printing adobe raw

[Paul Stuart]

hello all a bit new to the photography and am having trouble getting prints to match screen ,equipment used epson r2000 , dell 23 ips , huey pro calibration ,using lightroom 3 ,is the adobe raw the setting to use ,is this going to give better reproduction than epson rgb  ,when at an epson seminar the tutor said i must do everything in adobe raw through camera settings to printer settings and to turn off printer managment ,is this true although isnt there a super adobe raw available ,iwas also recommended buying a wider gamut monitor but that out of my price range ,i did read that the srgb is better for displays and adobe for printing is this true ,any advice mostly appreciated

[Mark D Segal]

What you are asking doesn't get handled with snippets of advice in forum posts. You need a comprehensive tutorial in digital imaging, which you can have at low cost and high quality here:http://store.luminous-landscape.com/zencart/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=2&products_id=281. It will address all of your questions and much more that you need to know.

[Paul Stuart]

yes kind of thought that would be the case just you get many conflicting views on the matter i looked at ken rockwell site he claims most of it is a waste time and should stick with srgb and that adobe rgb is a myth?mind also you he also claims jpegs over raw?mind you he may have a point as my printer or monitor do not support/handle  the wider gamut of adobe rgb ,confused probably ,i am.think your right im due some tutorial help.

[MonsterBaby]

one thing in general:

once you loose data... its gone forever!  keep that in mind.

no matter what your screen or printer can do NOW.. if you limit your data now.. thats all you have.

if you are not interested keep it simple.. if it is your hobby.. dig as deep as you can.. read as much as you can.. shoot in raw.. keep as many bits as you can.. you might wanna use them in some years!

have fun

[Ellis Vener]

Yes KR is wrong and not to be trusted. His site exists to make him money (no problem with that except when he presents  information and reviews as first hand knowledge when it isn't ) but it really is aimed at the lowest level of camera purchaser . What he actually knows about photography, photographic equipment,  and photographic technology, if hand written would likely fit on the back of a standard size postage stamp.

Your printer, with good paper, has a gamut that doesn't exact fit the purity of sRGG or Adobe RGB(1998) -- which are mathematical constructs -- and it is  likely a good semi-gloss or gloss paper in+ your Epson ink and printer has a gamut that exceeds sRGB is many colorss and may even exceed in some very saturated colors Adobe RGB(1998).

If you are using Epson papers and inks start by downloading Epson's  profile for that paper in your printer and using that as your printer profile in Lightroom 3.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

If you apply the same level of attention to detail in your color management as you apparently do in your writing, you might end up with some pretty fascinating results

[Mark D Segal]

If you apply the same level of attention to detail in your color management as you apparently do in your writing, you might end up with some pretty fascinating results

Slobodan, yes, but I wasn't going to go there. In this forum we are trying to objectively address OP's requirements - in respect of photography.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Slobodan, yes, but I wasn't going to go there. In this forum we are trying to objectively address OP's requirements - in respect of photography.

Indeed Mark, and kudos for doing that, you are a better man than I am. It is just that I could barely understand what OP's requirements are.

For instance, what is "adobe raw"? Is the OP referring to Adobe RGB color space or Adobe Camera Raw, a RAW converter? When I read the title of the thread it looked like the latter, while, in the post, it seems to be the former.

[Wayne Fox]

Indeed Mark, and kudos for doing that, you are a better man than I am. It is just that I could barely understand what OP's requirements are.

For instance, what is "adobe raw"? Is the OP referring to Adobe RGB color space or Adobe Camera Raw, a RAW converter? When I read the title of the thread it looked like the latter, while, in the post, it seems to be the former.

OP's requirements were obvious and those comments you didn't understand were the dead give aways.  He doesn't need those questions answered, he needs to be pointed somewhere to start understanding this stuff, which is what Mark did.

Certainly not everything written should be taken literally and sometimes it's very easy to read between the lines and understand what might help someone asking questions - which sometimes is not an answer to the question they are asking because it's obvious they really don't know what they are asking.

And of course, the KR reference was a huge red flag that he's already gotten a ton of misinformation ...

[Mark D Segal]

Hi Slobodan, I understand the nature of the uncertainties you mention, but I approached the subject from a different perspective, largely because I see this kind of posting occurring on the forum more and more frequently. I have no doubt that for the OP it was a perfectly innocent attempt to get some quick answers, because he mistakenly thought that what he wants to get a grip of is amenable to quick answers. So whatever precisely he meant by the terms he used in a way doesn't matter to the basic issue that he is at a stage where - much like how most of us started down this path - he doesn't know what he doesn't know, but really should know to address his legitimate concerns satisfactorily. It struck me immediately that he needed some in-depth tuition, to which I pointed him, and I am pleased to note he recognizes that need. So all to the good.

I add in general - a great many "new topics" are generated by people who haven't researched whether there are already answers - for example I've lost track of the number of people for whom I and others pointed them to Andrew Rodney's tutorial on "why are my prints too dark", because the same "problem" keeps being raised over and over and over again. Well, everyone is free to ask what they want of course, but LULA is great resource, and there are others on the internet also ranging from free to inexpensive, for answering a high percentage of the stuff that comes up as "new topics". I guess my general message is to encourage newcomers to do more research and open new topics on aspects of their problems for which they haven't found answers and are amenable to a Forum format of assistance. Needless to say here (but I'll say it anyhow) the search tools we have allow people who know next to nothing to get very deeply into all kinds of stuff without needing to write a word, and the price of a LULA tutorial is a small fraction of the cost of paper and ink many would waste if they had not given themselves access to this knowledge. So that's where my mind was when this topic crossed my screen today.

Cheers,

Mark

[Mark D Segal]

...................And of course, the KR reference was a huge red flag that he's already gotten a ton of misinformation ...

In spades!