Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Custom profiles  (Read 4300 times)

GeraldB

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 144
    • Gerald Bloch Photography
Custom profiles
« on: July 24, 2010, 11:48:43 am »

I have a new printer (Epson 7900) and it came with  a roll of double weight mat paper. When I print a test print it is a little dark and if I lighten the test print I can see the colours are off a bit. I'm printing from LRM3. Monitor is profiled and I'm using the paper profile provided with the printer. I assume that the problem is that the paper profile was made some years ago on a specific 7900 and a specific batch of that paper so that explains the differences to my printer/paper.

Are printers sufficiently the same that one profile from a paper vendor will work on all printers of that type or is it common practice to have to make/buy custom profiles?
If I need to buy a custom profile where is a good source to buy them?
thanks
Gerald

Scott O.

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 315
    • Photography by Scott and Joyce
Custom profiles
« Reply #1 on: July 24, 2010, 12:17:59 pm »

I use a 7900 also, and say welcome to the wonderful and highly frustrating world of color management.  Here is my answer.  Others may disagree, and other opinions would certainly be interesting.  And you probably won't like my answer!  You need a profile for each printer and each paper you use.  Profiles need to be printer/paper specific.  Some would suggest you even need new profiles when replacing ink, but I have not found that necessary.  You can generally download pretty good profiles from manufacturers web sites.  If this doesn't work for you they can be custom made, each in the $35 or so range.  I have found it cost-effective to make my own using a ColorMunki.  This device will also allow the monitor to be calibrated.

And speaking of monitor calibration, the problem obviously becomes matching what you see on your monitor to what comes out of the printer, or visa versa.  This process is what makes a color calibrated workflow such a nightmare.  You are trying to match a screen image with a reflected paper image.  The screen on most monitors has a much more limited gamut than does your printer.  So this is not an easy task.  I have found that the paper profile that I make is generally pretty correct, and the monitor is more of a problem.  I try to match the monitor to the print, not the other way around.  I took delivery of a NEC PA271 monitor this week, and can honestly say it is the first monitor I have ever used that I have been able to come pretty darn close to matching the monitor and printer.  The NEC is a so-called wide gamut monitor, allegedly capable of showing 97+%  of the Adobe RGB color gamut.  As a contrast, I have read that the Apple Cinema Display (which I thought was pretty darn good) is somewhere around 71%.  I haven't seen figures about other monitors.

Anyhow, good luck with all of this.  Read and experiment, and be prepared to use up a bunch of paper and ink in the process!  This forum is excellent for ideas and tips, as others have faced the same issues you are wading into.  Questions are good, as there is always someone who has dealt with your problem and can help.  And as an aside, the roll of paper that came with the printer is pretty crappy, useful only for doing alignment tests and things of that sort.

GeraldB

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 144
    • Gerald Bloch Photography
Custom profiles
« Reply #2 on: July 24, 2010, 01:12:53 pm »

Thanks for you comments. I also use a wide gamut monitor (NEC 2690Wuxi) and calibrated it with the Spectraview II that came with the monitor. I realize that the paper that comes with the printer is just to get going. I've ordered some Epson Exhibition Fiber that was on sale at IT Supplies. Hopefully that is better.

Nill Toulme

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 738
    • http://www.toulmephoto.com
Custom profiles
« Reply #3 on: July 24, 2010, 01:18:56 pm »

Where's the best place to get one-off custom profiles these days?  Is Cathy's still recommended?

Nill
Logged

NikoJorj

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1082
    • http://nikojorj.free.fr/
Custom profiles
« Reply #4 on: July 24, 2010, 01:50:01 pm »

For custom profiles, I'd vote for Eric Chan...
« Last Edit: July 24, 2010, 01:50:10 pm by NikoJorj »
Logged
Nicolas from Grenoble
A small gallery

Scott O.

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 315
    • Photography by Scott and Joyce
Custom profiles
« Reply #5 on: July 24, 2010, 06:52:08 pm »

GeraldB:  Hope my post helped a bit.  I ordered the monitor with the Spectraview, but it wasn't in the box, so I had to use the ColorMunki.  I was surprised that it worked so well.  As far as having custom profiles made, I have used Cathy's several times in the past.  There has been posts within the past couple of years that her service had slipped, but I have no personal knowledge of this.  I have heard good things about Eric Chan, and would probably use him if I needed a profile.  For glossy, my paper of choice is Epson Exhibition Fiber.  Epson's profile works well for the 7900/EEF combo.  My favorite matte paper is Moab Entrada.  You sound pretty savvy, so I expect you will figure it all out in short order...

