am I an idiot or is my printer: color management and st
I've always struggled with color management, and can never get it right.
Simply put, the colors don't match screen and printer. They don't match so bad, you'd think it was a different picture. I'm using a PC, Adobe PS CS2, and a Canon i850. I've printed a few things that seemed OK, close enough for me not to complain about 5x7's. Now I'm trying to print out a sunset with mountains. The colors come out way too saturated- the sky is really orange and the whole thing looks really fake. Perhaps this photograph I'm trying to print is just accentuating the already existent problem.
How I am handling color management when printing: Well I've tried a number of different ways to print the picture, all resulting in the same crap. I'll print with preview and let PS manage colors (selecting the crappy generic printer profile), or let the printer manage colors (trying auto or manual color management within driver)- they all turn out crap. Usually all of this from sRGB or RGB 1998 colorspace.
I haven't plunked down the $250 for monitor calibration software- I know I need to do this (I use Adobe Gamma). BUT, I don't see how the colors could be THAT off...I mean it's really bad. Also, the pritner doesn't come with ICC profiles, so I'm stuck using the generic crap- I've read it's better to handle color management in that case through the printer driver. It gets slightly better if I do that with certain settings, but the colors are still way off.
So what's the correct answer?
A) "Get the monitor calibration tools- it will fix all your problems"
B) "Get a better printer with ICC profiles"
C) answers A and B "and SOFTPROOFING YOU FOOL!!" <---expensive
D) While C will help, the real root of the problem is.... (insert answer here)
E) You will have no help with that piece of crap printer (see answer B).
As you can tell by my questioning here, I am guessing the answer is D. But you be the judge. PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD HELP ME!!!!!!!!!
here's the pic:
Attachment#1 (jpg file)
#1. "RE: am I an idiot or is my printer: color management an" | In response to Reply # 0esantos Nikonian since 10th Nov 2002Thu 22-Dec-05 02:21 AM
First off, a monitor profiling tool that is hardware driven is a big first step toward solving the problem. Adobe Gamma is OK and better than nothing, but if you are striving for really good prints then it's a must.
You don't mention what paper you are using so I'll assume its Canon paper. Try to get a profile specific for that paper, a generic profile (not sure what that is) will never get you there.
Lastly, I'm afraid you may be encountering the limitations of the Canon print software. I am not very familiar with these printers but I understand that Canon printer drivers rely more on a somewhat proprietary system to handle colors. I'm a big Epson fan so I'll just say you would not have this issue to deal with if you switched to Epson. They are not perfect but they are the best printers if you want to achieve accurate color reproduction, which is what it's all about in my opinion.
esartprints.com Ernesto Santos Photography
Get my new e-Book "Churches of Texas"
#5. "RE: am I an idiot or is my printer: color management an" | In response to Reply # 1Thu 22-Dec-05 04:03 AM
>First off, a monitor profiling tool that is hardware driven
>is a big first step toward solving the problem. Adobe Gamma
>is OK and better than nothing, but if you are striving for
>really good prints then it's a must.
It truely is next on my list...
>You don't mention what paper you are using so I'll assume
>its Canon paper. Try to get a profile specific for that
>paper, a generic profile (not sure what that is) will never
>get you there.
I'm using Ilford Galerie Smooth Gloss and the recommended settings from Ilford for this printer. Also, the inks are Canon inks, so no cutting corners there.
>I'm a big Epson fan so I'll just say you would not have this
>issue to deal with if you switched to Epson. They are not
>perfect but they are the best printers if you want to
>achieve accurate color reproduction, which is what it's all
>about in my opinion.
Yes colors are a big deal when they don't match. You can forget about them when they're fine and you can worry about speed, resolution, gamut, etc...
So, that leads to my next question...if I were to buy a new printer, what would you recommend that is cheaper than pro glass?
#2. "RE: am I an idiot or is my printer: color management an" | In response to Reply # 0
Definitely start with option "A" since, unless you profile your monitor you truly can never tell what your images actually look like. Only then will you be able to determine whether anything else needs addressed.
