Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Printing: Printers, Papers and Inks => Topic started by: idenford on May 02, 2008, 06:32:58 pm
-
I paid the bucks and sent off three profiles to Cathy.
My Ilford Gold Fibre Silk prints on my new Epson 3800 are coming out too dark.
My monitor is calibrated, and so a friend suggested I look into Cathy's profiles.
Anyone else have success with her profiles?
-
Could your monitor just be too bright? Or your lighting too dim? When you compare the white's onscreen to a white piece of paper do they match in terms of luminance and color?
-
I've had great success with Cathy's profiles. No problems here. I've had about 10 papers profiled by her, matte and coated, from a variety of manufacturers. My print results were not dark at all.
-
I've had great success with Cathy's profiles. No problems here. I've had about 10 papers profiled by her, matte and coated, from a variety of manufacturers. My print results were not dark at all.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=193232\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm looking forward to the three profiles I purchased to see if I get closer to what I see on the screen.
When I print on matte paper, I get an image that is closer to what I see on the monitor, But I decided to include it as well in the three I purchased.
-
I often hear of the perception of a luster or gloss paper being too dark, but not cotton or matte papers. I suspect, as Scott asked above, that your ambient lighting is too minimal or your monitor is dialed up too bright.
-
I paid the bucks and sent off three profiles to Cathy.
My Ilford Gold Fibre Silk prints on my new Epson 3800 are coming out too dark.
My monitor is calibrated, and so a friend suggested I look into Cathy's profiles.
Anyone else have success with her profiles?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=193204\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Are you softproofing and adjusting the images accordingly or just simply printing with application managed color and the profiles? You really haven't described your print workflow.
-
What software and platform are you using? What 3800 driver? With a profiled monitor, you should be getting close to on screen output on the 3800.
-
From Steve Upton, Chromix.com;
>I am new to this list but not to color management. My apologies if I breach some protocol. I have been very successful with making paper profiles with an i1 spectrophotometer for my Epson 7600. It has done as advertised- reduced my tests/wastage and calibrated several studio monitors regularly. All of my current profiles were built from and for a system 10.4(+) Mac. I bought a new 8-processor (system 10.5 + current updates) Intel Mac and imported the paper profiles from the 10.4 machine and they produce prints with darker shadow areas (blocked-up, really) when I print with the same profiles but from the new machine. Mid-tones and highlights are close but the shadows and blacks seem stretched down too dark and the print is correspondingly more contrasty. In concept the promise of a calibrated, closed-loop workflow like i am describing should have consistent results from the same profile. Unless the printer driver (or the OS?) has changed the way it uses the profile. The prospect of creating multiple profiles for each paper/printer combo to suit each workstation becomes an impractical time-eater. Does anyone have any insight or similar experience?
we've seen this occurring with some of our ColorValet customers.
Open the ColorSync Utility and find your printer under 'Devices'. Set 'Generic RGB' for the profile for your printer. Make sure you set it for the particular paper type you are profiling (and selecting in the print driver when you print).
Also, set the printer as the default printer in Leopard's printer setup tool.
THEN try printing your target, it should work OK.
A good way to confirm the problem (and the fix) is plot the measurements in ColorThink (if you are a user) and plot the Generic RGB profile along with it. If you see all the measurements are inside the Generic RGB gamut then you are seeing the problem... When you successfully turn off color management the colors will appear well outside the gRGB gamut.
If you are not certain, feel free to send me the measurement file offline and I'll take a look.
Kudos to our color tech Pat Herold for figuring this one out.
Maybe the problem lies there?
-
Are you softproofing and adjusting the images accordingly or just simply printing with application managed color and the profiles? You really haven't described your print workflow.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=193339\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I am printing from Lightroom. I choose the profile, choose perceptual as the rendering intent, go into the print setting menu and for the gold silk fibre I choose premium semi gloss as suggested by Ilford.
i have downloaded the drivers from Ilford and installed them properly.
I re calibrated my monitor so all is well there
-
I am printing from Lightroom. I choose the profile, choose perceptual as the rendering intent, go into the print setting menu and for the gold silk fibre I choose premium semi gloss as suggested by Ilford.
i have downloaded the drivers from Ilford and installed them properly.
I re calibrated my monitor so all is well there
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=193422\")
Lightroom has some nifty print features but softproofing isn't one of them. You won't be able to see a representation of what the print will actually look like. In other words you're printing blind. This style of printing usually works best with a glossy paper with a wide gamut.
If you're not aware of softproofing check out Andrew Rodney's tutorial [a href=\"https://admin.adobe.acrobat.com/_a227210/p84783897/]here.[/url]
-
Lightroom has some nifty print features but softproofing isn't one of them. You won't be able to see a representation of what the print will actually look like. In other words you're printing blind. This style of printing usually works best with a glossy paper with a wide gamut.
