Datacolor User to User Support Group.

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/410 - Release Date: 5/08/2006

HI Paul,
I've got the PFP for 2 weeks now. I've only printed 2 prints so far 
and I also could not match the prints to the softproof. With me the 
exposure and contrast and general colors were pretty spot on except 
for a tinge of coldness or bluishnes/Cyan compared to the PS soft 
proof on the monitor. I guess mine is as not as bad as yours.

I couldn't do any comparison this weekend due to work issues but 
believe most profiles would need some adjustments to match the 
softproof unless you're not fussy or don't need to monitor match.

I kind of smirk when I read that part which says most PFP profiles 
dont need adjustments....

I'll wait till next weekend to work on the prints with the softproof 
and some adjustment sliders. Let's see how close I can get a match.

Sorry, I don't really have a solution or suggestion for you. 

Here are my 2 cents:
1)I trust you are using the same batch of paper? - its not enough if 
its the same brand or paper type, must be same batch.

2)I assume you let the patch dry for at least a day before commencing 
the reading?

Ed.

Thanks for your reply Ed.
Yes I have been using the same paper as I have a 30 mt roll.
And yes I did let it dry for that time. In fact I have re measured over a
two week period to see if there is any difference. 

Actually your observation and experience is pretty much what I am looking
for.  I am just concerned that I am going about the process incorrectly and
I suppose I need confirmation that I am going along the right track and I
will get there.

The biggest issue I have is the soft proof and the final print for the
standard profile are pretty good and even match each other reasonably well,
but the PFP profile is way out in the print and when that is fixed the soft
proof is way out?

Thanks for your thoughts.

Paul


|-----Original Message-----
|From: colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com 
|[mailto:colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ed_limmy
|Sent: Sunday, 6 August 2006 8:59 p.m.
|To: colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com
|Subject: [colorvision_group] Re: PrintFix Pro profile problems
|
|HI Paul,
|I've got the PFP for 2 weeks now. I've only printed 2 prints 
|so far and I also could not match the prints to the softproof. 
|With me the exposure and contrast and general colors were 
|pretty spot on except for a tinge of coldness or 
|bluishnes/Cyan compared to the PS soft proof on the monitor. I 
|guess mine is as not as bad as yours.
|
|I couldn't do any comparison this weekend due to work issues 
|but believe most profiles would need some adjustments to match 
|the softproof unless you're not fussy or don't need to monitor match.
|
|I kind of smirk when I read that part which says most PFP 
|profiles dont need adjustments....
|
|I'll wait till next weekend to work on the prints with the 
|softproof and some adjustment sliders. Let's see how close I 
|can get a match.
|
|Sorry, I don't really have a solution or suggestion for you. 
|
|Here are my 2 cents:
|1)I trust you are using the same batch of paper? - its not 
|enough if its the same brand or paper type, must be same batch.
|
|2)I assume you let the patch dry for at least a day before 
|commencing the reading?
|
|Ed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 
|Yahoo! Groups Links
|
|
|
| 
|
|
|
|--
|No virus found in this incoming message.
|Checked by AVG Free Edition.
|Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/410 - Release 
|Date: 5/08/2006
|
|
|-- 
|No virus found in this incoming message.
|Checked by AVG Free Edition.
|Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/410 - Release 
|Date: 5/08/2006
| 
|

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/410 - Release Date: 5/08/2006

HI Paul,
1) another suggestion - use several same paper underneath the patch 
print. THe lights from the PFP is quite bright and what's underneath 
the patch print can/could affect the readings.

I was quite anal about this and used up to 3-4 pieces of the same 
paper underneatch.

2) Try to hands off the spectro when the reading is done. I noticed 
when I'm holding the spectro - sometimes i would leave a gap because 
the way my hand was angled. So when i would hands off the spectro, it 
would sit 100% flush against the paper. I did not want any ambient 
light to leak into the spectro readings.

I think the statement that 'most PFP profiles don't need any further 
adjustment' is just too ambitious or over optimistic. after all we're 
trying to match to very separate independent system - the printer and 
the monitor. TO be able to bring a close enough match without any 
major effort would be a miracle. I don't have any experience with the 
gretag or xrite but I would imagine those more expensive systems 
would also require some iterations  before a good enought match 
happens. Anyone care to rebutt that?



