Datacolor User to User Support Group.

On Aug 18, 2009, at 1:51 PM, "zaxman94611" <lotus@...> wrote:

> I have some legacy hardware, a Fuji Lannovia scanner, that must be  
> run from a OS 9 platform, so I have a G4.
> I had to get a new monitor and now would like to use my Spyder III  
> to calibrate and profile it.
> Is this possible ?
>
> TIA
>
>
> J.Z.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

--- In datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com, Bob Petruska wrote:
>
> I currently have a Canon I950 photo printer that I'm very happy with
> the printout image quality, but it never really matches the monitor
> to where I'm extremely happy. I use Spyder3Print for printer
> calibration. My NEC monitor is calibrated and the image on it looks
> extremely close to what I see in the real world. The Canon I950 is
> a 6 color dye based ink printer. It is starting to give me some
> trouble and looks like it is time to find a replacement.
>
> So my question is what is the best printer out there for photography
> work that will match my monitor as close as possible using
> Spyder3Print for printer calibration? Thus I would like to print my
> targets, scan them in, and be as close as possible to the screen
> colors. I really don't want to spend months of printing and adding
> brightness and contrast to printer profiles as I have done that with
> the Canon I950 and I consumed a ton of ink and paper until I got it close.
>
> I don't want to spend more than $500 - 700 if possible. I only do 8X10s max.

Basically what is needed is 1) a monitor that has been color calibrated to some a standard, 2) printer color profiles that are for the particular printer, ink and paper combination you want to use and 3) an application that allows you to manipulate and print your images in a color managed environment (such as Photoshop).

If the monitor is not calibrated to a standard value and maintained at the standard, then the ability to see the image as it is going to look when printed is not possible. There are different standards that people maintain works the best for this but, at least for PCs, the basic one seems to be using a gamma of 2.2 and a color tempature of 6500 Kelvin. The brigtness needed depends on the working environment - I am finding that 100cd/m2 works for me. I use the Spyder3 Elite package to profile the monitor but have recently started to use only the colorimeter with the Eiso profiling software for my Eiso monitor.

You will need to run an application that supports color management and allows for "soft proofing" using profile created for the output printer, ink and paper combination. The match will be close but never perfect. Depending on the printer, ink and paper you use, you will find that you have to make adjustments to an image that looks great on the screen in order to make it look that way on a print. For example, I have an Epson SP4000 and I print on a non brightened,matte paper. I find that I have to add some extra "punch" to the image to compensate for this combination - up the brightness, contrast and, in some cases, the color saturation. I use Photoshop CS4 to do my work and print directly from it.

I use the PrintFix Pro product to create custom profiles for my printer, ink and paper combinations. The paper vendor offers profiles for the SP4000 printer but I decided to create my own to get better control as while generic profiles will work, ones built specifically for your printer will work the best. I haven't (yet) done it but I really should rebuild the profiles for each new batch of paper I get from the vendor if I want to be 100% sure.

I also have an Epson PictureMate for doing snapshots (4x6). I use a generic profile for the paper with it and have had good luck. The particular paper/ink used with it requires very little changes to account for the paper/ink as opposed to the viewed image; in fact, there are usually no changes.

One other thing. Your print viewing environment can drastically effect how the print looks. Normal color management is setup for daylight viewing where as most indoor lighting is not daylight. I have an OTT-Light that does a good job of letting me see what the print will look like under daylight as opposed to the incandesent lights in my work area.

So, the net is, in my opinion, you buy a good printer, find a paper you like and then get the monitor profiled to a standard and get profiles for the printer, ink and paper and it should work.

Some time back, I bought the book "Real World Color Management" (2nd Edition) by Bruce Fraser, Chris Murphy and Fred Bunting to try to understand color management. I happen to think it is one of the best books out there on the subject.

I hope this helps,
Rollin

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Petruska <petruska@...>
To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, Aug 19, 2009 5:31 pm
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with Spyder3Print














        














Rolin,


Thanks for the reply.? I was trying to imply in my original post
that I have done everything that you listed.? I do have my NEC
monitor calibrated with the I1D2 calibrator and my NEC is internally
hardware profiled.? I would say that it is very close to being right
one matching the real world.? I use Spyder3Print to calibrate my
printers. I also use color management aware Nikon Capture NX2 and
CS4.? And I did read that "book"!?? 


What I was getting at is to buy the latest printer that will give will
generate printer profiles more accurately than what I'm getting now from
my Canon I950 6 color printer.


After spending all night I have decided that the newer Canon PXIMA PRO
9000 Mark II 8 color printer is the way that I'm going to go.?
Hopefully my Spyder3Print profiles will be more accurate with the
additional 2 colors and will reduce my profile tweaking time do to days
not weeks!





Bob P.







At 01:57 PM 8/19/2009, you wrote:


? 


--- In

datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com, Bob Petruska <petruska@...>
wrote:

>

> I currently have a Canon I950 photo printer that I'm very happy with


> the printout image quality, but it never really matches the monitor


> to where I'm extremely happy. I use Spyder3Print for printer 

> calibration. My NEC monitor is calibrated and the image on it looks


> extremely close to what I see in the real world. The Canon I950 is


> a 6 color dye based ink printer. It is starting to give me some


> trouble and looks like it is time to find a replacement.

> 

> So my question is what is the best printer out there for photography


> work that will match my monitor as close as possible using 

> Spyder3Print for printer calibration? Thus I would like to print my


> targets, scan them in, and be as close as possible to the screen


> colors. I really don't want to spend months of printing and adding


> brightness and contrast to printer profiles as I have done that with


> the Canon I950 and I consumed a ton of ink and paper until I got it
close.

> 

> I don't want to spend more than $500 - 700 if possible. I only do
8X10s max.


Basically what is needed is 1) a monitor that has been color calibrated
to some a standard, 2) printer color profiles that are for the particular
printer, ink and paper combination you want to use and 3) an application
that allows you to manipulate and print your images in a color managed
environment (such as Photoshop). 


If the monitor is not calibrated to a standard value and maintained at
the standard, then the ability to see the image as it is going to look
when printed is not possible. There are different standards that people
maintain works the best for this but, at least for PCs, the basic one
seems to be using a gamma of 2.2 and a color tempature of 6500 Kelvin.
The brigtness needed depends on the working environment - I am finding
that 100cd/m2 works for me. I use the Spyder3 Elite package to profile
the monitor but have recently started to use only the colorimeter with
the Eiso profiling software for my Eiso monitor. 


You will need to run an application that supports color management and
allows for "soft proofing" using profile created for the output
printer, ink and paper combination. The match will be close but never
perfect. Depending on the printer, ink and paper you use, you will find
that you have to make adjustments to an image that looks great on the
screen in order to make it look that way on a print. For example, I have
an Epson SP4000 and I print on a non brightened,matte paper. I find that
I have to add some extra "punch" to the image to compensate for
this combination - up the brightness, contrast and, in some cases, the
color saturation. I use Photoshop CS4 to do my work and print directly
from it.


