Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Colour Management => Topic started by: AndreG on April 11, 2008, 07:39:43 am
-
Hi,
Is there a lucky fellow who had the privilege to try out the new ColorMunki from X-Rite ? It just seem to good to be true.
Here is a video showing it in action:
http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Colour%20Manageme...unki/munki.html (http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Colour%20Management/munki/munki.html)
Thank you for sharing!
-
Hi,
Is there a lucky fellow who had the privilege to try out the new ColorMunki from X-Rite ? It just seem to good to be true.
Here is a video showing it in action:
http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Colour%20Manageme...unki/munki.html (http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Colour%20Management/munki/munki.html)
Thank you for sharing!
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=188674\")
Andrew Rodney (aka digitaldog) has one for testing. You might read the other discussions about ColorMunki ([a href=\"http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?act=Search&CODE=show&searchid=036d2509ba86513f654ef76037456a04&search_in=posts&result_type=topics&highlite=colormunki]here[/url]).
-
Thank you for the reference.
-
Another review here:
http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_colormunki_photo.php (http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_colormunki_photo.php)
-
Another review here:
http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_colormunki_photo.php (http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_colormunki_photo.php)
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=188753\")
Don't forget that like any other comments you read, they are still not using finalised software (no matter what they say ;-). I too have been involved in testing for the last year or so and am waiting for finalised software until I'd want to go into any detail.
I'd add my own thoughts from testing [a href=\"http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/profiling/colormunki.html]Initial review[/url]
Definitely works well, but some key features are still problematic in the current s/w release ;-)
-
Definitely works well, but some key features are still problematic in the current s/w release ;-)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=188974\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I was able to download the final software, but alas, the beta hardware will not run (a big mistake on X-Rite's part IMHO) so I can't comment on the final.
The product is shipping, the software is said to be golden. Considering that non of the beta sites I know of got a copy or could use it for testing, it will be real interesting to see how users find the product in terms of software. I have no issues with the hardware; its quite good. The software? Time will tell.
-
I was able to download the final software, but alas, the beta hardware will not run (a big mistake on X-Rite's part IMHO) so I can't comment on the final.
The product is shipping, the software is said to be golden. Considering that non of the beta sites I know of got a copy or could use it for testing, it will be real interesting to see how users find the product in terms of software. I have no issues with the hardware; its quite good. The software? Time will tell.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=188990\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I've got both beta hardware (which as you say won't run) and a shipping version of the hardware (which I've been using for all the recent beta testing). Although the software maybe being made more widely available, it most definitely isn't ready for 'prime time' yet - there are still issues that are being sorted out. Since this relates to aspects of using the hardware, I'm waiting for the next release before doing any more detailed evaluation. Mail me directly if you want since we are now out of the NDA period :-)
-
First, as far as I'm concerned, my NDA is up with respect to beta which is over. I've heard nothing about new builds (in fact I only knew about the released version from another post). Since I can't use the newer software, I'm pretty much done until I hear from X-Rite about getting a real unit. They are in a bit of a state of chaos now so I'm just going to go back to real work <g>.
I'm not surprised that you're finding issues with the final software product. I could say that the beta process created by X-Rite was one of the most dysfunctional processes I've witnessed in a very long time or that they could learn a lot about software development from the company they purchased (GMB) but that would be only be an expression of tough love, which hasn't worked well with the company in the past.
As I said, I'm real impressed with the hardware, but that was something developed a very long time ago in a country far far away from the US. The software is another issue all together. I'll await the comments from the customer base as it trickles in.
-
They are in a bit of a state of chaos now... [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=189002\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Boy, no kidding! I'm sure it's fine to talk about said consumer product but NDAs aren't up yet for unannounced technologies.
-
Boy, no kidding! I'm sure it's fine to talk about said consumer product but NDAs aren't up yet for unannounced technologies.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=189033\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That's why I was referring to the ColorMunki ;-)
-
As I said, I'm real impressed with the hardware, but that was something developed a very long time ago in a country far far away from the US. The software is another issue all together. I'll await the comments from the customer base as it trickles in.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=189002\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
My NDA re. ColorMunki is up too, obviously.
If it helps, they have already fired the guy who saw through the development of this product, over in Switzerland - his name is Michael Lanke, and I think he did a really nice job on the hardware and didn't deserve this.
On the other hand, they are in such extreme debt from all those M&A's that I guess desesperation breeds layoffs.
Edmund
-
they are still not using finalised software for it and it is hard to use in my opinion.
Hi,
Is there a lucky fellow who had the privilege to try out the new ColorMunki from X-Rite ? It just seem to good to be true.
Here is a video showing it in action:
Thank you for sharing!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=188674\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Colour%20Management/munki/munki.html)
-
they are still not using finalised software for it and it is hard to use in my opinion.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=189594\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yes I'd agree about the software, but what aspects do you find hard to use?
Is this based on actually using a CM or just watching the videos?
I was initially quite sceptical of the sliding the device across the paper approach, but after a few goes it really is easy. I've been making some targets for using the CM for QTR linearisation and as long as you have decent size patches it works well (at the moment I'm having to fiddle the data formats a bit, but the measurements are fine)
The way of hanging the CM over your screen with the sand filled strap is a little awkward, but it seems to work fine.
-
Yes I'd agree about the software, but what aspects do you find hard to use?
First, the software is finalized (the product is shipping, the software has to be downloaded).
I can't comment on how much its changed since the last beta, as I can't even use the stinkin product now with the beta hardware. Don't get me started.
Its not "hard to use", its very poorly designed for the market X-Rite was (is) going after. Do designers and similar users really need to hear about gamma? Come on, its 2008. X-Rite had an opportunity to make this a far easier process, in terms of what they ask in the UI, the instructions provided etc. Instead, they pretty much put a more modern UI on EyeOne Match. They failed IMHO to produce a more modern color management package that reduces to a bare minimum all the color geek stuff this market shouldn't have to even think about.
Hardware wise, GretagMacbeth has a very nice product they designed. Software, done in the US, kind of messy. Its like Audi providing a great car to Ford, then having them rip out the nice interior and making it look like a 1971 Pinto! OK, its not that bad, but the software wasn't at all designed as well as the hardware.
-
My review on PhotographyBLOG was based on what I was told was the shipping version of software ( I had to download it). The software works fine with the 2nd CM they sent to me (had problems with printer profiling on the first one), although the part number still has -DEV. Not sure if regular production units have this -DEV in the part number or not - it could be Development, it could be Device, who knows?
That said, I agree with the others - the software is funky but it does a good job, especially when you consider the price and the target audience. Will I be throwing out my i1 Photo and ProfileMaker? Nope.
-
My review on PhotographyBLOG was based on what I was told was the shipping version of software ( I had to download it). The software works fine with the 2nd CM they sent to me (had problems with printer profiling on the first one), although the part number still has -DEV. Not sure if regular production units have this -DEV in the part number or not - it could be Development, it could be Device, who knows?
That said, I agree with the others - the software is funky but it does a good job, especially when you consider the price and the target audience. Will I be throwing out my i1 Photo and ProfileMaker? Nope.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=189965\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
My purchased CM also has the -DEV part number. I had some initial system (OS 10.5.2, Intel Mac) problems that I think may have been caused by the appset module or monitor calibration reminder so I just disabled both and currently things are back to normal. Profiling works just fine for me (both RGB for Epson driver and also CMYK for the ColorBurst X-Photo RIP). I've also worked out some targets and export file conversions for QTR linearization and Create-icc measurement with the ColorPicker module. In general I'm very pleased with the Munki performance although as others here have pointed out the software still needs some work. The output quality is more than adequate for both my color and B&W profiling needs so my i1 (very old model) and x-rite Pulse are both going on the block. I've tried some profile optimization, specifically for toned monochrome printing and I think this part needs some more work. The "optimized" profiles do seem to yield marginally better prints but I'd like to know more about what this procedure is actually doing under the hood. Monitor calibration worked perfectly.
-
As I said, I'm real impressed with the hardware, but that was something developed a very long time ago in a country far far away from the US. The software is another issue all together. I'll await the comments from the customer base as it trickles in.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=189002\")
Could one describe the two stage target/reading as iterative? I get the impression it is more like sculpturing where a rough shape based on 50 readings creates new coördinates for a better fitting next shape. Probably keeping the initial readings as well. Or is the second set of patches very similar to the first set ? Must be a smart system if it rivals much larger target systems.
The low number and large patches to start with + another set of similar patches afterwards should diminish the risks that could happen with iterative readings of larger targets with smaller patches. In that case there's probably more fluctuation in the measurements than the precision planned with iterative readings.
Ernst Dinkla
Try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers[/url]
-
Could one describe the two stage target/reading as iterative?
Absolutely!
-
Absolutely!
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=190180\")
Andrew,
If it is just the iterative method that is bringing this quality, would a similar approach with few patches and two targets/readings not be used a long time ago ? Iterative has been discussed enough and some profile creators have it aboard, it is hard to believe nobody ever tried that with smaller targets in the past.
Nothing special like shifted lamp spectrum or different profile builders for the two stages ?
Ernst Dinkla
Try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
-
The iterative method isn't a new idea. Its been used in the past. What's somewhat unique is the quality of the profiles with so few patches, something others (including GretagMacbeth) have tried in the past with little success.
-
Nothing special like shifted lamp spectrum or different profile builders for the two stages ?
The iterative technique is interesting in that you supply images to analyse and it uses colours in that image to decide upon what new patches to test.
I'm not able to test this further at the moment (CM users might want to check for updated s/w this weekend ;-) but when I first tried it on earlier Beta s/w I was surprised to see the iterative sheets look rather similar with different images supplied.
I tried a B/W image to see if it would be smart enough to know I wanted a profile with good neutrals and there were lots of colour patches, not what I might have expected for fine tuning neutrality (but not knowing what it's up to, I wasn't sure what to expect ;-)
There is no change to the behaviour of the measuring device as far as I can tell, when looking at 'iterative' patch sets. The software seems to behave just the same way when building profiles.
