"Mike Russell" <groupsRE@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:f84mjb68jugq.dlg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 07:57:38 -0700 (PDT), Empedocles wrote:
>
>> Why, on many of the prints I make, I must use Epson's color management,
>> rather than PS's color management, to get a print that most closely
>> matches my monitor? I have an Epson 1280 that I've profiled using
>> GretagMacbeth's Eye-One system. I profiled it for Epson's Premium Photo
>> Glossy paper and MIS inks.
>
> This is the cris de cour of almost anyone who is very discerning about
how
> well their printer matches their monitor. Millions of dollars have
been
> spent on it, with no sure fire solution in sight.
>
> A problem that seems simple to understand, isn't simple at all. It's a
> problem that unravels as you chase it.
>
>> Too frequently, when I run a test on 4x6 Epson Premium Photo Glossy
paper
>> (soft-proofing is a waste of time for me), I find that, using my
profile
>> & letting PS manage the printing, that the print fails miserably to
>> match my monitor's image. (I recalibrate & profile my monitor monthly.)
>
> Well, right there I would question the accuracy of your printer profile.
> There are a number of things you can do to *****s the accuracy of your
> profile - one is to convert a grayscale gradient, and check the
individual
> channels for blending. I provide an action that does this, then plots
the
> components as a graph. See if your profile looks like the
Frankenprofile
> example.
> http://curvemeister.com/downloads/profileplotter/index.htm
>
>> When I try letting Epson
>> manage the printer, the print matches the monitor almost exactly. If I
>> need to tweak the image, using the Epson system, I can do so in the
>> Epson printer controls. With PS, I have to go back to the image in PS
>> & guess & by gosh. This is very inefficient.
>
> Perhaps by Epson color management, you mean either the PhotoEnhance4
mode,
> or the mode with explicit color sliders. I've used both of these to
good
> effect, and have to agree with you that it works.
>
>> I would use Epson color management exclusively if it were not for the
>> fact that on some images, PS control is better than Epson control. So,
>> you could say this is my workflow: If PS is best, use it. If Epson is
>> best, use that. 4x6 paper isn't that expensive.
>
> The choice probably depends on the subject matter of the image.
>
>> I'm just curious why I can't standardize on one color management
>> printer system.
>
> This is key, I believe, to understanding what the basic flaw in
> over-reliance on color management and calibration is. That is the
belief,
> that perfect calibration will produce excellent images - it will not.
> Calibration can produce OK images, but it will not produce great ones.
It
> takes a person to squeeze the last 10, 20, or 30 percent out of an
image.
> No profile alone can do that, even as well as a moderately skilled
person.
>
>> It's incredible to me that the Epson system, using non- Epson inks, can
>> produce more accurate results than the PS system with my profile. Maybe
>> some of you have run into the same situation & that what I have to do
is
>> all I can do. Maybe I should reprofile my printer, paper, and inks,
>> altho my printer hasn't changed, my paper hasn't changed, and my inks
>> haven't changed.
>
> The fact that the inks match Epson's reasonably well is a testimony to
the
> folks who made the inks. Epson, as well, has a great economic interest
in
> providing a good out of box experience for people who purchase their
> equipment. Both of these companies have spectrophotometers and other
> color
> measurement instruments that cost as much as your house - or at least
your
> car. The fact that they can accomplish this is a testimony to their
> collective calibration abilities.
>
> Can you accomplish the same thing with a minimum of training, and a
device
> that clocks in at just over $1000? I don't think so. Can you recognize
a
> good image, and adjust it to look better? Absolutely, and this is the
key
> to why Epson's manual controls give you such an advantage over reliance
on
> a profile.
>
> Color editing, over and above calibration, is the key to get the most
out
> of your images. Whether you spend a few seconds, or hours on an image,
> you
> can improve your color, provided you trust your own eyes, color
judgment,
> and make effective use of the all im****tant numbers in Photoshop's
> info-palette.
>
> OK, that was a bit long, but as of two minutes ago, it's my birthday,
LOL.
> --
> Mike Russell - http://www.curvemeister.com
both worth saying twice
Calibration can produce OK images, but it will not produce great ones. It
takes a person to squeeze the last 10, 20, or 30 percent out of an image.
No profile alone can do that, even as well as a moderately skilled person
and happy Birthday to You
and happy Birthday to You
|
