Datacolor User to User Support Group.

I have purchased Datacolor Spyder Studio S4SSR100 and I have installed all the software that came with the product.  After I have calibrated the monitor according to the software instructions I proceeded to print the color the color targets so I can have my printer in sync with the monitor. I deactivated the color management in the printer dialogue, and inserted the appropriate icc. The result is a dark color targets page.

I need your help to resolve this problem. I opened a ticket at the Datacolor website, but I only received an e-mail from Switzerland telling me to install the software and follow direction. Does Datacolor have an help desk in USA so I can call talk and talk to someone to discuss this problem? 

I have deadline for a project and need to print several photographs.

Thank you very much for your help.

jorge

>>I have purchased Datacolor Spyder Studio S4SSR100 and I have installed all the software that came with the product. After I have calibrated the monitor according to the software instructions I proceeded to print the color the color targets so I can have my printer in sync with the monitor. I deactivated the color management in the printer dialogue, and inserted the appropriate icc. The result is a dark color targets page.

Let's see if I am following you correctly. Calibrated your monitor, SpyderProof images looked okay at the end of that process, correct?

Next you planned to profile your printer, which is a more complex task. You deactivated color management in the driver (this can be tricky, we may need more details, starting with your OS, OS version, printer, driver version, and application you are printing from, and its version). You inserted the appropriate ICC. Do you mean you have skipped entirely describing the process of printing the charts, reading term back in, and building the profile, and jumped to using the profile? Can't do that, and expect assistance. 

Or do you mean you turned off color management in the driver, then printed your choice of targets, and the target prints look dark? If thats the case, that is correct, targets printed with color management off will look dark. 

This can be a complex issue to troubleshoot, or even describe in detail, and support ticket assistance, complete with sending measurement sets and profiles, is the best way to troubleshoot it. But if you insist on working on it here, please provide all the info requested above, plus any other info that you have, and we'll see if we can help you that way.

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Imaging Color Solutions
Datacolor inc. 
cdtobie@...
www.datacolor.com

On Aug 29, 2012, at 10:56 AM, "JorgeG" <jorgegaj@...> wrote:

> I have purchased Datacolor Spyder Studio S4SSR100 and I have installed all the software that came with the product. After I have calibrated the monitor according to the software instructions I proceeded to print the color the color targets so I can have my printer in sync with the monitor. I deactivated the color management in the printer dialogue, and inserted the appropriate icc. The result is a dark color targets page.

Dear Mr. Tobie,

Thank you very much for your prompt response. You are 100% right, in my previous e-mail I haven't provided enough information to help me with my printing problems.

Let's try again. I will respond to each of your questions below and provide any additional information that may help.

Thank you very much for your help.
 
Regards from Sacramento,

Jorge

jorgegaj@...  or pegasus@...





________________________________

 From: CDTobie <CDTobie@...>
To: "datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com" <datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Dark pics and dark color targets 8x10
 

  
>>I have purchased Datacolor Spyder Studio S4SSR100 and I have installed all the software that came with the product. After I have calibrated the monitor according to the software instructions I proceeded to print the color the color targets so I can have my printer in sync with the monitor. I deactivated the color management in the printer dialogue, and inserted the appropriate icc. The result is a dark color targets page.

Let's see if I am following you correctly. Calibrated your monitor,    Yes, I calibrated my monitor (ASUS PA246Q) by following all the on screen directions. (I have attached the calibration results) SpyderProof images looked okay at the end of that process, correct? Yes, all the pictures look pretty good in my screen.
Next you planned to profile your printer, which is a more complex task. You deactivated color management in the driver Yes, I deactivated color management in the drive, by going to my Epson R2400 printer and under Color Management, in the Advanced properties,  click "off No Color Adjustment".  (this can be tricky, we may need more details, starting with your OS, OS version, printer, driver version, and application you are printing from, and its version).  I used Windows 7, my printer is an Epson R2400, and I use Lightroom 4.1 64 bits, You inserted the appropriate ICC. Yes, I inserted the appropriate ICC, for my Epson paper.  Do you mean you have skipped entirely describing the process of printing the charts, reading term back in, and building the profile, and jumped to using the profile? Can't do that, and expect assistance.  After I started Spyderprint I printed a 225 Patch Target page. This printed page looked darker that what I was seeing in my
 screen. I continue by reading the target and building a profile. Afterwards, I used the profile in Lightroom 4. The final print is darker of what I see in the Development and Print modules. I'm not sure what other information can be useful for you to help me, or what exactly I need to do to be able to print exactly what I see on my screen. 

