Datacolor User to User Support Group.

Hello to Everyone,

I work for  a university photo dept which is in need of print profiling solution for our Epson 
printers. We currently have the Spyder2 monitor calibrator,which seems to work fine, but I 
think it's time to start creating custom icc profiles for our printers to fine tune our color 
workflow. As it stands now we are using Epson profiles, which don't match up close enough 
for our liking; a lot of paper/ink being wasted on test strips and so on. I know that prices for 
custom profiling software can cost an upwards of few $1000. My question: does anyone have 
an opinion as to whether or not the Spyder3 would be sufficient in creating profiles for this 
type of environment or would we be better off spending the extra $$ for the higher end 
systems? For those of you with experience, is there a significantly noticeable difference 
between the quality of Epsons canned profiles vs those made with the Spyder3? Pardon my 
ignorance on the subject; this is my first venture into custom profiling and I want to be sure 
that purchasing a system will be money well spent. TIA

--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, "elvissivle77"
<rasianator@...> wrote:
>
> Hello to Everyone,
> 
> I work for  a university photo dept which is in need of print
profiling solution for our Epson 
> printers. We currently have the Spyder2 monitor calibrator,which
seems to work fine, but I 
> think it's time to start creating custom icc profiles for our
printers to fine tune our color 
> workflow. As it stands now we are using Epson profiles, which don't
match up close enough 
> for our liking; a lot of paper/ink being wasted on test strips and
so on. I know that prices for 
> custom profiling software can cost an upwards of few $1000. My
question: does anyone have 
> an opinion as to whether or not the Spyder3 would be sufficient in
creating profiles for this 
> type of environment or would we be better off spending the extra $$
for the higher end 
> systems? For those of you with experience, is there a significantly
noticeable difference 
> between the quality of Epsons canned profiles vs those made with the
Spyder3? Pardon my 
> ignorance on the subject; this is my first venture into custom
profiling and I want to be sure 
> that purchasing a system will be money well spent. TIA
>

Can you get better, most likely.  A lot will depend on what all you
do, and on how many different printers and media are used.  Since it's
mostly photo work, it will work well enough especially since you'll
have work study students to read patches which is not automated.  It
is much better than the canned profiles for most media once you get
away from the Atkinson/Epson combo's.  The only real reason to step up
from this would be if you have the need to profile a lot of media and
often, where an auto reader would be most rewarding.

I¹ll second CD¹s suggestion. I am running a college lab for print and video
and have been happy with the PrintFix / Spyder bundle. BIG difference in my
profiles versus the canned!



D A V I D    E M E R I C K
Digital Media Specialist
St. Mary's College of Maryland
18952 East Fisher Road
St. Mary's City, Maryland  20686
240 . 895 . 2034
dnemerick@...
http://staff.smcm.edu/dnemerick/
http://emerick.blogspot.com
http://smcmlibrary.blogspot.com



In a message dated 3/31/08 12:47:05 PM, rasianator@... writes:


does anyone have
an opinion as to whether or not the Spyder3 would be sufficient in creating
profiles for this
type of environment or would we be better off spending the extra $$ for the
higher end
systems? For those of you with experience, is there a significantly
noticeable difference
between the quality of Epsons canned profiles vs those made with the
Spyder3? Pardon my
ignorance on the subject; this is my first venture into custom profiling and
I want to be sure
that purchasing a system will be money well spent. TIA



Well, I'm biased, but I would consider Spyder3Print to be fine for custom
profiling inkjets and various media for a university program. I've certainly
set it up for that a number of times, and seen a lot of success. So, the
Spyder3Studio bundle (Print, plus Elite) would be what you would want. I'm
sure others will give you some more specific pointers.

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

--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, David Emerick <dnemerick@...> wrote:

