Canon ip4200 Help needed

[snappa]

I am getting desperate ! I have bought a Canon ip4200 and I am having a few problems.
I have set up a separate file for some piccies in My Documents. When I click on a picture my PC automatically enables Photoshop Elements and the picture appears there. This means I can dabble before printing.
When the picture appears it is perfect apart from slight sharpening which I then do. However when the picture prints it is considerably darker than the picture shown on PE.
I have tried adjusting the Brightness, Intensity, Paper type and Print type. Adjusting these makes no difference whatsoever. Every print comes out exactly the same. The only thing left to try is the colour profiles of which there are six. As I have little idea what these are I thought best to leave well enough alone but I am getting frustrated with my inability to produce a lighter print.
The prints are superb from such a cheap printer but they are too dark.
Any help would be much appreciated.

[snappa]

Anybody please ? Forgot to mention that when I click on the picture and XP transfers me to PE then a window appears asking whether I would like the picture to be in the default colour depth. I usually click "Yes" which may be the problem.
If I click "No" then I get another message stating that "Could not open because the file uses a colour depth not supported by PE". ????

[The Hardcard]

I can give you a solution for Photoshop, which may help with PE.

If you have "Print with Preview," go to that, select Color Management in the lower section, then go to Color Handling in the Options grouping. Select "Let Printer Determine Colors".

This is assuming you are using color management. If not you need to enable use of Microsoft ICM in the printer screen, I don't directly recall how to do that, (I don't have access to my PC now).

I have the iP4200 and I have so far found that it is bess to tell the printer driver that you are printing on Photo Paper Pro, regardless of the actual paper you are using. So far it is the one that looks most accurate and pleasant, even for plain paper.

[guitarman]

I can give you a solution for Photoshop, which may help with PE.

If you have "Print with Preview," go to that, select Color Management in the lower section, then go to Color Handling in the Options grouping. Select "Let Printer Determine Colors".

This is assuming you are using color management. If not you need to enable use of Microsoft ICM in the printer screen, I don't directly recall how to do that, (I don't have access to my PC now).

I have the iP4200 and I have so far found that it is bess to tell the printer driver that you are printing on Photo Paper Pro, regardless of the actual paper you are using. So far it is the one that looks most accurate and pleasant, even for plain paper.

I think it could differ depending on the paper you use. Although I have a Pixma 8500 I use Ilford paper with the available profiles for my printer. Ilfords suggestion was to use photo paper + glossy for the classic/smooth pearl paper. It turns out very nice. I used canons photo paper pro which is pretty expensive and I thought it wasn't very good.

[The Hardcard]

Well, I haven't really used any photo paper yet. On plain paper, all the other setting have an reddish-orange cast to them compared to a photo that appears correct on the monitor. The Pro setting makes the print have the same colors as is on the monitor, at least so far for me.

[snappa]

Thanks for the help guys. I did try the Photo Paper Pro thing and it did not make any difference on either plain paper or photographic paper. It seems that as soon as you settle for the default colour depth, on PE, then that is it !
I may be totally wrong but I cannot see how a different paper would do the trick. If guitarman could not get good results using Canon paper with a Canon printer then all may well be lost.
I did ask a boffin at my work and he suggested that PE does not have sufficient colours available hence the default window. He then suggested that I use a different application.
I shall have to try different papers and possibly start to tinker with the different colour management settings.
Anybody else with any suggestions would be more than welcome.
Thank you again.

[Redr8]

Have you done the screen calibration? Might help out a little too if your settings are way off.

Start --> Control Panel --> Adobe Gamma

Hope that helps.

[snappa]

Thank you Redr8. I have not calibrated the screen yet. I would like the printer to print the pictures exactly as they appear on the screen. At the risk of appearing totally stupid I do not understand how calibrating the screen will affect the colours of the prints other than if the calibration makes the screen darker.

[The Hardcard]

It may or may not be the issue. You definitely will have a harder time solving the problem unless you have a reasonably calibrated monitor. One of the main things calibrated is gamma. Gamma affects the brightness of the screen. It is very possible that you have the wrong gamma, in that many people prefer a bright gamma to look at on screen. While more pleasing to many eyes, images on such screens will be brighter than what the computer and applications agree they actually are.

