Printer Profiles - Colorvision Spyder & PrintFIX

On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 15:34:17 GMT, Steffen Kluge <kluge.RemoveThis@dotnet.org>
wrote:

>no_name wrote:

>have. I found this extremely cumbersome and time/paper/ink consuming.
>I'm now using the Monaco EZcolor OptixPro combo, which creates printer
>profiles automatically (you need a scanner).
>
>Cheers
>Steffen.

Steffen,

I have often read statements where the writer says that doing printer
profiles using a scanner to measure the printer output is not very
good or very accurate. These people say that you need to spend well
over $1000 or €1000 and get a printer profiling system based on a more
accurate color-measuring device.

What is your opinion?

Father Kodak
 >> Stay informed about: Printer Profiles - Colorvision Spyder & PrintFIX 

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 13:47:58 -0700, Father Kodak
<dont_bother.RemoveThis@IDontCare.COM> wrote:

>On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 15:34:17 GMT, Steffen Kluge <kluge.RemoveThis@dotnet.org>
>wrote:
>
>>no_name wrote:
>
>>have. I found this extremely cumbersome and time/paper/ink consuming.
>>I'm now using the Monaco EZcolor OptixPro combo, which creates printer
>>profiles automatically (you need a scanner).
>>
>>Cheers
>>Steffen.
>
>Steffen,
>
>I have often read statements where the writer says that doing printer
>profiles using a scanner to measure the printer output is not very
>good or very accurate. These people say that you need to spend well
>over $1000 or €1000 and get a printer profiling system based on a more
>accurate color-measuring device.
>
>What is your opinion?
>
>Father Kodak


I'm not Steffen.

I have tried almost every scanner-based printer profiling
system there is: Wiziwyg, Monaco, ColorVision, Profile
Prism... must have missed one or two. I can't tell you
how many $$$ of ink and paper I've killed trying to make
printer profiles with these.

None were reliable. With some struggling a good profile
could be made but it's usually hit-and-miss. Profile Prism
was the best of the lot, IMO.

Mike Chaney (the creator of Profile Prism) says that
using LED-based scanners (aka "CIS") like the Canon
Lide-80 took care of certain metamerism issues. I've
always used Epsons for my profile target scans.

I wonder what he's recommending now that the Lide-80
seems to be gone from the market.

Anyway, I've always wanted a Gretag Eye-1 Photo
(a spectro-based print profiling system) but I've never
seen that package for under $1200.


rafe b
www.terrapinphoto.com
 >> Stay informed about: Printer Profiles - Colorvision Spyder & PrintFIX 

Raphael Bustin wrote:
> None were reliable. With some struggling a good profile
> could be made but it's usually hit-and-miss. Profile Prism
> was the best of the lot, IMO.

They say you have to create a printer profile for every paper/ink
combination you use. That's only the partial truth. To be accurate you'd
need a profile for every paper/ink/viewing light combination. The light
source plays an important role in the appearance of a print-out, and
however precise your spectrophotometer is, the printer profile you get
is accurate only for one particular assumed light source.

Of course, using any kind of tri-stimulus scanning in printer profiling,
there will be metamerism issues, no doubt. Combine these with the
metamerism effects of printer inks under different light sources, and
all hopes for "simply making the print-out look like the monitor image"
are dashed.

At least my scanner based printer profile will put me in the right ball
park. From there, I can use the Ezcolor software to edit the profile to
my liking (or to match a particular light source).

Cheers
Steffen.
 >> Stay informed about: Printer Profiles - Colorvision Spyder & PrintFIX