I use the PrintFix Pro product to create custom profiles for my printer,
ink and paper combinations. The paper vendor offers profiles for the
SP4000 printer but I decided to create my own to get better control as
while generic profiles will work, ones built specifically for your
printer will work the best. I haven't (yet) done it but I really should
rebuild the profiles for each new batch of paper I get from the vendor if
I want to be 100% sure.


I also have an Epson PictureMate for doing snapshots (4x6). I use a
generic profile for the paper with it and have had good luck. The
particular paper/ink used with it requires very little changes to account
for the paper/ink as opposed to the viewed image; in fact, there are
usually no changes.


One other thing. Your print viewing environment can drastically effect
how the print looks. Normal color management is setup for daylight
viewing where as most indoor lighting is not daylight. I have an
OTT-Light that does a good job of letting me see what the print will look
like under daylight as opposed to the incandesent lights in my work
area.


So, the net is, in my opinion, you buy a good printer, find a paper you
like and then get the monitor profiled to a standard and get profiles for
the printer, ink and paper and it should work.


Some time back, I bought the book "Real World Color Management"
(2nd Edition) by Bruce Fraser, Chris Murphy and Fred Bunting to try to
understand color management. I happen to think it is one of the best
books out there on the subject.


I hope this helps,

Rollin

From: Bob Petruska
To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, Aug 19, 2009 5:31 pm
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with Spyder3Print



Rolin,

Thanks for the reply. I was trying to imply in my original post that I have done everything that you listed. I do have my NEC monitor calibrated with the I1D2 calibrator and my NEC is internally hardware profiled. I would say that it is very close to being right one matching the real world. I use Spyder3Print to calibrate my printers. I also use color management aware Nikon Capture NX2 and CS4. And I did read that "book"!

What I was getting at is to buy the latest printer that will give will generate printer profiles more accurately than what I'm getting now from my Canon I950 6 color printer.

After spending all night I have decided that the newer Canon PXIMA PRO 9000 Mark II 8 color printer is the way that I'm going to go. Hopefully my Spyder3Print profiles will be more accurate with the additional 2 colors and will reduce my profile tweaking time do to days not weeks!



Bob P.




At 01:57 PM 8/19/2009, you wrote:

--- In datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com, Bob Petruska wrote:
>
> I currently have a Canon I950 photo printer that I'm very happy with
> the printout image quality, but it never really matches the monitor
> to where I'm extremely happy. I use Spyder3Print for printer
> calibration. My NEC monitor is calibrated and the image on it looks
> extremely close to what I see in the real world. The Canon I950 is
> a 6 color dye based ink printer. It is starting to give me some
> trouble and looks like it is time to find a replacement.
>
> So my question is what is the best printer out there for photography
> work that will match my monitor as close as possible using
> Spyder3Print for printer calibration? Thus I would like to print my
> targets, scan them in, and be as close as possible to the screen
> colors. I really don't want to spend months of printing and adding
> brightness and contrast to printer profiles as I have done that with
> the Canon I950 and I consumed a ton of ink and paper until I got it close.
>
> I don't want to spend more than $500 - 700 if possible. I only do 8X10s max.

Basically what is needed is 1) a monitor that has been color calibrated to some a standard, 2) printer color profiles that are for the particular printer, ink and paper combination you want to use and 3) an application that allows you to manipulate and print your images in a color managed environment (such as Photoshop).

If the monitor is not calibrated to a standard value and maintained at the standard, then the ability to see the image as it is going to look when printed is not possible. There are different standards that people maintain works the best for this but, at least for PCs, the basic one seems to be using a gamma of 2.2 and a color tempature of 6500 Kelvin. The brigtness needed depends on the working environment - I am finding that 100cd/m2 works for me. I use the Spyder3 Elite package to profile the monitor but have recently started to use only the colorimeter with the Eiso profiling software for my Eiso monitor.

You will need to run an application that supports color management and allows for "soft proofing" using profile created for the output printer, ink and paper combination. The match will be close but never perfect. Depending on the printer, ink and paper you use, you will find that you have to make adjustments to an image that looks great on the screen in order to make it look that way on a print. For example, I have an Epson SP4000 and I print on a non brightened,matte paper. I find that I have to add some extra "punch" to the image to compensate for this combination - up the brightness, contrast and, in some cases, the color saturation. I use Photoshop CS4 to do my work and print directly from it.

I use the PrintFix Pro product to create custom profiles for my printer, ink and paper combinations. The paper vendor offers profiles for the SP4000 printer but I decided to create my own to get better control as while generic profiles will work, ones built specifically for your printer will work the best. I haven't (yet) done it but I really should rebuild the profiles for each new batch of paper I get from the vendor if I want to be 100% sure.

I also have an Epson PictureMate for doing snapshots (4x6). I use a generic profile for the paper with it and have had good luck. The particular paper/ink used with it requires very little changes to account for the paper/ink as opposed to the viewed image; in fact, there are usually no changes.

One other thing. Your print viewing environment can drastically effect how the print looks. Normal color management is setup for daylight viewing where as most indoor lighting is not daylight. I have an OTT-Light that does a good job of letting me see what the print will look like under daylight as opposed to the incandesent lights in my work area.

So, the net is, in my opinion, you buy a good printer, find a paper you like and then get the monitor profiled to a standard and get profiles for the printer, ink and paper and it should work.

Some time back, I bought the book "Real World Color Management" (2nd Edition) by Bruce Fraser, Chris Murphy and Fred Bunting to try to understand color management. I happen to think it is one of the best books out there on the subject.

I hope this helps,
Rollin

From: Bob Petruska
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with Spyder3Print
To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, August 20, 2009, 8:46 PM

Dave,

I'm just best guessing at what to buy. I do like the 9500 pigment inks, but reviews say that the photos lack the vivid colors and punch.

Do you have any suggestions for what printer I should look at? I have a bad taste with Epson with all the clogging in the past, maybe that has changed?


Thanks,

Bob P.



At 07:11 AM 8/20/2009, you wrote:

After spending all night I have decided that the newer Canon PXIMA PRO 9000 Mark II 8 color printer is the way that I'm going to go

This is a dye printer. Haven't tested the Mark II but I never liked the first version; its grays are not at all stable, and turn terrible colors under differing light sources. The 9500's pigment inks, on the other hand, are great, though the printer is slower, due to the pigments.

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


-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Petruska
To: datacolor_group@ yahoogroups. com
Sent: Wed, Aug 19, 2009 5:31 pm
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with Spyder3Print



Rolin,

Thanks for the reply. I was trying to imply in my original post that I have done everything that you listed. I do have my NEC monitor calibrated with the I1D2 calibrator and my NEC is internally hardware profiled. I would say that it is very close to being right one matching the real world. I use Spyder3Print to calibrate my printers. I also use color management aware Nikon Capture NX2 and CS4. And I did read that "book"!

What I was getting at is to buy the latest printer that will give will generate printer profiles more accurately than what I'm getting now from my Canon I950 6 color printer.