I strongly recommend this as the first step to solving any problems in having images from one device look like those displayed on another device. You will almost guaranteed not get a fully accurate calibration from the Adobe gamma control panel, but it can make a huge difference.

[Glyyde]

its probably a little hard for the printout to appear exactly like wat u see from the monitor, more so if u r using LCD.... ip4200, though its quality is nice, are not that good until it can produce exact colours of wat u see I think.... haven't tried a more sophisticated printer yet... I own the ip4200 as well...

what I notice is, go to print with preview, change it to let photoshop determine the print colour, and it will turns out to be much much better.... I tried printing with the printer deciding the colour and it turns out to be duller.... hope this helps

[soupdragon]

Well, if it's any consolation, I use the 5000 and all my prints come out with a yellow cast. I have to make all my pictures look blue on the screen before printing, Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

[aliflack]

try setting the settings in the printer dialogue to AdobeRGB or sRGB (depending on what colour space your Photoshop is set to)...I found that sorted out colour issues.

In terms of colour management you need to:
* get photoshop to accurately display the image in the first place on your monitor (photoshop colour management settings)
* calibrate your monitor so that you see white when it thinks its displaying white etc (Adobe Gamma)
* calibrate your printer so that it recognises what photoshop is telling it (Printer settings)

Hope that helps.

[soupdragon]

try setting the settings in the printer dialogue to AdobeRGB or sRGB (depending on what colour space your Photoshop is set to)...I found that sorted out colour issues.

In terms of colour management you need to:
* get photoshop to accurately display the image in the first place on your monitor (photoshop colour management settings)
* calibrate your monitor so that you see white when it thinks its displaying white etc (Adobe Gamma)
* calibrate your printer so that it recognises what photoshop is telling it (Printer settings)

Hope that helps.

You're right I really should sit down and sort these things out.

[snappa]

Thanks again guys. I am about to delve into the world of Adobe Gamma as a first step to printing perfection !
Although I know next to nothing about computers I still have the feeling that the window that opens when I first go into PE2 may be having an effect on my prints. It asks if I want to go into the default colour depth. This would suggest to me that PE2 does not have the resources to deal with the print as it is.
This is coupled with the second message if I decline the default colour depth that "Could not open because the file uses a colour depth not supported by Photoshop Elements". It would appear that I am trying to print something via PE2 that it is not capable of printing.
I shall now calibrate my monitor. Yes it is an LCD monitor. Oops !

[The Hardcard]

You mentioned that color depth issue before, but I wasn't thinking about it. Are you using 24-bit color for your monitor? You don't mention what color depth Windows is set to. You should be at 24-bit color. You should make sure of that before you even go into Adobe Gamma.

[snappa]

Hardcard, Been to the display thing in the control panel and I am currently using, apparently, a screen resolution of 1280x1024 and the colour quality is set to Highest (32 Bit).
I have an iiyama LCD monitor if that helps.
Also pm`d somebody with the same printer and he advised me to change the colour settings but also to make sure that I chose the sRGB profile. As I am a total fool with computers I do not have the first idea how to change the profile to sRGB.
In fact as I am using ADOBE Photoshop Elements then I assume that the default setting will be Adobe RGB. My camera is set to sRGB just to confuse matters even more.

[snappa]

Further investigation has revealed that I do not appear to have a 24 bit setting. Just highest (32 Bit) and Medium (16 Bit). Looks like I am going to have to find the monitor manual now.
This is beginning to turn into a bit of a crusade but I am determined to resolve this one way or the other.

[The Hardcard]

I'm sorry, my main machine is a Mac. 32-bit is the one.

As for sRGB, not only is that not necessary, but you will reduce the printer's capacity to reproduce blue-green elements in your images if you do. It would be better to assign your images to AdobeRGB.

Seems to me like your good to go for monitor calibration.

[DavidW]

You shouldn't be assigning Adobe RGB to images that aren't Adobe RGB. Adobe RGB is a medium gamut colour space - you can take pictures in Adobe RGB on most Canon cameras, though they'll look wrong in applications that aren't colour management aware. Photoshop is aware, many standard applications, especially on Windows, are not.