Ed.

hey Paul. how about trying out the other modes instead of the Expert 
Mode. i use the 224 patch reading and the results i got were amazingly 
close, with the soft proof matching the output (soft proofing is done 
in Photoshop).

ghi

On 6-Aug-06, at 2:53 AM, Paul Nieuwenhuize wrote:

> Thanks for your reply Ed.
> Yes I have been using the same paper as I have a 30 mt roll.
> And yes I did let it dry for that time. In fact I have re measured 
> over a
> two week period to see if there is any difference.
>
> Actually your observation and experience is pretty much what I am 
> looking
> for.  I am just concerned that I am going about the process 
> incorrectly and
> I suppose I need confirmation that I am going along the right track 
> and I
> will get there.
>
> The biggest issue I have is the soft proof and the final print for the
> standard profile are pretty good and even match each other reasonably 
> well,
> but the PFP profile is way out in the print and when that is fixed the 
> soft
> proof is way out?
>
> Thanks for your thoughts.
>
> Paul
>
>
> |-----Original Message-----
> |From: colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com
> |[mailto:colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ed_limmy
> |Sent: Sunday, 6 August 2006 8:59 p.m.
> |To: colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com
> |Subject: [colorvision_group] Re: PrintFix Pro profile problems
> |
> |HI Paul,
> |I've got the PFP for 2 weeks now. I've only printed 2 prints
> |so far and I also could not match the prints to the softproof.
> |With me the exposure and contrast and general colors were
> |pretty spot on except for a tinge of coldness or
> |bluishnes/Cyan compared to the PS soft proof on the monitor. I
> |guess mine is as not as bad as yours.
> |
> |I couldn't do any comparison this weekend due to work issues
> |but believe most profiles would need some adjustments to match
> |the softproof unless you're not fussy or don't need to monitor match.
> |
> |I kind of smirk when I read that part which says most PFP
> |profiles dont need adjustments....
> |
> |I'll wait till next weekend to work on the prints with the
> |softproof and some adjustment sliders. Let's see how close I
> |can get a match.
> |
> |Sorry, I don't really have a solution or suggestion for you.
> |
> |Here are my 2 cents:
> |1)I trust you are using the same batch of paper? - its not
> |enough if its the same brand or paper type, must be same batch.
> |
> |2)I assume you let the patch dry for at least a day before
> |commencing the reading?
> |
> |Ed.
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |Yahoo! Groups Links
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |--
> |No virus found in this incoming message.
> |Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> |Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/410 - Release
> |Date: 5/08/2006
> |
> |
> |--
> |No virus found in this incoming message.
> |Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> |Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/410 - Release
> |Date: 5/08/2006
> |
> |
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/410 - Release Date: 
> 5/08/2006
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

Paul,
I also had great results out of the box with no further adjustments 
with my PFP. I tried both the mid and large target and the results 
were nearly identical. I profiled canvas, Epson Premium Luster and 
Somerset Velvet. All PFP profiles have now replaced my Atkinson 
profiles which I had been using with satisfaction. 

I believe that you will find some small oversight is the problem, 
but one suggestion: This has never been mentioned to my knowledge 
but, I was careful to profile with just enough light to see the 
target clearly. My thought was that perhaps a strong room light may 
contaminate my readings. 
Chuck Warner