I'm curious to find out more, but for the time being I'm a bit stuck with the current s/w
Keith Cooper
PS Andrew ... did you ask X-Rite for a new CM? I did and they just shipped one to me for continuing testing :-)
-
PS Andrew ... did you ask X-Rite for a new CM? I did and they just shipped one to me for continuing testing :-)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=190390\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not yet. I wanted to give them breathing room after firing 100 employees week before last. I'm really not in a hurry.
-
Just a note to Mac users about a conflict between ColorMunki and CS3. The Xrite ColorMunki installer puts a ProfileSetterCS3.plugin file in the Applications>CS3>Plugins folder. If this file is present then one cannot open CS3 image files from the finder either by dbl clicking or drag/drop. Removing the plugin restores normal file handling with CS3. This is using an Intel Mac, OS 10.5.2. Nasty little bug.
-
Just a note to Mac users about a conflict between ColorMunki and CS3. The Xrite ColorMunki installer puts a ProfileSetterCS3.plugin file in the Applications>CS3>Plugins folder. If this file is present then one cannot open CS3 image files from the finder either by dbl clicking or drag/drop. Removing the plugin restores normal file handling with CS3. This is using an Intel Mac, OS 10.5.2. Nasty little bug.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=190985\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It's similar on 10.4.11 on a PPC Mac - This is a known issue and I'm told a fix is due...
-
The entire Profilesetting concept was about the dumbest thing X-Rite did. Mucking around with someone else's preferences is a no-no. I didn't suspect they would get pinged this quickly after release. Keep em coming, I have a list of "I told you so's" for X-Rite.
-
The entire Profilesetting concept was about the dumbest thing X-Rite did. Mucking around with someone else's preferences is a no-no. I didn't suspect they would get pinged this quickly after release. Keep em coming, I have a list of "I told you so's" for X-Rite.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191002\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That's as maybe, but it was actually a bug we were mentioning, not a comment on functionality ;-)
Whilst I do indeed have some comments on choices of functionality, I'm waiting until I can test the software as it's meant to be.
If anyone has any detailed questions, please feel free mail/PM me directly... I'm happy to discuss experiences off-list
Long ago I worked as a software developer, so I can sympathise with people working to fix issues (oh and I got fired from the job too :-)
-
That's as maybe, but it was actually a bug we were mentioning, not a comment on functionality ;-)
Its a bug in dumb functionality and illustrates how fragile it is (now), let alone anytime Adobe updates Photoshop.
-
Well it was great while it was working, but my Munki just died. Plugged it back in after the resolving the plugin fiasco and now it seems to have no power (no light) and is not seen by the software. Apple system profiler does see the Munki on the USB port so I'm not sure what is going on now. Guess I'll just pack it up and send it back to Xrite.
-
Well it was great while it was working, but my Munki just died. Plugged it back in after the resolving the plugin fiasco and now it seems to have no power (no light) and is not seen by the software. Apple system profiler does see the Munki on the USB port so I'm not sure what is going on now. Guess I'll just pack it up and send it back to Xrite.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191026\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This is spooky! Exactly the same thing happened today when I tried to use my iSis. No power, DOA.
-
This is spooky! Exactly the same thing happened today when I tried to use my iSis. No power, DOA.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191028\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Any sunspot activity today?
-
Any sunspot activity today?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=191030\")
Not really.
[a href=\"http://spaceweather.com/]http://spaceweather.com/[/url]
-
Any sunspot activity today?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191030\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not even full moon!
-
So, a few days ago I bought a Canon IPF 5100, and while so far, the profiles I'm using seem fine. I was thinking about this product. My current unit is a Monaco Optix, which I used for just my monitor profiling, and I'd like to move up, and do some printer profiling as well. When I had my lab, I had much more complex equipment, but now I'm retired, I don't want to spend another several thousand.
It seems as though this is an unfinished product, though it's been out for sale supposedly.
What would you guys recommend in the $500 to $1,000 price range? (approx, the numbers aren't fixed)
I'm not concerned about software complexity, just accuracy for the purpose of monitors and printers. Scanners would be nice, but not required.
Thanks.
-
So, a few days ago I bought a Canon IPF 5100, and while so far, the profiles I'm using seem fine. I was thinking about this product. My current unit is a Monaco Optix, which I used for just my monitor profiling, and I'd like to move up, and do some printer profiling as well. When I had my lab, I had much more complex equipment, but now I'm retired, I don't want to spend another several thousand.
It seems as though this is an unfinished product, though it's been out for sale supposedly.
What would you guys recommend in the $500 to $1,000 price range? (approx, the numbers aren't fixed)
I'm not concerned about software complexity, just accuracy for the purpose of monitors and printers. Scanners would be nice, but not required.
Thanks.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191242\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Based on what you say, seems ColorMunki would still be an ideal product for you.
-
It seems as though this is an unfinished product, though it's been out for sale supposedly.
What would you guys recommend in the $500 to $1,000 price range? (approx, the numbers aren't fixed)
Whilst there are still a few issues with the software with the ColorMunki, I'd still suggest it might fit your needs, since I know that the bugs are being worked on. The CD that comes with the ColorMunki has a downloader that will pull down the latest version of the s/w and you can easily check for new versions online.
The other alternative at that level is really the SpyderPrint. It doesn't have the 'simplified' interface of the ColorMunki, but that's a plus point (or not) depending on your POV ;-)
I know some complain about its ease of use but when testing it out, I didn't notice any real problems. If you regularly build profiles like I do, then the automated patch readers I've got make the job a lot easier, but then again it's part of my job ;-) It really does not take that much manual dexterity to use the SpyderPrint and I did wonder about the frailty of some people I've heard whinge about it :-) :-)
The SpyderPrint software was recently updated even for owners of the older PrintFIX Pro (same measuring device). Datacolor are still developing the software, so I wouldn't be surprised to see additional functionality added over time.
-
So you guys see no advantage in the i1Photo or Design series?
-
So you guys see no advantage in the i1Photo or Design series?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191257\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
In this business we usually trust an instrument after it's been around for about one year, and samples have been dropped, exposed to the attentions of cats, dogs, small children and early adopters. During that time we run comparisons, and wait for our colleagues to run comparisons. I see no reason to change this advocacy just because this product is cheaper than the ones we usually deal with.
I would recommend that anyone with a decent budget stay with the true and tested albeit more expensive EyeOne Pro for the time being. Let the pro testers like Andrew and Keith be the kids with the new and shiny toys. Their superior intellect, tireless patience and selfless commitment to the progress of color-management warrants that they be allowed their place in the front lines.
Edmund
PS. I guess the EyeOne is the better instrument any way - at least that's what the guys who make them told me
-
PS. I guess the EyeOne is the better instrument any way - at least that's what the guys who make them told me
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191258\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Not the guys I know who make em. CM is based on newer technology found in the iSis.
If someone has the budget for the EyeOne Pro, fine. Its supported far more in other applications. But if you need something today in the CM price range, I see no reason not to go there. I have a beta hardware product and its working fine (the software is another story, although a non beta is supposed to be on its way). The product works and works well (beyond software design decisions I don't think were spot on). Its got a warranty. It works.
-
So you guys see no advantage in the i1Photo or Design series?
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=191257\")
In this instance I was very much thinking of the budget... ;-)
If you buy an i1 LT you only get the small patch target and monitor calibration. If you want more then the modules all start to rack up the cost. The LT is really a version to get if you want to use other software with your i1 device.
[a href=\"http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/profiling/i1-lt.html]i1 LT review [/url](links to all the other versions too)
Over time I've looked at all the different i1 options and while you get a pretty solid product, the price point of the ColorMunki does make you wonder how it fits alongside the i1 line-up. Also, the iterative profile s/w in the CM suggests that the GMB i1 Match s/w might be due for an update before too long.
And yes Ed, it is always nice to get shiny new toys to play with :-)
-
Not the guys I know who make em. CM is based on newer technology found in the iSis.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191261\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Indeed, the ColorMunki is nice hardware, made by a very good company. And yes, I'll still recommend that anyone who can afford it go for EyeOne, for at least the next 6 months until the software is fully stable. In 6 months I'll recommend ColorMunki warmly to all my friends. In the mean time EyeOne is a known quantity. I guess I'm old now and conservative.
I do hope that i1 Match is brought up to date to do at least what the ColorMunki does ...
Welcome to the club, Keith
Edmund
-
In this business we usually trust an instrument after it's been around for about one year, and samples have been dropped, exposed to the attentions of cats, dogs, small children and early adopters. During that time we run comparisons, and wait for our colleagues to run comparisons. I see no reason to change this advocacy just because this product is cheaper than the ones we usually deal with.
I would recommend that anyone with a decent budget stay with the true and tested albeit more expensive EyeOne Pro for the time being. Let the pro testers like Andrew and Keith be the kids with the new and shiny toys. Their superior intellect, tireless patience and selfless commitment to the progress of color-management warrants that they be allowed their place in the front lines.
Edmund
PS. I guess the EyeOne is the better instrument any way - at least that's what the guys who make them told me
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191258\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Fortunately, I didn't have small animals, or children wandering around (except when someone had to bring their kid in for a day) my lab
I often did testing for manufacturers, so I'm used to beta hardware and software. Doesn't mean I want to use it at home all the time.
I still have my Fuji Pictography with the X-Rite AutoScan Spectrophotometer, but that's of little use here, sadly.
I haven't used the EyeOne.
I still have my old, non working with OS X Colortron.
-
>>Indeed, the ColorMunki is nice hardware, made by a very good company. And yes, I'll still recommend that anyone who can afford it go for EyeOne, for at least the next 6 months until the software is fully stable. In 6 months I'll recommend ColorMunki warmly to all my friends. In the mean time EyeOne is a known quantity. I guess I'm old now and conservative.<<
I just got the ColorMunki Design and I'm very disappointed with the function and instalation so far. The software is really not ready for prime time. The package included instructions for an online link for registration that's simply wrong (registration and download of accessory software is done via the software setup screen).
I uninstalled my i1Match software before installing the Colormunki application. I'm not sure the unistaller worked since the Colormunki tray application seems balky and it may be conflicting with the old i1 profile installer and reminder. I can't see those set to load, but I know the profile reminder application still lives on the drive because it ran with errors after I did a system restore.