>
> I¹ll second CD¹s suggestion. I am running a college lab for print and video
> and have been happy with the PrintFix / Spyder bundle. BIG difference in my
> profiles versus the canned!
> 
> 
> 
> D A V I D    E M E R I C K
> Digital Media Specialist
> St. Mary's College of Maryland
> 18952 East Fisher Road
> St. Mary's City, Maryland  20686
> 240 . 895 . 2034
> dnemerick@...
> http://staff.smcm.edu/dnemerick/
> http://emerick.blogspot.com
> http://smcmlibrary.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> In a message dated 3/31/08 12:47:05 PM, rasianator@... writes:
> 
> 
> does anyone have
> an opinion as to whether or not the Spyder3 would be sufficient in creating
> profiles for this
> type of environment or would we be better off spending the extra $$ for the
> higher end
> systems? For those of you with experience, is there a significantly
> noticeable difference
> between the quality of Epsons canned profiles vs those made with the
> Spyder3? Pardon my
> ignorance on the subject; this is my first venture into custom profiling and
> I want to be sure
> that purchasing a system will be money well spent. TIA
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I'm biased, but I would consider Spyder3Print to be fine for custom
> profiling inkjets and various media for a university program. I've certainly
> set it up for that a number of times, and seen a lot of success. So, the
> Spyder3Studio bundle (Print, plus Elite) would be what you would want. I'm
> sure others will give you some more specific pointers.
> 
> C. David Tobie
> WW Product Technology Manager
> Digital Imaging & Home Theater
> Datacolor
> CDTobie@...
> www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
>

Thanks for all of your responses. Sounds like the consensus is that the Spyder3 bundle 
would fit the bill. Now, and i'm somewhat hesitant to bring this up in the colorvision 
forum, but today I stumbled upon a new x-rite product (colormunki) that is supposedly 
being released here any day. Since the product lacks reviews thus far I understand that it's 
not possible to get performance feedback. The price is comparable to the Spyder system; 
any initial thoughts? Anyone have experience with any X-Rite product here? Again, I 
apologize if i've offended anyone in the forum ; )

--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, David Emerick <dnemerick@...> wrote:

>
> I¹ll second CD¹s suggestion. I am running a college lab for print and video
> and have been happy with the PrintFix / Spyder bundle. BIG difference in my
> profiles versus the canned!
> 
> 
> 
> D A V I D    E M E R I C K
> Digital Media Specialist
> St. Mary's College of Maryland
> 18952 East Fisher Road
> St. Mary's City, Maryland  20686
> 240 . 895 . 2034
> dnemerick@...
> http://staff.smcm.edu/dnemerick/
> http://emerick.blogspot.com
> http://smcmlibrary.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> In a message dated 3/31/08 12:47:05 PM, rasianator@... writes:
> 
> 
> does anyone have
> an opinion as to whether or not the Spyder3 would be sufficient in creating
> profiles for this
> type of environment or would we be better off spending the extra $$ for the
> higher end
> systems? For those of you with experience, is there a significantly
> noticeable difference
> between the quality of Epsons canned profiles vs those made with the
> Spyder3? Pardon my
> ignorance on the subject; this is my first venture into custom profiling and
> I want to be sure
> that purchasing a system will be money well spent. TIA
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I'm biased, but I would consider Spyder3Print to be fine for custom
> profiling inkjets and various media for a university program. I've certainly
> set it up for that a number of times, and seen a lot of success. So, the
> Spyder3Studio bundle (Print, plus Elite) would be what you would want. I'm
> sure others will give you some more specific pointers.
> 
> C. David Tobie
> WW Product Technology Manager
> Digital Imaging & Home Theater
> Datacolor
> CDTobie@...
> www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
>

Keith Cooper did a review here
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/profiling/colormunki.html

There was a lot of talk about it on the ColorSync users group.

david



-----Original Message-----
From: colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com on behalf of elvissivle77
Sent: Mon 31/03/2008 10:24 PM
To: colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [colorvision_group] Re: Spyder3/printfixpro appropriate for University Lab???
 
Thanks for all of your responses. Sounds like the consensus is that the Spyder3 bundle 
would fit the bill. Now, and i'm somewhat hesitant to bring this up in the colorvision 
forum, but today I stumbled upon a new x-rite product (colormunki) that is supposedly 
being released here any day. Since the product lacks reviews thus far I understand that it's 
not possible to get performance feedback. The price is comparable to the Spyder system; 
any initial thoughts? Anyone have experience with any X-Rite product here? Again, I 
apologize if i've offended anyone in the forum ; )

--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, David Emerick <dnemerick@...> wrote:

