Datacolor User to User Support Group.

Hi newbie here
I am using spyder2express for the first time to calibrate my monitor 
for printing photographs to my Epson R800 printer.My question is as 
follows what is the best room lighting to use with the calibration is 
it ok to have the room light on or is it best to use daylight.The room 
I am in at present is not vety bright,in fact could be described as 
fairly dark with the light off.Even with the light on it is not all 
that bright as using energy lamps. Any suggestions would be much 
appreciated.
Mick

--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, CDTobie@... wrote:
>
> 
> In a message dated 12/5/06 10:08:21 AM, mick094m@... writes:
> 
> 
> > I am using spyder2express for the first time to calibrate my 
monitor
> > for printing photographs to my Epson R800 printer.My question is 
as
> > follows what is the best room lighting to use with the 
calibration is
> > it ok to have the room light on or is it best to use daylight.The 
room
> > I am in at present is not vety bright,in fact could be described 
as
> > fairly dark with the light off.Even with the light on it is not 
all
> > that bright as using energy lamps. Any suggestions would be much
> > appreciated.
> > 
> 
> For CRT monitors, VERY dark is right. For LCDs, dim is right. 
Anything that 
> doesn't seem dim is too bright. The light color isn't that 
important, unless 
> you are using it to view prints. And Daylight, no matter how 
wonderful the color 
> and bredth of it, is TOO BRIGHT, and TOO VARIABLE to allow into a 
serious 
> digital imaging space!
> 
> C. David Tobie
> Product Technology Manager
> ColorVision Business Unit
> Datacolor Inc.
> CDTobie@...
> www.colorvision.com
>Thanks for the quick reply,have tried calibrating and the prints 
seem to be a bit on the dark side,the monitor is a Viglen CRT and 
don't have any handbook for it and unable to set at the default 
setting,going to have another go at calibrating

--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, CDTobie@... wrote:
>
> 
> In a message dated 12/6/06 4:21:15 AM, mick094m@... writes:
> 
> 
> > >Thanks for the quick reply,have tried calibrating and the prints
> > seem to be a bit on the dark side,the monitor is a Viglen CRT and
> > don't have any handbook for it and unable to set at the default
> > setting,going to have another go at calibrating
> > 
> If your prints seem on the darkside, you should probably set up a 
5000k 
> proofing light (Staples has a $20 flex arm office desk lamp with a 
daylight bulb, 
> so you don't need to spend a fortune) that you can move closer to 
or further 
> from the prints to get the correct illumination. A rheostatic 
proofing box is 
> nice, if you can justify it.
> 
> C. David Tobie
> Product Technology Manager
> ColorVision Business Unit
> Datacolor Inc.
> CDTobie@...
> www.colorvision.com
>
I thought the whole idea of this product was to match the actual 
print to what you have on the monitor,I fail to see what a proofing 
light has to do with the end result, I was getting a more closer 
print from photoshop gamma than this product,am thinking of reverting 
back to photoshop and reselling the product as it does not do what it 
is supposed to do.I am not impressed at all

--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, CDTobie@... wrote:
>
> 
> In a message dated 12/7/06 4:14:59 AM, mick094m@... writes:
> 
> 
> > I thought the whole idea of this product was to match the actual
> > print to what you have on the monitor,I fail to see what a 
proofing
> > light has to do with the end result,
> > 
> 
> Lets see, if I make my viewing area darker, my actual print looks 
darker. For 
> serious proofing the best answer is to fix your proofing lighting 
at the 
> right level. 
> 
> C. David Tobie
> Product Technology Manager
> ColorVision Business Unit
> Datacolor Inc.
> CDTobie@...
> www.colorvision.com
>
from the beginning, I purchased this product as I found that to get 
prints the same as, or as close as to what you see on your monitor 
you 
needed to have your monitor calibrated correctly,with me so far ... I 
then purchased this product in orde to do so
and calibrated the monitor in subdued room lighting ,the resulting 
screen was showing a bit on the lighter side to before the 
calibration,so I then printed off a sample of a print that I had 
previously printed with photoshop using the Gamma calibration 
settings in photoshop, that I had been using prior to the purchase of 
this product.Expecting to get better prints from my printer,but on 
comparison  of the two prints in "good daylight" ....."not with any 
proofing light", the one with this product is darker,in other words 
less detail in the Shadows and overall darker, this could be 
corrected 
with photoshop but I thought that this was not the purpose of this 
product, that it was to get a decent print in 3 easy steps  I think 
was 
the wording of the advert,but it did not mention how many attempts of 
the  3 steps you may need to get what you want.........if you ever 
do,...I don' t use a 
proofing light to see what my final prints look like I 
use "daylight " as that would be what the prints would be seen in I 
suppose,unless you mean to use the proofing light to calibrate the 
monitor