After spending all night I have decided that the newer Canon PXIMA PRO 9000 Mark II 8 color printer is the way that I'm going to go. Hopefully my Spyder3Print profiles will be more accurate with the additional 2 colors and will reduce my profile tweaking time do to days not weeks!



Bob P.




At 01:57 PM 8/19/2009, you wrote:

--- In datacolor_group@ yahoogroups. com, Bob Petruska wrote:
>
> I currently have a Canon I950 photo printer that I'm very happy with
> the printout image quality, but it never really matches the monitor
> to where I'm extremely happy. I use Spyder3Print for printer
> calibration. My NEC monitor is calibrated and the image on it looks
> extremely close to what I see in the real world. The Canon I950 is
> a 6 color dye based ink printer. It is starting to give me some
> trouble and looks like it is time to find a replacement.
>
> So my question is what is the best printer out there for photography
> work that will match my monitor as close as possible using
> Spyder3Print for printer calibration? Thus I would like to print my
> targets, scan them in, and be as close as possible to the screen
> colors. I really don't want to spend months of printing and adding
> brightness and contrast to printer profiles as I have done that with
> the Canon I950 and I consumed a ton of ink and paper until I got it close.
>
> I don't want to spend more than $500 - 700 if possible. I only do 8X10s max.

Basically what is needed is 1) a monitor that has been color calibrated to some a standard, 2) printer color profiles that are for the particular printer, ink and paper combination you want to use and 3) an application that allows you to manipulate and print your images in a color managed environment (such as Photoshop).

If the monitor is not calibrated to a standard value and maintained at the standard, then the ability to see the image as it is going to look when printed is not possible. There are different standards that people maintain works the best for this but, at least for PCs, the basic one seems to be using a gamma of 2.2 and a color tempature of 6500 Kelvin. The brigtness needed depends on the working environment - I am finding that 100cd/m2 works for me. I use the Spyder3 Elite package to profile the monitor but have recently started to use only the colorimeter with the Eiso profiling software for my Eiso monitor.

You will need to run an application that supports color management and allows for "soft proofing" using profile created for the output printer, ink and paper combination. The match will be close but never perfect. Depending on the printer, ink and paper you use, you will find that you have to make adjustments to an image that looks great on the screen in order to make it look that way on a print. For example, I have an Epson SP4000 and I print on a non brightened,matte paper. I find that I have to add some extra "punch" to the image to compensate for this combination - up the brightness, contrast and, in some cases, the color saturation. I use Photoshop CS4 to do my work and print directly from it.

I use the PrintFix Pro product to create custom profiles for my printer, ink and paper combinations. The paper vendor offers profiles for the SP4000 printer but I decided to create my own to get better control as while generic profiles will work, ones built specifically for your printer will work the best. I haven't (yet) done it but I really should rebuild the profiles for each new batch of paper I get from the vendor if I want to be 100% sure.

I also have an Epson PictureMate for doing snapshots (4x6). I use a generic profile for the paper with it and have had good luck. The particular paper/ink used with it requires very little changes to account for the paper/ink as opposed to the viewed image; in fact, there are usually no changes.

One other thing. Your print viewing environment can drastically effect how the print looks. Normal color management is setup for daylight viewing where as most indoor lighting is not daylight. I have an OTT-Light that does a good job of letting me see what the print will look like under daylight as opposed to the incandesent lights in my work area.

So, the net is, in my opinion, you buy a good printer, find a paper you like and then get the monitor profiled to a standard and get profiles for the printer, ink and paper and it should work.

Some time back, I bought the book "Real World Color Management" (2nd Edition) by Bruce Fraser, Chris Murphy and Fred Bunting to try to understand color management. I happen to think it is one of the best books out there on the subject.

I hope this helps,
Rollin

From: Bob Petruska
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with Spyder3Print
To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, August 20, 2009, 8:46 PM



Dave,

I'm just best guessing at what to buy. I do like the 9500 pigment inks, but reviews say that the photos lack the vivid colors and punch.

Do you have any suggestions for what printer I should look at? ; I have a bad taste with Epson with all the clogging in the past, maybe that has changed?


Thanks,

Bob P.



At 07:11 AM 8/20/2009, you wrote:

After spending all night I have decided that the newer Canon PXIMA PRO 9000 Mark II 8 color printer is the way that I'm going to go

This is a dye printer. Haven't tested the Mark II but I never liked the first version; its grays are not at all stable, and turn terrible colors under differing light sources. The 9500's pigment inks, on the other hand, are great, though the printer is slower, due to the pigments.

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


-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Petruska
To: datacolor_group@ yahoogroups. com
Sent: Wed, Aug 19, 2009 5:31 pm
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with Spyder3Print



Rolin,

Thanks for the reply. I was trying to imply in my original post that I have done everything that you listed. I do have my NEC monitor calibrated with the I1D2 calibrator and my NEC is internally hardware profiled. I would say that it is very close to being right one matching the real world. I use Spyder3Print to calibrate my printers. I also use color management aware Nikon Capture NX2 and CS4. And I did read that "book"!

What I was getting at is to buy the latest printer that will give will generate printer profiles more accurately than what I'm getting now from my Canon I950 6 color printer.

After spending all night I have decided that the newer Canon PXIMA PRO 9000 Mark II 8 color printer is the way that I'm going to go. Hopefully my Spyder3Print profiles will be more accurate with the additional 2 colors and will reduce my profile tweaking time do to days not weeks!



Bob P.




At 01:57 PM 8/19/2009, you wrote:

--- In datacolor_group@ yahoogroups. com, Bob Petruska wrote:
>
> I currently have a Canon I950 photo printer that I'm very happy with
> the printout image quality, but it never really matches the monitor
> to where I'm extremely happy. I use Spyder3Print for printer
> calibration. My NEC monitor is calibrated and the image on it looks
> extremely close to what I see in the real world. The Canon I950 is
> a 6 color dye based ink printer. It is starting to give me some
> trouble and looks like it is time to find a replacement.
>
> So my question is what is the best printer out there for photography
> work that will match my monitor as close as possible using
> Spyder3Print for printer calibration? Thus I would like to print my
> targets, scan them in, and be as close as possible to the screen
> colors. I really don't want to spend months of printing and adding
> brightness and contrast to printer profiles as I have done that with
> the Canon I950 and I consumed a ton of ink and paper until I got it close.
>
> I don't want to spend more than $500 - 700 if possible. I only do 8X10s max.

Basically what is needed is 1) a monitor that has been color calibrated to some a standard, 2) printer color profiles that are for the particular printer, ink and paper combination you want to use and 3) an application that allows you to manipulate and print your images in a color managed environment (such as Photoshop).

If the monitor is not calibrated to a standard value and maintained at the standard, then the ability to see the image as it is going to look when printed is not possible. There are different standards that people maintain works the best for this but, at least for PCs, the basic one seems to be using a gamma of 2.2 and a color tempature of 6500 Kelvin. The brigtness needed depends on the working environment - I am finding that 100cd/m2 works for me. I use the Spyder3 Elite package to profile the monitor but have recently started to use only the colorimeter with the Eiso profiling software for my Eiso monitor.

