LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


X-Rite ColorMunki vs ICC

FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing
Thread started 06 Apr 2011 (Wednesday) 12:57   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
tvphotog
Cream of the Crop
tvphotog's Avatar
Joined Aug 2007
5,788 posts
New York City
[MORE/SHARE]

I've got a new Epson R3000, for which Ilford, Hahnemuhle and Innova will soon have ICC codes for their various papers.

Are these enough to produce accurate renditions of my Spyder 3 Pro-calibrated monitor colors, or is the ColorMunki better at accuracy?

It's an expensive gadget which I would get only if the ICC codes don't do the job.

I'm asking because I found that with my Canon ip5200 Pixma, the ICC codes for various papers were fine at reproducing the monitor image.

Post #1, Apr 06, 2011 12:57:14


Jay
Ireland in Word and Imageexternal link Jay Ben Imagesexternal link5D III | 5D II | 7D | Powershot S100 | 24-105L | 100-400L | 16-35 f/2.8 IIL | 24 T/S f /3.5L II | 17 T/S f/4L | 50mm f/1.2L | 35mm f/1.4L | 580 EX II | 600 EX-RT | Feisol 3441T/Markins Q3T lever QR | Gitzo 3542L Markins Qi20 BV-22 screw clamp | Gitzo 5561T RRS MH-02 head

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
ChasP505
"brain damaged old guy"
ChasP505's Avatar
Joined Dec 2006
5,566 posts
New Mexico, USA
[MORE/SHARE]

tvphotog wrote in post #12170374external link
Are these enough to produce accurate renditions of my Spyder 3 Pro-calibrated monitor colors, or is the ColorMunki better at accuracy?

First of all, take your monitor out the equation. It has absolutely no affect on the quality of prints. If you print a standardized printer test image on Epson paper, using a canned Epson profile, it will print the same whether your monitor is calibrated or not.

Epson profiles are reputed to be excellent and you may or may not find a difference between a paper manufacturer supplied profile and one created by the ColorMunki.

I'd suggest holding off on investing in a ColorMunki until you do some printing. But always judge from a print of a standard test image, not one of your own.

Post #2, Apr 06, 2011 14:44:06


Chas P
"It doesn't matter how you get there if you don't know where you're going!"http://photography-on-the.net ...p?p=10864029#post10​864029

LOG IN TO REPLY
tvphotog
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
tvphotog's Avatar
Joined Aug 2007
5,788 posts
New York City
[MORE/SHARE]

Chas,

I have found that for my calibrated monitor, using a Kodak ICC code for their paper on my Canon printer, I was able to reproduce the colors on my monitor exactly. I understand that the printer will print the same each and every time, regardless of whether my monitor is calibrated or not.

I will wait and see how the new ICC codes from each paper company work on each of their papers, using my new Epson printer. I assume that they should reproduce what I see on my calibrated monitor. I'll hold off on the ColorMunki til then.

Thanks.

Post #3, Apr 06, 2011 15:07:52


Jay
Ireland in Word and Imageexternal link Jay Ben Imagesexternal link5D III | 5D II | 7D | Powershot S100 | 24-105L | 100-400L | 16-35 f/2.8 IIL | 24 T/S f /3.5L II | 17 T/S f/4L | 50mm f/1.2L | 35mm f/1.4L | 580 EX II | 600 EX-RT | Feisol 3441T/Markins Q3T lever QR | Gitzo 3542L Markins Qi20 BV-22 screw clamp | Gitzo 5561T RRS MH-02 head

LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
bohdank's Avatar
Joined Jan 2008
14,060 posts
Montreal, Canada
[MORE/SHARE]

Whether the colors will be exactly the same is debatable. If the monitor has a wider color gamut than the printer as does the image, then the "missing" colors will not be the same. Prints also have less contrast than monitors so that will also not be the same. Same for dynamic range and general "brightness". Adjusting the luminance on your monitor to match prints may be necessary.

With all that said, it is amazing how close you can get, if everything is set up properly.

Post #4, Apr 06, 2011 18:26:08


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographerexternal link
Flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
ChasP505
"brain damaged old guy"
ChasP505's Avatar
Joined Dec 2006
5,566 posts
New Mexico, USA
[MORE/SHARE]

tvphotog wrote in post #12171149external link
Chas,

I have found that for my calibrated monitor, using a Kodak ICC code for their paper on my Canon printer, I was able to reproduce the colors on my monitor exactly.

Jay, your print color management thinking is totally backwards. The purpose of a high quality icc printer profile is NOT to make the print match the monitor display but to optimize the output of the specific printer-paper-ink combination. But, the purpose of a well calibrated monitor is to provide a reasonably reliable PREDICTION of how your print output will look.

Right now, when you print a standard test image on a common Epson paper like Premium Lustre, using the icc profile installed with your R3000, do you get a good match between the print and the softproofed display on your monitor? If not, you need to go back and review your entire color managed print workflow, starting from the monitor calibration.

Post #5, Apr 07, 2011 08:36:49


Chas P
"It doesn't matter how you get there if you don't know where you're going!"http://photography-on-the.net ...p?p=10864029#post10​864029

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Matt ­ M.
Senior Member
Matt M.'s Avatar
Joined Feb 2013
573 posts
Eastern Washington
[MORE/SHARE]

tvphotog wrote in post #12171149external link
I have found that for my calibrated monitor, using a Kodak ICC code for their paper on my Canon printer, I was able to reproduce the colors on my monitor exactly. I understand that the printer will print the same each and every time, regardless of whether my monitor is calibrated or not.

I will wait and see how the new ICC codes from each paper company work on each of their papers, using my new Epson printer. I assume that they should reproduce what I see on my calibrated monitor. I'll hold off on the ColorMunki til then.

