Matching Print and monitor: the last little bit

[jtmiller]

I'm helping my artist daughter obtain "perfect" print and monitor image matching. Perfect in quotes for the reason that nothing is perfect.

We have CS6, LR5, Z3200PS with calibrated gloss paper and HP inks, and monitors which have been color calibrated with a Spyder3 within the last week.

Our current results are close. Skin tones are quite close but the overall images are still darker than seen on the monitor.

My 67 year old male eyes aren't as good as hers for evaluating color so I have to trust her judgment that we're just not there yet.

We've selected the proper calibrated paper settings and profiles in the various print dialogs, having PS manage the colors and using perceptual rendering.

I'm wondering if we've hit the limits of what can be done "automatically" and need to do some sort of preset to make up the difference.

Is this what is normally done? If so, how, so as to make it as "recipe-like" as possible.

She certainly doesn't want to have to go through and adjust all her images in her 2 terabyte catalog. So some sort of "just before printing" canned adjustment approach would be what is desired.

Of course we'd have to get that canned adjustment made here based on a variety of images but would certainly like some advice and help to make it as painless as possible to use at "print time." Most of her printing is done through PSCS6.

Thanks

Jim

[howardm]

my first question(s) would be..............

what are your monitor calibration targets (color temp, luminance, gamma, etc) ?
what kind and intensity of lamp are you using to compare the printed output vs. screen?

'slightly dark' prints *usually* means that the monitor is too bright relative to how you're viewing the prints.

[RHPS]

'slightly dark' prints *usually* means that the monitor is too bright relative to how you're viewing the prints.

For me this is the most important point. If the white (unprinted paper) on the print looks "darker" than the white on the monitor then the whole print will look darker. You need a lot of light on a print to make it match a monitor. If you're not prepared to put that much light on your print then you need to lighten the image before you print it.

[Iluvmycam]

I'm helping my artist daughter obtain "perfect" print and monitor image matching. Perfect in quotes for the reason that nothing is perfect.

We have CS6, LR5, Z3200PS with calibrated gloss paper and HP inks, and monitors which have been color calibrated with a Spyder3 within the last week.

Our current results are close. Skin tones are quite close but the overall images are still darker than seen on the monitor.

My 67 year old male eyes aren't as good as hers for evaluating color so I have to trust her judgment that we're just not there yet.

We've selected the proper calibrated paper settings and profiles in the various print dialogs, having PS manage the colors and using perceptual rendering.

I'm wondering if we've hit the limits of what can be done "automatically" and need to do some sort of preset to make up the difference.

Is this what is normally done? If so, how, so as to make it as "recipe-like" as possible.

She certainly doesn't want to have to go through and adjust all her images in her 2 terabyte catalog. So some sort of "just before printing" canned adjustment approach would be what is desired.

Of course we'd have to get that canned adjustment made here based on a variety of images but would certainly like some advice and help to make it as painless as possible to use at "print time." Most of her printing is done through PSCS6.

Thanks

Jim

Forget perfect, 2 different mediums.

Get close and make work prints.

 

[Tim Lookingbill]

Before you change anything first view the print in the brightest light you have in the house and make sure it's right next to the monitor. Get the print as close as possible to the light to create a match. Window light with a sunbeam coming through is best. Bluish diffused skylight will change color appearance.

If it matches, then you need to find a light that's bright enough to allow the print to get as close to it or you need to lower the brightness of your display and recalibrate so display white is as bright as white paper you print and view under the lights you have.

[jtmiller]

Thanks all for the quick and useful input. Will research all and report back.

Thanks!!

Jim

[jferrari]

Jim, another thing to remember when trying for the perfect match is that the image on the monitor is back lit and the print you are comparing it to is reflectively lit. Pretty close may be as perfect as you can get.    - Jim

[Erland]

If it is just the brightness that is the biggest difference, just lower the monitors brightness. Do you happen to know what monitor she is using? Depending on what kind, you can actually adjust some things to make it match a print better.

If she thinks something else differs, can she give us a prioritized list on things, so perhaps we can help her step by step.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

.... So some sort of "just before printing" canned adjustment approach would be what is desired...