You will need to run an application that supports color management and allows for "soft proofing" using profile created for the output printer, ink and paper combination. The match will be close but never perfect. Depending on the printer, ink and paper you use, you will find that you have to make adjustments to an image that looks great on the screen in order to make it look that way on a print. For example, I have an Epson SP4000 and I print on a non brightened,matte paper. I find that I have to add some extra "punch" to the image to compensate for this combination - up the brightness, contrast and, in some cases, the color saturation. I use Photoshop CS4 to do my work and print directly from it.

I use the PrintFix Pro product to create custom profiles for my printer, ink and paper combinations. The paper vendor offers profiles for the SP4000 printer but I decided to create my own to get better control as while generic profiles will work, ones built specifically for your printer will work the best. I haven't (yet) done it but I really should rebuild the profiles for each new batch of paper I get from the vendor if I want to be 100% sure.

I also have an Epson PictureMate for doing snapshots (4x6). I use a generic profile for the paper with it and have had good luck. The particular paper/ink used with it requires very little changes to account for the paper/ink as opposed to the viewed image; in fact, there are usually no changes.

One other thing. Your print viewing environment can drastically effect how the print looks. Normal color management is setup for daylight viewing where as most indoor lighting is not daylight. I have an OTT-Light that does a good job of letting me see what the print will look like under daylight as opposed to the incandesent lights in my work area.

So, the net is, in my opinion, you buy a good printer, find a paper you like and then get the monitor profiled to a standard and get profiles for the printer, ink and paper and it should work.

Some time back, I bought the book "Real World Color Management" (2nd Edition) by Bruce Fraser, Chris Murphy and Fred Bunting to try to understand color management. I happen to think it is one of the best books out there on the subject.

I hope this helps,
Rollin

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Petruska <petruska@...>
To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, Aug 20, 2009 11:46 pm
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with Spyder3Print














        














Dave,


I'm just best guessing at what to buy.? I do like the 9500 pigment
inks, but reviews say that the photos lack the vivid colors and
punch.


Do you have any suggestions for what printer I should look at?? I
have a bad taste with Epson with all the clogging in the past, maybe that
has changed?




Thanks,


Bob P.





At 07:11 AM 8/20/2009, you wrote:


? 








After spending all night I have decided that the newer Canon PXIMA
PRO 9000 Mark II 8 color printer is the way that I'm going to go





This is a dye printer. Haven't tested the Mark II but I never liked
the first version; its grays are not at all stable, and turn terrible
colors under differing light sources. The 9500's pigment inks, on the
other hand, are great, though the printer is slower, due to the
pigments.


C. David Tobie

Global Product Technology Manager

Digital Imaging & Home Theater

Datacolor

CDTobie@...


www.datacolor.com/Spyder3




-----Original Message-----

From: Bob Petruska <petruska@...>

To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Wed, Aug 19, 2009 5:31 pm

Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with
Spyder3Print





Rolin,


Thanks for the reply.? I was trying to imply in my original post
that I have done everything that you listed.? I do have my NEC
monitor calibrated with the I1D2 calibrator and my NEC is internally
hardware profiled.? I would say that it is very close to being right
one matching the real world.? I use Spyder3Print to calibrate my
printers. I also use color management aware Nikon Capture NX2 and
CS4.? And I did read that "book"!?? 


What I was getting at is to buy the latest printer that will give will
generate printer profiles more accurately than what I'm getting now from
my Canon I950 6 color printer.


After spending all night I have decided that the newer Canon PXIMA PRO
9000 Mark II 8 color printer is the way that I'm going to go.?
Hopefully my Spyder3Print profiles will be more accurate with the
additional 2 colors and will reduce my profile tweaking time do to days
not weeks!





Bob P.







At 01:57 PM 8/19/2009, you wrote:


? 


--- In

datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com, Bob Petruska <petruska@...>
wrote:

>

> I currently have a Canon I950 photo printer that I'm very happy with


> the printout image quality, but it never really matches the monitor


> to where I'm extremely happy. I use Spyder3Print for printer 

> calibration. My NEC monitor is calibrated and the image on it looks


> extremely close to what I see in the real world. The Canon I950 is


> a 6 color dye based ink printer. It is starting to give me some


> trouble and looks like it is time to find a replacement.

> 

> So my question is what is the best printer out there for photography


> work that will match my monitor as close as possible using 

> Spyder3Print for printer calibration? Thus I would like to print my


> targets, scan them in, and be as close as possible to the screen


> colors. I really don't want to spend months of printing and adding


> brightness and contrast to printer profiles as I have done that with


> the Canon I950 and I consumed a ton of ink and paper until I got it
close.

> 

> I don't want to spend more than $500 - 700 if possible. I only do
8X10s max.


Basically what is needed is 1) a monitor that has been color calibrated
to some a standard, 2) printer color profiles that are for the particular
printer, ink and paper combination you want to use and 3) an application
that allows you to manipulate and print your images in a color managed
environment (such as Photoshop). 


If the monitor is not calibrated to a standard value and maintained at
the standard, then the ability to see the image as it is going to look
when printed is not possible. There are different standards that people
maintain works the best for this but, at least for PCs, the basic one
seems to be using a gamma of 2.2 and a color tempature of 6500 Kelvin.
The brigtness needed depends on the working environment - I am finding
that 100cd/m2 works for me. I use the Spyder3 Elite package to profile
the monitor but have recently started to use only the colorimeter with
the Eiso profiling software for my Eiso monitor. 


You will need to run an application that supports color management and
allows for "soft proofing" using profile created for the output
printer, ink and paper combination. The match will be close but never
perfect. Depending on the printer, ink and paper you use, you will find
that you have to make adjustments to an image that looks great on the
screen in order to make it look that way on a print. For example, I have
an Epson SP4000 and I print on a non brightened,matte paper. I find that
I have to add some extra "punch" to the image to compensate for
this combination - up the brightness, contrast and, in some cases, the
color saturation. I use Photoshop CS4 to do my work and print directly
from it.


I use the PrintFix Pro product to create custom profiles for my printer,
ink and paper combinations. The paper vendor offers profiles for the
SP4000 printer but I decided to create my own to get better control as
while generic profiles will work, ones built specifically for your
printer will work the best. I haven't (yet) done it but I really should
rebuild the profiles for each new batch of paper I get from the vendor if
I want to be 100% sure.


I also have an Epson PictureMate for doing snapshots (4x6). I use a
generic profile for the paper with it and have had good luck. The
particular paper/ink used with it requires very little changes to account
for the paper/ink as opposed to the viewed image; in fact, there are
usually no changes.


One other thing. Your print viewing environment can drastically effect
how the print looks. Normal color management is setup for daylight
viewing where as most indoor lighting is not daylight. I have an
OTT-Light that does a good job of letting me see what the print will look
like under daylight as opposed to the incandesent lights in my work
area.