As for "C" if you have PS CS, you can already do soft proofing. It\'s built in.
#7. "RE: am I an idiot or is my printer: color management an" | In response to Reply # 6Thu 22-Dec-05 04:44 AM
Yes, you do. Specific to your printer and paper actually, and I'm not sure if Canon provides one for the i850 and whatever paper you are using. If not, it will cost you more, but not a lot. You can get a custom profile quite cheaply.
#9. "RE: am I an idiot or is my printer: color management an" | In response to Reply # 7Thu 22-Dec-05 04:56 AM
No they don't. Canon has one for their i950, but that's a 5 ink printer and mine is a 3 ink one. I'm giving it a shot with Ilford's profile for their paper and that printer, maybe I should just pop in that printer profile and see what happens.
I'd pay $40 to get my pictures looking right, I just might try that. I'm getting really frustrated and I don't want to have to buy a new printer.
#3. "RE: am I an idiot or is my printer: color management an" | In response to Reply # 0
Nathan, what I'm about to tell you will seem to the technically minded among us to be absolutely incorrect. Why? because I don't do ANYTHING in Adobe RGB mode like most others do. Here goes....
1. I purchased a colorimeter ($150) and calibrated my monitor
2. I told my printer to use that newly created color profile to be the default from here on out.
3. I set my D100 to shoot everything in sRGB mode
4. I edit these images in sRGB mode
5. I print in sRGB mode.
What I see on my monitor is the SAME THING I GET from my Epson R200 printer. I use epson paper and epson inks so don't cut corners here.
When I send out for prints from Shutterfly, dotphoto and MPIX I get the same results. Everything matches from the camera, to the monitor to the final printed product.
This way is simple, fast and most of all it WORKS! I did a side by side comparision with different color profiles and I can honestly say that in most cases the sRGB color space actually gave better skin tones.
I can tell you as a working professional who depends on accurate colors (fussy customers) that this color space works great! Once you have your system set up like this you won't have anymore problems with color management. I promise
#4. "RE: am I an idiot or is my printer: color management an" | In response to Reply # 3Thu 22-Dec-05 03:23 AM
On #2, is this a typo? You should never tell your printer to use a profile you made for your monitor.
Also, on #5, what do you mean that you print in sRGB? I'm guessing that on this one you mean your working space is sRGB. Just as with #2, you should never use sRGB as a printer profile. There's nothing wrong with sRGB of course. It is more limited than Adobe RGB, but there's no reason why you can't use it as your working space since it will indeed simplify some things. As such, it is choosing simplicity over the ability to use a wider gamut. However, it isn't a printer profile.
#10. "RE: am I an idiot or is my printer: color management an" | In response to Reply # 4Pegleg Registered since 28th May 2003Thu 22-Dec-05 09:32 AM
Yep! I use the same profile for the printer as I do for the monitor. Why? Because it works great. It may be technically incorrect but it works!
And yes, I print using the sRGB color space. I guess the point I'm trying to make is to just keep it simple. Color management doesn't have to be as much as it's been written about. It's been over complicated IMO and it doesn't need to be so. The color gamut may be a little different (I refuse to use the term limited) but in a print there just is not that BIG a difference to warrant using one over the other.
I like people who can get to the point about how to make things work from start to finish. Sort of like visiting my doctor. He doesn't go into long explanations about what's wrong. He tells me what to do to fix the problem and off I go to get it done.
Keep it simple
#11. "RE: am I an idiot or is my printer: color management an" | In response to Reply # 10Thu 22-Dec-05 07:08 PM
>Yep! I use the same profile for the printer as I do for the
>monitor. Why? Because it works great. It may be
>technically incorrect but it works!
I understand keeping it simple, but I'm not sure how printing with the monitor's profile gives accurate colors. I'm glad it works for you, but for me, I can really choose any profile when printing, and it all turns out the same garbage.
