Spyder 2 Calibration Help

[col4bin]

I went through the calibration and thought it was quite simple. WHen I got the end, the before and after look exactly the same. I feel like I did something wrong but is it possible my monitor needed no adjustment?

[jbkalla]

Well, it's possible but unlikely! My laptop and my desktop ended up warmer than I had them set.

[col4bin]

WHich Spyder 2 did you use? I went with the Suite version as I am hardly a pro. IF it would make more of a difference, I will upgrade the software (I think that is the only difference between versions).

[jbkalla]

WHich Spyder 2 did you use? I went with the Suite version as I am hardly a pro. IF it would make more of a difference, I will upgrade the software (I think that is the only difference between versions).

Just the regular Spyder2 Color ($129US, I think). I was looking to go as cheap as possible at the time. I'm glad I got it, since the Adobe plugin only got me so far!

I think your version is a step up from mine, but should have the same calibration hardware.

[col4bin]

I may have spoke too soon. Last night I converted a RAW to a TIFF and printed out. I just reprinted the same picture post calibration and the results are noticeably different. The post calibration print using the PSE4 and the newly created monitor profile in the print settings is more true to life and almost identicle to the on screen version.

I got a bit concerned that I wasted my money but I feel a lot better now.

[jj1987]

umm you printed the same file after monitor callibratio only and it came out different? I'd demand a refund, it shouldnt do that.

[col4bin]

umm you printed the same file after monitor callibratio only and it came out different? I'd demand a refund, it shouldnt do that.

huh?

[The22oz]

umm you printed the same file after monitor callibratio only and it came out different? I'd demand a refund, it shouldnt do that.

Post means after ...

[col4bin]

maybe jj1987 did not read that I reprinted a picture and compared results. no biggie

[jj1987]

maybe jj1987 did not read that I reprinted a picture and compared results. no biggie
did you re-EDIT the file? If you just reprinted it, something got screwed up. Monitor callibration shouldnt effect how a print comes out.

If I print a file, callibrate my monitor and reprint it, it should be exactly the same print.

[col4bin]

did you re-EDIT the file? If you just reprinted it, something got screwed up. Monitor callibration shouldnt effect how a print comes out.

If I print a file, callibrate my monitor and reprint it, it should be exactly the same print.

hmmm...i guess not. Maybe setting the printer profile in photoshop elements 4 to the monitor profile affected the output?

While I have your attention....is it possible that my cheap ($99) espon printer does not have a selectable printer profile when I print in PSE4?

[jj1987]

thats the problem. You dont set the printer profile to the monitor profile.

Profiling the monitor brings the color up to an indusrty standard (srgb I think, but its late so I'm probly wrong).

Then you profile a printer for paper types and inks.

The two are unrelated. You can color correct images on any callibrated monitor and print them on any computer as long as the printer profile is chosen correctly and they will match.

Your printer should come with profiles on the original cd, what model is it?

[col4bin]

It is the c84. When I print in PSE4, I do not see any printer profile options that look like something I should select.

Thanks for your help and patience. :)

[blackviolet]

the Spyder is for monitor calibration. the upgraded versions let you calibrate multiple monitors (however it's extremely simple to calibrate multiple monitors with the cheaper versions if you think about it). it shouldn't have had any bearing on your print, unless you mean you either applied the monitor colour profile to the print, or you made new edits in PS based upon how it looks in the monitor.

also, make sure when you do calibrate that you let the spyder warm up for a bit, keep the lights dim, and make sure the default colour profiles are loaded.

edit: oops, i see you've already discussed that :)

[col4bin]

I think I got the calibration part right. I let everything warm up for a while.

Yes, I did apply the monitor profile to print. Man am I confused...but I am determined to get this right.

[jj1987]

I think I got the calibration part right. I let everything warm up for a while.

Yes, I did apply the monitor profile to print. Man am I confused...but I am determined to get this right.
then thats the only step you did wrong. Apply the paper profile to the print.

[col4bin]

jj1987...my printer is the epson c84...i left out the epson part above

[col4bin]

then thats the only step you did wrong. Apply the paper profile to the print.

