Assistance with Colormunki and Macbook Pro (old one)

[MichaelAlanBielat]

I'm hoping there are some Mac color gurus out there who can help me calibration my laptop screen with my new toy. I had great results with my Huey but my new x-rite ColorMunki is leaving me feeling green... I am a Mac and PC owner who has more intimate knowledge on the PC color management than with a Mac.

I have been using my Macbook Pro 15" For about three years now. This is one of the first versions with the specs 2 gHz Intel Core Duo and maxed out 2GB of 677mHz DDR2 SDRAM... I did pick up the glossy screen version (this model had the matte or glossy version)

It is an oldie but a goodie and has served me well. I would imagine that the age isn't really an issue as long as you are on top of your calibration regiment. First off as a side note, can someone let me know if that statement is true or not?

I have always outsource my printing (I shoot weddings and portraits where it works well) but have been quite intrigued to do it more myself for my fine art work. My only obstacle is that I am not familiar with the Mac's color management as well as with a PC.

I just picked up a x-rite ColorMunki Photo calibration tool and will be hopefully putting my Huey to the curb. I deleted my Huey profiles and uninstalled it from the computer and installed the software from x-rite and ran through calibrating my laptop's screen. I must say that the results are much, much more on the green side than when calibrated with my Huey... At leas that is the difference between the two. I am a perfectionist and am probably over-thinking things so I am just looking for opinions and techniques that you may have used with a Mac laptop and ColorMunki combo for calibration.

I took the default (easy) ColorMunki calibration steps but I am unsure of if the profile is even loaded or if it is running something odd because of the ColorSync utility or Display settings in the System Preferences that is either overriding or mixing with my recent x-rite calibration.

So here is what I did to have hopefully gotten off on the right foot to get back to factory and erase all previous Huey profiles...
1.) Using the ColorSync utility in the Devices tab and then the Display > Color LCD:
The Factory Profile is set to: "/Library/ColorSync/Profiles/Displays/Color LCD-4271800.icc" and I went ahead and ensured that the Current Profile there was "Set to Factory".
2.) From there, I ran through the ColorMunki calibration: Connect it, Calibrate Device and then Measure where I saw all the funky colors just like calibration tools do. It gave me the before and after buttons where I saw the ColorSync utility changing the names of the current profile from the default Factory preset (more vivid colors) to my newly created "~/Library/ColorSync/Profiles/Color LCD_D65.icc" (with duller more subdued colors which is what I expected)

Question: So my only concern is that I did the "Easy" setup for calibration. Would you recommend going Advanced for more accuracy? If so then should I check the "optimize the brightness and contrast settings of my display" and/or also "optimize the luminance level based upon current ambient light conditions?" I didn't check either of those, I just chose my Target White Point as the D65 default. My ColorMunki preferences for the tone response curve are also set for 2.2 over 1.8...

I plan on using the laptop like how I always have. I would like to use it for as accurate color renditions as possible for first runs, proofing and hopefully even critical color accuracy. My prints come out stellar when printed at labs but look like doo doo when I print off my Mac (Photoshop = bad but Lightroom yields better results with the Mac).

So any help would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance and I hope to learn something from you guys.

[digitaldog]

Laptop displays kind of suck, that's first off.

2.2, even Native if there's such an option is preferred but you need to view the resulting previews in an ICC aware application (not the desktop).

D65 is a good start but if it appears too cool or warm, adjust to taste. The right answer is the one that produces a good print to display match.

[MichaelAlanBielat]

Laptop displays kind of suck, that's first off.

2.2, even Native if there's such an option is preferred but you need to view the resulting previews in an ICC aware application (not the desktop).

D65 is a good start but if it appears too cool or warm, adjust to taste. The right answer is the one that produces a good print to display match.

Haha, I hear you on the Laptop displays... I do have a Dell 22" screen which may render better results but as mentioned in the previous post, I am all about getting as much done on that laptop as possible. I know critical color accuracy may be tough coming into it but with my work and schedule it is just so much more convenient for having a laptop so I can work wherever, whenever...

The Huey profile seemed nice but swayed to the red tones while this ColorMunki profile is more to the green. The red looked better for skin tones while not so hot with the ColorMunki. I expected

I decided last night that I would go ahead and profile my printer/paper combo using the ColorMunki and soft proof something and then print it to really see how off it is...

The Huey is a $100 calibration device while the ColorMunki runs $400 so I hopefully will see that you get what you pay for you know? I am just not seeing it right now. I just can't believe how much they were off!

I should also take a look with a new pair of eyes later today because I was staring at that screen for a good 4 hours before calibration and I am wondering if my eyes were just used to the other colors in relation to the new calibration.

[MichaelAlanBielat]

Yeah, I looked at it with a new pair of eyes today and the color and screen calibration look just fine to me. If you look at my first post it was done at 1:30am so I was pulling an all nighter of sorts and you know what that can do to your logic haha.