Or do you mean you turned off color management in the driver, then printed your choice of targets, and the target prints look dark? If thats the case, that is correct, targets printed with color management off will look dark.See above comments.

This can be a complex issue to troubleshoot, or even describe in detail, and support ticket assistance, complete with sending measurement sets and profiles, is the best way to troubleshoot it. But if you insist on working on it here, please provide all the info requested above, plus any other info that you have, and we'll see if we can help you that way.I have also attached the XLM file for my PremiumLusterPhotoPaper that I created today.

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Imaging Color Solutions
Datacolor inc. 
cdtobie@...m
www.datacolor.com

On Aug 29, 2012, at 10:56 AM, "JorgeG" <jorgegaj@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I have purchased Datacolor Spyder Studio S4SSR100 and I have installed all the software that came with the product. After I have calibrated the monitor according to the software instructions I proceeded to print the color the color targets so I can have my printer in sync with the monitor. I deactivated the color management in the printer dialogue, and inserted the appropriate icc. The result is a dark color targets page.

>>Yes, I inserted the appropriate ICC, for my Epson paper. 

That clarifies your earlier statement. Yu dd not select an ICC, as printing a target through a profile would invalidate the process. What you did was choose an appropriate media setting. This, in turn, would trigger a related ICC profile, if you let the printer manage the color. Since you did not let the ringer manage the color, this does not introduce a paper profile conversion. This is correct for target printing. 

>>After I started Spyderprint I printed a 225 Patch Target page. This printed page looked darker that what I was seeing in my screen. 

Yes, as I noted earlier, this should print much darker and duller than the screen view. This is a good sign, and tends to indicate the target was printed correctly. 

>>I continue by reading the target and building a profile. Afterwards, I used the profile in Lightroom 4. The final print is darker of what I see in the Development and Print modules. I'm not sure what other information can be useful for you to help me, or what exactly I need to do to be able to print exactly what I see on my screen. 

Before moving on to using the profile in third party software, introducing a whole new set of possible errors, it is important to first soft proof, then print, through the profile directly from SpyderPrint, to test the profile. Open your measurement set again (there is a fork in the software where you can chose to open an existing measurement set), and build the profile again. This time, stop at SpyderProof, and print the test image, or one of the sub-images from it. Does the resulting image look dark? If not, then your issue isn't with the profile, it's with using it in Lightroom. If the print does look dark, then go into Lightroom 4, and turn on soft proofing in the Develop module, to be sure you are seeing a print emulation, not just your image, and see if that looks like the resulting print. 

Let me know how these steps work for you.

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Imaging Color Solutions
Datacolor inc. 
cdtobie@...
www.datacolor.com

On Aug 29, 2012, at 7:10 PM, Jorge Gaj <jorgegaj@...> wrote:

> Yes, I inserted the appropriate ICC, for my Epson paper.  Do you mean you have skipped entirely describing the process of printing the charts, reading term back in, and building the profile, and jumped to using the profile? Can't do that, and expect assistance.  After I started Spyderprint I printed a 225 Patch Target page. This printed page looked darker that what I was seeing in my screen. I continue by reading the target and building a profile. Afterwards, I used the profile in Lightroom 4. The final print is darker of what I see in the Development and Print modules. I'm not sure what other information can be useful for you to help me, or what exactly I need to do to be able to print exactly what I see on my screen.

Dear Mr. Tobie,

I'm sorry I didn't get back to you sooner, but I was working with Datacolor staff in resolving my problem. I had the opportunity to work with a wonderful staff member. I sent him my xml files for him to review and afterward we had the change to discussed them together. He believes that something may be wrong with the spectro since the xml files look problematic. He is sending new hardware and after I receive the spectro I will measure the targets once again. 

That said, I need to ask you a question, since I softproof and and printed the test image. In two different type of papers the test image came out somewhat dark. Should the print look alike the softproof test image I see in the screen?