So, the net is, in my opinion, you buy a good printer, find a paper you
like and then get the monitor profiled to a standard and get profiles for
the printer, ink and paper and it should work.


Some time back, I bought the book "Real World Color Management"
(2nd Edition) by Bruce Fraser, Chris Murphy and Fred Bunting to try to
understand color management. I happen to think it is one of the best
books out there on the subject.


I hope this helps,

Rollin

-----Original Message-----
From: Dwain Morse <dawgshair@...>
To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, Aug 21, 2009 8:54 am
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with  Spyder3Print














        




















I own the 9500 and I don't see that problem.? Perhaps they are not processing correctly, wrong profiles?? I just ran a shot from the studio I took the other day, through the 9500 with a vivid red colored dress and it was great.

--- On Thu, 8/20/09, Bob Petruska <petruska@...> wrote:


From: Bob Petruska <petruska@...>
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with  Spyder3Print
To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, August 20, 2009, 8:46 PM









    

                  


Dave,


I'm just best guessing at what to buy.? I do like the 9500 pigment
inks, but reviews say that the photos lack the vivid colors and
punch.


Do you have any suggestions for what printer I should look at?? I
have a bad taste with Epson with all the clogging in the past, maybe that
has changed?




Thanks,


Bob P.





At 07:11 AM 8/20/2009, you wrote:



? 








After spending all night I have decided that the newer Canon PXIMA
PRO 9000 Mark II 8 color printer is the way that I'm going to go





This is a dye printer. Haven't tested the Mark II but I never liked
the first version; its grays are not at all stable, and turn terrible
colors under differing light sources. The 9500's pigment inks, on the
other hand, are great, though the printer is slower, due to the
pigments.


C. David Tobie

Global Product Technology Manager

Digital Imaging & Home Theater

Datacolor

CDTobie@datacolor. com


www.datacolor. com/Spyder3




-----Original Message-----

From: Bob Petruska <petruska@microserve .net>

To: datacolor_group@ yahoogroups. com

Sent: Wed, Aug 19, 2009 5:31 pm

Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with
Spyder3Print





Rolin,


Thanks for the reply.? I was trying to imply in my original post
that I have done everything that you listed.? I do have my NEC
monitor calibrated with the I1D2 calibrator and my NEC is internally
hardware profiled.? I would say that it is very close to being right
one matching the real world.? I use Spyder3Print to calibrate my
printers. I also use color management aware Nikon Capture NX2 and
CS4.? And I did read that "book"!?? 


What I was getting at is to buy the latest printer that will give will
generate printer profiles more accurately than what I'm getting now from
my Canon I950 6 color printer.


After spending all night I have decided that the newer Canon PXIMA PRO
9000 Mark II 8 color printer is the way that I'm going to go.?
Hopefully my Spyder3Print profiles will be more accurate with the
additional 2 colors and will reduce my profile tweaking time do to days
not weeks!





Bob P.







At 01:57 PM 8/19/2009, you wrote:


? 


--- In

datacolor_group@ yahoogroups. com, Bob Petruska <petruska@...>
wrote:

>

> I currently have a Canon I950 photo printer that I'm very happy with


> the printout image quality, but it never really matches the monitor


> to where I'm extremely happy. I use Spyder3Print for printer 

> calibration. My NEC monitor is calibrated and the image on it looks


> extremely close to what I see in the real world. The Canon I950 is


> a 6 color dye based ink printer. It is starting to give me some


> trouble and looks like it is time to find a replacement.

> 

> So my question is what is the best printer out there for photography


> work that will match my monitor as close as possible using 

> Spyder3Print for printer calibration? Thus I would like to print my


> targets, scan them in, and be as close as possible to the screen


> colors. I really don't want to spend months of printing and adding


> brightness and contrast to printer profiles as I have done that with


> the Canon I950 and I consumed a ton of ink and paper until I got it
close.

> 

> I don't want to spend more than $500 - 700 if possible. I only do
8X10s max.


Basically what is needed is 1) a monitor that has been color calibrated
to some a standard, 2) printer color profiles that are for the particular
printer, ink and paper combination you want to use and 3) an application
that allows you to manipulate and print your images in a color managed
environment (such as Photoshop). 


If the monitor is not calibrated to a standard value and maintained at
the standard, then the ability to see the image as it is going to look
when printed is not possible. There are different standards that people
maintain works the best for this but, at least for PCs, the basic one
seems to be using a gamma of 2.2 and a color tempature of 6500 Kelvin.
The brigtness needed depends on the working environment - I am finding
that 100cd/m2 works for me. I use the Spyder3 Elite package to profile
the monitor but have recently started to use only the colorimeter with
the Eiso profiling software for my Eiso monitor. 


You will need to run an application that supports color management and
allows for "soft proofing" using profile created for the output
printer, ink and paper combination. The match will be close but never
perfect. Depending on the printer, ink and paper you use, you will find
that you have to make adjustments to an image that looks great on the
screen in order to make it look that way on a print. For example, I have
an Epson SP4000 and I print on a non brightened,matte paper. I find that
I have to add some extra "punch" to the image to compensate for
this combination - up the brightness, contrast and, in some cases, the
color saturation. I use Photoshop CS4 to do my work and print directly
from it.


I use the PrintFix Pro product to create custom profiles for my printer,
ink and paper combinations. The paper vendor offers profiles for the
SP4000 printer but I decided to create my own to get better control as
while generic profiles will work, ones built specifically for your
printer will work the best. I haven't (yet) done it but I really should
rebuild the profiles for each new batch of paper I get from the vendor if
I want to be 100% sure.


I also have an Epson PictureMate for doing snapshots (4x6). I use a
generic profile for the paper with it and have had good luck. The
particular paper/ink used with it requires very little changes to account
for the paper/ink as opposed to the viewed image; in fact, there are
usually no changes.


One other thing. Your print viewing environment can drastically effect
how the print looks. Normal color management is setup for daylight
viewing where as most indoor lighting is not daylight. I have an
OTT-Light that does a good job of letting me see what the print will look
like under daylight as opposed to the incandesent lights in my work
area.


So, the net is, in my opinion, you buy a good printer, find a paper you
like and then get the monitor profiled to a standard and get profiles for
the printer, ink and paper and it should work.


Some time back, I bought the book "Real World Color Management"
(2nd Edition) by Bruce Fraser, Chris Murphy and Fred Bunting to try to
understand color management. I happen to think it is one of the best
books out there on the subject.