The display profiler is stuck in a loop of light gray to dark gray. Initially the profiling ran through color samples, but that calibration failed partway through the measurements and left me with a dark, dim display. I'm running ATI FireGL cards with dual LUTs and my dual NEC2190UXi displays may well support hardware profiling. The Colormunki may be puking over specific hardware, but it will be a major pain figuring this out. The X-Rite website has been recently reworked and it has a flash interface with a poor ratio of pretty site to information content ratio. There is no phone contact information for product support and I'm sure I'll need some one-on-one to get this mess working.
I did the early adopter on Colormunki based on my trust of X-Rite. I made a poor decision. I've been through several generations of Monaco and Gretag-Macbeth and X-rite calibration tools and none gave me this kind of complete failure out of the box. The hardware isn't intuitive. You need to be careful not to press the button in the center of the rotating sensor when you're directed to move the sensor to the calibration position or one of the other position. The button does an enter-key command and pressing that at the wrong time confuses the application (not to mention the user). The software has you align the sensor over a target area, but then the entire display area is used for color sample display. At least this software drops the annoying and slow i1 gimmick of locating the sensor prior to running the color samples.
I'm old and conservative too, and my trust of X-Rite to not endanger my productivity is clearly misplaced. I'm going to try uninstalling and reinstalling Colormunki before I plan my attack on X-rite support. It's telling that X-rite has no user forum on their site. I also recommend that anyone looking at Colormunki wait for functional software.
-
>>Indeed, the ColorMunki is nice hardware, made by a very good company. And yes, I'll still recommend that anyone who can afford it go for EyeOne, for at least the next 6 months until the software is fully stable. In 6 months I'll recommend ColorMunki warmly to all my friends. In the mean time EyeOne is a known quantity. I guess I'm old now and conservative.<<
I just got the ColorMunki Design and I'm very disappointed with the function and instalation so far. The software is really not ready for prime time. The package included instructions for an online link for registration that's simply wrong (registration and download of accessory software is done via the software setup screen).
I uninstalled my i1Match software before installing the Colormunki application. I'm not sure the unistaller worked since the Colormunki tray application seems balky and it may be conflicting with the old i1 profile installer and reminder. I can't see those set to load, but I know the profile reminder application still lives on the drive because it ran with errors after I did a system restore.
The display profiler is stuck in a loop of light gray to dark gray. Initially the profiling ran through color samples, but that calibration failed partway through the measurements and left me with a dark, dim display. I'm running ATI FireGL cards with dual LUTs and my dual NEC2190UXi displays may well support hardware profiling. The Colormunki may be puking over specific hardware, but it will be a major pain figuring this out. The X-Rite website has been recently reworked and it has a flash interface with a poor ratio of pretty site to information content ratio. There is no phone contact information for product support and I'm sure I'll need some one-on-one to get this mess working.
I did the early adopter on Colormunki based on my trust of X-Rite. I made a poor decision. I've been through several generations of Monaco and Gretag-Macbeth and X-rite calibration tools and none gave me this kind of complete failure out of the box. The hardware isn't intuitive. You need to be careful not to press the button in the center of the rotating sensor when you're directed to move the sensor to the calibration position or one of the other position. The button does an enter-key command and pressing that at the wrong time confuses the application (not to mention the user). The software has you align the sensor over a target area, but then the entire display area is used for color sample display. At least this software drops the annoying and slow i1 gimmick of locating the sensor prior to running the color samples.
I'm old and conservative too, and my trust of X-Rite to not endanger my productivity is clearly misplaced. I'm going to try uninstalling and reinstalling Colormunki before I plan my attack on X-rite support. It's telling that X-rite has no user forum on their site. I also recommend that anyone looking at Colormunki wait for functional software.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191455\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Hmm!
I think I'll wait a bit longer. So far, the canned profiles seem to be working out ok, even with Galerie and Harman.
-
Hmm!
I think I'll wait a bit longer. So far, the canned profiles seem to be working out ok, even with Galerie and Harman.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191501\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You could also get some custom profiles made. If it's "only" a few papers it's probably a lot easier to let someone else do the profile making stuff.
-
Well it was great while it was working, but my Munki just died. Plugged it back in after the resolving the plugin fiasco and now it seems to have no power (no light) and is not seen by the software. Apple system profiler does see the Munki on the USB port so I'm not sure what is going on now. Guess I'll just pack it up and send it back to Xrite.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=191026\")
I returned the ColorMunki as a defective unit and have a replacement coming tomorrow. I wanted to remove all of the old CM software before installing the new, but there apparently is no software un-installer. There is a broken link to an un-installer here: [a href=\"http://www.xritephoto.com/index.cfm?MenuItemID=464&MenuSubID=70&MenuGroup=Support]http://www.xritephoto.com/index.cfm?MenuIt...nuGroup=Support[/url]
but when I asked CM support they didn't know anything about it and just told me to trash the CM application folder, but how do I get rid of all the orphaned system files?
-
but when I asked CM support they didn't know anything about it and just told me to trash the CM application folder, but how do I get rid of all the orphaned system files?
There was a Mac uninstaller - I've used it when testing (but that was several releases ago and I wouldn't want to try it now) You should be able to just re-install the software though?
Note that you can only access the preferences through the colorpicker application (??). The preferences are greyed out when you launch the ColorMunki Photo software. You can turn off launch at startup in the prefs. As to where all the CM bits actually live, I've found quite a few in prefs and some other areas, but I wouldn't want to bet I've caught them all :-)
-
There was a Mac uninstaller - I've used it when testing (but that was several releases ago and I wouldn't want to try it now) You should be able to just re-install the software though?
Note that you can only access the preferences through the colorpicker application (??). The preferences are greyed out when you launch the ColorMunki Photo software. You can turn off launch at startup in the prefs. As to where all the CM bits actually live, I've found quite a few in prefs and some other areas, but I wouldn't want to bet I've caught them all :-)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191681\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks Keith. Too bad the programmers didn't create an un-installer for the end user - I hate digging through library files to weed out the leftovers. At the very least they should have left an install log text file listing the items installed and the locations (SOP, right?) Not very professional. The reason I want to clear this all out is that there is a very nasty bug in there that can only be eliminated by first clearing out all the bits of the previous installation, before reinstalling - at least that is what support passed on to me (this was relative to version 1.0 vs 1.0.1). The software people knew what bits to get rid of, but they neglected to tell anyone else. Duh!
-
You could also get some custom profiles made. If it's "only" a few papers it's probably a lot easier to let someone else do the profile making stuff.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191586\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I really don't like others doing my work for me. Besides, every time I want to try a new paper, I'd have to pay someone to do a profile. no thanks. I like to try out lots of papers. I just bought a box of lford Galerie smooth Fine Art Paper (100% rag). Another profile. Right now, I'm testing settings, and modding the color output in the driver. Works, but it's a pain. Ilford doesn't support the new Canon IPF x100's, just the older 5000. I sent them a nasty note, after they wrote what I thought was an insult. It was a canned response. No name attached.
Harmon doesn't support the printers either.
No, I've got to be able to do it here, in a reliable way. I'm sure most people here agree that's the way to do it.
-
I really don't like others doing my work for me. Besides, every time I want to try a new paper, I'd have to pay someone to do a profile. no thanks. I like to try out lots of papers. I just bought a box of lford Galerie smooth Fine Art Paper (100% rag). Another profile. Right now, I'm testing settings, and modding the color output in the driver. Works, but it's a pain. Ilford doesn't support the new Canon IPF x100's, just the older 5000. I sent them a nasty note, after they wrote what I thought was an insult. It was a canned response. No name attached.
Harmon doesn't support the printers either.
No, I've got to be able to do it here, in a reliable way. I'm sure most people here agree that's the way to do it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191794\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
At this point, EyeOne and the new Spyder kit are reliable tested solutions for print profiling, and ColorMunki will probably be very good in about 6 months. I would recommend the EyeOne, it'll also measure all your screens for you, and is supported by every existing piece of software.
Edmund
-
At this point, EyeOne and the new Spyder kit are reliable tested solutions for print profiling, and ColorMunki will probably be very good in about 6 months. I would recommend the EyeOne, it'll also measure all your screens for you, and is supported by every existing piece of software.
Whilst you might recommend it, I'd point out the sizeable price difference between an i1 version with decent patch count targets and the SpyderPrint.
In the UK
SpyderPrint ~ £260 +VAT
i1 Photo ~ £850 +VAT
Bit like me saying I prefer my Canon 1Ds3 to a 5D and neglecting to mention the slight difference in price :-)
I recently did a Colour Management workshop for a large group of mostly amateur photographers, and while quite a few had (and liked) the PrintFIX PRO/SpyderPrint not one had ever considered an i1 photo ... that's the market that the ColorMunki is aimed at ;-)
-
I think you're mostly right. Let's hope the Munki gets sorted out pronto.
Edmund
Whilst you might recommend it, I'd point out the sizeable price difference between an i1 version with decent patch count targets and the SpyderPrint.
In the UK
SpyderPrint ~ £260 +VAT
i1 Photo ~ £850 +VAT
Bit like me saying I prefer my Canon 1Ds3 to a 5D and neglecting to mention the slight difference in price :-)
I recently did a Colour Management workshop for a large group of mostly amateur photographers, and while quite a few had (and liked) the PrintFIX PRO/SpyderPrint not one had ever considered an i1 photo ... that's the market that the ColorMunki is aimed at ;-)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191828\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Whilst you might recommend it, I'd point out the sizeable price difference between an i1 version with decent patch count targets and the SpyderPrint.
Agreed.
Anyone getting email replies from this discussion can see what Edmund first said then edited in the last post. I'll point out for that he's as yet provided no firm evidence that anyone should wait 6 months (to pull a length of time out of his rear-end) before purchasing this product. Its not prefect! I have some beef's with the software. But the bloody product works and pretty darn well! In fact, on the 3-4 printers I tested (Epson), the output profile quality with 100 patches was as good and in some cases BETTER than what I got reading 1700 patches on an iSis using ProfileMaker Pro! Now X-Rite and perhaps someone in the business of building custom profiles for others may not like such a report. That we're talking a differences of way more than 10X in price between the two above products, one can see how this new technology may be frightening.