Thanks,

Regards from Sacramento,

Jorge

jorgegaj@...  or pegasus@...





________________________________

 From: CDTobie <CDTobie@...>
To: "datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com" <datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Dark pics and dark color targets 8x10
 

  
>>Yes, I inserted the appropriate ICC, for my Epson paper. 

That clarifies your earlier statement. Yu dd not select an ICC, as printing a target through a profile would invalidate the process. What you did was choose an appropriate media setting. This, in turn, would trigger a related ICC profile, if you let the printer manage the color. Since you did not let the ringer manage the color, this does not introduce a paper profile conversion. This is correct for target printing. 

>>After I started Spyderprint I printed a 225 Patch Target page. This printed page looked darker that what I was seeing in my screen. 

Yes, as I noted earlier, this should print much darker and duller than the screen view. This is a good sign, and tends to indicate the target was printed correctly. 

>>I continue by reading the target and building a profile. Afterwards, I used the profile in Lightroom 4. The final print is darker of what I see in the Development and Print modules. I'm not sure what other information can be useful for you to help me, or what exactly I need to do to be able to print exactly what I see on my screen. 

Before moving on to using the profile in third party software, introducing a whole new set of possible errors, it is important to first soft proof, then print, through the profile directly from SpyderPrint, to test the profile. Open your measurement set again (there is a fork in the software where you can chose to open an existing measurement set), and build the profile again. This time, stop at SpyderProof, and print the test image, or one of the sub-images from it. Does the resulting image look dark? If not, then your issue isn't with the profile, it's with using it in Lightroom. If the print does look dark, then go into Lightroom 4, and turn on soft proofing in the Develop module, to be sure you are seeing a print emulation, not just your image, and see if that looks like the resulting print. 

Let me know how these steps work for you.


C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Imaging Color Solutions
Datacolor inc. 
cdtobie@...
www.datacolor.com

On Aug 29, 2012, at 7:10 PM, Jorge Gaj <jorgegaj@...> wrote:


Yes, I inserted the appropriate ICC, for my Epson paper.  Do you mean you have skipped entirely describing the process of printing the charts, reading term back in, and building the profile, and jumped to using the profile? Can't do that, and expect assistance.  After I started Spyderprint I printed a 225 Patch Target page. This printed page looked darker that what I was seeing in my screen. I continue by reading the target and building a profile. Afterwards, I used the profile in Lightroom 4. The final print is darker of what I see in the Development and Print modules. I'm not sure what other information can be useful for you to help me, or what exactly I need to do to be able to print exactly what I see on my screen.

>>That said, I need to ask you a question, since I softproof and and printed the test image. In two different type of papers the test image came out somewhat dark. Should the print look alike the softproof test image I see in the screen?

The match between an image in a universal workingspace (say AdobeRGB) on screen, and in print will have a certain relationship to one another, but will seldom be 'a match' since there are media and ink specific factors in the print, as well as there being an unknown level of light on the print. But assuming a good lightsource, and a reasonable degree of light (say a desktop 5000k proofing lamp), then the match should be quite good for glossy media on a good inkjet printer. 

Using soft proofing should automatically increase that match, especially on matte media. But there are still outside factors. A dim proofing light will make your print look dimmer, and the shadows more clogged, while a too-bright monitor will make your prints seem dark, by making your on-screen image too bright. So make sure you are calibrating the display to a defined brightness, not to native brightness, for proofing uses, and that you are using an appropriate proofing light, in addition to using softproof mode.  

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Imaging Color Solutions
Datacolor inc. 
cdtobie@datacolor.com
www.datacolor.com

On Sep 2, 2012, at 12:11 AM, Jorge Gaj <jorgegaj@yahoo.com> wrote:

> That said, I need to ask you a question, since I softproof and and printed the test image. In two different type of papers the test image came out somewhat dark. Should the print look alike the softproof test image I see in the screen?

Mr. Tobie,

Thank you very much for your advice.

Yesterday, I purchased a desktop 5000k lamp. Hopefully this lamp should provide me with a good light to review my soft proofing. 