--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, CDTobie@... wrote:
>
> 
> In a message dated 12/7/06 12:13:17 PM, mick094m@... writes:
> 
> 
> > ,so I then printed off a sample of a print that I had
> > previously printed with photoshop using the Gamma calibration
> > settings in photoshop, that I had been using prior to the 
purchase of
> > this product.Expecting to get better prints from my printer,but on
> > comparison  of the two prints in "good daylight" ....."not with 
any
> > proofing light", the one with this product is darker,in other 
words
> > less detail in the Shadows and overall darker, this could be
> > corrected
> > with photoshop but I thought that this was not the purpose of this
> > product
> > 
> Hard to know exactly what you mean, so here's the full set of 
responses:
> 
> First, if you aren't adjusting the files on screen, just printing 
it, then 
> whether you use an AdobeGamma monitor profile, or a hardware 
monitor profile 
> makes NO difference in the prints at all.
> 
> Second, if you are adjusting the images on screen, seperately under 
the two 
> monitor profiles, then that STILL doesn't close the loop to your 
prints; until 
> you have a profiled printer, there's really no gurarantee, and a 
poorly 
> controlled printer might well relate better to a poorly profiled 
monitor. Its a crap 
> shoot.
> 
> 
> Next, comparing two prints under daylight tells you how they look 
with quite 
> cool lighting, and lots of it. This effects colors and shadow 
detail. Unless 
> your work is to hang in very open, daylit environments, this isn't 
the best way 
> to judge prints. (And is this IS how your prints will be displayed, 
they 
> won't last very long! <G>)
> 
> Finally, if you are profiling both your printer and your monitor, 
then you 
> should get a good relationship between them; what the prints look 
like compared 
> to prints corrected on an AdobeGamma monitor is a rather abstract 
> difference... I know of no way to quantify that.
> 
> C. David Tobie
> Product Technology Manager
> ColorVision Business Unit
> Datacolor Inc.
> CDTobie@...
> www.colorvision.com
>
So I will tell Epson that there pigment inks are useless according to 
you think they will be very pleased with that, also I have followed 
the instructions and have printed to your bloody useless profile to 
get these results and I never said anything about adjusting anything 
on screen your produst supposed to do it automatically,don't send any 
replies to this I am selling your product on and would never ever 
encourage anyone to purchase them they are rubbish and also the so 
called technical responce is the same.........repeat no reply needed 
from you

Hi,
I am not CDTobie, but feel compelled to reply.  The product you 
mention works as advertised and about as well as any other brand as 
well.  You possibly could give it some thought and find out a bit 
more about how color management works.  Viewing conditions play a big 
role in any screen to print match as does the need from time to time 
to customize a profile to your particular environment.  Guess what I 
am trying to say is don't throw the baby out with the bath.  Be glad 
to try to help in any way I might.
Paul

--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, "tommy" <mick094m@...> 
wrote:
>
> --- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, CDTobie@ wrote:
> >
> > 
> > In a message dated 12/7/06 12:13:17 PM, mick094m@ writes:
> > 
> > 
> > > ,so I then printed off a sample of a print that I had
> > > previously printed with photoshop using the Gamma calibration
> > > settings in photoshop, that I had been using prior to the 
> purchase of
> > > this product.Expecting to get better prints from my printer,but 
on
> > > comparison  of the two prints in "good daylight" ....."not with 
> any
> > > proofing light", the one with this product is darker,in other 
> words
> > > less detail in the Shadows and overall darker, this could be
> > > corrected
> > > with photoshop but I thought that this was not the purpose of 
this
> > > product
> > > 
> > Hard to know exactly what you mean, so here's the full set of 
> responses:
> > 
> > First, if you aren't adjusting the files on screen, just printing 
> it, then 
> > whether you use an AdobeGamma monitor profile, or a hardware 
> monitor profile 
> > makes NO difference in the prints at all.
> > 
> > Second, if you are adjusting the images on screen, seperately 
under 
> the two 
> > monitor profiles, then that STILL doesn't close the loop to your 
> prints; until 
> > you have a profiled printer, there's really no gurarantee, and a 
> poorly 
> > controlled printer might well relate better to a poorly profiled 
> monitor. Its a crap 
> > shoot.
> > 
> > 
> > Next, comparing two prints under daylight tells you how they look 
> with quite 
> > cool lighting, and lots of it. This effects colors and shadow 
> detail. Unless 
> > your work is to hang in very open, daylit environments, this 
isn't 
> the best way 
> > to judge prints. (And is this IS how your prints will be 
displayed, 
> they 
> > won't last very long! <G>)
> > 
> > Finally, if you are profiling both your printer and your monitor, 
> then you 
> > should get a good relationship between them; what the prints look 
> like compared 
> > to prints corrected on an AdobeGamma monitor is a rather abstract 
> > difference... I know of no way to quantify that.
> > 
> > C. David Tobie
> > Product Technology Manager
> > ColorVision Business Unit
> > Datacolor Inc.
> > CDTobie@
> > www.colorvision.com
> >
> So I will tell Epson that there pigment inks are useless according 
to 
> you think they will be very pleased with that, also I have followed 
> the instructions and have printed to your bloody useless profile to 
> get these results and I never said anything about adjusting 
anything 
> on screen your produst supposed to do it automatically,don't send 
any 
> replies to this I am selling your product on and would never ever 
> encourage anyone to purchase them they are rubbish and also the so 
> called technical responce is the same.........repeat no reply 
needed 
> from you
>

--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, "tommy" <mick094m@...> 
wrote:
>
 
> So I will tell Epson that there pigment inks are useless according 
to 
> you think they will be very pleased with that, also I have 
followed 
> the instructions and have printed to your bloody useless profile 
to 
> get these results and I never said anything about adjusting 
anything 
> on screen your produst supposed to do it automatically,don't send 
any 
> replies to this I am selling your product on and would never ever 
> encourage anyone to purchase them they are rubbish and also the so 
> called technical responce is the same.........repeat no reply 
needed 
> from you
>
Mr.Tom

IMHO before learning to profile you need to learn good manners.