I hope this helps,

Rollin

On Aug 21, 2009, at 2:48 PM, CDTobie wrote:

>
> I own the 9500 and I don't see that problem.  Perhaps they are not  
> processing correctly, wrong profiles?  I just ran a shot from the  
> studio I took the other day, through the 9500 with a vivid red  
> colored dress and it was great.
> Pigments look great, unless you are used to dyes, and glossy media.  
> Its a painful change over from dyes to pigs, when it first happens;  
> but later, you can't remember what all the fuss was about...
>
> C. David Tobie
> Global Product Technology Manager
> Digital Imaging & Home Theater
> Datacolor
> CDTobie@...
> www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dwain Morse <dawgshair@...>
> To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Fri, Aug 21, 2009 8:54 am
> Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with  
> Spyder3Print
>
>
>
> I own the 9500 and I don't see that problem.  Perhaps they are not  
> processing correctly, wrong profiles?  I just ran a shot from the  
> studio I took the other day, through the 9500 with a vivid red  
> colored dress and it was great.
>
> --- On Thu, 8/20/09, Bob Petruska <petruska@...> wrote:
>
> From: Bob Petruska <petruska@...>
> Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with  
> Spyder3Print
> To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Thursday, August 20, 2009, 8:46 PM
>
>
> Dave,
>
> I'm just best guessing at what to buy.  I do like the 9500 pigment  
> inks, but reviews say that the photos lack the vivid colors and punch.
>
> Do you have any suggestions for what printer I should look at?  I  
> have a bad taste with Epson with all the clogging in the past, maybe  
> that has changed?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bob P.
>
>
>
> At 07:11 AM 8/20/2009, you wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> After spending all night I have decided that the newer Canon PXIMA  
>> PRO 9000 Mark II 8 color printer is the way that I'm going to go
>>
>> This is a dye printer. Haven't tested the Mark II but I never liked  
>> the first version; its grays are not at all stable, and turn  
>> terrible colors under differing light sources. The 9500's pigment  
>> inks, on the other hand, are great, though the printer is slower,  
>> due to the pigments.
>>
>> C. David Tobie
>> Global Product Technology Manager
>> Digital Imaging & Home Theater
>> Datacolor
>> CDTobie@datacolor. com
>> www.datacolor. com/Spyder3
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Bob Petruska <petruska@microserve .net>
>> To: datacolor_group@ yahoogroups. com
>> Sent: Wed, Aug 19, 2009 5:31 pm
>> Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with  
>> Spyder3Print
>>
>>
>>
>> Rolin,
>>
>> Thanks for the reply.  I was trying to imply in my original post  
>> that I have done everything that you listed.  I do have my NEC  
>> monitor calibrated with the I1D2 calibrator and my NEC is  
>> internally hardware profiled.  I would say that it is very close to  
>> being right one matching the real world.  I use Spyder3Print to  
>> calibrate my printers. I also use color management aware Nikon  
>> Capture NX2 and CS4.  And I did read that "book"!
>>
>> What I was getting at is to buy the latest printer that will give  
>> will generate printer profiles more accurately than what I'm  
>> getting now from my Canon I950 6 color printer.
>>
>> After spending all night I have decided that the newer Canon PXIMA  
>> PRO 9000 Mark II 8 color printer is the way that I'm going to go.   
>> Hopefully my Spyder3Print profiles will be more accurate with the  
>> additional 2 colors and will reduce my profile tweaking time do to  
>> days not weeks!
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob P.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> At 01:57 PM 8/19/2009, you wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> --- In datacolor_group@ yahoogroups. com, Bob Petruska  
>>> <petruska@...> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I currently have a Canon I950 photo printer that I'm very happy  
>>> with
>>> > the printout image quality, but it never really matches the  
>>> monitor
>>> > to where I'm extremely happy. I use Spyder3Print for printer
>>> > calibration. My NEC monitor is calibrated and the image on it  
>>> looks
>>> > extremely close to what I see in the real world. The Canon I950 is
>>> > a 6 color dye based ink printer. It is starting to give me some
>>> > trouble and looks like it is time to find a replacement.
>>> >
>>> > So my question is what is the best printer out there for  
>>> photography
>>> > work that will match my monitor as close as possible using
>>> > Spyder3Print for printer calibration? Thus I would like to print  
>>> my
>>> > targets, scan them in, and be as close as possible to the screen
>>> > colors. I really don't want to spend months of printing and adding
>>> > brightness and contrast to printer profiles as I have done that  
>>> with
>>> > the Canon I950 and I consumed a ton of ink and paper until I got  
>>> it close.
>>> >
>>> > I don't want to spend more than $500 - 700 if possible. I only  
>>> do 8X10s max.
>>>
>>> Basically what is needed is 1) a monitor that has been color  
>>> calibrated to some a standard, 2) printer color profiles that are  
>>> for the particular printer, ink and paper combination you want to  
>>> use and 3) an application that allows you to manipulate and print  
>>> your images in a color managed environment (such as Photoshop).
>>>
>>> If the monitor is not calibrated to a standard value and  
>>> maintained at the standard, then the ability to see the image as  
>>> it is going to look when printed is not possible. There are  
>>> different standards that people maintain works the best for this  
>>> but, at least for PCs, the basic one seems to be using a gamma of  
>>> 2.2 and a color tempature of 6500 Kelvin. The brigtness needed  
>>> depends on the working environment - I am finding that 100cd/m2  
>>> works for me. I use the Spyder3 Elite package to profile the  
>>> monitor but have recently started to use only the colorimeter with  
>>> the Eiso profiling software for my Eiso monitor.
>>>
>>> You will need to run an application that supports color management  
>>> and allows for "soft proofing" using profile created for the  
>>> output printer, ink and paper combination. The match will be close  
>>> but never perfect. Depending on the printer, ink and paper you  
>>> use, you will find that you have to make adjustments to an image  
>>> that looks great on the screen in order to make it look that way  
>>> on a print. For example, I have an Epson SP4000 and I print on a  
>>> non brightened,matte paper. I find that I have to add some extra  
>>> "punch" to the image to compensate for this combination - up the  
>>> brightness, contrast and, in some cases, the color saturation. I  
>>> use Photoshop CS4 to do my work and print directly from it.
>>>
>>> I use the PrintFix Pro product to create custom profiles for my  
>>> printer, ink and paper combinations. The paper vendor offers  
>>> profiles for the SP4000 printer but I decided to create my own to  
>>> get better control as while generic profiles will work, ones built  
>>> specifically for your printer will work the best. I haven't (yet)  
>>> done it but I really should rebuild the profiles for each new  
>>> batch of paper I get from the vendor if I want to be 100% sure.
>>>
>>> I also have an Epson PictureMate for doing snapshots (4x6). I use  
>>> a generic profile for the paper with it and have had good luck.  
>>> The particular paper/ink used with it requires very little changes  
>>> to account for the paper/ink as opposed to the viewed image; in  
>>> fact, there are usually no changes.
>>>
>>> One other thing. Your print viewing environment can drastically  
>>> effect how the print looks. Normal color management is setup for  
>>> daylight viewing where as most indoor lighting is not daylight. I  
>>> have an OTT-Light that does a good job of letting me see what the  
>>> print will look like under daylight as opposed to the incandesent  
>>> lights in my work area.
>>>
>>> So, the net is, in my opinion, you buy a good printer, find a  
>>> paper you like and then get the monitor profiled to a standard and  
>>> get profiles for the printer, ink and paper and it should work.
>>>
>>> Some time back, I bought the book "Real World Color  
>>> Management" (2nd Edition) by Bruce Fraser, Chris Murphy and Fred  
>>> Bunting to try to understand color management. I happen to think  
>>> it is one of the best books out there on the subject.
>>>
>>> I hope this helps,
>>> Rollin
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>

