Colour Management – Aaarrgghh
OK so an extreme reaction but the two phrases seem to go quite well together.
As a new comer with a new 3880 printer and Spyder 3R Print Studio calibration kit (and PC Win 7 64bit) I have a heap of questions I hope someone can answer. I will split them into a couple of posts.
Spyder: Having just done a print calibration I have options to view results under a variety of options:
Saturation
Perception
Relative colorimetric
Absolute calorimetric
All of the post-calibration on-screen example prints look washed out and their colour range highly compressed. I chose “Relative colorimetric” and the print results look better than the screen but I was assuming they should look the same as the screen.
BTW my monitor is also calibrated with Spyder3 elite.
When I choose to print the Spyder test print, having calibrated my printer, should I still choose all the same Epson driver settings, especially “no colour management” or should I be loading my new printer profile somewhere in the Epson print dialogue?
cheers
Steve
You think I’m dumb now – just wait ‘til my next questions :confused:
Re: Colour Management – Aaarrgghh
Datacolor recommends "saturation" with the profiles made with your equipment.
"When I choose to print the Spyder test print, having calibrated my printer, should I still choose all the same Epson driver settings, especially “no colour management” or should I be loading my new printer profile somewhere in the Epson print dialogue?"
By "Spyder test print" do you mean the swatch pages printed by the Spyder Print software? If so, then you use the exact print driver settings that you are going to use to print images. You should definitely choose "no color management" in the print driver, and make sure to pick the best media and quality settings.
Here is an overview of color management:
1) Make your input profile, which can be made with an IT8 target, a scanner, and profiling software. You can also make profiles for digital cameras, although many people don't.
2) Make your output profile with the Spyder3Print. Use the exact settings that you want to use to make a print. Make sure to turn off all color management in the print driver.
3) You must now convert the file from the input profile to an "editing" color space for work in photoshop. In the case of a scanned file with an icc attached, when bringing the file into photoshop you convert the file from the input profile to the editing profile, the latter of which is usually Adobe 98, Ektaspace, or Profoto. In the case of a file from a raw converter, these usually tag the image directly in an editing space. As such, as long as you pick the proper color space in your converter, you won't have to convert the file when bringing in to photoshop.
3) Edit the file in photoshop. If you want to see a soft proof of how the image will look when printed, go to View>Proof Setup>Custom. Pick the output profile that you made with your Spyder3Print. This only changes how the image is displayed in photoshop. It doesn't change the file. You can toggle it on and off. You can also play with rendering intents to see if a different gives you a better look.
4) When you go to print, choose "Photoshop manages colors" in the Photoshop print dialogue. Make sure to specify the printer/paper/settings icc file in the appropriate place.
5) Make sure to keep the exact same settings in the print driver that you used to print on the Spyder3Print swatch pages.
6) View the print under some well-thought-out viewing light.
Re: Colour Management – Aaarrgghh
I would add, don't make any selections in the print driver that intentionally adjust color. That is, a lot of drivers enable the user to adjust color right from driver itself. All of this type of capability should be turned off, set to zero, etc., when you're printing the target and when you're printing photographs. Certainly, you don't want any setting in the print driver that "automatically" adjusts color.
What version of Photoshop are you using?
Re: Colour Management – Aaarrgghh
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SteveH
OK so an extreme reaction but the two phrases seem to go quite well together.
As a new comer with a new 3880 printer and Spyder 3R Print Studio calibration kit (and PC Win 7 64bit) I have a heap of questions I hope someone can answer. I will split them into a couple of posts.
Spyder: Having just done a print calibration I have options to view results under a variety of options:
Saturation
Perception
Relative colorimetric
Absolute calorimetric
All of the post-calibration on-screen example prints look washed out and their colour range highly compressed. I chose “Relative colorimetric” and the print results look better than the screen but I was assuming they should look the same as the screen.
BTW my monitor is also calibrated with Spyder3 elite.