GeraldB

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 144
    • Gerald Bloch Photography
Custom profiles
« Reply #6 on: July 24, 2010, 08:05:38 pm »

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll check out both Cathy and MMChan's website.

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22814
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Custom profiles
« Reply #7 on: July 24, 2010, 11:02:46 pm »

Quote from: NikoJorj
For custom profiles, I'd vote for Eric Chan...

Me too! 
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20630
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Custom profiles
« Reply #8 on: July 25, 2010, 05:39:17 pm »

Quote from: GeraldB
Are printers sufficiently the same that one profile from a paper vendor will work on all printers of that type or is it common practice to have to make/buy custom profiles?

The better (higher end) Epson printers, with their inks and papers are pretty darn good. A custom profile may be a tad better but I usually recommend you at least try printing some tough images with the supplied Epson profiles and see what you think before automatically assuming you need a custom profile. 3rd party papers (with whatever media settings they may or may not recommend), all bets are off.

As for screen to print matching, they key is having the display calibration target values you select such that you do get that visual match. Forget the specific numbers (like “you must calibrate to 120cd/m2” or “you should always calibrate to D65”). Ignore such comments since YMMV (so much depends on how you are viewing the prints next to that display).
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

Wayne Fox

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4237
    • waynefox.com
Custom profiles
« Reply #9 on: July 26, 2010, 02:30:02 pm »

The variation and difficulty of profiling monitors and matching those to viewing conditions is far greater than that between the current generation of printers.  I would be very surprised if a custom profile delivers any significant change (you probably will have to look VERY hard to find any differences), and the prints from the custom profile will match prints from the previous profile far closer  than they will match your display.

With current generation printers such as your 7900, if you are trying to solve a problem matching output to display, custom profiles is not the answer.  Insuring you have an appropriate and adequate viewing light source, and perhaps experimenting with various white points and luminance values when creating the monitor display may be more helpful.  (also insuring your printer is functioning correctly.)

IMHO, the very first step in any setup is using a known high quality test file, such as from Bill Atkinson, Digital Dog's, or Outback photography.  This will print out very accurately, and if there is any weakness in the profile it should show up in various areas.  (In fact, if these prints don't look good it may indicate a problem with the printer (or workflow), not the profile.)  Then go about trying to get your display to match that print.  The only real variables are the display and the viewing conditions.

Personally I think it is very challenging to match displays to matt papers anyway.
Logged

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4344
    • A Goldhammer Photography
Custom profiles
« Reply #10 on: July 26, 2010, 02:41:50 pm »

Quote from: Wayne Fox
The variation and difficulty of profiling monitors and matching those to viewing conditions is far greater than that between the current generation of printers.  I would be very surprised if a custom profile delivers any significant change (you probably will have to look VERY hard to find any differences), and the prints from the custom profile will match prints from the previous profile far closer  than they will match your display.

With current generation printers such as your 7900, if you are trying to solve a problem matching output to display, custom profiles is not the answer.  Insuring you have an appropriate and adequate viewing light source, and perhaps experimenting with various white points and luminance values when creating the monitor display may be more helpful.  (also insuring your printer is functioning correctly.)

IMHO, the very first step in any setup is using a known high quality test file, such as from Bill Atkinson, Digital Dog's, or Outback photography.  This will print out very accurately, and if there is any weakness in the profile it should show up in various areas.  (In fact, if these prints don't look good it may indicate a problem with the printer (or workflow), not the profile.)  Then go about trying to get your display to match that print.  The only real variables are the display and the viewing conditions.

Personally I think it is very challenging to match displays to matt papers anyway.
I've highlighted Wayne's comment here as this has been my experience as well.  I still do a fair bit of printing on matte papers as some images just look better.  If one has been printing on gloss paper which have a better black point and color gamut, the surprise on seeing the first matte print come out with the same image is often times shocking.  I'm to the point right now that unless it is a certain image that I want to print on textured fine art paper, most of my matte printing is confined to black and white images.  The quality of the gloss papers both with respect to the coating and the 'paper' stock have improved so much over the the recent years that I think matte papers will slowly disappear from the market place (just an opinion of course).

Alan
Logged

GeraldB

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 144
    • Gerald Bloch Photography
Custom profiles
« Reply #11 on: July 27, 2010, 09:52:22 pm »

Great comments. I've ordered some Epson Exhibition fiber (on sale 17x24 at IT supplies http://www.itsupplies.com/Exhibition-Fiber-Paper) so I'll try that with the profile from the Epson site before going for a custom profile. Of course then I'll never know if I'm missing anything, so maybe...  