On Aug 21, 2009, at 2:07 PM, CDTobie wrote:

>
> >I'm just best guessing at what to buy.  I do like the 9500 pigment  
> inks, but reviews say that the photos lack the vivid colors and punch.
>
> Well, dye has more punch, especially for glossy prints, but for how  
> long? Pigment has the virtue of retaining its look for long enough  
> to justify selling the images. I don't know anyone willing to sell  
> dye prints as art photos any longer...
>
>
> >Do you have any suggestions for what printer I should look at?  I  
> have a bad taste with Epson with all the clogging in the past, maybe  
> that has changed?
>
> It has improved, but it hasn't gone away. The beauty of the Canons  
> is the replaceable heads. The problem with the Canons is the price  
> of the replaceable heads. Pick your poison. A close friend, who does  
> photography as a hobby recently announced to me that he was going to  
> get a Pro 9000. I had the "birds and the bees" (dyes and pigments)  
> talk with him, though it seemed to be falling on deaf ears, as he  
> didn't like the slower print time of the 9500. A week later he  
> called me to tell me he had purchased a 9500, and didn't regret it  
> one bit. Since then, he as started selling his prints at a number of  
> locations; which would be a scary thought if he had purchased a dye  
> printer. Please note, this is not a Canon issue, its a dye issue...
>
>
> C. David Tobie
> Global Product Technology Manager
> Digital Imaging & Home Theater
> Datacolor
> CDTobie@...
> www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Petruska <petruska@...>
> To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thu, Aug 20, 2009 11:46 pm
> Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with  
> Spyder3Print
>
>
>
> Dave,
>
> I'm just best guessing at what to buy.  I do like the 9500 pigment  
> inks, but reviews say that the photos lack the vivid colors and punch.
>
> Do you have any suggestions for what printer I should look at?  I  
> have a bad taste with Epson with all the clogging in the past, maybe  
> that has changed?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bob P.
>
>
>
> At 07:11 AM 8/20/2009, you wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> After spending all night I have decided that the newer Canon PXIMA  
>> PRO 9000 Mark II 8 color printer is the way that I'm going to go
>>
>> This is a dye printer. Haven't tested the Mark II but I never liked  
>> the first version; its grays are not at all stable, and turn  
>> terrible colors under differing light sources. The 9500's pigment  
>> inks, on the other hand, are great, though the printer is slower,  
>> due to the pigments.
>>
>> C. David Tobie
>> Global Product Technology Manager
>> Digital Imaging & Home Theater
>> Datacolor
>> CDTobie@...
>> www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Bob Petruska <petruska@...>
>> To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com
>> Sent: Wed, Aug 19, 2009 5:31 pm
>> Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with  
>> Spyder3Print
>>
>>
>>
>> Rolin,
>>
>> Thanks for the reply.  I was trying to imply in my original post  
>> that I have done everything that you listed.  I do have my NEC  
>> monitor calibrated with the I1D2 calibrator and my NEC is  
>> internally hardware profiled.  I would say that it is very close to  
>> being right one matching the real world.  I use Spyder3Print to  
>> calibrate my printers. I also use color management aware Nikon  
>> Capture NX2 and CS4.  And I did read that "book"!
>>
>> What I was getting at is to buy the latest printer that will give  
>> will generate printer profiles more accurately than what I'm  
>> getting now from my Canon I950 6 color printer.
>>
>> After spending all night I have decided that the newer Canon PXIMA  
>> PRO 9000 Mark II 8 color printer is the way that I'm going to go.   
>> Hopefully my Spyder3Print profiles will be more accurate with the  
>> additional 2 colors and will reduce my profile tweaking time do to  
>> days not weeks!
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob P.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> At 01:57 PM 8/19/2009, you wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> --- In datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com, Bob Petruska  
>>> <petruska@...> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I currently have a Canon I950 photo printer that I'm very happy  
>>> with
>>> > the printout image quality, but it never really matches the  
>>> monitor
>>> > to where I'm extremely happy. I use Spyder3Print for printer
>>> > calibration. My NEC monitor is calibrated and the image on it  
>>> looks
>>> > extremely close to what I see in the real world. The Canon I950 is
>>> > a 6 color dye based ink printer. It is starting to give me some
>>> > trouble and looks like it is time to find a replacement.
>>> >
>>> > So my question is what is the best printer out there for  
>>> photography
>>> > work that will match my monitor as close as possible using
>>> > Spyder3Print for printer calibration? Thus I would like to print  
>>> my
>>> > targets, scan them in, and be as close as possible to the screen
>>> > colors. I really don't want to spend months of printing and adding
>>> > brightness and contrast to printer profiles as I have done that  
>>> with
>>> > the Canon I950 and I consumed a ton of ink and paper until I got  
>>> it close.
>>> >
>>> > I don't want to spend more than $500 - 700 if possible. I only  
>>> do 8X10s max.
>>>
>>> Basically what is needed is 1) a monitor that has been color  
>>> calibrated to some a standard, 2) printer color profiles that are  
>>> for the particular printer, ink and paper combination you want to  
>>> use and 3) an application that allows you to manipulate and print  
>>> your images in a color managed environment (such as Photoshop).
>>>
>>> If the monitor is not calibrated to a standard value and  
>>> maintained at the standard, then the ability to see the image as  
>>> it is going to look when printed is not possible. There are  
>>> different standards that people maintain works the best for this  
>>> but, at least for PCs, the basic one seems to be using a gamma of  
>>> 2.2 and a color tempature of 6500 Kelvin. The brigtness needed  
>>> depends on the working environment - I am finding that 100cd/m2  
>>> works for me. I use the Spyder3 Elite package to profile the  
>>> monitor but have recently started to use only the colorimeter with  
>>> the Eiso profiling software for my Eiso monitor.
>>>
>>> You will need to run an application that supports color management  
>>> and allows for "soft proofing" using profile created for the  
>>> output printer, ink and paper combination. The match will be close  
>>> but never perfect. Depending on the printer, ink and paper you  
>>> use, you will find that you have to make adjustments to an image  
>>> that looks great on the screen in order to make it look that way  
>>> on a print. For example, I have an Epson SP4000 and I print on a  
>>> non brightened,matte paper. I find that I have to add some extra  
>>> "punch" to the image to compensate for this combination - up the  
>>> brightness, contrast and, in some cases, the color saturation. I  
>>> use Photoshop CS4 to do my work and print directly from it.
>>>
>>> I use the PrintFix Pro product to create custom profiles for my  
>>> printer, ink and paper combinations. The paper vendor offers  
>>> profiles for the SP4000 printer but I decided to create my own to  
>>> get better control as while generic profiles will work, ones built  
>>> specifically for your printer will work the best. I haven't (yet)  
>>> done it but I really should rebuild the profiles for each new  
>>> batch of paper I get from the vendor if I want to be 100% sure.
>>>
>>> I also have an Epson PictureMate for doing snapshots (4x6). I use  
>>> a generic profile for the paper with it and have had good luck.  
>>> The particular paper/ink used with it requires very little changes  
>>> to account for the paper/ink as opposed to the viewed image; in  
>>> fact, there are usually no changes.
>>>
>>> One other thing. Your print viewing environment can drastically  
>>> effect how the print looks. Normal color management is setup for  
>>> daylight viewing where as most indoor lighting is not daylight. I  
>>> have an OTT-Light that does a good job of letting me see what the  
>>> print will look like under daylight as opposed to the incandesent  
>>> lights in my work area.
>>>
>>> So, the net is, in my opinion, you buy a good printer, find a  
>>> paper you like and then get the monitor profiled to a standard and  
>>> get profiles for the printer, ink and paper and it should work.
>>>
>>> Some time back, I bought the book "Real World Color  
>>> Management" (2nd Edition) by Bruce Fraser, Chris Murphy and Fred  
>>> Bunting to try to understand color management. I happen to think  
>>> it is one of the best books out there on the subject.
>>>
>>> I hope this helps,
>>> Rollin
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Peirce <bob@...>
To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, Aug 21, 2009 9:14 pm
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with Spyder3Print