IF Edmund has empirical evidence to suggest that the ColorMunki is flawed, isn't a good buy, or that such issues will be cleared up in 6 months, I'm all ears. But lately, his ideas about color management seem to be generated more by religion than science. Either that or there's a political slant, neither of which serves him well!
If you think you want to try the ColorMunki, of course purchase from a good supplier, understand that there's a warranty and that a good company like B&H or Calumet, or Chromix would be happy to take back the product and return your money if you don't care for the product. One day of testing and you can make such a decision on your own.
Or you can wait 6 months and pay for someone else to build your profiles or buy a more expensive solution. Neither option is a poor one, but its one only YOU can make!
At least here in the US, we're tired of scare tactics. If Edmund has GOOD intelligence of WMD's, lets see it. Otherwise, dismiss it.
-
Right now I'm considering two choices:
1) Upgrade my EyeOne Proof (full cmyk, small rgb patchs) to full rgb... about $400
or
2) Buying the ColorMunki Photo... about $450
With the first choice, I keep on reliable and familar EyeOne hardware and interface.
Having the second choice gives me a extra spectro and maybe similar quality in RGB printing.
I been watching this tread and is getting very difficult to decide... but I have no hurry so I will wait a little more...
Anyway, I will appreciate any comments
-
Right now I'm considering two choices:
1) Upgrade my EyeOne Proof (full cmyk, small rgb patchs) to full rgb... about $400
or
2) Buying the ColorMunki Photo... about $450
With the first choice, I keep on reliable and familar EyeOne hardware and interface.
Having the second choice gives me a extra spectro and maybe similar quality in RGB printing.
I been watching this tread and is getting very difficult to decide... but I have no hurry so I will wait a little more...
Anyway, I will appreciate any comments
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191895\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I have a few more choices for you
- Try the Basiccolor test software from the Basiccolor site.
- Try Graeme Gill's free (GPL) argyll software.
- Try the Fuji software.
And of course, I have a feeling that the EyeOne bundle will be upgraded to be at least as good as ColorMunki; Xrite have a history of looking after their customers. Come to think of it, I'm going to email that to Xrite as a request
I'm sure Andrew will have some good suggestions too
Edmund
-
I returned the ColorMunki as a defective unit and have a replacement coming tomorrow. I wanted to remove all of the old CM software before installing the new, but there apparently is no software un-installer. There is a broken link to an un-installer here: http://www.xritephoto.com/index.cfm?MenuIt...nuGroup=Support (http://www.xritephoto.com/index.cfm?MenuItemID=464&MenuSubID=70&MenuGroup=Support)
but when I asked CM support they didn't know anything about it and just told me to trash the CM application folder, but how do I get rid of all the orphaned system files?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191662\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I received ColorMunki #2 today and the installation was the same - installs ColorMunki Photo 1.0 and ColorPicker 1.0.1. I'm hoping there is no repeat of the previous problems. What ever happened to the new software that was promised last week?
-
Anyone getting email replies from this discussion can see what Edmund first said then edited in the last post. I'll point out for that he's as yet provided no firm evidence that anyone should wait 6 months (to pull a length of time out of his rear-end) before purchasing this product. Its not prefect! I have some beef's with the software. But the bloody product works and pretty darn well! In fact, on the 3-4 printers I tested (Epson), the output profile quality with 100 patches was as good and in some cases BETTER than what I got reading 1700 patches on an iSis using ProfileMaker Pro! Now X-Rite and perhaps someone in the business of building custom profiles for others may not like such a report. That we're talking a differences of way more than 10X in price between the two above products, one can see how this new technology may be frightening.
IF Edmund has empirical evidence to suggest that the ColorMunki is flawed, isn't a good buy, or that such issues will be cleared up in 6 months, I'm all ears. But lately, his ideas about color management seem to be generated more by religion than science. Either that or there's a political slant, neither of which serves him well!
At least here in the US, we're tired of scare tactics. If Edmund has GOOD intelligence of WMD's, lets see it. Otherwise, dismiss it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191843\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks Andrew.
Let me summarize my position re. ColorMunki: Nice hardware built on validated i1 with solid-state illuminant technology, interesting innovative software, good features, breakthrough price, has just hit the market. Conclusion: If you like the latest toy go for it, if you are in production, stand aside a bit and wait a few months and *then* go for it. I'm over 50 and as you say I've got religion - it's called being careful. I now wait at the lights before I cross the road.
Let me repeat, I like the ColorMunki a lot, but it never hurts to wait a bit before going for a new product. Also, in a few months it will hopefully be supported as a display calibrator by the ColorEyes and Basicolor guys.
I do like the iSis though - funny, though, the one I have now has a lock for the head which wasn't there on the first production unit I got Xrite has a habit of listening to their customers and improving the product.
Edmund
-
If you like the latest toy go for it, if you are in production, stand aside a bit and wait a few months and *then* go for it.
Production? This products audience? And I suspect you are serious.
-
Production? This products audience? And I suspect you are serious.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191920\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Andrew,
I am serious, and you are smart enough to pick up on it.
The EyeOne was overpriced for its target audience in the photography market - photographers spend heavily only for their cameras while printers have heavy presses and investments. As a result there is *huge* pent up demand among pro photographers for color-management for their inkjets.
To support my thesis, ColorMunki is now being bundled with *wide-format* Epson printers by at least one major pro dealer in Paris. These printers are not exactly hobbyist toys.
The good news is that the pro photographers usually pull the market - whenever the pros embrace a technology, the prosumers then go for it too. So if the pros now go for color-managed workflows, finally, then the prosumers will do so too.
Edmund
-
The EyeOne was overpriced for its target audience in the photography market
Which photography market, those that purchase a Canon 1Ds Mark III or those that purchase a Rebel? I don't see how you can lump them all into one group and say it was over priced.
Will X-Rite sell more ColorMunki's than EyeOne's? Well Canon sells more Rebels than 1Ds Mark III's!
And just what have you found in CM that leads you to recommend a wait time of six months or an inability for users to keep from hosing their "production" whatever that vague term means.
Like your discussions of camera profiling, you make points but never back them up or reply to a question about said points. So staying OT, just what is there in CM that makes you suggest someone should wait 6 months or that a so called production environment would be hosed? We know about the dumb Appsetter and how to make it go away. So aside from that, I'm all ears.
-
Which photography market, those that purchase a Canon 1Ds Mark III or those that purchase a Rebel? I don't see how you can lump them all into one group and say it was over priced.
Will X-Rite sell more ColorMunki's than EyeOne's? Well Canon sells more Rebels than 1Ds Mark III's!
And just what have you found in CM that leads you to recommend a wait time of six months or an inability for users to keep from hosing their "production" whatever that vague term means.
Like your discussions of camera profiling, you make points but never back them up or reply to a question about said points. So staying OT, just what is there in CM that makes you suggest someone should wait 6 months or that a so called production environment would be hosed? We know about the dumb Appsetter and how to make it go away. So aside from that, I'm all ears.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=191929\")
EyeOne is substantially more expensive than a 40D
[a href=\"http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/531271-REG/Canon_1901B010_EOS_40D_SLR_Digital.html]http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/5312...LR_Digital.html[/url]
And near the price range of a 5D. Both of these are nowadays found in many pro kitbags.
I'm not saying that production would be "hosed". I'm saying that new toys can be left to cool down a little bit, and minor annoyances be sorted out in a software update. As will certainly happen.
As for you, me, and Keith, remember we have fallback tools and even fallback computers for the cases when we hit a problem and are in a hurry to continue working. This gives us a measure of tolerance to bugs that normal users cannot afford.
Edmund
Ps. When can we expect a new edition of your book updated for ColorMunki and Printfix Pro ?
-
Thanks Keith. Too bad the programmers didn't create an un-installer for the end user - I hate digging through library files to weed out the leftovers. At the very least they should have left an install log text file listing the items installed and the locations (SOP, right?) Not very professional. The reason I want to clear this all out is that there is a very nasty bug in there that can only be eliminated by first clearing out all the bits of the previous installation, before reinstalling - at least that is what support passed on to me (this was relative to version 1.0 vs 1.0.1). The software people knew what bits to get rid of, but they neglected to tell anyone else. Duh!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191683\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
You might try something like AppZapper or AppDelete. Both seem to get preference files that I would miss by just deleting the program folder.
-
You might try something like AppZapper or AppDelete. Both seem to get preference files that I would miss by just deleting the program folder.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191955\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks Jon. I'll give those a try. Currently everything seems to be working OK (fingers crossed).
-
Edmund, from my status with the Colormunki I think your suggestion to wait is sound. Six months may not be a "scientific" figure, but considering your atagonist provided the bit of information about X-Rite firing 100 people, I'm betting bug fixes won't come quickly. My fallback i1 Match software package that I got last spring was only made Vista compatible with this month's update in case anyone wonders how responsive X-Rite has been to the consumer calibration market.
I gave up trying to request support via X-Rite's site and called their toll-free number. I got a call back from their tech support and have been able to provide details of my system and my problems with calibration. I've confirmed my displays support hardware profiling and it sounds like X-Rite thinks its a hardware communicaton bug. I appreciate being able to talk with an X-Rite support person and I was pleased to get a return call in less than a day.
Meanwhile, I was able to install the application on my notebook and profile it (for what that's worth). I also tried profiling an Epson digital projector. The profiled projector's color was improved, but I'm surprised the profile for the projector is left active once the projector is unplugged. Even if the Colormunki tray application couldn't monitor the Dsub port for a projector, I'd think there would at least be a tray option to select between display and projector profiles. No such luck, and there's nothing in the main application that I can find either. When you finish projector calibration there's message strongly suggesting you calibrate a projector a each use. Since there's no way to tell the profile loader to restore your display profiler, it seems that X-Rite intends you to profile *twice* each session with a projector.
I'm attracted to the Colormuki's price and feature set based on the reviews I've read for its ability to create good printer profiles. I don't intend to do much printer profiling, but if I get a device with the capability I want it to work well enough that I'll use it and not be tempted to instead buy profiles. The device will primarily do my display calibration and I expect that color sampling will be my next most frequent use. Since I have the ImagePrint RIP and access to its vast catalog of profiles, I really will only use the Colomunki's print profiling capability for the odd specialty paper for my graphic design business needs.