If you're not aware of softproofing check out Andrew Rodney's tutorial here. (https://admin.adobe.acrobat.com/_a227210/p84783897/)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=193426\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes I know that is a problem with Lightroom. I was mostly printing matte or glossy paper, then I got rid of my 2400 and got a 3800 so I could do fine art printing. So . . . now I need to include soft proofing and also re look at the printing tutorial I purchased, and check out the link you just sent me, so thanks for that. A friend suggested Cathy's profiles as well, couldn't hurt eh?
Thanks for the feedback I do appreciate it.
Iden
-
...I re calibrated my monitor so all is well there
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=193422\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
At what luminance level?
Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
-
A friend suggested Cathy's profiles as well, couldn't hurt eh?
Thanks for the feedback I do appreciate it.
Iden
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=193428\")
Cathy has a pretty good reputation so it definitely won't hurt.
If you're on the learning curve you might want to also check out the video, From Camera to Print, by Michael Reichmann and Jeff Schewe at the L-L store [a href=\"http://www.luminous-landscape.com/zencart/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=2&products_id=164]here.[/url]
-
Cathy has a pretty good reputation so it definitely won't hurt.
If you're on the learning curve you might want to also check out the video, From Camera to Print, by Michael Reichmann and Jeff Schewe at the L-L store here. (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/zencart/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=2&products_id=164)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=193468\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have it already and am reviewing it. I spent the afternoon looking at the Adobe video mentioned and changed some settings in photoshop as well as soft proofed a photo.
The bottom line is that I now own an Epson 3800 and am attempting to print on papers other than glossy and matte. I stricty use Premier papers but I thought to try the Ilford gold fibre silk which was so highly recommended here.
I have probably wasted about five sheets of it so far, that's why I went to Cathy to see if she could help.
The problem seems to be in the shadows on the Ilford paper.
However I did make two excellent black and white prints which led me to believe that it was a paper more suited to black and white prints.
I will await Cathy's profile.
I will do more soft proofing now,
but in the end, a big why oh why does Lightroom not offer a soft proofing module??
A serious fly in the ointment imo.
Perhaps the new 2.0 will? Does anyone know??
-
Perhaps the new 2.0 will? Does anyone know??
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=193479\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Nope, no soft proofing this time around.
-
I will do more soft proofing now, but in the end, a big why oh why does Lightroom not offer a soft proofing module??
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=193479\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I suspect that given the colorspace choices they made in Lightroom that softproofing may be tougher to accomplish than we expect. They may also want to do it in a way that reflects some of the other concepts in Lightroom which would be a departure from the way we do it in Photoshop. Just speculating though. Whenever they do deliver it I hope they do a great job with it.
-
I paid the bucks and sent off three profiles to Cathy.
My Ilford Gold Fibre Silk prints on my new Epson 3800 are coming out too dark.
My monitor is calibrated, and so a friend suggested I look into Cathy's profiles.
Anyone else have success with her profiles?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=193204\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I recommend that you start with Ilford"s latest profile for GFS (dated February 2008), export your images from Lightroom to Photoshop, make your final luminosity edits with Curves while in Softproof mode, and at the same time verify the on-display appearance you get from varying the Rendering Intent between the four options provided. RI can make a substantial difference, depending on the imahe characteristics and the effect you are trying to replicate. You may find this solves your problem. A custom profile, properly made, may also exhibit small differences in results relative to the Ilford profile. As you've already ordered it, of course test it - but doing the same things I've just recommended.
-
You still haven't told us what luminance value you have your monitor set to. If your monitor is too bright, all the profiling and soft-proofing in the world won't keep your prints from coming out too dark in comparison.
Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
-
You still haven't told us what luminance value you have your monitor set to. If your monitor is too bright, all the profiling and soft-proofing in the world won't keep your prints from coming out too dark in comparison.
Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=193691\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Absolutely - I forgot to mention that point. I would recommend a value in the range of 100~120 cd, but it varies according to the display conditions and to some extent the paper being simulated.
-
I've worked my way down to 90 cd/m² on mine.
Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
-
I've worked my way down to 90 cd/m² on mine.
Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=193698\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not surprising - I'm at 110 and I've been tempted to reduce further when I was using matte, but with Ilford GFS 110 works - what kind of paper are you relating it to?
-
Not sure where to check this, I use a Huey to adjust the display. I am thinking of getting a better display calibrator as I noticed in the tutorial, They are talking about this. Where do I check it?