There is an app for that, as Apple would say

It is called Print Adjustment, at the bottom of the Print panel in LR, where you can adjust brightness and contrast "just before printing."

[Alan Goldhammer]

Before you change anything first view the print in the brightest light you have in the house and make sure it's right next to the monitor. Get the print as close as possible to the light to create a match. Window light with a sunbeam coming through is best. Bluish diffused skylight will change color appearance.

Of course if one is working in the evening this great solution is not possible.  An inexpensive approach is to get a clamp-on Solux fixture and put it next to the monitor (https://www.solux.net/cgi-bin/tlistore/clampon.html ) this way you have a uniform light source that can be used to view the printed image and adjust the monitor's parameters until you get as close a match as possible.  Although viewing booths are perhaps best, you cannot easily get the monitor next to it and it is a more costly option.

[PeterAit]

You've gotten some good advice. But, it's important to remember that getting a good print-monitor match is a means to an end, and not a goal in itself (except for techno-fiddlers, I suppose). The end is being able to make prints that look the way you want on the first try. And remember too that print and monitor will never really match because of the inherent differences between transmitted and reflected light.

[digitaldog]

There is an app for that, as Apple would say
It is called Print Adjustment, at the bottom of the Print panel in LR, where you can adjust brightness and contrast "just before printing."

It's a huge kludge. It ensures all other app's will not honor the numbers in a document and print it differently. It's a color management cop-out. If I can be so kind to use color management and this kludge in the same sentence!

Fix the issue where it needs to be fixed: the calibration of the display or adjustment to the print viewing conditions.

And it isn't Apple's kludge, it's Adobe's. Shame on them.

The fix explained for the OP: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/why_are_my_prints_too_dark.shtml

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

It's a huge kludge....

"Color management folks were aghast, but this is actually a very elegant solution."

Jeff Schewe, The Digital Print, page 220

[dwswager]

My thoughts are that there is no possible way to "match" an additive color light emitting medium to a subtractive color light reflecting medium.  You can get close.  You want the overall tone and color balance on.  To make even a really really close match, you would have to have different print viewing lighting conditions for every ink/paper set because they have different reflective properties.

I use a X-Rite ColorMunki and it works pretty well.  But the big problem is that we are going at it from the wrong end.  We need the print calibrated and then make the monitor look like the print.  The output should be the target, not the monitor!!!  If you use the softproofing and/or match paper and printer color check boxes in the Photoshop you get the hint.  There should be multiple monitor calibrations to match the printer.  There used to be really expert folks in the early days that did this.  They would make a reference print that was what they were looking for and then adjust the monitor to try to match the print.  They did it by eye and by hand.  Some of these folks were the ones that could color correct by numbers.

It's a huge kludge. It ensures all other app's will not honor the numbers in a document and print it differently. It's a color management cop-out. If I can be so kind to use color management and this kludge in the same sentence!

Fix the issue where it needs to be fixed: the calibration of the display or adjustment to the print viewing conditions.

This is not a kludge.  It's an understanding that every ink/media has different reflective properties. 

[AFairley]

"Color management folks were aghast, but this is actually a very elegant solution."

Jeff Schewe, The Digital Print, page 220

Jeff is correct, it is a very elegant solution -- for people who do not want to fully color manage their workflow.

[digitaldog]

"Color management folks were aghast, but this is actually a very elegant solution."
Jeff Schewe, The Digital Print, page 220

I totally disagree. Jeff (and the Adobe team) got an ear full from me and others.
It is nothing more than a kludge! It treats the data differently from all other app's that can access that rendered data. All to fix something that can be done at the source. There are all kinds of sliders in these products that affect image lightness. The RGB values either need it or they don't. RGB working space are print output agnostic. By design! So the numbers are either OK or they make 'dark prints.' What Adobe has done is take a slider that's appeared since version 1 of ACR let alone LR to make the image lighter but placed it in a stupid place to aid stupid users. It seems NAPP designed  
If the RGB working space values are correct but print too dark, it's not the fault of the RGB working space numbers. Fix the problem at the source.
If you have to screw something in and you have the option to use a kitchen knife or a screwdriver, you're stupid to pick the kitchen knife. IMHO of course.