>
> I¹ll second CD¹s suggestion. I am running a college lab for print and video
> and have been happy with the PrintFix / Spyder bundle. BIG difference in my
> profiles versus the canned!
> 
> 
> 
> D A V I D    E M E R I C K
> Digital Media Specialist
> St. Mary's College of Maryland
> 18952 East Fisher Road
> St. Mary's City, Maryland  20686
> 240 . 895 . 2034
> dnemerick@...
> http://staff.smcm.edu/dnemerick/
> http://emerick.blogspot.com
> http://smcmlibrary.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 
> In a message dated 3/31/08 12:47:05 PM, rasianator@... writes:
> 
> 
> does anyone have
> an opinion as to whether or not the Spyder3 would be sufficient in creating
> profiles for this
> type of environment or would we be better off spending the extra $$ for the
> higher end
> systems? For those of you with experience, is there a significantly
> noticeable difference
> between the quality of Epsons canned profiles vs those made with the
> Spyder3? Pardon my
> ignorance on the subject; this is my first venture into custom profiling and
> I want to be sure
> that purchasing a system will be money well spent. TIA
> 
> 
> 
> Well, I'm biased, but I would consider Spyder3Print to be fine for custom
> profiling inkjets and various media for a university program. I've certainly
> set it up for that a number of times, and seen a lot of success. So, the
> Spyder3Studio bundle (Print, plus Elite) would be what you would want. I'm
> sure others will give you some more specific pointers.
> 
> C. David Tobie
> WW Product Technology Manager
> Digital Imaging & Home Theater
> Datacolor
> CDTobie@...
> www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
>

I was wondering if this would ever come up here! ... it seems so  
similar to the PrintFIX/Spyder3 package i figure it was developed in  
response to the Colorvision product niche. must mean Colorvision has  
been very popular indeed.

ghi

On Mar 31, 2008, at 7:24 PM, elvissivle77 wrote:

> Thanks for all of your responses. Sounds like the consensus is that  
> the Spyder3 bundle
> would fit the bill. Now, and i'm somewhat hesitant to bring this up  
> in the colorvision
> forum, but today I stumbled upon a new x-rite product (colormunki)  
> that is supposedly
> being released here any day. Since the product lacks reviews thus  
> far I understand that it's
> not possible to get performance feedback. The price is comparable to  
> the Spyder system;
> any initial thoughts? Anyone have experience with any X-Rite product  
> here? Again, I
> apologize if i've offended anyone in the forum ; )
>

--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, "elvissivle77" <rasianator@...> wrote:

> As it stands now we are using Epson profiles, which don't match up close enough 
> for our liking; a lot of paper/ink being wasted on test strips and so on. I know that prices for 
> custom profiling software can cost an upwards of few $1000. My question: does anyone have 
> an opinion as to whether or not the Spyder3 would be sufficient in creating profiles for this 
> type of environment or would we be better off spending the extra $$ for the higher end 
> systems? For those of you with experience, is there a significantly noticeable difference 
> between the quality of Epsons canned profiles vs those made with the Spyder3? 

Spyder3 and PrintFix Pro 2+3 builds profiles at least equal to the Xrite's EyeOne that costs about 3 times as much. There is no 
way that Xrite would build the Munki to produce profiles equal to the EyeOne as that would undercut EyeOne sales.

Also the design of the Munki looks like light would leak in from the side while calibrating monitors.

The Munki doesn't impress...least it's name.

Well then, i'm sold! I'll be looking forward to getting the Spyder3/PFP here soon. Thanks to 
everyone for all of your input; made my decision much easier : ) It's particularly nice to 
have received feedback from those, like myself, who manage student labs. The 3 computer 
limitation of the Colormunki definitely would not do...thank goodness I found this forum! 
Thanks again everyone! 

--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, CDTobie@... wrote:
>
> 
> In a message dated 3/31/08 10:24:35 PM, rasianator@... writes:
> 
> 
> > today I stumbled upon a new x-rite product (colormunki) that is supposedly
> > being released here any day. Since the product lacks reviews thus far I 
> > understand that it's
> > not possible to get performance feedback.
> > 
> I've spoken to several beta testers, including one who runs a university 
> photography program, and who contacted me because, even though she now has a free 
> ColorMunki, she would like to purchase Spyder3Studio... <G>
> 
> There will be more on this later, once the "honeymoon period" where only 
> their testers have tried it is over, but the target market for the CMunki is 
> amateurs and less serious photographers, and it is limited to reading 50 to 100 
> patches to build printer profiles. No magic can produce a gallery quality profile 
> from that amount of data. It is also limited to calibrating three computers, 
> so would not fit your needs for digital studios and classrooms.
> 
> C. David Tobie
> WW Product Technology Manager
> Digital Imaging & Home Theater
> Datacolor
> CDTobie@...
> www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
> 
> 
> **************
> Create a Home Theater Like the Pros. 
> Watch the video on AOL Home.
>       
> (http://home.aol.com/diy/home-improvement-eric-stromer?
video=15&ncid=aolhom00030000000001)
>

See what digitaldog (a nickname in one of the other forum)say about
the Munki. He did give a hard time on PrintFix Pro :-)