Spectrophotometers….

**Henry Yorke** · 19-Mar-2017, 15:28

Hi, everyone.

I’m interested in buying a spectrophotometer and have been looking at the X-Rite ColorMunki Photo and the Datacolor SpyderPRINT.

Does anyone have strong opinions either way about the two units? Curious to know what people are using.

**Jim Andrada** · 19-Mar-2017, 16:00

I'm using a ColorMunki. So far I'm happy with it.

**sanking** · 19-Mar-2017, 18:04

Originally Posted by Henry Yorke

Hi, everyone.

I’m interested in buying a spectrophotometer and have been looking at the X-Rite ColorMunki Photo and the Datacolor SpyderPRINT.

Does anyone have strong opinions either way about the two units? Curious to know what people are using.

What is the anticipated use of these devices?

If for monitor calibration both should work fine. If your anticipated use is creating icc profiles for different papers you can do that with the basic Spyder Print kit and software, not sure if it is possible with the ColorMunki as you may have to buy iProfiler Pro, which could cost you a lot over the cost of the device itself.

Sandy

**Henry Yorke** · 19-Mar-2017, 18:42

Sandy - I'm experimenting with Jon Cone's PiezoDN - and as part of the workflow for both linearizing .QUADs and building ICC profiles, it's recommended that a spectrophotometer be used. I've been using my scanner for these things - but have gotten curious about purchasing a spectrophotometer based on what I've been reading in the PiezoDN manual.

Jim - thanks for letting me know.

**sanking** · 19-Mar-2017, 18:56

Originally Posted by Henry Yorke

Sandy - I'm experimenting with Jon Cone's PiezoDN - and as part of the workflow for both linearizing .QUADs and building ICC profiles, it's recommended that a spectrophotometer be used. I've been using my scanner for these things - but have gotten curious about purchasing a spectrophotometer based on what I've been reading in the PiezoDN manual.

Jim - thanks for letting me know.

Henry,

Then I think you need to ask the PiezoDN guys if either of these devices can be used to scan their targets to do the linearzing. An iOne or iOne 2 would probably be a better instrument for the PiezoDN work, but it may be possible to do it with the Spyder Print or ColorMunki.

Sandy

**ben_hutcherson** · 19-Mar-2017, 19:02

I use the ColorMunki Smile on my Intel Macs and a Spyder2Pro for PowerPC Macs(both are part of my workflow still).

Software wise, the ColorMunki is faster and easier to use but the Spyder offers more options. Ultimately, I just let them both go on default and don't worry about it. It's hard to make direct side by side comparison, but I don't see any difference using either colorimeter on the same monitor.

BTW, the analytical chemist in me has to nit-pick. A spectrophotometer(in grossly simple terms) passes a known amount of light of a specific wave length through a sample and measures how much is absorbed. Note that "light" could be anything from radio waves to X-ray and there are sampling techniques that involve measuring all wavelengths of interest at the same time.

What you are looking at is a colorimeter-something that measures the wavelength of light being output.

**Henry Yorke** · 19-Mar-2017, 19:15

Sandy - they do mention that both the X-Rite ColorMunki Photo and the Datacolor SpyderPRINT would work for the PiezoDN process - neither is as expensive as a new i1Pro2 (though I see that used i1Pro1's are comparably priced).

Ben - thanks for the info about both - and the precision around what these things should be called.

**Jim Andrada** · 20-Mar-2017, 17:43

The software supplied with the ColorMunki produces pretty good paper profiles. I use it often.

**neil poulsen** · 20-Mar-2017, 19:26

I know very little about Color Munki, or other current software. I use and like ProfileMaker 5 that I've owned for years. Up until a little after X-Rite swallowed Gretag-Macbeth whole, this was their professional level offering. (PM5 was originally developed by Gretag.) It requires Snow Leopard, or an earlier version of OSX to run. (Whatever hincludes Rosetta.)

Having provided that bit of context (above), I would not own any spectrophotometer that wasn't capable of measuring both with, and without, a UV filter to address issues related optical brighteners. I suppose the modeling options used in current software have improved. These modelers help predict UV response without using a UV filter. Still, I prefer having a UV filter option available to me.

**Duolab123** · 20-Mar-2017, 20:25

Originally Posted by ben_hutcherson

I use the ColorMunki Smile on my Intel Macs and a Spyder2Pro for PowerPC Macs(both are part of my workflow still).

Software wise, the ColorMunki is faster and easier to use but the Spyder offers more options. Ultimately, I just let them both go on default and don't worry about it. It's hard to make direct side by side comparison, but I don't see any difference using either colorimeter on the same monitor.

BTW, the analytical chemist in me has to nit-pick. A spectrophotometer(in grossly simple terms) passes a known amount of light of a specific wave length through a sample and measures how much is absorbed. Note that "light" could be anything from radio waves to X-ray and there are sampling techniques that involve measuring all wavelengths of interest at the same time.

What you are looking at is a colorimeter-something that measures the wavelength of light being output.

I bet I've run 100,000 samples through a spectrophotometer. Old school back in the late 70's and into the 80's. Quite a modern convenience compared to gravimetric analysis. That was back when analytical chemistry was fun, like a darkroom is fun today. Just thinking about calibrating scanners and printers makes my head hurt. Of course you need control charts and standards, no matter how it's done .
Good luck, Mike