I'm a bit confused about this. If you have a "calibrated monitor," that would indicate to me that you've used some sort of calibrating device in the recent past. If so, you wouldn't also need the ColorMunki... would you?

Post #6, May 21, 2013 16:17:01


Matt
6d, T3i, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L[COLOR="Black"], 28-80mm, f/2.8-4L, 24-105mm f/4L , 24mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.8 II, 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II, 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II, 600EX-RT, etc.

LOG IN TO REPLY
Mavgirl
Senior Member
Joined Mar 2013
647 posts
Dallas area
[MORE/SHARE]

tvphotog wrote in post #12170374external link
I've got a new Epson R3000, for which Ilford, Hahnemuhle and Innova will soon have ICC codes for their various papers.

Are these enough to produce accurate renditions of my Spyder 3 Pro-calibrated monitor colors, or is the ColorMunki better at accuracy?

It's an expensive gadget which I would get only if the ICC codes don't do the job.

I'm asking because I found that with my Canon ip5200 Pixma, the ICC codes for various papers were fine at reproducing the monitor image.

When I spend the extra money for Hahnemuhle paper I want my print to be right on the first try. For me that means ICC profiles AND accurate monitor calibration with a calibration device. That paper is too expensive to waste with a bunch of test strips and off prints.

Post #7, May 21, 2013 17:23:33


6D/50D/350D with too many lenses
Calumet 4x5, Pentax SV 35mm, Canon A-1, Rebel G and many more toys...

LOG IN TO REPLY
Mark ­ Vuleta
Goldmember
Mark Vuleta's Avatar
Joined Aug 2006
4,014 posts
Auckland NZ
[MORE/SHARE]

Mavgirl wrote in post #15954319external link
When I spend the extra money for Hahnemuhle paper I want my print to be right on the first try. For me that means ICC profiles AND accurate monitor calibration with a calibration device. That paper is too expensive to waste with a bunch of test strips and off prints.

You always print with an ICC profile, weather it is the correct one for your printer/ink/paper combination under the lighting conditions expected or a generic profile.

Even the paper supplied profile will generally benefit from a tweak via printer proofing/profiling and this must be done on the paper you want to use, necessitating "waste with a bunch of test strips".

Post #8, May 22, 2013 01:30:41




LOG IN TO REPLY
Mark ­ Vuleta
Goldmember
Mark Vuleta's Avatar
Joined Aug 2006
4,014 posts
Auckland NZ
[MORE/SHARE]

Matt M. wrote in post #15954122external link
I'm a bit confused about this. If you have a "calibrated monitor," that would indicate to me that you've used some sort of calibrating device in the recent past. If so, you wouldn't also need the ColorMunki... would you?

The Spider 3 Pro is a monitor calibration device, a different device is used to proof & profile printed output.

Post #9, May 22, 2013 01:32:21




LOG IN TO REPLY
Mavgirl
Senior Member
Joined Mar 2013
647 posts
Dallas area
[MORE/SHARE]

Mark Vuleta wrote in post #15955545external link
You always print with an ICC profile, weather it is the correct one for your printer/ink/paper combination under the lighting conditions expected or a generic profile.

Even the paper supplied profile will generally benefit from a tweak via printer proofing/profiling and this must be done on the paper you want to use, necessitating "waste with a bunch of test strips".

I should have been more clear. I mean the correct ICC profiles for the paper and having my monitor calibrated as close to my printer output as I can get it. I'm not saying you won't have to make very minor adjustments or run a couple test strips. With the generic ICC profiles and an uncalibrated monitor you can use several pieces of paper up for test strips before you get it right. With the correct ICC profile and a monitor calibrated to your printer you will waste a lot less trying to get it right. And once you get set up for a specific paper on your printer you should get it right on the first try most of the time after that.

Post #10, May 22, 2013 13:35:31


6D/50D/350D with too many lenses
Calumet 4x5, Pentax SV 35mm, Canon A-1, Rebel G and many more toys...

LOG IN TO REPLY
Matt ­ M.
Senior Member
Matt M.'s Avatar
Joined Feb 2013
573 posts
Eastern Washington
[MORE/SHARE]

Mark Vuleta wrote in post #15955549external link
The Spider 3 Pro is a monitor calibration device, a different device is used to proof & profile printed output.

If I have a calibrated monitor (via Spyder, Colormunki, etc), and the correct ICC profiles for the printer and paper, I should be able to print photos that are very, very close to the image that I see on my screen, shouldn't I? What other calibration is necessary?

Post #11, May 22, 2013 13:48:31


Matt
6d, T3i, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L[COLOR="Black"], 28-80mm, f/2.8-4L, 24-105mm f/4L , 24mm f/2.8, 50mm f/1.8 II, 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II, 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II, 600EX-RT, etc.

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
tonylong
do I really have to respond?
tonylong's Avatar
Joined Sep 2007
53,001 posts
Vancouver, WA USA
[MORE/SHARE]

Matt M. wrote in post #15957205external link
If I have a calibrated monitor (via Spyder, Colormunki, etc), and the correct ICC profiles for the printer and paper, I should be able to print photos that are very, very close to the image that I see on my screen, shouldn't I? What other calibration is necessary?

I suggest running some small test prints and then soft-proofing your images, comparing them soft-proofing with the actual prints and doing any fine-tuning needed, and saving the resulting adjustments as print-specific presets in Lightroom or actions in Photoshop.

Post #12, May 28, 2013 14:49:17


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBaseexternal link
Wildlife project pics hereexternal link, Biking Photog shoots hereexternal link, "Suburbia" project hereexternal link! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics hereexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
1,498 views & 0 likes for this thread
X-Rite ColorMunki vs ICC
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00274 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.01s
858 guests, 769 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is shwater

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.