[digitaldog]

My thoughts are that there is no possible way to "match" an additive color light emitting medium to a subtractive color light reflecting medium.  You can get close.  You want the overall tone and color balance on.  To make even a really really close match, you would have to have different print viewing lighting conditions for every ink/paper set because they have different reflective properties.

The goal (my goal) is to output a print, place it next to the display under a controlled print viewing condition, view a soft proof and see that the two are visually close.
This is a much closer visual match than a Polaroid and E6 film which I used in a similar way in the analog capture days. I'm not expecting what isn't possible, a 100% match. What I expect and see is a print and display that correlate which is what I expect from color management.

We need the print calibrated and then make the monitor look like the print.  The output should be the target, not the monitor!!!  If you use the softproofing and/or match paper and printer color check boxes in the Photoshop you get the hint.  There should be multiple monitor calibrations to match the printer.

No. Build multiple display calibration's to match the print under that viewing booth. Different papers have different paper whites and contrast ratio's. With the correct display and calibration technology, you can calibrate for this. Or make the wide gamut display simulate sRGB.
Without something like a SpectraView with their software plus your ColorMunki, that's not going to happen.

Once the print leaves the booth, it should look fine under other and differing illuminants within reason. The other light source, the colorants and paper (OBAs?), how the profiles are built, all play a role here. When the RGB values in a working space look good color managed and produce what I see, color management is working as it should.

[dwswager]

The goal (my goal) is to output a print, place it next to the display under a controlled print viewing condition, view a soft proof and see that the two are visually close.
This is a much closer visual match than a Polaroid and E6 film which I used in a similar way in the analog capture days. I'm not expecting what isn't possible, a 100% match. What I expect and see is a print and display that correlate which is what I expect from color management.

No. Build multiple display calibration's to match the print under that viewing booth. Different papers have different paper whites and contrast ratio's. With the correct display and calibration technology, you can calibrate for this. Or make the wide gamut display simulate sRGB.
Without something like a SpectraView with their software plus your ColorMunki, that's not going to happen.

Once the print leaves the booth, it should look fine under other and differing illuminants within reason. The other light source, the colorants and paper (OBAs?), how the profiles are built, all play a role here. When the RGB values in a working space look good color managed and produce what I see, color management is working as it should.

First, let me admit that I have used your advice and techniques alot.  So thanks!

I get that you calibrate the monitor to a known point and then the Softproof simulates the paper and ink.  My typical setup is to do base adjustments in regular mode and then using adjustment layers in softproof mode to do target output adjustments.

[digitaldog]

My typical setup is to do base adjustments in regular mode and then using adjustment layers in softproof mode to do target output adjustments.

Right but you expect that base adjustments (on what I presume you mean the RGB working space) is done based on what you see on-screen right? Backed up by numbers and/or Histograms to a degree. Further, you expect soft proof to look like print using a profile. There's no role here for the sliders. It's a kludge. The print is or isn't too dark or appears too dark for another reason and that needs to be addressed.

[brinked]

There was a 4 month period last year where I obsessed over color profiles, and making sure my prints were as color accurate as possible.  I calibrated my monitor, I had ICC profiles created by professionals, and after spending thousands of dollars, I was still not satisfied.  This was my own fault, because there is no such thing as a perfect color accurate profile.  Colors change with even the slightest change of light.  Types of lights, positioning of the print along with countless other factors play a role in how we see colors in a print.

What I did find was holding up a print next to your monitor is not a good idea.  They will always be different, no matter what you think or know, they will always appear different put up next to each other.  The best way I found to compare a print to what you see on a monitor, is to look at them separately.  Look at the monitor, then turn to look at your print (preferably hanging close by on a wall).  If you can not notice a difference doing this, then your in good shape.

Looking back I now realize that I obsessed over color too much.  I know this because I work with some of the most pickiest and particular photographers in the world, and I have never once heard that the colors are slightly off.  I have been told to make a print slightly lighter or darker, but I believe that was just an adjustment for that particular print, not a fault of the profile.

My advice would be to not obsess over color too much.  Consult with someone who deals with color for a living such as digitaldog if it means that much to you and you need some assurance that your colors are accurate, but dont drive yourself crazy over it.