If you want to move an image from one colour space to another, you should be converting, not assigning. You only assign when you know an image should have a particular profile attached, and it's not attached.

When converting, you can't put back colours that were lost - for example, you can't get colours that are in Adobe RGB but not in sRGB when you're starting out with an sRGB image.


If you shoot RAW, most RAW converters can convert RAW to a variety of colour spaces; it doesn't matter whether the camera was set to sRGB or Adobe RGB. Adobe Camera Raw 3.2 (which I use with Photoshop CS2) can convert to sRGB, Adobe RGB or the wide gamut ProPhoto RGB colour spaces.


When trying to get prints to match what you see on screen, you need to start out with a calibrated monitor so that your monitor accurately represents what Photoshop (Elements) believes it's displaying. If your monitor is not calibrated and ideally profiled correctly, you're trying to match the errors in your monitor display on your printer - how's your printer going to know what to do when it has no idea of the magnitude of the errors?

Without a calibrated monitor, your pictures will look different on screen on someone else's setup, let alone when printed. Adobe Gamma may help - but most people find it doesn't work that well with an LCD monitor. There are various software solutions which allow you to set your white point, black point and gamma, the three most important variables.

That said, the best solution is a hardware monitor calibration setup. I use Monaco OPTIX XR Pro, which is quite expensive - OPTIX XR or Gretag Macbeth Eye One Display 2 are both good options and aren't quite so expensive.


Even with a calibrated monitor, and an appropriate profile for your printer / ink / paper combination, you won't get complete matching, due to the different nature of a monitor and a print (how you see a print depends on the illumination). However, with a calibrated and profiled monitor and an appropriate printer profile, you can get close.



David

[snappa]

DavidW, I have sent you a pm. Hope you do not mind. there would appear to be some slight confusion here, probably my fault. I am not using Photoshop I am using Photoshop Elements 2. I can find no way of changing from what I imagine to be Adobe RGB to sRGB.
As my camera is set to sRGB and the scanned negatives I am trying to print are, I believe, in sRGB then I may well be fighting a losing battle with PE2. Perhaps an upgrade to PE3 or PE4 may do the trick but they are still both Adobe applications.
There is also an Adobe RGB 1998 in my colour profiles on my printer but no sign of sRGB. If anybody could tell me how to add sRGB to my colour profiles on my printer then this may help.
Thank you.

[DavidW]

There may be some differences between Photoshop and Photoshop Elements, but they're not going to change the basic principles of colour management. I have Photoshop Elements 2 somewhere (in my 20D box in the loft, probably), but never bothered installing it as I already had Photoshop CS2. If Photoshop Elements 2 is not colour management aware, then I suggest upgrading to a version that is colour management aware, but doing that will still leave you with colour management issues to overcome.


In essence, output devices have profiles, and images have profiles. What I'm about to say is very simplified, especially in terms of what a colour management system does, but it should hopefully explain the basics.

Output device profiles tell the colour management system about the features of that device - its gamut (what range of colours it can display or print), and a set of corrections that allow accurate display or printing.

Images either contain the profile of a standard colour space, such as sRGB or Adobe RGB, or, if they were created with a device like a scanner or profiled camera, should theoretically start out with the profile of the input device attached to them. It is best to work in a standard colour space - so if you had a profile for your scanner, you could assign the scanner profile to the image when importing into Photoshop, then convert to a standard colour space. I'm not going to bother explaining the details of conversions and rendering intents at this point.

As an aside, profiling cameras is essentially impossible outside the studio, as the profile changes according to the illumination. The best you can do easily is set an accurate white balance; for most purposes that suffices. You only need to mess around profiling cameras if you're doing things like product shots, where accurate colour matters.


You're scanning negatives; I'm not aware of any way of profiling a negative scanner, not least as negative film is a sort of work in progress, a step towards an eventual print rather than a finished image. You can profile if you're scanning reversal film, which is a finished image; you use a calibrated target produced on that film type together with software that produces a profile from that scanner.

That means that your input from the scanner is not colour managed. If you get things to look right on your (uncalibrated) screen, what you've actually done is created an image that should have the (unknown) profile representing the properties of your screen attached - the working space is that of your screen, not sRGB or similar. In essence, without a calibrated monitor, your workflow isn't colour managed at all, and any attempt to use a colour management system will quite likely make things worse.