There's no standalone uninstaller for Colormunki but there is an unstall for it via the Windows Control Panel. I discovered that both the i1Match and prior Monoco tools I've uninstalled left deadwood in the registry. I hoped that clearing that out might get calibration working on my main workstation, but no luck. Colormunki for Windows is build on the .net framework and I have to say that so far I've only experienced slow and buggy applications build on that platform.
BJ
-
Based on all the "crap" installed, its inexcusable that there's no uninstaller. Something I mentioned during beta (and was provided). How X-Rite didn't place this into the final installer, or as a separate download, I can't understand.
As I said earlier, the hardware is there. The software needs work. It does build good (great) profiles. But the criticism of the software end is valid.
That said, I don't see this much different from a lot of products (two wrongs don't make a right) and, the product does work. But X-Rite, the division that built the software deserves some heat.
-
That said, I don't see this much different from a lot of products (two wrongs don't make a right) and, the product does work. But X-Rite, the division that built the software deserves some heat.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191963\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Andrew,
Enough. Please stop playing naive. You know very well that Michael Lanke, the young man in charge of developing the ColorMunki over in Regensdorf, got laid off a couple of weeks ago. This was an interesting choice as this spectro is -we consultants all agree- a successful launch. Michael did his job well and got the product built, tested and shipped.
Obviously, everyone at Xrite is working like crazy in order to hang on to their jobs while the company runs -yet again- through the process of reorganizing itself. In such hectic times, bugs take just a bit longer to straighten out. Therefore, I have no problems in telling those *who can afford it* to get the more expensive, aging, but fully proven and stable EyeOne solution.
Anyone who cannot afford EyeOne but really needs profiles now can probably live with the minor annoyances of the current -working- ColorMunki software for a few months.
Edmund
-
Obviously, everyone at Xrite is working like crazy in order to hang on to their jobs while the company runs -yet again- through the process of reorganizing itself.
Edmund
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=191998\")
And I was thinking that Xrite, Monaco, Gretag Macbeth, Pantone merging would create a monopoly in profile creation soft- and hardware. A suitable case for Neelie Kroes. Avantes SpectroCam was no contender anymore after the patent issue and IMHO a lack of interest by Avantes to market that meter. Leaving the Print Fix Pro as competition in the lower end of the market only. I don't think Barbieri etc are real competition either. And then Xrite is still not able to squeeze the market 8-)
Ernst Dinkla
Try: [a href=\"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/]http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/[/url]
-
It's not that Xrite's technology or products have a problem, it's that the company got put massively into debt by the M&A activity.
The Spyder guys are now a very real competitor in the photo market - and if spectrophotometers on a chip become a reality it's going to be a free for all.
Edmund
And I was thinking that Xrite, Monaco, Gretag Macbeth, Pantone merging would create a monopoly in profile creation soft- and hardware. A suitable case for Neelie Kroes. Avantes SpectroCam was no contender anymore after the patent issue and IMHO a lack of interest by Avantes to market that meter. Leaving the Print Fix Pro as competition in the lower end of the market only. I don't think Barbieri etc are real competition either. And then Xrite is still not able to squeeze the market 8-)
Ernst Dinkla
Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/ (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wide_Inkjet_Printers/)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=192002\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
Here's another update in my ColorMunki problem resolution saga. Last Thursday I got a registry file from X-Rite support that they thought would fix the problem I've had with the display profiler failing on my NED 2190UXi displays. The .reg file set the DDC check function (looking at DDC data reported by the displays) to null. ColorMunki would then, theoretically ignore my display's DDC data. Apparently this registry change allowed X-Rite tech support to profile a similar NEC display. I reinstalled the ColorMunki software with the DDC set to null and got through one display profile. After that, I still get the perpetual gray sample loops. I tried disabling the second display channel - no luck. Despite the registry settings to disable communication with the display, ColorMunki clearly is still communicating with the display hardware as the gray test loop leaves the display in a dimmed mode - that mode can be reset by cycling display power.
I've been able to install and run ColorMunki on two computers - my notebook and my backup workstation both worked. I'd suggest folks with the NEC 2190UXi or the LaCie 321 that's the same display hardware hold off getting the ColorMunki until these problems are resolved. I'll post again if I get a resolution to the problem from X-Rite support.
BJ
-
I'd suggest folks with the NEC 2190UXi or the LaCie 321 that's the same display hardware hold off getting the ColorMunki until these problems are resolved. I'll post again if I get a resolution to the problem from X-Rite support.
FWIW, they are not the same display.
-
As someone who can usually break most software, the ColorMunki has been solid for me. Except for when doing a 3rd printer profile there is no check box for the profile has already been printed.
What I really love about the ColorMunki is how fast it is when doing printer profiles. Versus having to read a bunch of individual color patches.
-
I am faced with the need to replace my Monaco Optix XR Pro because my workstation died, and I replaced it with an HP Pavilion Dual Core running Vista Home Premium 64-bit. The Optix XR won't run on it.
The ColorMunki sounds like an interesting solution, but I have a couple of questions. First, any problems running on Vista Home Premium? Second, will it profile my Samsung SynchMaster 244T as my main display, with a Wacom Cintiq 12WX running as a secondary display? I saw a comment that led me to believe the ColorMunki will only profile a single display.
-- Russ
-
Ok, I think we can summarize at this point that the ColorMunki hardware is working with no issues, and print profiling is making users very happy; people still seem to be having various issues with regards to monitors. I will recommend -yet again- to Xrite that the platform be opened up to third party monitor calibration vendors.
Edmund
-
With all these said, Would you experts agree or recommend buying a ColorMunki at this time? or should i go buy something else? I use Tiger Mac.
-
With all these said, Would you experts agree or recommend buying a ColorMunki at this time? or should i go buy something else? I use Tiger Mac.
[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a] (http://index.php?act=findpost&pid=202052\")
You don't say what you want to do? or whether budget is an issue ;-)
With care it can make some nice printer profiles, it's nice for doing just a few, but the drying time wait would be a PITA if you wanted to do a whole load of profiles in one go.
The profile setting software just doesn't do much on my Mac, but that's not a problem since I don't really want other apps messing with my print settings (it also wont set any non-colormunki profiles)
I tried to put as much as I can to help make this decision in the printer profiling review I wrote for the CM:
[a href=\"http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/profiling/colormunki_printing.html]ColorMunki printer profiling[/url]
-
You don't say what you want to do? or whether budget is an issue ;-)
With care it can make some nice printer profiles, it's nice for doing just a few, but the drying time wait would be a PITA if you wanted to do a whole load of profiles in one go.
The profile setting software just doesn't do much on my Mac, but that's not a problem since I don't really want other apps messing with my print settings (it also wont set any non-colormunki profiles)
I tried to put as much as I can to help make this decision in the printer profiling review I wrote for the CM:
ColorMunki printer profiling (http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/profiling/colormunki_printing.html)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=202054\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I will not be a heavy user...but occasionally plan to build printer profiles...say, once or twice a month or so. Budget IS an ISSUE of course, which is why i was considering the Color Munki and not the iOne Photo. I have read your article on topic (and all of the other discussions on this hardware as well) - but am confused if this is a good product to invest in...with all the negative comments on the software...
Anyways, i think i will go ahead and get one!
-
...with all the negative comments on the software...
Please do take any negative comments in context, and see if they are relevant to your own situation. One of the difficulties I had in writing about the CM is to remember the market it's aimed at, and what is a show stopper for me might not even appear on some users' radar. As ever, if anyone ever has questions on what I've written, I'm always happy to discuss things directly and address specific issues...
-
I have finally run across a media that is giving me profiling problems with the CM. Specifically, Lexjet Sunset Select Gloss Canvas. The image below shows two crops in the top panel from an image that has problem areas in deep shadow. The second panel is a CS3 softproof using the CM profile I made for this media. Note the weird shadow colors. Used the image crops from the shadow areas of the test image as a source image for profile optimization and the softproof with the "optimized" profile is shown in the bottom panel. Some improvement, but still not perfect. I had no problems like this with other papers and canvas materials. I may have to go back and try some other paper settings before trying to profile this canvas again. Any suggestions for options to try would be welcomed. Settings for this trial were media: Epson Premium Luster 260 paper, 2880, High speed on, Epson 4000 printer.
(http://homepage.mac.com/scho/darkshadows.jpg)
-
I'd first try a different paper setting (media setting). Also, I think that the iterative process only selects a ring around of 5 initial samples so you may need to do a few more if the above doesn't work. Its getting better, but one round may not be enough data for the product to "know" what to handle in these dark areas.
-
I'd first try a different paper setting (media setting). Also, I think that the iterative process only selects a ring around of 5 initial samples so you may need to do a few more if the above doesn't work. Its getting better, but one round may not be enough data for the product to "know" what to handle in these dark areas.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=202634\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Thanks Andrew. I will try more optimization samples and different paper settings.
-
Andrew,
Enough. Please stop playing naive. You know very well that Michael Lanke, the young man in charge of developing the ColorMunki over in Regensdorf, got laid off a couple of weeks ago. This was an interesting choice as this spectro is -we consultants all agree- a successful launch. Michael did his job well and got the product built, tested and shipped.
Obviously, everyone at Xrite is working like crazy in order to hang on to their jobs while the company runs -yet again- through the process of reorganizing itself. In such hectic times, bugs take just a bit longer to straighten out. Therefore, I have no problems in telling those *who can afford it* to get the more expensive, aging, but fully proven and stable EyeOne solution.
Anyone who cannot afford EyeOne but really needs profiles now can probably live with the minor annoyances of the current -working- ColorMunki software for a few months.
Edmund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=191998\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Andrew & Edmund,
I've been contemplating a purchase of the Colormunki, but I won't buy it till I stop hearing reports about sofware bugs in a WINXP environment. I have little tolerance for half-baked products, and if the software is buggy no matter how good the hardware, the package is therefore buggy because both need to tango. And the cause of the problems is irrelevant. They can re-organize and re-re-organize themselves till the cows come home from the moon - all I'm interested in is whether the product works properly without "issues". In the interval, if I need custom profiles I can get them made.
-
I've been contemplating a purchase of the Colormunki, but I won't buy it till I stop hearing reports about sofware bugs in a WINXP environment. I have little tolerance for half-baked products, and if the software is buggy no matter how good the hardware, the package is therefore buggy because both need to tango.