>And yes, I print using the sRGB color space. I guess the
>point I'm trying to make is to just keep it simple. Color
>management doesn't have to be as much as it's been written
>about. It's been over complicated IMO and it doesn't need
>to be so. The color gamut may be a little different (I
>refuse to use the term limited) but in a print there just is
>not that BIG a difference to warrant using one over the
I guess part of my problem is that I've been keeping it simple- and I can't seem to get anything to work. Printing from the same color space I've been using is what I've been doing, and it does not give me accurate results. I suspect it's partly because you are probably using a much better printer than me. I wish keeping it simple worked for me like it does for you...but unfortunately it looks like I may have to resort to more elaborate solutions to get good results.
#12. "RE: am I an idiot or is my printer: color management an" | In response to Reply # 10Thu 22-Dec-05 07:22 PM
It may work just the same way that certain things that are indeed wrong sometimes do through pure serendipity. It will not work in general, and does not constitute a good workflow for most cases. even a basic understanding of what profiles do should clarify this.
#8. "RE: am I an idiot or is my printer: color management an" | In response to Reply # 0
So there is what I'm attempting:
I downloaded the profiles from ilford for this paper and the canon i950- (my printer is the i850, a 3 not 5 color printer so this will probably throw things off but what the hell). Now I'm trying to soft proof, so I got to print "proof" instead of "document."
But the problem is when I go to print proof it asks me three things: Color Handing (none, PS or printer), Printer Profile, and Proof Setup Preset. I thought that I should have photoshop manage colors, but I already managed them with the proof, so I should leave to none- problem is it results in funny colors and having photoshop manage gives better results. I know Proof setup is the proof I just made for the paper and the printer similar in model number. What do I choose for printer profile? If I choose the same thing I did soft proof with, it seems like it double corrects for color when I preview the print - everything turns pink- just like it does when I turn color management off. If I choose anything else, it doesn't look quite right. What should I pick? With RGB1998 the colors are closer but the trees in the foreground come out very light colored, and not dark like they are supposed to.
Bleh. THanks for all your responses so far. I'm using lots of INK!
#13. "RE: am I an idiot or is my printer: color management an" | In response to Reply # 8AQS1974 Basic MemberWed 28-Dec-05 06:32 AM
I just figured this out yesterday! (Well this morning LOL)
If I'm following this thread correctly,... you still need to profile your monitor, at least you did the Adobe Gamma-Human Eyeball set up.
Printing on your Cannon i850 with an ICC Profile for ilford paper & a Cannon i950 may not work.... but what the heck, if you got the ink, it might be worth a try.
I hope I'm not going over stuff you already know.
Here's what I did,
First: Put your new ICC profile for the Cannon and Ilford paper into the correct folder. I found in the middle of this page the folder where it goes on the computer depending on what operateing system you are useing.
Next: I reviewed these color handeling settings just to make sure I didn't mess them up in my previous attempts to grasp all this information. Note this is what it looked like in PS CS (I think), and in PS CS2 instead of checking the advanced box there is a button that says show more options or something like that to make the bottom part of the window expand.
Then: I set up the soft proof, it was at the top of the View tab in PS CS2. You saw it toward the bottom of the first page that I linked to above, and you already have your ilford&cannon ICC profile in the correct folder so it will be an option in photoshop when you get this far.
Finally: Print with preview, and the bottom of this page helped me especially since Adobe has made some minor changes to the way things look and the names of the options in PS CS2, the updated information is here.
At the bottom of this page there is info about setting your Cannon printer options so that it doesn't alter from the ilford paper&cannon ICC profile that you want to use.
I just needed to make sure that I was not selecting color management twice.... I am one of the guys that thought I should enter the name of the ICC Profile in every blank I could find in photoshop NO! . Too much color management is a bad thing.
#14. "RE: am I an idiot or is my printer: color management an" | In response to Reply # 13
#15. "Sorry to say..." | In response to Reply # 8
It's very unlikely that the i950 profiles will be anything close to correct for your i850.
Your i850 has 4 ink colors, the i950 has 6. That's a fundamental difference that makes it very unlikely that i950 profiles will be very close for your printing. It's pointless to try and troubleshoot your results when you're using the wrong profiles.