After a long night trawling the internet, I'll answer my own post.
1) With Colorvision loading my monitor profile, I need to disable Adobe
Gamma Loader, which does a similar thing.
2) I do colour manipulation within PE and not through the printer
driver. I managed to find explanations for the arcanely named C*non
paper/ink profiles, so I can now load the correct one in the PE print
dialogue box.
3) The printer driver has been neutered, so it's not competing with PE
or the profile.
Results now are pretty good, both on a test image and a couple of OM
photos (portra 400NC).
Martin
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Walters, Martin
Sent: August 27, 2007 10:40
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Printing what you see on the screen - my trials and
tribulations of calibration
This is a long post, so apologies up front. It also has OM content -
it's all about keeping my OMs running through "DDC".
Background
Recently did a batch of prints - from PE v2, via a Can*n i960 (six
colour machine, Can*n paper and inks) from scanned pictures (on Portra
160/400NC and 160VC, from W*lm*rt) as well some from my wife's Nik*n
digital P&S. The prints were uniformly darker/warmer than on screen and
the Nik*n photos also had a slight bluish cast to shadow areas. Ah ha, I
thought, calibration issues......
So, treated myself to a Spyder and calibrated my (run-of-the-mill Dell)
LCD. I couldn't find any way to change brightness and contrast, though.
End result - noticeably richer and warmer tone to the display. As an
aside, the instructions for the Spyder are skimpy at best. Then, I
installed PE v5 (there was a good update deal).
At the end of all this, nothing had changed and the prints are still
"warmer" than the screen, which is a bit yellower. Having burned up a
lot of Can*n paper trying different settings (and comparing the end
result to the W*lm*rt print), I'm no further ahead, though I can get
very close to the original print.
I now also have a whole host of colour profiles, which just confuses the
matter - or me, anyway. The biggest difference remains between PE on
the screen and printer output (and this difference is still there, but
perhaps reduced, using Nik*nview and an old version of C*rel Photo
Paint). I also got Colorvision's PrintFix software with the Spyder,
which is supposed to allow me to profile my printer, but I haven't got
to it yet.
Here's what I understand.
1) Calibration of the monitor provides accurate colour settings for the
video card. I also had Adobe Gamma Loader installed and working at
startup. I have disabled this, as my Spyder settings are the only thing
I want loaded. My Spyder profile is only useful for the video card and
not for anything else.
2) PE v5 works with its own sRGB profile, which is expected. I believe
that this is a default setting for the software and is not being loaded
independently.
When I come to print, PE provides a dialogue box where I can set the
output colour space (the working colour space, which is identified but
cannot be changed, is Adobe's sRGB ICC profile), by selecting a profile.
However, the list of options includes just about every profile I have in
the folder (including the Spyder, Adobe's RGB profiles, Canon
profiles..... etc) as well as options along the lines of "use printer
colour management" , "use working colour space" etc. There is also an
option for choosing the Rendering Intent - not mentioned in the book of
words, but I now understand what it means thanks to info on the web.
3) The Can*n printer driver allows colour management with ICC profiles.
It also includes auto and manual colour management. Manual allows me to
"enable/disable ICM" as well as play with CMYK levels and brightness.
Lots to play with here, too.
My baseline, for good or bad, is the original print and original scan.
The photos in question were taken in Cairo in mid-afternoon, and are the
same type of scene and from the same place. There's haze and glare from
the bright sun to consider as well.
I can get very close to the original print (letting the printer do the
colour management and using manual settings in the printer driver) with
PE, and also with Can*n's Easy Print (though not identical), which comes
with the printer and should not be using Adobe's sRGB profile. However,
in every case the printed image is "warmer" that the screen image.
Do they resemble how I remember the scene? In general, yes. The one
aspect that may not be entirely realistic is the sky colour. Most other
prints/scans show a bluer sky, whereas the group I am using show a sky
is more grey than blue. Interestingly, the screen view in PE shows a
sky that is at least a pale blue. From this aspect alone, it is
probably more pleasing than the original print and scan.
As I can change the colour characteristics in either PE or Photo Paint
(I can adjust curves with it), it's the screen image that I wish to
reproduce. I now have lots of choices to make and little guidance. So,
for example, should I let the printer do the colour management, or
should I let PE do the job?
All suggestions welcome on causes and solutions. And while W*lm*rt is
probably not the best place to scan Portra, I've been happy with
previous scans, and they do half frame, no questions asked.
Martin
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|