>C. David Tobie
>Global Product Technology Manager
>Imaging Color Solutions
>Datacolor inc. 
>cdtobie@...
>www.datacolor.com
>

David,

Thank you very much for taking time from your busy schedule to reply.
I will dutifully review my methodology when printing the targets. 

Experience has shown me that in a majority of cases my problems are
caused by myself and not the hardware/software I am so quick to blame.

In case anybody has additional comments or help I will add follow
facts:

Printer Canon Pixma Pro9000 mark 11
Substrates - Red River and Iford.
Ink Image Specialists

I am sure I was using correct printing procedure, and my method was
common for CM and Spyder profiles.  - Will revisit it to be certain.

Interestingly both CM and Spyder displayed plugged shadows and three
quarter tones. compared to the soft proof. Unfortunately the Spyder
profile also significantly warmer overall.

I used the TIFF file from Uwe Steinmueller's test image for
comparisons to take my monitor profile out of the evaluation.

I would welcome any comments for others on this matter.

Sincerely

Roy Sletcher