I suspect though that you will have a bit of a wait, since if you listen carefully enough on the net you will hear of problems for almost any product ;-) Whilst, as someone who tests new software and hardware I may be be more tolerant of software 'foibles', I think you would be doing the ColorMunki a dis-service if you were to describe it as 'half baked'
Since writing the articles (http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/profiling/colormunki_printing.html) about the ColorMunki I've had quite a few mails from people describing various issues with the software - but the majority were quite happy, particularly when they took some of the initial media testing steps I described. Just throwing more measurement sets at the software doesn't seem to fix 'bad' profiles, and I'd be tempted to go back to more testing of initial print settings.
Although I've got lots of 'better' kit, I used it the other day to generate a quick profile when testing a new canvas. It worked just fine and the test print I made looks great. However on the PowerBook I was using, the profile setting application still does nothing. Since I don't want applications messing around with my colour settings I'm not particularly bothered about this bit of the software not working.
It makes reasonable profiles, it can calibrate the screen, it can calibrate a projector connected to the laptop and I can use it to create black and white linnearising ICC profiles (with QTR)
It seems to produce the results quite well so I'd have no problems in suggesting it to someone to consider, as long as they took the time to understand what they were doing and how to get the best out of it. If that's not good enough then yes... wait, look at alternatives, or pay someone to make the profiles :-) :-)
-
Andrew & Edmund,
I've been contemplating a purchase of the Colormunki, but I won't buy it till I stop hearing reports about sofware bugs in a WINXP environment. I have little tolerance for half-baked products, and if the software is buggy no matter how good the hardware, the package is therefore buggy because both need to tango. And the cause of the problems is irrelevant. They can re-organize and re-re-organize themselves till the cows come home from the moon - all I'm interested in is whether the product works properly without "issues". In the interval, if I need custom profiles I can get them made.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=202952\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
As usual, Edmund is OT and the people in Europe have little if anything to do with any or all of this. I just spent two days at X-Rite in Ames pond talking with the development team about a number of subjects. They are aware of the issues in the 1.0 software, they have updated it slightly to overcome the initial bugs (mostly with App setter). If you're interested in the product and think you'd like to evaluate it, find a good dealer. Anyone worth their salt would allow you to return the product after a nominal test period (a few days at the very least).
As for Michael Lanke, never heard of him and he absolutely was NOT the product manager for the product (the man who was, who I worked with for several years did leave the company in good graces). And that has absolutely nothing to do with anything! The software was not produced in Regensdorf.
-
I suspect though that you will have a bit of a wait, since if you listen carefully enough on the net you will hear of problems for almost any product ;-) Whilst, as someone who tests new software and hardware I may be be more tolerant of software 'foibles', I think you would be doing the ColorMunki a dis-service if you were to describe it as 'half baked'
Since writing the articles (http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/profiling/colormunki_printing.html) about the ColorMunki I've had quite a few mails from people describing various issues with the software - but the majority were quite happy, particularly when they took some of the initial media testing steps I described. Just throwing more measurement sets at the software doesn't seem to fix 'bad' profiles, and I'd be tempted to go back to more testing of initial print settings.
Although I've got lots of 'better' kit, I used it the other day to generate a quick profile when testing a new canvas. It worked just fine and the test print I made looks great. However on the PowerBook I was using, the profile setting application still does nothing. Since I don't want applications messing around with my colour settings I'm not particularly bothered about this bit of the software not working.
It makes reasonable profiles, it can calibrate the screen, it can calibrate a projector connected to the laptop and I can use it to create black and white linnearising ICC profiles (with QTR)
It seems to produce the results quite well so I'd have no problems in suggesting it to someone to consider, as long as they took the time to understand what they were doing and how to get the best out of it. If that's not good enough then yes... wait, look at alternatives, or pay someone to make the profiles :-) :-)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=202994\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Keith,
Yes, I know the danger of listening too much on the net. Once needs good filters for the noise one listens to, and I think I have those. There are real issues, quibbles and pilot-error issues. I try to focus on the first category when looking for lessons of experience.
If all it does is make "reasonable" profiles, for the small number in a year I need, I'd prefer a higher quality solution.
But I think in the final analysis Andrew has the correct approach - buy it and try it, and return it if not happy. It is very often the case that one's own experience is the best guide.
Vistek sells them here in Toronto for 530 CAD, while B&H sells it for 449 USD; the two dollars are close to parity, so once again Canadians are being dinged - in this case 17.8%. My rule of thumb is that we should expect to pay a comparative inefficiency penalty here of roughly 15% on an exchange rate adjusted basis, so its about right. (BTW "inefficiency" here doesn't mean any one is incompetent - it relates to the facts that our markets are much smaller scale and overheads are higher). I'd have to see whether Vistek allows one to try it. B&H clearly says they do not - no returns unless defective.
-
I had one on order but canceled, putting that money towards a lens instead (EF100-400/4.5-5.6L IS)}. I suppose I had some doubt as to whether or not it would satisfy my profiling needs, in particular quality printer profiles. As Keith points out however, a lot of these problems may also be that for most of this product's targeted users there is also a learning curve. Anyhow, when I finally come in from shooting I will reconsider the Munki again!
Thanks to everyone for their comments and findings.
Dave
Good Photoworks
-
Andrew,
I much appreciate that you clarify this issue. Objective information is much appreciated but rumours are not.
I bought a ColorMunki a couple of days ago. I'm quite satisfied with it, I may feel that it would be fine to have a real manual but Xrite at least have a FAQ which is quite good.
Best regards
Erik
As usual, Edmund is OT and the people in Europe have little if anything to do with any or all of this. I just spent two days at X-Rite in Ames pond talking with the development team about a number of subjects. They are aware of the issues in the 1.0 software, they have updated it slightly to overcome the initial bugs (mostly with App setter). If you're interested in the product and think you'd like to evaluate it, find a good dealer. Anyone worth their salt would allow you to return the product after a nominal test period (a few days at the very least).
As for Michael Lanke, never heard of him and he absolutely was NOT the product manager for the product (the man who was, who I worked with for several years did leave the company in good graces). And that has absolutely nothing to do with anything! The software was not produced in Regensdorf.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203034\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-
I bought a ColorMunki a couple of days ago. I'm quite satisfied with it, I may feel that it would be fine to have a real manual but Xrite at least have a FAQ which is quite good.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=203605\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
IF the design of the product was 100% successful, there be no need for a manual. They got pretty close (I'd give them a C+).
-
For awhile now I have been thinking of getting an eye one photo. I have been following this thread and reading others about the colormunki.
For the people who have used/tested both do you think one does a better job for printer profiles? monitor profiles?
This is using the software that comes with the hardware. The eye one photo is about my limit for cost at this time. I do not print professionally, just as a hobby.
It seems from reading, the higher end software seems to do a better job with shadow detail. Is there much difference between the eye1 photo and munki?
For the testers of the colormunki do you think they will update/upgrade the software for larger number of patch targets? If so shouldn't this help with the quality of the profiles?
Thanks for any feedback
Tony
-
The official line is that the colormunki is firmly an introductory level package and will not be upgradeable.
Also X-rite are only currently letting third party software writers have access to the monitor profiling hardware/SDK
Now whether this changes, depends on whether we see a replacement for the i1 any time soon and how that affects the product lineup at X-rite.
You have the iSis based measuring technology in the iSis, ColorMunki and add ins for printers (HP/Epson)
I have a colormunki and i1 and if given the choice would use the i1 and i1 match - the i1 is aimed at a higher end user than the CM.
There is also the fact that if you combined the iterative capabilities of the CM software, with higher patch count targets and an i1 you should have a quite nice solution ;-)
-
I can not comment from a technical point but have found the unit quite effective.
I bought mine through Amazon in the US (I am in Canada) for about $440us. It came through customs with payment for Provincial taxes. I have made two profiles on paper with it and am very pleased. I was quite surprised at how easy it was. AND WITH ONLY two sheets of SAMPLES. I did not need to go to the next level (another 8x10 sheet.) I also calibrated my monitors and am pleased.
I can not comment on "deep" questions but it seems to work for me. If there are improvements, great.
Martin
-
Just got mine yesterday... have not profiled printer yet, but I did my monitors.
The quality of the monitor profiles is very good. It is a better profile than what my Eye One Display could do - larger gamut, more accurate, more neutral grays.
However, the software interface toward setting up your monitor for profiling is very poor.
For example, its critical to get your screen brightness and whitepoint color correct. In Eye One match, it has recommended cd/m2 values to achieve (I like from 90-100). The colormunki does not do this however. It simply has a bar that tells you to go up or down in brightness.
I have found this bar to be simply wrong. If you take an ambient light measurement in my studio (which is suitably dim for graphics editting), it tells you to turn the monitor brightness far too low. Whites become gray and the profile will be out of whack. If you choose not to do an ambient measurement, it tells you to turn the brightness up simply too high.
And there is no indication of what the actual cd/m2 value is.
And it also has no whitepoint adjustment. You cannot see what the actual color temp the monitor is achieving. This doesn't matter for lower-end monitors - trying to adjust the temp will cause casts and you should leave it at native. But if you're working with a quality 10bit+ graphics display, you want to use the monitor controls to achieve a solid 6500k - not just rely on the colormunki.
IMO, these should be part of the "advanced" calibration. For now, I'm using my EyeOne to achieve brightness and color temp, and then switching to the colormunki for the actual profile generation, because it is quite good - once your monitor is set right.
-
However, the software interface toward setting up your monitor for profiling is very poor.
For example, its critical to get your screen brightness and whitepoint color correct. In Eye One match, it has recommended cd/m2 values to achieve (I like from 90-100). The colormunki does not do this however. It simply has a bar that tells you to go up or down in brightness.
I have found this bar to be simply wrong. If you take an ambient light measurement in my studio (which is suitably dim for graphics editting), it tells you to turn the monitor brightness far too low. Whites become gray and the profile will be out of whack. If you choose not to do an ambient measurement, it tells you to turn the brightness up simply too high.