FrankPinkston

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14
Custom profiles
« Reply #12 on: July 28, 2010, 02:44:29 am »

Photoshop CS5 does not have the choice to print with "No Color Management" option. Adobe is working on a stand alone app to print test targets for generation of a profile but it is not available yet. See http://kb2.adobe.com/cps/834/cpsid_83497.html

Frank
Logged

GeraldB

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 144
    • Gerald Bloch Photography
Custom profiles
« Reply #13 on: July 28, 2010, 01:04:20 pm »

For Windows users I presume one could use QImage. I've just downloaded the trial and it seems to have the ability to let the printer manage the color. Then in the printer driver you turn off color mgt.

nilo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 397
Custom profiles
« Reply #14 on: July 28, 2010, 10:26:16 pm »

Quote from: NikoJorj
For custom profiles, I'd vote for Eric Chan...

I try to contact Eric Chan for some time, but he doesn't seem to read his mail at present. Does anyone know if he really still continues to do custom profiles?
Logged

nilo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 397
Custom profiles
« Reply #15 on: August 01, 2010, 01:48:45 pm »

Quote from: ninoloss
I try to contact Eric Chan for some time, but he doesn't seem to read his mail at present. Does anyone know if he really still continues to do custom profiles?

Got a reply today.
Logged

peninsula

  • Guest
Custom profiles
« Reply #16 on: August 01, 2010, 09:00:59 pm »

Quote from: digitaldog
The better (higher end) Epson printers, with their inks and papers are pretty darn good. A custom profile may be a tad better but I usually recommend you at least try printing some tough images with the supplied Epson profiles and see what you think before automatically assuming you need a custom profile. 3rd party papers (with whatever media settings they may or may not recommend), all bets are off.

As for screen to print matching, they key is having the display calibration target values you select such that you do get that visual match. Forget the specific numbers (like “you must calibrate to 120cd/m2” or “you should always calibrate to D65”). Ignore such comments since YMMV (so much depends on how you are viewing the prints next to that display).


I'm a big fan for making custom profiles whether done onsite or the targets printed and shipped offsite. All the papers I use are third party.

As digitaldog indicates, the other key piece to correct color workflow (what you see is what you get) is a large gamut monitor. I use the Eizo CG241W. I set the luminance to 90cd/m2 and black point at .4 for semi-gloss/gloss and .5 for matt papers. I always calibrate to D50. I use a D50 viewing light to inspect my prints side by side with the Eizo display. Rendering intent is determined while soft proofing, but making two test prints, one perceptual and the other relative, is a good way to prove the correct rendering choice. Soft proofing for rendering intent should provide the correct choice the vast majority of the time.

Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Custom profiles
« Reply #17 on: August 03, 2010, 04:20:32 pm »

I have always indicated that I'd run a free profile for any member of this forum. I've never had a single taker on this offer
Which hasn't prevented Xrite and Barbieri from asking me to consult for *them*

Most papers are supplied with downloadable profiles these days. If such a "canned" profile is really really bad, you probably have a workflow issue.

In my experience, all the manufacturer profiles are ok these days ***on the pro printers (wide body) if the printer is in spec***. There are some cases, with third party profiles or old profiles, where inspection of the profile envelope will however persuade one that a custom profile can only improve matters.

With consumer printers I guess you should have a custom profile whatever the paper you use.

What you'll get with a custom photo-use profile is better smoothness, sometimes an improvement in shadow tones, and also a different esthetic, eg grays which are differently balanced.

If you custom profile you can do a lot of delicate adjustments by changing software options: Tune the gamut mapping or select a different viewing illuminant, and compensate for ink metamerism. Also, I often profile for ink densities which are different form what the printer manufacturer recommends. You can tune a profile for faithful reproduction of a painting - but we're talking about specialist tricks at this point.

One interesting and immediate effect of a custom profile can be the overall gray balance and look. AFAIK all consultants own motor driven scanning spectros that can read thousands of patches in a few minutes. Most consultants and manufacturers now employ the industry standard iSis spectro and Profile Maker Pro package, but in my experience the resulting profiles will look very different if run with the older DTP70 and the Monaco software, or a more esoteric Barbieri device and Basiccolor's OEM software. There's not really a "best" look, but each corresponds to a preferred way of resolving the errors eg. err towards green or towards magenta.

Anyone really interested in the topic can join the ICC - I did.  Andrew was a member too at some point.

Edmund

PS. You do need a calibrated monitor; it's not that the monitors are always unusable uncalibrated, many good monitors are nice out of th box, it's that if you have problems you don't know which to trust, the monitor or the print. The quick check for a monitor is a comparison with a printed reference eg. a Colorchecker card.
« Last Edit: August 03, 2010, 05:56:42 pm by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald
Pages: [1]   Go Up