Do I need a printer profiler

[mephisto2061]

Hi all.  I am planning to get an A2 printer (Epson 3850 most likely) and start making my own prints. I've been printing my photographs for a while (generally approx. A2 or A3 sizes) but with photo labs so far.  With a pro quality printer like the 3850, I've heard Epson's own profiles (or other 3rd party profiles for this printer that can be purchased) are very good quality and investing in a printer profiling system is not necessarily required.  I obviously calibrate my monitor (with a Spyder 3 pro).  What do you think? If you think it is still worth every penny making your own printer profiles, what system would you recommend (keeping in mind I already have a Spyder 3)?  Thanks.

[Czornyj]

SP3880 with generic profiles gives you the output that - so or so - is light years of what you get from photo lab (in terms of color fidelity and constancy), and profiling system is not that necessary.

It may only be useful if you want to create profiles to your own taste and viewing conditions, but then a lot of experience/learning, or investment, or both may be needed.

[francois]

I'd say that if you plan to use only a handful of papers, you can easily have custom profiles made for them (look for Eric Chan - madmanchan - or Andrew Rodney on this forum). On the other hand, if you want to use tons of different papers then looking into a custom profile system (Spyder, Color Munki or i1) becomes interesting.

I think that you should try your printer with OEM profiles and once you've settled on a few papers, decide whether investing in custom profiles or in a profiling system is worth the effort/cost or not.

[Wayne Fox]

Most paper manufacturers are making pretty good profiles right now for all of Epson's printers. Epson's own profiles for their papers are almost all very good, and most of the more notable paper makers also are producing good profiles.  There might be a few exceptions, but before investing in a profiling solution I'd recommend you settle on the papers you like and try them with the manufacturers profiles.  If you love the paper but don't like the results with the profile, make sure it's the profile by printing a standard image using the correct settings.  I recommend this one from Outbackphoto, also I recommend you read this article about what to look for when printing this standard image.  If the standard print looks good that will validate the profile.  If it doesn't double check your workflow .. .once you know for sure it's the profile if you still want to use the paper you can have a custom profile made for a lot less than buying a good profiling package.

[StuNY]

I'm using my 3880 with the profiles provided by various paper makers using a Spyder3 calibrated monitor and don't feel the need to custom profile. Printing on everything from glossy papers, art papers to canvas with great results. For ABW printing I use Eric Chan's profiles when available for the paper I am using. The couple times I have printed ABW with the normal paper profiles though I find it still comes out very good. I am sure like everything else as I get more picky I may decide I have to have better control and create my own profiles, but for now it is very easy and I am very happy to use the supplied ones. I just printed 2 17x30 canvas prints this morning and am marveling at how accurate the colors are!

[mephisto2061]

Thanks this is all very helpful.

[digitaldog]

Start with the canned profiles from Epson, if you are happy, you’re done. The canned profiles are quite good. If you are super picky, and depending on the way the profiles were built (the software and settings), there can be a visible difference between such profiles and a custom profile. This is especially true with the newer generation of profile software released this year from X-Rite.

Also, if you are super picky about neutrality when printing with color images, I’ve found the new iteration system using a newer target supplied by X-Rite (using 2500 gray patches) can again make a small but visible difference. The key for those who may have read my Lula article on i1Profiler here is that this new 2500 patch target is solely created with Lab values running from Lstar 0 to Lstar 100 using +/- 1-2 increments. The iterated profile does indeed appear a bit more neutral on my 3880 and shows smoother gradients of grays. I’m hoping X-rite supplies the new target in the install disk of i1P, in the meantime for those with the software, you can get it here:

http://www.i1upgrades.com/category/tech-corner/

[Sven W]

For ABW printing I use Eric Chan's profiles when available for the paper I am using. The couple times I have printed ABW with the normal paper profiles though I find it still comes out very good.