And there is no indication of what the actual cd/m2 value is.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=213559\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I finally bought one and this has been my experience also. Hopefully if enough of us keep "suggesting" that X-Rite adds more functionality to the software they will listen and open up the advanced mode. I have also sent them a bug report where the Optimize Existing Profile option (XP Pro) keeps crashing the application, however if I restart (several times) I can eventually print and read the optimized chart.
The Munki builds very good printer and monitor profiles IMHO).
Dave
David Good
Good Photoworks
-
I ordered one - mainly as a cheap printer profiler, but also to verify the accuracy of my colorcheckers. It seems to do the printer job o.k. but I'd need some more time before commenting further.
Just a quick note ... if you want to save a bit of paper and your printer driver allows you to scale the output, the deveice seems quite happy reading the targets at 50% of normal size. I guess this might reduce the accuracy, but is quite useful if your trying out a few different media settings.
-
Hi all.
For those considering purchasing the ColorMunki, I thought I'd share my experiences with the product and X-Rite support.
First, the background: I'm running Vista Home Premium on a home built machine sporting a dual core 2.14mhz intel chip, 4 gigs of RAM, and a good NEC monitor. I've had a fully color managed system for about 4 years now, and while far from a technical expert, I've been using profiles competently for most of that time. Prior to the ColorMunki I used an i1Photo system to calibrate monitor, printer, projector, etc. The i1Photo has performed well, but it is more product than I actually need. By purchasing the ColorMunki, I was hoping to give myself the opportunity to sell the i1Photo kit and recoup some of my initial investment in that product.
Well, I've been very disappointed with the ColorMunki and X-Rite support, and here is why:
1. Monitor calibrations vary widely from calibration to calibration. I've got the ambient light option turned off, but each time I calibrated my monitor I get different results. I quickly lost confidence in the monitor profiling and switched back to the i1, which does the job consistently.
2. Printer/paper profiles are very poor compared to those the i1 generates - even compared to the canned profiles provided with my paper. When I try to "optimize" the CM profiles, the software crashes when I start scanning the color swatch print. Others have noted this problem. Likewise, its back to the i1 for me.
These two issues render the product useless. I could probably find workarounds, but with my i1Photo still on hand, I don't need to. And after spending nearly $500, I really shouldn't have to do that anyway.
I contacted X-Rite support about the problems. At first they were very responsive and seemed genuinely interested in learning from my experiences. Since I have both the CM and the i1Photo, they requested copies of the monitor profiles generated by each. I forwarded those along about four weeks ago, and since then, I have heard almost nothing from them, despite emails every 10 days or so asking for an update.
I expect that X-Rite will correct these issues with a future software update. I'm stunned, however, that they released such a flawed product to begin with. At this stage, I wouldn't recommend the ColorMunki to anyone – at least anyone running MS Vista. Perhaps XP or Mac users are having better experiences.
Adam
-
2. Printer/paper profiles are very poor compared to those the i1 generates - even compared to the canned profiles provided with my paper. When I try to "optimize" the CM profiles, the software crashes when I start scanning the color swatch print. Others have noted this problem. Likewise, its back to the i1 for me.
Maybe its Vista, but that's not anything like I see (on a Mac), even comparing profiles build from an iSis! Of course, my software doesn't crash at optimizing, and I've seen little reason to even use that feature other than for testing. The 100 patch profiles on my Epson's are very good.
-
Yes, I think it must be a problem between the ColorMunki software and Vista. Others have reported problems with the CM software, but several of the worst cases seem associated with Vista users (or perhaps Vista victims is the more accurate characterization).
Still, since Eye-One Match software works perfectly well with Vista, the CM software should be able to work with it too.
I wonder if the problem lies with the new color engine (WCS I think its called) that lurks somewhere beneath Vista's hood. If I recall the marketing hype, it was supposed to revolutionize color management and replace the ICC standard - at least for Vista users. As far as I know, however, no 3rd party software is taking advantage of it.
-
I don't think Vista was replacing the ICC standard. The idea was that the color management would reside with the operating system and hence be system-wide, rather than individual programs like photoshop being color-managed but the windows explorer not.
I believe it was also going to bring color management to web browsers. I don't think these changes made it in the final release (I'm still with XP).
In theory it is the right idea, but as always its the implementation that matters most.
-
I have ColorMunki installed on both XP Pro and Vista (laptop), the "crash" occurs on both. The curious thing is it advances further into the process after crashing it several times. I was able to eventually complete the optimize process after @15-20 tries (I don't give up easily). The "good news" is that it worked for the image I was dealing with, no more banding in the orange sky of a sunrise printed on Harman Gloss.
The display profiles appear quite good on my laptop and LCD, I haven't tried profiling CRT's yet, preferring my Eye-One. I learned early on to ignore the ambient light option. I wonder how far X-Rite will go with this project as far as software upgrades are concerned.
-
I have ColorMunki installed on both XP Pro and Vista (laptop), the "crash" occurs on both. The curious thing is it advances further into the process after crashing it several times. I was able to eventually complete the optimize process after @15-20 tries (I don't give up easily). The "good news" is that it worked for the image I was dealing with, no more banding in the orange sky of a sunrise printed on Harman Gloss.
The display profiles appear quite good on my laptop and LCD, I haven't tried profiling CRT's yet, preferring my Eye-One. I learned early on to ignore the ambient light option. I wonder how far X-Rite will go with this project as far as software upgrades are concerned.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=216223\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'm in Oz and have had a CM for about 2 weeks trying to get it to a) be recognized by the software calibrate screens consistently c)keep the printer profiles once done d) not dump everything once you reboot the computer so you have to start over with manual installations and re-callibration each time.
I'm on XP with plenty of speed and memory.
I think I bought in too early, even though it's about 6 months since release, and I have a CM that's full of bugs.
David can you give me your CM part and serial no. so I can compare how old mine is with yours... which apparently is humming along on XP very well.
Anyone else whose XP and CM work well, I'd appreciate your input as the importers here probably have landed a crook early batch.
thanks
Terry
Woops... perhaps not humming along 'very well' but at least manageable with XP David!
It's a nuisance returning equipment so work-arounds with a bad release can be an option
-
Just got mine yesterday... have not profiled printer yet, but I did my monitors.
The quality of the monitor profiles is very good. It is a better profile than what my Eye One Display could do - larger gamut, more accurate, more neutral grays.
However, the software interface toward setting up your monitor for profiling is very poor.
For example, its critical to get your screen brightness and whitepoint color correct. In Eye One match, it has recommended cd/m2 values to achieve (I like from 90-100). The colormunki does not do this however. It simply has a bar that tells you to go up or down in brightness.
I have found this bar to be simply wrong. If you take an ambient light measurement in my studio (which is suitably dim for graphics editting), it tells you to turn the monitor brightness far too low. Whites become gray and the profile will be out of whack. If you choose not to do an ambient measurement, it tells you to turn the brightness up simply too high.
And there is no indication of what the actual cd/m2 value is.
And it also has no whitepoint adjustment. You cannot see what the actual color temp the monitor is achieving. This doesn't matter for lower-end monitors - trying to adjust the temp will cause casts and you should leave it at native. But if you're working with a quality 10bit+ graphics display, you want to use the monitor controls to achieve a solid 6500k - not just rely on the colormunki.
IMO, these should be part of the "advanced" calibration. For now, I'm using my EyeOne to achieve brightness and color temp, and then switching to the colormunki for the actual profile generation, because it is quite good - once your monitor is set right.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=213559\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The adjustment feedback is too jumpy IMO. On a MacBookPro one notch goes off the acceptance scale too fast. Not having white point is okay for LCD monitors for this level of calibration. I would like to see developers have the CM running on apps like ColorEyes. I think this would be the right way to go. Keep the pricing low, have SDKs for developers for optional higher end profiling. Perhaps X-Rite should offer a higher end option too for the CM.
It seem to profile the MBP well enough and without problem. I still prefer ColorEyes and an i1D2 but that option costs a lot more. The CM does for the price a very decent job on my first calibration/profile on a difficult portable.
-
I have ColorMunki installed on both XP Pro and Vista (laptop), the "crash" occurs on both. The curious thing is it advances further into the process after crashing it several times. I was able to eventually complete the optimize process after @15-20 tries (I don't give up easily). The "good news" is that it worked for the image I was dealing with, no more banding in the orange sky of a sunrise printed on Harman Gloss.
The display profiles appear quite good on my laptop and LCD, I haven't tried profiling CRT's yet, preferring my Eye-One. I learned early on to ignore the ambient light option. I wonder how far X-Rite will go with this project as far as software upgrades are concerned.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=216223\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I wonder if it will crash on a MacBookPro with Bootcamp and XP SP2?
Anybody try?
-
Since I trashed the ColorMunki in an earlier post, I thought I'd share my experiences so far with ColorMunki software 1.05.
In short, the device is finally working as advertised on my Vista Home Premium system. The monitor profile is fine, the printer profiles are fine. I haven't tested extensively yet, but the device is working well enough to make further experimentation worthwhile, and that was not the case before. Based on initial results, I expect the devise will do everything I need it to do.
My eye-one unit will be on sale shortly!
Adam
-
Since I trashed the ColorMunki in an earlier post, I thought I'd share my experiences so far with ColorMunki software 1.05.
In short, the device is finally working as advertised on my Vista Home Premium system. The monitor profile is fine, the printer profiles are fine. I haven't tested extensively yet, but the device is working well enough to make further experimentation worthwhile, and that was not the case before. Based on initial results, I expect the devise will do everything I need it to do.
My eye-one unit will be on sale shortly!
Adam
A refreshing and useful post.
Steve
-
Another update ...
Though the display profile generate by ColorMunki are now fine, those profiles are still not fully compatible with Vista's ICM color engine. As a result, applications that plug into that engine display images incorrectly. This includes Photo Mechanic and Vista's built in image viewer. Photoshop and Lightroom use their own color engine, and as a result, images display as they should in those apps.
As a work around, I've turned color management off in Photo Mechanic, where, for my purposes at least, color accuracy is not important. I don't normally use Vista's built in image viewer, so issues with that app are irrelevant.
Though manageable, the ongoing issues between ColorMunki and Vista are frustrating. X-Rite's Match software produces display profiles that work perfectly well with Vista. Why would the ColorMunki software, which is newer, have this issue? - even after the software update?
