Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Print Matching  (Read 4069 times)

CBarrett

  • Guest
Print Matching
« on: April 21, 2010, 12:53:14 pm »

Ok.... so I've got my Eizo calibrated to D65 and 80 cd/m2 as Color Navigator recommends.  I've used my Eye One Pro to calibrate my iPF 5000 and though my colors are really good, the prints feel dark.  Always too dark... always the same issue.  Then it occurred to me that my images (5x7 on 8.5xll paper) have this big white border and while in Photoshop you are generally working with a grey or black border.  This all takes me back to color theory and how proximity and alternate backgrounds can totally change a swatch of color or density.  I'm going to set my P'Shop background to white and play that way for a while.

Craziness.

-CB
Logged

JeffKohn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1668
    • http://jeffk-photo.typepad.com
Print Matching
« Reply #1 on: April 21, 2010, 01:17:09 pm »

Normally when somebody talks about dark prints, the mostly likely culprit is an over-bright monitor; but you say you're running at 80cd/m2 which is actually pretty dim for an LCD unless you're working in a cave. I run at 100cd/m2, and it seems a lot of folks are running their LCD's at 125-150.

The next consideration is viewing light for the print. If the ambient light in your workspace is fairly low (which I'm guessing may be the case if given your display luminosity), it may be a matter of just getting brighter light to evaluate the print in.

Finally, inkjets tend to crush the shadows a bit. If you're printing with an ICC profile using rel-col intent, try perceptual intent for images with lots of darker tones, as that will usually open up the shadows a little. Also, for B/W images you may want to try the monochrome printing mode, which I've found usually has slightly better linearity with most printers (particularly the Epson ABW mode, but also Canon's Mono Printing mode to a lesser extent).


Changing the background in PS may very well help to give you an idea what the print will look like with a white border, although rather than using pure white you may want to use something closer to actual paper white (which is usually around L*= 97-98). Also, using the simulate paper white/black-ink options may be useful when soft-proofing (although I've found them to be overly pessimistic compared to what the print actually looks like in hand).
« Last Edit: April 21, 2010, 01:20:06 pm by JeffKohn »
Logged
Jeff Kohn
[url=http://ww

CBarrett

  • Guest
Print Matching
« Reply #2 on: April 21, 2010, 01:31:03 pm »

Quote from: JeffKohn
Normally when somebody talks about dark prints, the mostly likely culprit is an over-bright monitor; but you say you're running at 80cd/m2 which is actually pretty dim for an LCD unless you're working in a cave. I run at 100cd/m2, and it seems a lot of folks are running their LCD's at 125-150.

The next consideration is viewing light for the print. If the ambient light in your workspace is fairly low (which I'm guessing may be the case if given your display luminosity), it may be a matter of just getting brighter light to evaluate the print in.

Finally, inkjets tend to crush the shadows a bit. If you're printing with an ICC profile using rel-col intent, try perceptual intent for images with lots of darker tones, as that will usually open up the shadows a little. Also, for B/W images you may want to try the monochrome printing mode, which I've found usually has slightly better linearity with most printers (particularly the Epson ABW mode, but also Canon's Mono Printing mode to a lesser extent).


Changing the background in PS may very well help to give you an idea what the print will look like with a white border, although rather than using pure white you may want to use something closer to actual paper white (which is usually around L*= 97-98). Also, using the simulate paper white/black-ink options may be useful when soft-proofing (although I've found them to be overly pessimistic compared to what the print actually looks like in hand).


Luminance has always kind of driven me nuts.  The Eye One software suggest 120 for LCD's and 90(I believe) for laptops.  ColorHQ, my printer and calibrator dealer suggested 90 for print matching and the Eizo software likes the screen at 80.  So far, viewing with a white background in P'Shop and 80 on the Eizo are the closest matches I've gotten.  I had also heard from an AD that the images were coming out dark and a little muddy on press, hence the chase.
Logged

tesfoto

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 145
Print Matching
« Reply #3 on: April 21, 2010, 02:36:06 pm »

Quote from: CBarrett
Luminance has always kind of driven me nuts.  The Eye One software suggest 120 for LCD's and 90(I believe) for laptops.  ColorHQ, my printer and calibrator dealer suggested 90 for print matching and the Eizo software likes the screen at 80.  So far, viewing with a white background in P'Shop and 80 on the Eizo are the closest matches I've gotten.  I had also heard from an AD that the images were coming out dark and a little muddy on press, hence the chase.


Are you using the same calibrator and software for monitor calibration and printer calibration ?

If the images also comes out dark on press, there is a good chance the your monitor calibration is off.

On the other hand, images you post here looks just fine on my monitor 2690, not dark at all.

How was your old monitor ?

I am also calibrated at 100 cd and the Epson 4800 seems to match all the way to press - I use the Eye one display 2 for the monitor and Eye one Pro for printer.

Cheers

TES


« Last Edit: April 21, 2010, 02:39:22 pm by tesfoto »
Logged

tho_mas

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1799
Print Matching
« Reply #4 on: April 21, 2010, 02:58:13 pm »

Quote from: CBarrett
Craziness
as strange is it may sound: push the black point of your display to 0.3cd/m2. at least give it a try.
also, the white background in photoshop is a good idea for print related edtiting. I do it all the time. By default I set Photoshop to the same grey as the "light grey" in Capture One (which is my default in C1)... but when I finished my files print files I always switch Photoshops background to white ... to double check the overall luminance.


Logged

TMARK

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1841
Print Matching
« Reply #5 on: April 21, 2010, 04:12:12 pm »

Quote from: CBarrett
I had also heard from an AD that the images were coming out dark and a little muddy on press, hence the chase.