I think the post on the curves adjustment is a good one. I really studied the tutorials recommended. Did the soft proofing in the custom view. tweaked the images til they looked about as close to the original after selecting the paper profile in custom view. But I imported the image back into Lightroom and printed from Lightroom. I attemted one print on Ultra Smooth Fine Art in Photoshop and it was ghastly. When I imported the soft proofed and tweaked image back into Lightroom, using Perceptual as the rendering intent, I had better success. But then I got even better prints using Watercolour paper. I spent my whole day on this thing. I will await Cathy's Profiles before I go back to the Ilford paper.
-
Not sure where to check this, I use a Huey to adjust the display. I am thinking of getting a better display calibrator as I noticed in the tutorial, They are talking about this. Where do I check it?
I think the post on the curves adjustment is a good one. I really studied the tutorials recommended. Did the soft proofing in the custom view. tweaked the images til they looked about as close to the original after selecting the paper profile in custom view. But I imported the image back into Lightroom and printed from Lightroom. I attemted one print on Ultra Smooth Fine Art in Photoshop and it was ghastly. When I imported the soft proofed and tweaked image back into Lightroom, using Perceptual as the rendering intent, I had better success. But then I got even better prints using Watercolour paper. I spent my whole day on this thing. I will await Cathy's Profiles before I go back to the Ilford paper.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=193706\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
OK, let's do this step-by-step:
(1) Display calibration and profiling: Yes, from what I've read, it would appear a reasonable idea to get something better than Huey for more reliable results. Integrated Color Corporation (www.integrated-color.com) provides ColorEyes Display software with Monaco DTP-94 colorimeter hardware package - excellent value for very high quality stuff. When you use this software, it provides the cd/M2 measurement and allows you to set that parameter. Many displays only show luminance as a percentage - not very useful.
(2) For each paper type you are using: (a) set-up the soft proof for that paper; ( make sure that paper or the nearest type correspoding to the paper profile is selected in the printer driver; © print from Photoshop and make sure the correct printer/paper profile is selected in the Photoshop print manager; © make sure printer colour management is OFF and Photoshop Manages Colors is ON.
If you do all that, you should get good results regardless of which paper you are using.
-
Not surprising - I'm at 110 and I've been tempted to reduce further when I was using matte, but with Ilford GFS 110 works - what kind of paper are you relating it to?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=193700\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I use InkJetArt MC Luster — very similar to Epson Premium Lustre. I've never heard of setting different luminance levels for different papers, but I guess that's could make some sense if the brightness of the papers varies significantly. The ambient lighting in your work environment has more effect on it, though, I believe. I work in a fairly dim room, so the monitor needs to be dialed down a lot.
Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
-
I use InkJetArt MC Luster — very similar to Epson Premium Lustre. I've never heard of setting different luminance levels for different papers, but I guess that's could make some sense if the brightness of the papers varies significantly. The ambient lighting in your work environment has more effect on it, though, I believe. I work in a fairly dim room, so the monitor needs to be dialed down a lot.
Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=193713\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Nill, I agree ambient light is the more important variable and I also work in a dim environment with a dim display, but the reflectivity and dMax between Matte and Luster/Gloss really varies substantially (also the role of OBAs impacts the appearance); so when soft-proofing with "Simulate Paper White" activated, the screen to print match is improved by fine-tuning the display luminance accordingly.
-
That makes sense.
I've never gotten into soft-proofing as I've pretty much stuck to the one paper. Is there no other parameter in the soft-proofing process that takes the reflectivity of the particular paper into account?
Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
-
The profile for the paper should record the white point of the paper. When soft proofing the simulate white of paper should show this. I don't find it's all that accurate as I like the way human vision adapts so quickly to the viewing light, hence the perception of the print always looks better than the soft proof via ICC profiles. It is however relative and in that case it is a tool to be used as such.
-
That suggests to me then that one should not change the luminance of the monitor for different papers. No?
Nill
~~
www.toulme.net
-
The profile for the paper should record the white point of the paper. When soft proofing the simulate white of paper should show this.
Further, and maybe more important is it simulates the dynamic range of the print on a device that has progressively been developed to exceed this target by a huge amount. Marketing thinks we end users believe a 800:1 contrast ratio in a display isn't as good as a 1000:1 contrast ratio which clearly isn't useful in this case. And with the inability to really control both black and white, as we had in much older CRT technology, or, as we had in the Sony Artisan, the ability to actually affect the contrast ratio by controlling both black and white, something that isn't happening in an ICC profile, we are finding it even harder to properly soft proof. So its no wonder that the simulate paper white makes the image look so crappy, especially when you view the rest of the UI not undergoing that simulation. That means, you really do need to be viewing in full screen mode.
-
Andrew, what I've been finding is that the "crappiness" of the Simulate Paper White "look" depends very much on what paper you are simulating. With Epson Enhanced Matte (or whatever they call it today), the effect was VERY noticeably more crappy looking from turning this on. With Ilford GFS, given the impact is visible but much less so. We're dealing with big differences of DMax and tint between these papers.