Something in X-Rite's software development process is badly amiss.
Adam
-
Here is the reply I received from X-Rite support after describing the problem:
"This issue is something that our development team is currently working on. The reason for the incompatibility is that the Windows platform, in particular Vista and Vista SP1, are not compatible with version 4 ICC profiles. The i1 Match and the i1 Products that use this software have the ability to generate version 2 ICC profiles which is why you are not seeing the incompatilbility issue.
This is being address with a future release to the software once the development team completes further testing."
-
Here is the reply I received from X-Rite support after describing the problem:
"This issue is something that our development team is currently working on. The reason for the incompatibility is that the Windows platform, in particular Vista and Vista SP1, are not compatible with version 4 ICC profiles. The i1 Match and the i1 Products that use this software have the ability to generate version 2 ICC profiles which is why you are not seeing the incompatilbility issue.
This is being address with a future release to the software once the development team completes further testing."
Sounds like a load of bull to me. I don't have a Colormunki, but I have had no problems at all using ICC v4 profiles under Vista x64 Ultimate. I use Eizo Color Navigotor for display profiling and Eye One Match 3.6.2 for printer profiling, both generate v4 profiles.
Maybe there's something specific to the way the Colormunki software is generating the profiles that causes the problem.
-
Here is the reply I received from X-Rite support after describing the problem:
"This issue is something that our development team is currently working on. The reason for the incompatibility is that the Windows platform, in particular Vista and Vista SP1, are not compatible with version 4 ICC profiles. The i1 Match and the i1 Products that use this software have the ability to generate version 2 ICC profiles which is why you are not seeing the incompatilbility issue.
This is being address with a future release to the software once the development team completes further testing."
I am having similar difficulties (I believe) with CM and Capture 1 Pro. X-rite's CM customer service is responsive but has not resolved my situation. I am running Windows Vista Ultimate. Printer profiles from CM are good, but I can't profile my monitor well----at least not for a profile that Capture 1 Pro can use.... I am told that Capture 1 Pro 3.78 doesn't work with icc version 4, and it appears the new Capture 1 Pro 4 also does not. It appears that the image highlights are totally blown and details gone. Color is off as well. When the image is adjusted to bring exposure and details back----the main subject in the image is then much too dark. I am told a CM software update to work with version 2 icc profiles will be needed.
Does anyone have a suitable workaround or suggestions??
-
I am new to color managagement - but not to software engineering and release having done support, engineering, test and release since 1982 in the retail and enterprise space.
I think I am one of the CM's target market segments being a part time wedding and portrait photographer.
I am using an Epson Stylus pro 3800.
Downloading and installing version 1.05 and using it as my base install on a Vista home premium, x64 SP1 system here are my observations:
1. monitor profiles do not stick, they disapper after UAC or on resume from S3 standby.
This has been a known issue since at least mid 2007, based on threads across multiple boards and product lines.
X-rites supports commnets - " it's a Vista issue - not our problem".
I've temporarily solved it by placing the CM gamma icon on my desktop and after resume rerunning it.
2. Per CM support the patch reading process is iterative and there are rounding errors on each successive pass of reading.
they have no hard and fast rule - surprise -! but I have been told that no more that four or five at most optimizations can be read without inducing errors.
I have a profile that has gone far green blue - at eight optimizations using Epson Ultra Premium Photo Luster
3. I am used to a customer is right attitude or a don't care attitiude, but typically support being helpful, off the bat and from the beginning I have to say they have referred me to online forums - here in specific, told me to go buy their three thousand dollar solution, and then go puchase training and support from then, all for profiling Crane museo rag and the above Epson pper - what a crock ! they have been quite antagonistic maybe they have knowledge - but interaction of some tech support stinks to put it mildly.
4. the profiles generated are not visible in the Epson control panel version 6.50 under vista x64 the answer I got after switching technicians after 5 email rounds was that Epson does not read version 4 of the ICC profiles - although photoshop, LR, Qimage all seem to just fine.
Overall I would not recommend this product to anyone who was not aware of the technical hurdles and problems in this segment of the industry, compared to support from Canon, Epson, DDI, or about any other vendor I've seen this was quite poor.
The profiless seem to get rid of some of the color casts - but definitely go very flat in the shadow details - any ideas how to bring this to a slightly better state ?
-
3. I am used to a customer is right attitude or a don't care attitiude, but typically support being helpful, off the bat and from the beginning I have to say they have referred me to online forums - here in specific, told me to go buy their three thousand dollar solution, and then go puchase training and support from then, all for profiling Crane museo rag and the above Epson pper - what a crock ! they have been quite antagonistic maybe they have knowledge - but interaction of some tech support stinks to put it mildly.
The "workaround" that I was advised by x-rite CM customer service was: "Stop using Capture One Pro."
This is unacceptable.
The second alternative they offered me was to buy yet another monitor profiling system (i1Display2), but at a discount, to use with the CM, and until a software patch solution was generated (if ever) to work with both ICC version 2.
Somehow, I just don't feel it is right to "reward" the company by having to buy yet another product from them, just to make the original product (Munki) work as they have initially represented. Over $400 dollars spent on the CM, doesn't work as advertised for me, and no returns. Real nice.
I'm leaning towards dumping X-rite completely and going with the Datacolor Spyder3Elite solutions if a better alternative doesn't present itself shortly.
-
The "workaround" that I was advised by x-rite CM customer service was: "Stop using Capture One Pro."
This is unacceptable.
The second alternative they offered me was to buy yet another monitor profiling system (i1Display2), but at a discount, to use with the CM, and until a software patch solution was generated (if ever) to work with both ICC version 2.
Somehow, I just don't feel it is right to "reward" the company by having to buy yet another product from them, just to make the original product (Munki) work as they have initially represented. Over $400 dollars spent on the CM, doesn't work as advertised for me, and no returns. Real nice.
I'm leaning towards dumping X-rite completely and going with the Datacolor Spyder3Elite solutions if a better alternative doesn't present itself shortly.
I agree with your general sentiment - the amazing thing has been the utter and total arrogance exhibited that bordered on plain hostility, well now I'm hostile.. and I'm usually able to put up with a lot from flaky drivers and know nothing tech support.
The problem here is they do know something about color and I do respect that, - but literally X-rite thinks that there is not a single solitary problelm with thier product and that you should be grateful to have it.
I fist called them as I became concerned while waiting for the ColorMunki as some threads had commented on the vagueness of the instructions - asking what the exact steps were to turn off color managment for my printer. There are three major manufacturers Canon, HP, and Epson, There are two operatings systems and a few variants - if you laid out a table and multiplied it by versions of drivers it's probably about 48 or so maximum that would cover 90% or better of the target market - truth be told probalby 16 screenshots / Kb articles would probalbby cover 99%, so I thought hey - just e-mail me the KB becaue I could not find it on your site........
Oh heck no, instead I started getting a rahter snooty lecture from the tech support guy on how this was not thier responsibility and impossible to do. I am sorry - in 4 weeks or less and documentation writer - or technical support staff could have knocked this out.
Besides any compotent quality assurance staff would have done this testing already and just could have taken the screeenshots and passed them along to a writer.
I should have just returned the device then, but I kept plugging along... figuring that all this great hoopla would show how great the device is.
The ColorMunki has defects in its USB driver were coming out of S3/ S4 hybrid standby it wont always be recognized on multiple different hubs and directs connects - instead of working with me X-rite has ignored me.
The device appears to not have any way to increase the accuracy of its black and white printing - or the gray tones - which so many of us with multiple inksets native in the printer for black and white printing want to use.
This was the quoted reccomendation,"You may also find that you are aiming at a result that would typically require the feature set of our professional level programs, Monaco Profiler or ProfileMaker."
Some more from X-rite support:
4: Profile adjustment and editing is not something that is central to the ColorMunki feature set. The types of prints that you are attempting to do are very specialized and grayscale profiles are not specifically addressed by the program. Many fine art companies have devoted considerable effort to create grayscale procedures for users such as yourself. I'd suggest checking out Nash Editions, or Luminous Landscape to see what suggestions they can provide.
=================================
WHAT ???
Bruce - can you please clarify this statement you are telling me that CM cannot be used to make professional level prints, either color nor greyscale and are recommending I go look on BBS's for support ??
You indicate you are using Qimage for printing. Our support department will have no information on this program, and although it might well produce excellent results, we would recommend contacting their support department for any print related issues.
====================================
So X-rite doesn't support the product with screenshots or workarounds to known issues , there are rounding errors that mean that a profile cannot be optimized more than some unknown unset standard, Drying times for full color maturity will not be something that X-Rite will provide any specific guidance on. X-rite's software is involved with making profiles, and we provided the suggestion that you increase your drying time based on the findings of many end users who report that their profiles improved on some papers when they left them to dry longer. You are free to make the call for your papers and length of time needed. Further information may be obtained from Epson, Crane or other paper manufacturers.
hey it's my three cents.- or more like four hundred dollars plus a box of crane rag and Epson paper - ouch.
-
The profiless seem to get rid of some of the color casts - but definitely go very flat in the shadow details - any ideas how to bring this to a slightly better state ?
The profiles are pretty accurate in mid-high tones. Although I cannot get the greens right in any of my Ilford papers, and it's not a gamut problem because monitor gamut is similar to the printers in greens but I get different colors (bit more acid greens on print)
You are totally right about the shadow details. The munki has two behavior about shadows
- on certain papers (esp. glossy - high glossy) it closes the shadows to amost dark, loosing details
- on other papers (es. semi-matte, pearl) it generates mushy shadows almost completely discolored (color get out from shadowy areas, especially red-orange: creating problems in low-key portrait for example)
I tried by optimization on dark tones and I got some slight improvement but not enough. And after the 5th optimization the profile "dies".
The tools is good, the software is ridiculous, I hope Basic ICC or similar third party will support the Munki hardware asap.
g
-
Back to page 4 or so and there are some reports of problems with DDC. I am seeing a loss of DDC on any computer I've installed the CM software. I can't understand what is going on as I've even clean installed both 10.4.11 and 10.5, and the restore discs for Mac.
Something is changing the DDC feedback. HAs anyone some experience with changing the DDC tags back on a Mac?