If you had a calibrated monitor, you could assign sRGB (you can't convert to sRGB, as the source space is unknown) when importing from the scanner. I'd regard assigning sRGB as reasonable, as the gamut of most monitors is fairly close to sRGB and you should work in standard colour spaces. If you did this, when you'd finished adjusting in Photoshop Elements, your output, if saved with an embedded sRGB profile, should look essentially the same on your monitor as it would if I loaded one of your files into Photoshop CS2 on my setup (which has a calibrated monitor).

If you're using Canon inks and Canon photo papers in your ip4200, you should then be able to print using the appropriate profiles in the driver of your ip4200, and get a print that's pretty close to what you see on your calibrated monitor.


The darkening of prints between your monitor and your printer could be down to various things, but the lack of monitor calibration could well be partly to blame, as could incorrect printer settings.

I wouldn't be looking to adjust things in the printer driver; the whole idea of a colour management system is that the results are reproducible between your devices. If Photoshop Elements is like Photoshop CS2, there's two arguably right ways of setting things up, and numerous wrong ways. In essence, you should either tell Photoshop to colour manage the printer, or the printer driver. I believe there's some setup instructions for colour management using recent Canon printer drivers floating around somewhere on the forums.


Hopefully, you're beginning to understand the importance of a calibrated monitor. If your monitor is calibrated and you're using a colour management aware application, what you see on screen should be an accurate rendition of the file, gamut issues aside (though, as I've said, sRGB is pretty near the gamut of most monitors).

Once you've got that much sorted, the next problem is to get your printer correctly colour managed so that you can print your files accurately. The profiles Canon supply should be pretty near if you're using the Canon paper that they're for. If you're using third party paper, you may be able to get a profile from the paper manufacturer, though be aware that your ip4200 uses a different ink set to the BCI-6 set used by most Canon printers up until recently, and will therefore need a different profile.


As for the unsupported colour depth error mentioned in your PM, I can only think that your scanner is outputting 16 bit files which your old version of Photoshop Elements won't deal with. Photoshop Elements isn't as capable as it's bigger brother Photoshop of handling 16 bit images; Photoshop CS2 is pretty fully featured for 16 bit, and has some ability to handle 32 bit HDR images as well.

You really need to address colour depth and colour management questions specifically about Photoshop Elements 2 to someone familiar with that software; I only know and use Photoshop CS2.


Does this help any? Feel free to ask questions if you're not following me at all. Colour management takes a bit of getting your head around, but there are some good references on the web (I haven't got my links handy, though Google for Norman Koren's site, also there's some good literature on X-Rite's site).



David

[snappa]

Thank you very much David. I think I have grasped most of that which you said. I do understand the importance of calibrating the monitor and will be doing this next. I shall invetsigate the software you mentioned but also found a web site that offered a free calibration service. How good this will turn out to be is questionable but I will probably give it a go.
I have also investigated the data on my scanned negatives and you are absolutely correct in that it is outputting 16 bit files which as you say PE2 will not deal with. I am only using PE2 as it came with my camera and I needed something to practice with. It is obviously time for a software upgrade whether it be to a later version of Elements or to a full blown Photoshop.
I have been to Norman Korens site but I will have to read it more than once so that it all sinks in. I was also aware of the new inks used in the IP4200. I believe they were brought out to rival Epsons claims of longer print life. They are so new that nobody seems to have any and because I have done so many prints I suspect I will finally crack it and then run out of ink !!
Thank you very much.

[DavidW]

I think you have nothing to lose by trying an online monitor calibration. It may well get you nearer than you are now - even though saving up for a colorimeter based solution like those I mentioned is, I feel, the best solution.

I'd investigate whether Photoshop Elements 4 (or 3 if you're using a Mac; Elements 4 on the Mac won't be out for a little while) has better 16 bit capabilities. Unfortunately there's no getting around Photoshop CS2 being expensive here in the UK; the cheap upgrade from a Canon bundled version of Elements doesn't apply in the UK.

The colour management stuff does make sense after a while. I find the Norman Koren site a bit chaotic in terms of layout, but the material there is good.


Feel free to come back if you have any more questions - glad I could help.



David