I feel your pain. I won't do prepress anymore.  I'll have the retoucher deliver the press ready files, because they are a prepress house as well.  I approve the press ready files, but I won't do it myself. I gave up after getting blamed for bad/sloppy press work, and after losing so much time chasing down problems like this in both my and my client's workflows.  You have your color work flow, then the clients, who are often printing proofs on a laser or looking at things on a luminance BLASTED iMac under flourscent lights.  I've had clients tweak an image because they were sure it was too bright, only to have a river of mud coming off the web press.
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Print Matching
« Reply #6 on: April 21, 2010, 05:57:25 pm »

Quote from: CBarrett
Luminance has always kind of driven me nuts.  The Eye One software suggest 120 for LCD's and 90(I believe) for laptops.

I wish these damn software companies would stop making these silly recommendations. The right value for the targets are those that produce a match. YMMV. You can't even start a recommendation until you define the print viewing conditions.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

David Saffir

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 172
    • http://davidsaffir.wordpress.com
Print Matching
« Reply #7 on: April 21, 2010, 08:56:28 pm »

It's also true that smaller prints tend to look darker, larger prints lighter - something of a trick of the eye. Perhaps your comparison of the 5x7 to the larger screen is one of the issues that's bugging you.

David

Logged
David Saffir
[url=http://davidsaffir.wor

gwhitf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 855
Print Matching
« Reply #8 on: April 21, 2010, 11:23:26 pm »

Quote from: digitaldog
I wish these damn software companies would stop making these silly recommendations. The right value for the targets are those that produce a match. YMMV. You can't even start a recommendation until you define the print viewing conditions.

I can't believe this is the year 2010, and we're still talking about this stuff, and it's no further along than it was years and years ago, back in the RG.com days. How could anyone "recommend" anything? I thought standards were standards; isn't that the whole idea about Calibration and Universality and WhatYouSeeIsWhatISee? The whole EyeOne mess, and every company recommending something different? What a scam, but yes, they got our money.
Logged

Wayne Fox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4237
    • waynefox.com
Print Matching
« Reply #9 on: April 22, 2010, 12:43:36 am »

Quote from: digitaldog
I wish these damn software companies would stop making these silly recommendations. The right value for the targets are those that produce a match. YMMV. You can't even start a recommendation until you define the print viewing conditions.

ditto what he said .. there is no "right" or "recommended" number.  Build a viewing station first, then match it.
Logged

fredjeang

  • Guest
Print Matching
« Reply #10 on: April 22, 2010, 02:54:20 am »

Quote from: CBarrett
... This all takes me back to color theory and how proximity and alternate backgrounds can totally change a swatch of color or density.  

Craziness.

-CB
Indeed.
I've noticed more issues with the dark greens and reds.
I've got a trick that works pretty well really, that I discovered by accident:
It's a kind of previous simulation. For that I would use a web system in intranet and a background switcher from dark grey to white.
When I have my ready-for-print Tiff, I make a copy of it in 8bits and upload the pic in the html structure, very important: small sized (700px).
Then use the switcher to change the html background and you are very aware of the real impact on colors etc...
Come back to photoshop and do the adjustments.


Cheers.

Logged

michele

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 230
Print Matching
« Reply #11 on: April 22, 2010, 02:55:19 am »

Quote from: CBarrett
Ok.... so I've got my Eizo calibrated to D65 and 80 cd/m2 as Color Navigator recommends.  I've used my Eye One Pro to calibrate my iPF 5000 and though my colors are really good, the prints feel dark.  Always too dark... always the same issue.  Then it occurred to me that my images (5x7 on 8.5xll paper) have this big white border and while in Photoshop you are generally working with a grey or black border.  This all takes me back to color theory and how proximity and alternate backgrounds can totally change a swatch of color or density.  I'm going to set my P'Shop background to white and play that way for a while.

Craziness.

-CB

Try to download the profile of the paper from the manufacter website... Use it with photosop. perhaps you had problems calibrating the printer. Just a question, when you run the linearization of the printer, which is the total % of ink that the printer can use? Does the ink dry fast or is it a little wet? This is a screen shot of my colornavigator window of the calibrated monitor, what i have on monitor i see on print (i use an epson 4880)

CBarrett

  • Guest
Print Matching
« Reply #12 on: April 22, 2010, 05:49:08 am »

Thanks for the input everyone!  Michelle, my Color Navigator window is pretty close to what you've got.  

And, the prints aren't really THAT far off, but I'm damn picky... and yeah I know that the print relies on reflected light while the other (monitor) is luminous.  I mean it's much better than the disappointment I used to get from Chrome to Print.... just pursuit of perfection and all that crap, yada yada.  I did try the canned profiles for my paper, and my calibrated profiles are much, much better.

At least with chromes you could always tell the print house, "Hey my film looks great, get your sh*t to match it!"

I do need to think more about my print viewing conditions, but then what do you standardize to?  I've never seen a GTI print viewer in an Architect's office... so do I just go to all their conference rooms with a light meter and build a simulated crappy viewing environment?  LoL....

On the bright side... i just dropped off a huge job with a client yesterday.  While we were talking about the shots, we reviewed them on their 40" LCD TV in a small conference room. looking at the Web Gallery I had posted for them online... and you know what?  The images looked pretty damn good... a little warm, but really pretty close.  It's sort of like when I spend 4 hours retouching an image, feel like I've finally got it JUST RIGHT and then turn off the retouch layers to see that it's not really all that different.

I'm just never going to be satisfied... which of course is part of why clients hire me.

Good Mornin'
CB
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up