Luca

--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, CDTobie@... wrote:
>
> 
> In a message dated 12/7/06 5:35:57 PM, mick094m@... writes:
> 
> 
> > So I will tell Epson that there pigment inks are useless 
according to
> > you think they will be very pleased with that, also I have 
followed
> > the instructions and have printed to your bloody useless profile 
to
> > get these results and I never said anything about adjusting 
anything
> > on screen your produst supposed to do it automatically,don't send 
any
> > replies to this I am selling your product on and would never ever
> > encourage anyone to purchase them they are rubbish and also the so
> > called technical responce is the same.........repeat no reply 
needed
> > from you
> > 
> 
> Not sure its useful to an emotional post, as its probably not about 
technical 
> issues; but I'll at least make one more stab:
> 
> First: monitor profiling software (from ColorVision or anyone else) 
does not 
> magically fix your images. It makes the representation of them on 
screen 
> appropriate, so that you can adjust them visually, and have some 
faith they are now 
> correct. If you view the same image on screen, with a custom 
monitor profile, 
> and with an AdobeGamma monitor profile, and then print them each 
time, 
> getting differing results, you have an error in your process 
somewhere as THE 
> MONITOR PROFILE HAS NO EFFECT ON THE PRINT. That is: unless you 
adjust the image 
> visually, while using that monitor profile, which is what the 
profile is for.
> 
> Second, I never said that Epson pigment inks are useless. I use 
them for the 
> majority of my printing. They are metameric, and will show 
differing color 
> effects under different lighting. I was printing a shot of a 
historic Indian 
> motorcyle at PhotoPlus, and moving the image from the 5000k 
proofing box, to the 
> show floor lighting changed the lovely red of the bike an ugly rust 
color. 
> Thats metamerism. Thats why I suggest that using "daylight" is not 
ideal. The sun 
> alone, at midday, is about 5000k. Add the blue sky reflection to 
this and its 
> a significantly higher 6500k. Move to open shade, where its blue-
sky-only (and 
> oddly, what a lot of people use, and call 'daylight) and its about 
9300k; 
> EXTREMELY blue!
> 
> Interestingly, Epson, HP, and Canon have all come up with non-
metameric 
> options for printing B&W images in the latest generation of 
graphics printers, by 
> minimizing the color ink (and especially the yellow ink) in 
neutrals printed 
> through their drivers. Thats what makes PrintFIX PRO 2.0 able to 
produce gallery 
> quality B&W on the same printer that it can produce color prints. I 
mention 
> this, as users get confused about claims or metamerism, or the lack 
or 
> metamerism, and don't always realize that the lack if it is in the 
neutral prints; 
> once you add lots of color into the image, the metamerism is still 
there...
> 
> Lets see, is there anything else I can respond to here? I guess the 
only 
> other item I can comment on is that untold thousands of users find 
our products 
> useful, so you might want to consider that you need to learn more 
about color 
> management, color workflow, and color printing methods, instead of 
kicking the 
> dog in frustration... or the Spyder, in this case.
> 
> C. David Tobie
> Product Technology Manager
> ColorVision Business Unit
> Datacolor Inc.
> CDTobie@...
> www.colorvision.com
>excuse me but if this product was manufactured in th UK it would be 
reported to the trading standards...........Correct me if I am wrong 
but on the box that I purchased it clearly states  "Quote" Three easy 
steps to ACCURATE colour.It does not mention that you have to go on a 
course for learning and understanding COLOUR MANAGEMENT, and please 
also note I listed or joined this forum as a NEWBIE, in fact that was 
the reason that I purchased the product as it was "described in all 
the blurbs as 3 easy steps to accurate colour,could I suggest that 
you alter the wording on the box and adverts to a more truthful 
statement by adding that a good working knowledge of colour 
management would be required and not a product for a novice ,regards 
the remarks previously about manners.I am a person who dislikes being 
MISLEAD to purchase a product and dinds that it is not was it says 
and if critisism cannot be put in this forum about a product then 
tough, or are you only allowed to sing the praises I am sure there 
must be others like me and have noted that even the professionals 
have problems and I suppose they have a working knowledge of colour 
management but they too find the same as me there are numerous 
listings about dark prints and casts and they have the expensive 
product.so please explain to me the what "3 easy steps to accurate 
colour" means.Because I have a good education and a good command of 
the "English" language but am a loss to comprehend how you can 
justify putting that on the box.If you answer this it will be my last 
remarks in this forum as I find that it is not very usefull and will 
be leaving it.