        
















On Aug 21, 2009, at 4:07 PM, CDTobie wrote:


       


 

>I'm just best guessing at what to buy.? I do like the 9500 pigment inks, but reviews say that the photos lack the vivid colors and punch.


 

Well, dye has more punch, especially for glossy prints, but for how long? Pigment has the virtue of retaining its look for long enough to justify selling the images. I don't know anyone willing to sell dye prints as art photos any longer...


 
 >Do you have any suggestions for what printer I should look at?? I have a bad taste with Epson with all the clogging in the past, maybe that has changed?
 


 

It has improved, but it hasn't gone away. The beauty of the Canons is the replaceable heads. The problem with the Canons is the price of the replaceable heads. Pick your poison. A close friend, who does photography as a hobby recently announced to me that he was going to get a Pro 9000. I had the "birds and the bees" (dyes and pigments) talk with him, though it seemed to be falling on deaf ears, as he didn't like the slower print time of the 9500. A week later he called me to tell me he had purchased a 9500, and didn't regret it one bit. Since then, he as started selling his prints at a number of locations; which would be a scary thought if he had purchased a dye printer. Please note, this is not a Canon issue, its a dye issue...

.


    
          ?                  

Don't forget the HP printers. ?I have a B9180 that makes terrific prints. ?It has replaceable heads as well, although I don't know how the prices compare. ?It is limited to 13" wide paper, but I think they make bigger printers for a lot more money.

On Aug 22, 2009, at 5:53 AM, Robert Peirce wrote:

>
> On Aug 22, 2009, at 4:51 AM, CDTobie wrote:
>
>>
>> I have difficulty considering the B9180 to be in the same class as  
>> the Epson and Canon printers of the same size. HP competes more  
>> effectively in the 24 inch and wider sizes.
>> .
>
>
>
>
> In what way is it deficient?  Nobody has ever commented that my  
> prints are so bad they must have been made on an HP!
>>
>
>
>

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Peirce <bob@...>
To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, Aug 22, 2009 7:53 am
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with Spyder3Print














        
















On Aug 22, 2009, at 4:51 AM, CDTobie wrote:


       
I have difficulty considering the B9180 to be in the same class as the Epson and Canon printers of the same size. HP competes more effectively in the 24 inch and wider sizes.
.


  
          








In what way is it deficient? ?Nobody has ever commented that my prints are so bad they must have been made on an HP!

-----Original Message-----
From: Sat Tara S. Khalsa <sattara@...>
To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, Aug 22, 2009 9:19 am
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with Spyder3Print














        












I think there are a number of well known photographers who would dispute David's position here,...
stsk




On Aug 22, 2009, at 5:53 AM, Robert Peirce wrote:








On Aug 22, 2009, at 4:51 AM, CDTobie wrote:


?
I have difficulty considering the B9180 to be in the same class as the Epson and Canon printers of the same size. HP competes more effectively in the 24 inch and wider sizes.
.












In what way is it deficient? ?Nobody has ever commented that my prints are so bad they must have been made on an HP!

?

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Peirce <bob@...>
To: datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, Aug 22, 2009 10:20 am
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Re: Best ink printer to match with Spyder3Print














        














On Aug 22, 2009, at 9:20 AM, CDTobie wrote:


       


 

In what way is it deficient? ?Nobody has ever commented that my prints are so bad they must have been made on an HP!
No, without context they wouldn't do that; but side by size, the B9180 is more of a glossy color printer, not handling matte media, or black and white, quite as well as the alternatives. For instance, it has only one gray ink, instead of two. And its B&W strategy is to print only black and gray inks, which results in different tonality of different media. And its almost identical in size to a 17 inch wide Epson 3800, while only printing 13 inches wide..


   
           
         

                 

Before the B9180, I had (and still have) a Canon i9100. ?The difference on B&W is like day and night. ?I have also reprinted some of the scans from my 4x5 B&W Tri-X on the B9180, using the semi-matte paper, and found them to be comparable to the originals printed on Oriental. ?I had to tweak them a bit in LightZone, but that has been good enough for me.




I should add that I prefer the color rendered as B&W to the straight grey colors. ?I find the former closer to a selenium toned print and the latter more like an untoned print with a faint olive caste. ?That may be why I am happier with the B&W prints than you are.




I have not tried matte p
aper, so I have no comment. ?I have been very happy with the HP semi-matte.




I did consider Epson, but rejected it because of its reputation for clogging. ?I go away for two weeks at a time and the HP has never given me a problem when turned off. ?OTOH, I have an Epson R200 that never seems to clog, so that may be more of a problem with some Epson printers than others.




Lastly, for a non-pro, such as myself, a 12x18 print on 13x19 paper is an almost perfect size. ?I wouldn't know where to hang a larger print. ?But, it would likely do better in competitions. ?Size does seem to be important there!

>
> 
> On Aug 22, 2009, at 3:58 PM, CDTobie wrote:
> 
> > B&W should be dead neutral until you ask it for a tint or cross- 
> > tint, and then offer exactly the tint of cross-tint you ask for. A  
> > printer that offers selenium and olive as its B&W options is a  
> > failure as a black and white printer, which was the basis of my  
> > comment in the first place...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it depends on your point of view.  Wet prints were never dead  
> neutral.  A straight print out of the fixer had (what I call) a very  
> faint olive caste.  Selenium toning would make the blacks "blacker"  
> and the whole print (what I call) colder.  The HP does that  
> automatically, and I like it.  If other printers really are dead  
> neutral, I would be hard pressed to create an ink jet print that  
> would match a wet print, which is my goal.
>