None of these options mean what you think they mean. Leave it on Relative Colorimetric. This has to do with what the driver does if it finds a pixel outside the color space. In some cases, it maps the whole color space down to compensate (Perceptual). Relative moves only the one color back into the space so it can print it. That's the way to go. Saturation is for graphics and such, not photos...
Just because you did a printer calibration (and a monitor calibration) it doesn't mean your print should - or will - match the screen. Not unless you are using a very limited color space, like cmyk, and a viewing booth. All the rest of us look at the print and make adjustments to get what we want. We slowly tune our eyes to the monitor and printer. (Just like looking at a darkroom print and knowing how much it will dry down - as in experience.) The profiling just makes it more predictable.
Lenny
EigerStudios
Re: Colour Management – Aaarrgghh
I agree.
I use relative colorimetric almost exclusively. It surprises me that your software even suggests saturation, because it's reserved for things like business graphics that benefit from enhanced saturation. If I'm not mistaken, saturation preserves saturation, sometimes at the expense of hue.
Perceptual is often touted for photographs and is used widely. But as Lenny Eiger suggests, it condenses the entire print gammut, versus just those colors that are outside the target gamut. Sometimes, that can be beneficial. So if there's a question between perceptual and relative colorimetric, use the one that looks the better. But for me, it's a rare occasion that I'll choose perceptual over relative colorimetric.
Re: Colour Management – Aaarrgghh
I don't think there is one single best setting for all papers and all images. Assuming you're soft proofing (View > Proof Set-up > Custom) try relative colorimetric with the black point compensation box checked and then try perceptual with the black point compensation box unchecked (always leave "Preserve RGB Numbers" unchecked and always check "Simulate Paper Color"). Then in the Print window just use whichever of the two looked best in the soft proof (the difference between the two often isn't very great). I've never heard of using Saturation or Absolute Colorimetric for printing photographs.
I don't know that this is the only way way to do things or even the best way. When I was trying to get a handle on color management I read a lot of conflicting or at least confusing information. What I've suggested above is just what I settled on after doing quite a bit of reading and it's worked well for me for a pretty long time.
You might find this paper from Adobe useful http://www.adobepress.com/articles/a...15593&seqNum=7. You might also find Eric Chan's 3800 workflow useful. http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan...800/index.html Although the Adobe paper deals with CS4 rather than CS5 and Eric Chan's workflow deals with the 3800 rather than the 3880 I think most of the information would still be useful for CS5 and the 3880 though I've never used a 3880.
I don't understand the question about the Spyder test sheet, presumably because I don't use Spyder to calibrate.
Re: Colour Management – Aaarrgghh
Despite Datacolor's recommendation to use saturation, I usually check out the various rendering intents and use the one looks best to me. Usually that's relative colormetric, but I've been surprised now and again.
Re: Colour Management – Aaarrgghh
Thanks guys
I did work out that "relative colourmetric" seemed to be the best option.
By test print I meant the Proof Sheet of about a dozen thumbnails that comes up after calibration thatyou can print to view things like skin tones, grey scales, bold primaries etc.
I don't have an IT8 target for the scanner and will be doing mainly B&W scanning.
One issue is that the personal work I am printing is primarily night work with high contrast areas and lots of areas of deep shadow. The test prints I have been making were not holding shadow detail or contrast anything like the image on the monitor, it wasn't even representative.
Having said that I did manage to whip off one print last night that if I turned the monitor brightness way down would probably look pretty close.
So maybe I'm getting closer. I will review all the excellent info here and have another go tonight.
cheers
Steve
Re: Colour Management – Aaarrgghh
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SteveH
OK so an extreme reaction but the two phrases seem to go quite well together.
Not at all extreme if you're a pirate.
Re: Colour Management – Aaarrgghh
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Will Whitaker
Not at all extreme if you're a pirate.
I used to be a happy pirate.
Now I'm just a confused pirate.:(
All this assistance is starting to show a light on the horizon though.:)
cheers
Steve