I'm not sure what do you mean to calibrate my "display to a defined brightness, not to native brightness"?  Also, shall I have the my 5000k lamp on when I calibrate my monitor and when I read the 225 patch High Quality Target with the spectro?

Thanks,
 
Regards from Sacramento,

Jorge

jorgegaj@...  or pegasus@...





________________________________

 From: CDTobie <CDTobie@...>
To: "datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com" <datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com> 
Sent: Sunday, September 2, 2012 6:47 AM
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Dark pics and dark color targets 8x10
 

  
>>That said, I need to ask you a question, since I softproof and and printed the test image. In two different type of papers the test image came out somewhat dark. Should the print look alike the softproof test image I see in the screen?

The match between an image in a universal workingspace (say AdobeRGB) on screen, and in print will have a certain relationship to one another, but will seldom be 'a match' since there are media and ink specific factors in the print, as well as there being an unknown level of light on the print. But assuming a good lightsource, and a reasonable degree of light (say a desktop 5000k proofing lamp), then the match should be quite good for glossy media on a good inkjet printer. 

Using soft proofing should automatically increase that match, especially on matte media. But there are still outside factors. A dim proofing light will make your print look dimmer, and the shadows more clogged, while a too-bright monitor will make your prints seem dark, by making your on-screen image too bright. So make sure you are calibrating the display to a defined brightness, not to native brightness, for proofing uses, and that you are using an appropriate proofing light, in addition to using softproof mode. 

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Imaging Color Solutions
Datacolor inc. 
cdtobie@...
www.datacolor.com

On Sep 2, 2012, at 12:11 AM, Jorge Gaj <jorgegaj@...> wrote:

> That said, I need to ask you a question, since I softproof and and printed the test image. In two different type of papers the test image came out somewhat dark. Should the print look alike the softproof test image I see in the screen?

>>Yesterday, I purchased a desktop 5000k lamp. Hopefully this lamp should provide me with a good light to review my soft proofing. 

Good, it never hurts to have a proofing lamp.

>>I'm not sure what do you mean to calibrate my "display to a defined brightness, not to native brightness"? 

In the calibration process you can define a brightness to calibrate to. The default for desktop displays is 120 candelas, while the default for laptops is native. That's because laptops are used in uncontrolled lighting, and their brightness is often adjusted after the fact for current conditions.

But for proofing, you should be sure your ambient light is low, without being dark, and your display I'd appropriately low as well. A moderately dim room and 120 candelas is okay for most LCDs, but if you keep your room very dim, it's still too bright. Using the option Ito have the Spyder read your ambient level, tell you what it is, and suggest settings to go with it, can assist in getting that right. 

>> Also, shall I have the my 5000k lamp on when I calibrate my monitor and when I read the 225 patch High Quality Target with the Spectro?

Lighting when reading printed targets is not a factor; they read the same in the dark or in sunshine ( though most anywhere in between those extremes would be more appropriate). For monitor calibration you should ideally have a stable, controlled, low light level. People are sometimes surprised to ear that aging a couple of nice windows with the sun shining in is not an acceptable environment for doing image editing. Drapes, plus blinds or shades to tr degree that you can barely tell if the sun goes behind a cloud is about right. Then things stay reasonably stable, and are about the same noon and night. Get your sunshine on breaks, not during imaging work. 

Typically, with windows sufficiently darkened, and a single desktop proofing light on one side, aimed at a backdrop that is perpendicular to the display, so that you pivot your head to see it, not having it lit up right next to the screen, provides an appropriate light level, without creating glare. No other lights would be on in the room while doing color managed imaging work, just the proofing light. If its a big room, there might be a second, similar proofing bulb elsewhere in the room, but not behind the display, or in front of it, off to the side. 
 
If that all sounds drastic, and any of you are unwilling to make your imaging area as controlled and sunless as this, you may have you rethink things. It's not as extreme as the old CRT days when we worked in the dark, but we still need to work in fairly dim, fully controlled lighting to get consistent and predictable light. Some people make the choice to never do image editing except a night, since they love their bright sunny studio, and don't want to black it out. 

