Color calibration

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

John - 16 Aug 2006 02:30 GMT

I use windows XP and an Epson 1280 Stylus printer. I also use PS 6.0. My
working space is: Adobe RGB 1998. Color management policies are: Preserve
embedded profiles, all are checked. Nothing is checked for "ask when
opening etc."
Am I on the right track, and how do I set my printer?
Thanks,

Reply to this Message

Shawn Hirn - 16 Aug 2006 04:27 GMT

> I use windows XP and an Epson 1280 Stylus printer. I also use PS 6.0. My
> working space is: Adobe RGB 1998. Color management policies are: Preserve
> embedded profiles, all are checked. Nothing is checked for "ask when
> opening etc."
> Am I on the right track, and how do I set my printer?
> Thanks,

What problem are you trying to solve? Do the photos you print look okay?

Reply to this Message

mark.thomas.7@gmail.com - 16 Aug 2006 05:52 GMT

Call me a heretic, but I'm inclined to agree with Shawn's question,
having travelled the color management path once and got very sick of
it...

To me, the final print is what needs to look good. So before going
into the realm of full color management, if setting up a new system I
would:
1. Set the monitor up for decent gamma and black/white point.
2. Forget the monitor for a while, and then simply play with the
printer driver to adjust the printer output using one of the many test
images out there (the ones that have gamma strips, flesh tones, typical
images with lots of dynamic range, etc..) Save those settings.
3. Now, go back and look at your monitor again, and see if you need to
tweak it to get close to the final print.

If you are unsatisfied, *then* think about color management... The
advantage of not using color management is that:
- it's easier and you may retain your sanity (your mileage may vary,
and others will have different opinions, which is fine (O:)
- everything you print, no matter what program and no matter if it does
or doesn't use c/m, should be consistent..

The disadvantage - you can *probably* get better results by using color
management. How much? Hmmmm.... I'll leave others to advise on
that. (O;

Try here for a reasonable but very comprehensive approach, and there
are links to some sample images you might like if you hunt around:

http://www.normankoren.com/color_management.html

Good luck!

Reply to this Message

mark.thomas.7@gmail.com - 16 Aug 2006 07:51 GMT

> Try here for a reasonable but very comprehensive approach, and there
> are links to some sample images you might like if you hunt around:
>
> http://www.normankoren.com/color_management.html

And I hope Normam won't mind if I quote him from the first paragraph on
that page:

"If you limit your operations to your own well-characterized equipment
and follow the procedures outlined in Monitor calibration (link) and
Printer calibration (link), you can get reasonably good results without
color management.:"

So follow those links first, and then see how you feel..

Reply to this Message

Roy G - 16 Aug 2006 13:05 GMT

>I use windows XP and an Epson 1280 Stylus printer. I also use PS 6.0. My
>working space is: Adobe RGB 1998. Color management policies are:
>Preserve embedded profiles, all are checked. Nothing is checked for "ask
>when opening etc."
> Am I on the right track, and how do I set my printer?
> Thanks,

Hi there.

Your Colour Setting policies are not correect.

They would not be so bad if you were using PsCS, because it can work in 2
Spaces at the same time, (sort of), but 6 doesn't have that ability.

I presume you are using Epson Inks in your 1280/1290, otherwise you need to
acquire customised ICC profiles for your Printer.

For a Colour Managed Workflow, have a look at Ayr Photo Society website
www.ayrphoto.co.uk and got to "Notices and Info" then to "How to Print for
Accurate Colour".

There is enough there to get you up and running, but it is not
comprehensive, and a bit more study would be advised. One site, out of many,
is www.computer-darkroom.com which has lots of very good articles and
advice, but some of it may go a bit too deep into the theory.

Roy G

Reply to this Message