Well of course my ink is running low so I need to run to the store and pick some up, so much for really giving this printer a run for it's money (well it was free with rebate when I got my 5D haha.)...

I can say that I probably was just all messed up from staring at my screen for a good 4 hours before calibration and the differences were very obvious to me. It looks very good now and I did do a quick paper icc profile with it and noticed amazing results! I actually used Photoshop to print instead of Lightroom for a change and it actually worked! I did a test print and it looked really good with accurate colors. Soft proofing with my custom made profile was just what the doctor ordered and I had immediate success (aside from some ). I did my first print on a portrait shoot and the skin tones were really stellar.

So I will do more of a review when I get a second (and when I get new ink cartridges). So far I am giving it a two thumbs up!

Easy to use, great initial results and it costs only $400 which is a fraction of the price of those other color management and profiling tools...

[MichaelAlanBielat]

So I loaded up on ink, profiled my monitor and noticed significant banding in the green and blue colors when making a Profile Color Chart using the ColorMunki... Ran some print head alignments, nozzle cleanings and so on and still there slightly.

Printed the two calibration charts and made my ICC profile for my printer and paper combo and used Photoshop to print....

My prints have never looked so awful in all my life. Made sure I had the correct print driver, even downloaded the defauly ICC profile from Canon's site for the printer and paper (paper was 13x19" Photo Paper Plus Glossy II BTW). My guess is that the banding in the blue and green could have gave my ICC profile so unsuccessful. It was noticeable even after making the finest print possible (High Quality Photo setting wasn't fine enough so I had to do a custom setting with the finest print quality to reduce the banding as much as possible) Another issue I have noticed is that say I printed a 13x19" print borderless, the first inch or two was much nicer and more accurate and then the banding and poor color started to occur. New ink didn't fix that. On a 4x6" the same thing happens just scaled down the same amount.

My buddy has the Epson Stylus R1900, same file, same ColorMunki calibration, new ICC profile with his printer, same paper and ColorMunki and within 10 minutes I had the print that I wanted and then some...

This Canon Pro9000 has been giving me issues ever since I got it. I think it is time to call Canon tech support which I am dreading.

I am going to give it one shot with my PC this time and not my Mac to see how it fairs up. I have Photoshop CS4 as well.

I guess if I am not happy with what I get then I will just move to HP or Epson so on that note, can you recommend me a good 13"-17" wide printer that is ideal for fine art landscape images? I know I will not be printing large any time soon so anything 17" and up will be overkill.

This is one of those hair pulling out moments...

Boy that was one expensive 11x14" I had to make! If it wasn't such short notice, I would have just given up after 5 minutes and have WHCC do it for me (It's a portrait job for mother's day so I needed to get it made asap).

[digitaldog]

I am going to give it one shot with my PC this time and not my Mac to see how it fairs up. I have Photoshop CS4 as well.

I guess if I am not happy with what I get then I will just move to HP or Epson so on that note, can you recommend me a good 13"-17" wide printer that is ideal for fine art landscape images? I know I will not be printing large any time soon so anything 17" and up will be overkill

I've had nothing but good results on the Mac with CM but profiling to Epson's. Sounds like it might be a driver issue of some kind.

To answer your question above, 3800?

[MichaelAlanBielat]

I've had nothing but good results on the Mac with CM but profiling to Epson's. Sounds like it might be a driver issue of some kind.

To answer your question above, 3800?

Thanks for the feedback. I tried the various drivers on Canon's site. If you look there in the Canon Pixma Pro9000 page on Canon's site:
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controll...wnloadDetailAct

and select OS X from the operating system then you will see three different drives. I tried them all out and even reinstalled the CD that the printer came with as well.

I currently have Pro9000 Printer Driver Ver. 7.14.0 (Mac OS X 10.3.9 or higher) and am running 10.5 so that seems correct. I called Canon tech support and after 30 minutes on hold they tell me that it would cost $10 to diagnose the problem. BS.

Thanks for the heads up on the 3800 printer by the way.

[MichaelAlanBielat]

Long overdue update on what happened...

Turns out that my Pixma Pro9000 printer was operating under it's last dying breath... That was one expensive paper weight. I would be a lot more ticked off but this printer was the result of a rebate so it technically was free... I just had to get a 5D as well...

I do not know what the deal is but all my Canon stuff has died or did die on me at one point.

Printer - fail.
5D - Only legit gear that still worked
24-70mm - bunch of soft copies
16-35mm - horrible edge to edge softness and chromatic abberation
70-200mm - IS motor died
580EX II - Hot shoe mount cracked off flash
85mm - AF died on lens
1D Mark III - AF died on camera at 8,000 clicks.
30D - endless buffer loop
30D - Err99 issue

It isn't like I beat up my stuff either. That is what ticks me off the most I guess.