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Imaging Color Solutions
Datacolor inc. 
cdtobie@...
www.datacolor.com

On Sep 3, 2012, at 8:43 AM, Jorge Gaj <jorgegaj@...> wrote:

> 
> Yesterday, I purchased a desktop 5000k lamp. Hopefully this lamp should provide me with a good light to review my soft proofing. 
> 
> I'm not sure what do you mean to calibrate my "display to a defined brightness, not to native brightness"?  Also, shall I have the my 5000k lamp on when I calibrate my monitor and when I read the 225 patch High Quality Target with the spectro?

Dear Mr. Tobie,

I'm sorry for my late response and thank you very much for your comments. They are very helpful, specially about creating a stable working environment.
 
See comments below.
 
Thank you very much for all your assistance.


Regards from Sacramento,

Jorge

jorgegaj@...m  or pegasus@...





________________________________
 From: CDTobie <CDTobie@...>
To: "datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com" <datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com> 
Sent: Monday, September 3, 2012 7:02 AM
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Dark pics and dark color targets 8x10
 

  
>>Yesterday, I purchased a desktop 5000k lamp. Hopefully this lamp should provide me with a good light to review my soft proofing. 

Good, it never hurts to have a proofing lamp.

A couple days ago I received my new desktop 5000k lamp. Wonderful tool to view my prints. I purchased the  Rosewill RLDL-11001 3W LED Desk Lamps, 240 lumens, 5000K. 


>>I'm not sure what do you mean to calibrate my "display to a defined brightness, not to native brightness"? 

In the calibration process you can define a brightness to calibrate to. The default for desktop displays is 120 candelas, while the default for laptops is native. That's because laptops are used in uncontrolled lighting, and their brightness is often adjusted after the fact for current conditions.

Thank you for the explanation. I always try to follow Datacolor's recommendation of 120 candelas and gamma of 2.2. 

But for proofing, you should be sure your ambient light is low, without being dark, and your display I'd appropriately low as well. A moderately dim room and 120 candelas is okay for most LCDs, but if you keep your room very dim, it's still too bright. Using the option Ito have the Spyder read your ambient level, tell you what it is, and suggest settings to go with it, can assist in getting that right. 

I always work with a my room having a low ambient light and having the Spyder indicating how is the light in the room is very helpful.  


>> Also, shall I have the my 5000k lamp on when I calibrate my monitor and when I read the 225 patch High Quality Target with the Spectro?

Lighting when reading printed targets is not a factor; they read the same in the dark or in sunshine ( though most anywhere in between those extremes would be more appropriate). For monitor calibration you should ideally have a stable, controlled, low light level. People are sometimes surprised to ear that aging a couple of nice windows with the sun shining in is not an acceptable environment for doing image editing. Drapes, plus blinds or shades to tr degree that you can barely tell if the sun goes behind a cloud is about right. Then things stay reasonably stable, and are about the same noon and night. Get your sunshine on breaks, not during imaging work. 

Typically, with windows sufficiently darkened, and a single desktop proofing light on one side, aimed at a backdrop that is perpendicular to the display, so that you pivot your head to see it, not having it lit up right next to the screen, provides an appropriate light level, without creating glare. No other lights would be on in the room while doing color managed imaging work, just the proofing light. If its a big room, there might be a second, similar proofing bulb elsewhere in the room, but not behind the display, or in front of it, off to the side. 
 
Great tips for creating a working environment. Thanks.

If that all sounds drastic, and any of you are unwilling to make your imaging area as controlled and sunless as this, you may have you rethink things. It's not as extreme as the old CRT days when we worked in the dark, but we still need to work in fairly dim, fully controlled lighting to get consistent and predictable light. Some people make the choice to never do image editing except a night, since they love their bright sunny studio, and don't want to black it out. 

C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Imaging Color Solutions
Datacolor inc. 
cdtobie@...
www.datacolor.com

On Sep 3, 2012, at 8:43 AM, Jorge Gaj <jorgegaj@...> wrote:



>
>Yesterday, I purchased a desktop 5000k lamp. Hopefully this lamp should provide me with a good light to review my soft proofing. 
>
>
>I'm not sure what do you mean to calibrate my "display to a defined brightness, not to native brightness"?  Also, shall I have the my 5000k lamp on when I calibrate my monitor and when I read the 225 patch High Quality Target with the spectro?