--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Green" 
<tomgreen00@...> wrote:
>
> I am also a new print fix pro user and have nothing but praise for 
what
> colorvision has achieved.  I printed the small target and got the 
same dark
> results you speak about.  I also kept tweaking sliders with 
horrible results
> until I figured out that I had not set up my printer driver 
correctly.  I
> had my media setting at plain paper.  I will make a long story 
short by
> stating that once I had adjusted my printer settings correctly the 
results
> were fantastic.  I have since built two profiles using the 729 
patch targets
> and am stunned at the quality prints they produce.  It took me 
about an hour
> to read the target and build the profile.  Kudos to colorvision.  
I am now
> getting far better results with my color managed system than ever 
before. 
> No more canned profiles for me.
> Thanks Colorvision
> Tom Green 
>  
> -------Original Message-------
>  
> From: colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com
> Date: 08/05/06 22:55:43
> To: colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [colorvision_group] PrintFix Pro profile problems
>  
> Hi all.
> As a new print fix pro user I am finding I cannot achieve the 
results I was
> expecting.
> I am presuming that I am doing something wrong, but of course I 
need
> direction to see if this is correct or it is another issue
> I am hoping that the knowledgeable users on this forum can point 
me in the
> right direction
>  
> I am currently running a AMD 3000+(32 Bit) 2 gig ram with a ATI 
9600XT.
> The printer is an Epson 4800 with Epson K3 inks.
> The monitor is a 17" LCD profiled with Syder2PRO and is shows 
reasonable
> consistency with printed material to date. 
> I use Qimage Studio for my normal printing and I also use 
Photoshop PS2 and
> Corel Draw X3.
> Printer Colour Management is set to Off in the printer driver and 
I use the
> relevant profile for the paper type in all the programs above.
> In Qimage I have the ability to select the same image multiple 
times and
> select different profiles for each instance of that image.
>  
> In this case, the paper I am trying to profile is Kodak(Encad) 
photo glossy
> Rapid dry 180 Gsm.
> I wanted to profile a paper I have that I have known results with 
and am
> reasonably happy with those results.
> The Epson Premium Glossy Photo paper profile downloaded from the 
Epson site
> produces a print similar to what the soft proof shows in either 
Qimage or
> CS2 and a final print that is acceptable.
>  
> I have printed a 729 Patch target and have measured this with the 
same paper
> type placed under the printed target.
> The Spectrocolorimeter is calibrated after doing about 20 measures 
of the
> white tile. (I find that the measurements keep rising when first 
used up to
> a certain value then stay reasonably constant from that point)
> I then measure the target, recheck to see if I have botched any 
measurements
> and go to create profile.
> I create the profile, print the test image and it is very dark.
> I then try and print with the new profile using Qimage and PS2. 
The Soft
> proof seems to be acceptable and about what I am expecting.
> However when I print the image with new image it again is very 
dark and
> oversaturated.
> So I figure, read the instructions and see what the story is.
> After spending days on adjusting sliders  and printing many sheets 
of paper,
> I have found a semi reasonable print.
> But it is still not as good as the standard profile and I am 
starting to
> lose heart.
> I am also finding that with the sliders set as they are.  +18 
Brightness, -
> 5 Saturation.  Now my soft proof for this profile is showing very 
light and
> washed out compared to what the actual print is.
> I was hoping to basically measure and create a profile with out 
doing dozens
> of prints and adjustments.
>  
>  
> My first questions are.
> In the help file of Printfix pro it says "Most PrintFIX PRO 
profiles need no
> adjustment. PrintFIX PLUS profiles typically involve several 
rounds of
> adjusting and test printing to reach an optimal profile.
> Does no adjustment mean only small adjustments?
> How much adjustment of the sliders does the average person on this 
group
> have to make with Print fix pro?
> Is my adjustment abnormal?
> Should my soft proof be that far out from the actual print being 
produced?
> Am I expecting to much or am I just not putting enough effort in?
> What suggestions does anybody have for me to try and resolve this 
issue.
>  
> Please note: I have re-measured the Target three times now and get 
pretty
> much the same result.  I had also checked my printer for a proper 
nozzle
> check prior to printing the target.
> The standard test image when printed at the start seems to print 
pretty well
> and would actually be acceptable as is.
> But at the end of the process the soft proof looks substantially 
different
> to the end print.
>  
> Should I continue to play with the sliders to try and get my good 
print
> profile or am I wasting my time with so much change required.
>  
> Thanks and look forward to some advice.
>  
> Paul
>  
> 
> 
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/410 - Release Date: 
5/08/2006
>

Hi all.

As a new print fix pro user I am finding I cannot achieve the results I was expecting.

I am presuming that I am doing something wrong, but of course I need direction to see if this is correct or it is another issue

--