I don't have a paper profile as an available option. Maybe my printer is too low end?

[jj1987]

I don't have a paper profile as an available option. Maybe my printer is too low end?

I'm looking for you now.....

[jj1987]

looks like you dont have many options. I really really really suggest using a professional lab anyways. www.showprints.com and www.mpix.com are the only two labs I will send my images to. Correct the images under the SRGB profile after callibrating your monitor and send these labs some tests.

When I worked for www.showprints.com and did the webpage heres something I threw together.
http://www.showprints.com/profiling.php

explains how to install custom profiles and also provides you with their lab specific ones (which I personally made and tweaked, and can attest to the accuracy of).

-James

[col4bin]

Thanks for your help. I was planning to get a new printer soon...which may be tomorrow. considering the canon i9900 and epson r1800 or r800

[jj1987]

Thanks for your help. I was planning to get a new printer soon...which may be tomorrow. considering the canon i9900 and epson r1800 or r800
I cant help much there. I always suggest a professional lab. That way you get long lasting prints, and ensure that if something breaks, they pay to fix it and not you. Not to mention they always are a step ahead quality wise.

And no, I do not still work for any lab. :lol:

I hated the hectic nature of a photo lab, and hate the slow nature of a college publications office :rolleyes: I guess you never know what you're loosing....

[col4bin]

I like being able to print photos at home. Maybe it's the immediate gatification I get of holding the finished product in my hands.

Anyway, I really appreciate your help tonight. It's people like you that make this forum an invaluable resource.

[Rob612]

then thats the only step you did wrong. Apply the paper profile to the print.

That's absolutely true, but I must say that using my i9950 and applying the monitor profile to the printer, and letting the ICM do its job, I am getting amazing results, really what I have on my mnitor is exactly what I get n paper (with the obvious difefrences from paper to paper, but I've found tha basically Canon PR-101, TDK and a local brand called Inkland perform almost the same).

I know its worng, but I don't want to mess anymore with a lab, unless i need somthing bigger than A3+ (very scarce chances) anf that happens, we'll g trough proofs.

I should get Printfix also (I have the spyder2 already) and give it a try but... as long as myself and my customers are happy... I don't see why should I, really.

[lostdoggy]

col4bin

If you are getting prints to match what you see on the screen and you are satisfied w/ your print you have done it right because that is the whole point in calibrating your monitor. To get it real to life. Where RED is RED, GREEN is GREEN and BLUE is BLUE. It is better to be able to match your prints to your monior then to be able to match some standard that will get you out of wack prints. Shoot more Print more and have fun!!!

[Rob612]

col4bin

If you are getting prints to match what you see on the screen and you are satisfied w/ your print you have done it right because that is the whole point in calibrating your monitor. To get it real to life. Where RED is RED, GREEN is GREEN and BLUE is BLUE. It is better to be able to match your prints to your monior then to be able to match some standard that will get you out of wack prints. Shoot more Print more and have fun!!!

That's exactly my philosophy. If it works, don't fix it and have fun. :D

[jj1987]

That's absolutely true, but I must say that using my i9950 and applying the monitor profile to the printer, and letting the ICM do its job, I am getting amazing results, really what I have on my mnitor is exactly what I get n paper (with the obvious difefrences from paper to paper, but I've found tha basically Canon PR-101, TDK and a local brand called Inkland perform almost the same).

I know its worng, but I don't want to mess anymore with a lab, unless i need somthing bigger than A3+ (very scarce chances) anf that happens, we'll g trough proofs.

I should get Printfix also (I have the spyder2 already) and give it a try but... as long as myself and my customers are happy... I don't see why should I, really.
First, printfix is horrible, dont get it and save your money. www.drycreekphoto.com will build you a CUSTOM profile for $50.

Second, if your monitor cant display a color and you apply that profile to a print, you essentially delete a color that you shouldnt have, meaning if your monitor has a narrow gamma range, then you limit the printers, plus you "double profile". Not saying you might not get unexplainable good results, but thats not really what you want in color management.

You guys are so close to a great system, dont stop now.

[jfrancho]

Unless the OP changed somehting in either the image file, or the printer settings, both before and after prints should look the same.