According to Eric Chan, you shouldn't use paper profiles (except for his "profiles") when printing with the ABW driver.
The recommendation is to pick sRGB.
"..the ICC profiles that we normally use for printing color images are only designed to work with the Epson RGB color driver, not the Epson ABW driver."
http://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/dp/Epson3800/printworkflow.html#abw_no_gray_curve

/Sven

[mephisto2061]

So I got the SP3885 and have spent the last couple of weeks testing it out with a glossy (Epson Premium Semi Gloss) and a matte paper (Epson Archival Matte).  Very happy with the quality but in terms of colour accuracy, I've still got some issues to fix.

I've got a well calibrated monitor that's set at ~100 luminosity in dim-medium ambient light, I've use the Epson standard profiles (not my custom profiles), I've soft proofed my images using the technique Jeff Schewe recommends in the LuLa Camera to Print guides, used the proper print settings with the application managing colour etc.  

Most colours look very accurate, especially in standard "test" images.  But in many of my real world images, I tend to get a distinct shift from "yellowish" on screen to "reddish" on paper. E.g. a photo with the first rays of dawn striking the grand canyon, that on screen has a very warm yellow glow of the sun on the rocks, it seems to appear more reddish on paper in both matte and semi gloss, and I lose that "warm" yellow sunlight.

I'm sure I must be doing something wrong and would like to be sure before buying a custom printer profiling system.

Could it be something that I'm missing in relation to colour spaces? My photos are in ProPhoto RGB initially and I don't explicitly change the colour space anywhere in my workflow (printing from either photoshop, or printing from Lightroom after soft proofing the DNG in photoshop and importing back to Lightroom as a TIFF).  Do I need to do some colour space conversions manually?

Welcome thoughts on any other possible issues.

[PeterAit]

Hi all.  I am planning to get an A2 printer (Epson 3850 most likely) and start making my own prints. I've been printing my photographs for a while (generally approx. A2 or A3 sizes) but with photo labs so far.  With a pro quality printer like the 3850, I've heard Epson's own profiles (or other 3rd party profiles for this printer that can be purchased) are very good quality and investing in a printer profiling system is not necessarily required.  I obviously calibrate my monitor (with a Spyder 3 pro).  What do you think? If you think it is still worth every penny making your own printer profiles, what system would you recommend (keeping in mind I already have a Spyder 3)?  Thanks.

You heard correctly. Assuming that you are adept at processing your images in LR/PS/whatever, and that your monitor is calibrated, the manufacturer's profiles are all you'll need. I have never seen a convincing demonstration of a custom profile making a print better - different, yes, but not better. And, that difference could have been achieved in LR/PS.

[mephisto2061]

Hi all.  Sorry to bring this up again, but I'm wondering if anyone has faced similar issues with yellow -> red shift.  I'm consistently seeing this in all my prints.  Thanks.

[StuNY]

I haven't seen this with my 3880. Maybe send your image to a lab for a print and see what they get? At least that way you will know whether it is your monitor or your printer that is the problem. I have been printing some very subtle fall leaves lately with a wide range of yellows, oranges, reds and they come out dead on to what I see on my monitor.

[Justan]

I vote maybe. If you want to get the best results, consistently, you will need something that will produce an accurate ICC profile for each roll of paper.

If you are okay with close enough, then don’t bother.

In summary, even when using the same paper type, the ability of the paper to produce the same results will change slightly from production lot to production lot. At least this is what I've been told by 2 different paper manufacturers and what my own experience has proven.

So if getting the most out of your resources matters, get something that will produce ICC profiles for the specific roll of paper you are using. If “close enough” is good enough, then don’t go to the expense.

[bill t.]

I think big manufacturers' profiles for paper and RC media tend to be pretty good.

If over a few dozen images you can't find anything to complain about, and if say the PrinterEvaluationImage mentioned earlier prints so that you can see the black patches down to at least RGB 16 or so, and the white patches up to about 252, and if the yellow leaves separate about the way you see them on the screen, and the overall feel is pretty neutral, you probably already have a profile that is as good as any you could have made or make yourself.

But I have noticed that canvas media is kinda slippery in the profiles department.

There seems to be more batch to batch variation in canvas than other media, and I have seen really significant improvements in the profiles that I have made for canvas versus the canned profiles, even the ones from Epson, BC, and Lexjet.  Also, over the years there been some sudden major changes in the same brand of canvas, for which the manufacturer did not offer a new online profile.