English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

i understand about color profiles. i have my dslr set to adobe rgb (1998) and my monitor and photoshop working space is set the same. but i'm having trouble with my printer's color profile. it's an epson r1800 (and i will soon acquire a r2400). i know epson has the built-in 'spr...' profiles for various paper types. but i get dramatically different results when printing heavily saturated or 'photoshopped' images. regular photos and lightly photoshopped images seem to print fairly well.
should i set my photoshop working space to match the printer's profile? will that get me a more accurate reading?
also, i've read that srgb is a better profile for printing to desktop inkjets as rgb (1998) is more suited to pro-level cmyk conversion. true or false?
thanks in advance for all your anwers

2007-10-20 04:27:25 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities Visual Arts Photography

8 answers

OK - your main problem is the fact you're using Adobe RGB. Don't. Yeah, yeah, it's so wonderful etc, etc. No it's not. The problem with it is that it's almost impossible to find a complete system from camera to print where it doesnt screw up. There are hardly any photo labs that print with Adobe RGB and your printer sure doesn't.
So unless you are specifically asked by a speacialized printer for god knows what reason to use Adobe, use sRGB.

As for conversion to cmyk, there is no difference that you can see.

Now, when you print, under colour management, select Photoshop manages colours, not printer manages colours.

Under Printer Profile, select your printer if it's listed there. If it isn't (and it should be if your software is installed correctly), then select working RGB.

Under Rendering Intent, select Perceptial. Relative Colormetric could also be used but Perceptial is what is most commonly used.

And then you're ready to hit print.

So remember to set your camera back to sRGB. I used to use Adobe RGB because it was 'better' but then my images were coming out too vivid even if I desaturated the images. I had nothing but problems - and it took me a while to figure out it was because of the colour profile.

2007-10-21 08:20:34 · answer #1 · answered by Piano Man 4 · 1 0

There is a couple things I do to get consistent color matching from my laptop monitor to my printer. I have read that though adobe RGB (1998) has been a standard, there is really nothing that indicates it is a better color space than sRGB, which is what I use and set my nikon D80 to. I find I have greater flexibility with it. Another thing I have done to maintain consistency is to use a colorimeter and calibration program, like Spyder to calibrate the monitor output which is recommended for LCD monitors monthly. But doing that actually replaces the sRGB color profile I am so fond of and after using the colorimeter, I have not been that impressed. Using sRGB the only non-consitent issue I have with printing is contrast, colors are pretty accurate. So, try switching to sRGB and see what that does for you. You've got an awesome printer, by the way. I envy you. Perhaps there is some insight Epson can provide. I hope this helps a bit.

2007-10-20 05:46:03 · answer #2 · answered by Joe Schmo Photo 6 · 1 0

Something that nobody ever seems to talk about is the fact that a monitor is a light source and a print uses reflected light. In my extremely humble and relatively inexperienced opinion, there are some things that just can never match exactly in making monitor to printer comparisons. I asked about calibrating my LCD monitor and got very mixed answers from telling me just how to do it to telling me that it is not possible to do. All of these answers were from people whose opinions I value highly, also.

To me, the bottom line has been a familiarity with my equipment. You just have to develop that sense of what is going to happen the same as we had to learn what Kodachrome or Ektachrome or Agfacrome or various Fujichrome's would do to the final rendering of the image. Make a test strip print, just like the darkroom days. Once you have the final version of your image, crop out a key portion using "No Restriction" and print a one or two inch wide strip of the image. Adjust as needed...

Most images need to be about 15-20% brighter on the screen than I like them to print the way I like them. Most images of people have to have the red midtones cut back by 10-15%. That's just my personal "calibration" factor. Maybe my LCD monitor is generally too blue, so it displays reds more muted than they will print.

My worst problem is that I work on the monitor in a relatively dark room and then I have to put a light directly on the print to judge the output. Sometimes I take it upstairs into the halogen floods or even outside into the sunlight.

I realize that I have almost totally ignored your question, but I have played with all of that and pretty much given up on getting my monitor to match my printer output. I did play with Adobe RGB for a while, but found the printer would never match what I saw on the monitor. Too many shades!!!

I am a total amateur and my production needs are nowhere near those of a professional, but this is what works for me.

2007-10-20 09:46:05 · answer #3 · answered by Picture Taker 7 · 2 0

In most decent software or print systems, you should be able to select an output profile as well as an input profile. I don't know Photoshop so well, but it really should be no exception to this.
Select the output profile to be your printer, and the input profile to match where the image came from (Adobe RGB (1998) in the case of your DSLR). The gamut conversion will then be done to give you the closest match output when you print.
You also may be given options for the type of gamut conversion, but since I work with RGB->CMYK most of the time, I'm not too familiar with RGB->RGB gamut conversions. If they're anything similar, then you'd want to choose either "Relative Colorimetric" for closest match, or "Photographic" for closest match but with avoidance of damage to gradients. Avoid anything called "Presentation"/"Vivid"/etc, as that converts the profile for "bright, punchy colours", which is terrible on photos.

2007-10-20 04:40:25 · answer #4 · answered by yttriumox 3 · 0 0

Try getting a sample image printed at a pro photo shop. They will render the truest example of color. You probably want to tell them what your doing so they dont try to adjust anything on their own. Then take your print back to your place and set it next to your monitor and the same print that you made at home. You will see which side needs adjusting and be able to go from there.

I agree with the Dr., I work at a screenprinting shop by day and from that experience, you will never get things to match perfectly. As you probably already know, some colors are harder to match than others. The further away from primary colors you get the further off it will be. And different papers really do make a difference.

Also, the light that you are viewing your print will affect what you see as well. Try to use a daylight balanced light to view your prints. This 'should' not affect your pro lab print to home printer sample comparison.

2007-10-21 04:37:55 · answer #5 · answered by cabbiinc 7 · 0 0

One more vote for sRGB.

I'd definitely set the color settings in Photoshop first {before you do anything else}...

...and then I'd figure out what the difference is between the two types of images.

2007-10-20 08:36:46 · answer #6 · answered by Rick Taylor 5 · 0 0

You've already gotten good information. But I'd suggest that one other thing you might look at is a final Levels adjustment after you've done a lot of manipulating and saturating.

If that's off, nothing you do will bring it back into acceptable and consistent form.

2007-10-20 09:14:58 · answer #7 · answered by Jim M 6 · 0 0

calabrate the screen to the printer

a

2007-10-20 14:20:08 · answer #8 · answered by Antoni 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers