having problem calibrating my monitors to match prints

I have three monitors one dell and two HP monitors. I used spyder pro 2 to calibrate all three monitors. when looking at the pictures on the new HP monitor they look different then the other two monitors. so I took a few pictures down to Wal-Mart to get some 5x7 prints to see which monitor was the closes. none of the monitors look like the print. I don't get my work printed at Wal-Mart I was just using them as a test. is there any questions I need to ask the lab that prints my pictures before I calibrate my monitor, and why doesn't the SPY 2 make all the colors the same on all three monitors am I doing something wrong.

The latest version of Spyder software is 3. I think its a free upgrade.
Anyway. The three monitors will not be perfectly aligned. Second, I presume they are on three different computers. If so, are they in similar lighting conditions?
Are all three computers running the same software with the same color space selected? Did you export the JPG for Walgreens into sRGB? That's the color space they are likely to be using for their printer.
If you are using Photoshop, did you soft proof the image for sRGB before exporting?

Color management takes planning and attention to detail to ensure the entire workflow is setup properly. There are stickies at the top of this sub-Forum that will help.

pbisfun wrote in post #13629022
so I took a few pictures down to Wal-Mart to get some 5x7 prints to see which monitor was the closes. none of the monitors look like the print.

Wal-Mart might your first mistake! My results were not good the one time I needed a fast print & there was no Costco near. I screwed up & only ordered one print when I wanted 5. So I placed a 2nd order within about 10 minutes. One print from the same file was WAY too dark. The other 4 were too light with a LOT of contrast. Remember, this was from the SAME FILE?
So maybe you can find a local lab that has consistent results in these:

008 Digital Photo Printing Product Comparisons

Costco & Sam's Club Digital Prints Post #10 & #18.

What's the best on-line print lab??

pbisfun wrote in post #13629022
I have three monitors one dell and two HP monitors. I used spyder pro 2 to calibrate all three monitors. when looking at the pictures on the new HP monitor they look different then the other two monitors. so I took a few pictures down to Wal-Mart to get some 5x7 prints to see which monitor was the closes. none of the monitors look like the print. I don't get my work printed at Wal-Mart I was just using them as a test. is there any questions I need to ask the lab that prints my pictures before I calibrate my monitor, and why doesn't the SPY 2 make all the colors the same on all three monitors am I doing something wrong.

Well, we definitely need more information before we can offer any advice. Answer to dmward's question is a good start. Then, we need to know whether you embed any ICC profile in you jpeg when i took it to Walmart, and what color space is in your workflow, etc. Also, those 3 monitors, are they mixture of TN panel and IPS panel, and their respective age.
I don't claim to be a color management expert, but from what i have learned, there are just great deal of factors that could contribute to color problems.

my old working station has two monitors a Dell and an HP monitor, my new station only has an HP monitor plan on getting a second monitor for that work station soon. both stations are in the same room. as for the last question dmward ask "Did you export the JPG for Walgreens into sRGB? That's the color space they are likely to be using for their printer." the anser is no. thanks for that information.

I also found out after makeing the test prints. I went in and set all the pictures white balance using the gray card shot and they now print correctly. yea for gray card.

Well, there ya go, you got a "chunk" figured out!

Not surprising that the TN monitor and the IPS monitor will look a bit different, especially if you are dealing with files that are not in the sRGB color space. The IPS monitors should match each other though if they are properly calibrated. And, if you convert to the sRGB color space, then the three of them should be close...

Only vaguely to do with the original question, but I'll throw it in for curiosities sake.

I've just finished making an A4 hardback version of the 5D2 manual and was printing off the dust cover, for which I'd sampled the blue of the Canon pdf original. Printing without paying much attention it came out green!

I reprinted using AdobeRGB and "no colour adjustment" and the blue is now blue. Still not the same blue as the pdf, but close enough for me.

It can be very frustrating to establish a reliable color managed workflow without clear references. If you are trying to establish the workflow for printing, then the final print is your reference. Here is the mindset you should get into:

You are not trying to match your print to your display, you are trying to match your display to your print.

Think of the process this way - you make an exposure with your camera, transfer the file to your computer and print it with the proper printer/paper profile on your printer (or get it printed at a lab). This is the reference. If you could print without even looking at the image on your display, you could literally eliminate the display from the process. This is what the image SHOULD look like (ignore any enhancements you might make in Photoshop, etc.) for your camera and printer/paper combination.

Now, the print can appear different depending upon the lighting conditions used to view it. This lighting will affect the White Point and Luminance you want to target when you calibrate and profile your display. Thus, you ned to establish your lighting/viewing conditions before you start selecting calibration target values for your display. So, get a Solux daylight bulb and you have fixed the reference lighting. You can vary the distance between the light and the print to vary the luminance value to be in line with what you feel comfortable with on your display.

Most calibration pucks permit you to measure ambient light levels and white points. So you can illuminate your white paper with your reference light and measure the intensity and color of the reflected light and adjust the distance between the bulb and the paper to get the luminance you want for your display (too bright of a display and your eyes will bug out of your head!).

Once you set your initial target values based on your measurements, you can adjust them to get a visual match between your print and the display that gives you the confidence to make adjustments to the image that produce predictable print outcomes. The last thing you want to do is make adjustments to an image to make a print match your display. You want to make adjustments to your display until the display matches the print. Then you can make aesthetic adjustments to the image knowing that the print will reflect your vision.

As an example, I have a Home Depot track light track that has 4 Solux daylight bulbs (spec'ed at 4700 °K) that illuminate the wall on which I hang prints for proofing. I installed the lights at a distance that gives me about 140 cd/m2 measured by the calibration puck - I made the measurement by pointing the puck at a blank sheet of photo paper hung in the location where I would hang a print for proof. I held the puck at a distance of about 10 inches away from the paper and pointed it at an angle that would not pick up a specular reflection on the glossy paper. I also measured the color temp (white point) of the light reflecting off of the paper. These values are my starting target values for my display calibration process.

Once I go through the calibration and profiling process, I use the resulting profile for comparison to the print. If there is a match, great! If not, I make adjustments to the target values and calibrate again. In this case, the luminance was spot on but the white point was too warm - I made an adjustment and found a match. This process is highly subjective and you need to look away from the display and the print to avoid your visual system's adapting to the differences.

My final values were 140 cd/m2 and 5750 °K for Epson Ultra Premium Glossy Photo Paper, with a match of a test image printed on a 3880. Some papers require a different calibration, so you may need to create a separate display profile for a different paper/printer combination (whether it is your printer/paper combo or another lab's output).

I would use a test print like this:

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/downloada​ble_1/DL_page.html

the first image, the one with the woman and three babies along the bottom edge, is the image I found useful in helping me. Get this image printed by whatever lab(s) you want to use and then use it as your reference under controlled lighting to guide your display matching process.

Good luck,

kirk

Most print-making places use an auto correction mode when they print snapshots from folks! And as mentioned in Post #3, you can get different results simply when printing the same file over and over at the same place, as a result.

BEFORE you try to 'match your monitor to your print', you have to ensure that the place is printing exactly what is in the file, with absolutely no 'CORRECTIONS' applied by them during the printing of the photo...'auto correction' needs to be OFF when the print is made. Only then, should you attempt to make your monitor display look like the print!