Monitor contrast ratio, printer profile and soft proofing

I have a NEC PA241W monitor with NEC's calibrator/software, which allows me to calibrate to a particular contrast ratio. For normal viewing, printing to luster paper without soft-proofing (print lab) I've been going with a calibrated contrast ratio of ~250:1.

Yesterday I received my new Epson Stylus Photo R3000 printer and have been testing my new system by soft proofing in LR using the profile of the paper I'm using (Epson Ultra Premium Glossy). In the print module I have color management turned off in the printer setup and have LR set to use the profile for the printer/paper I'm using.

When I correct the proof copy in Soft Proof mode and then print it, the resulting print is much too contrasty (everything else is great). So, the question I have is the following: For soft proofing to glossy does a paper manufacturer expect that you should first switch to a monitor contrast ratio for glossy (350:1)? In other words, is the following the correct workflow:

Plan to print luster:
1. Choose a monitor profile giving a calibrated contrast ratio of 250:1
2. Create a proof copy of the image in PS and tweak it until it looks good for the appropriate luster paper profile
3. Print using the profile for the luster paper

Now want to print some glossy prints:
4. Choose a monitor profile giving a calibrated contrast ratio of 350:1
2. Create a proof copy of the image in PS and tweak it until it looks good for the appropriate glossy paper profile
3. Print using the profile for the glossy paper

My own monitor is profiled with an Eye-One Display 2. While it does help me set up both contrast and luminance I have absolutely no idea what the contrast ratio is.

The profiling software displays a horizontal target with a sliding scale both above and below the optimum, but what the software considers that optimum should be I have absolutely no idea!

I'm thinking (probably wrong) that the manufacturer's printer/paper profiles need to be based on some sort of standard monitor contrast ratio or they won't really work well for soft proofing. Is it a fixed standard, or is it based on what you should be using for a particular type of paper:

Matte: 150 to 200
Luster: 250
Glossy: 350

By the way, my NEC calibrator is really weird when it comes to arriving at a calibrated contrast ratio. I target 250:1 and I get 200:1. ... so I end up targeting 350:1 to get 250:1. And I can only get 350:1 by using "Monitor Default" as the contrast ratio target It looks like it's a really difficult target for the calibrator to solve, particularly when the luminance has been turned down to around 110 cd/m^2 at a D65 white point.

My monitor is calibrated to white 90 cd/sqm and black 0.4, which is 1:225. When I soft proof for Epson Luster and tick the Simulate Paper checkbox I see a slight decrease in contrast and brightness. I assume that the profile contains a tone curve that expresses the paper's contrast.

Bob_A wrote in post #15591030
I'm thinking (probably wrong) that the manufacturer's printer/paper profiles need to be based on some sort of standard monitor contrast ratio or they won't really work well for soft proofing. Is it a fixed standard, or is it based on what you should be using for a particular type of paper:

Matte: 150 to 200
Luster: 250
Glossy: 350

By the way, my NEC calibrator is really weird when it comes to arriving at a calibrated contrast ratio. I target 250:1 and I get 200:1. ... so I end up targeting 350:1 to get 250:1. And I can only get 350:1 by using "Monitor Default" as the contrast ratio target It looks like it's a really difficult target for the calibrator to solve, particularly when the luminance has been turned down to around 110 cd/m^2 at a D65 white point.

Your luminance is far higher than mine, which I set at 80 cd/m2.

Hmmm ... thanks guys.

I'm not seeing dark prints, which is what I'd expect if my luminance was set too high. In fact I almost have the opposite problem in that the prints may be just a tad bright. The 110 number also agrees with the following article from imagescience.com.au:

http://www.imagescienc​e.com.au …nitor+With+Spec​traView+II

Also, on my setup when I adjust exposure to get close to R=230 for caucasian skin in the Develop module the image on my screen looks a little bit dark. I'll have to scratch my head about this one for awhile since it looks like I don't have my system set up as well as I thought.

Just remember that you are trying to get your display to match your print. You just completely changed your print, so you need to figure out what your new target is to get your display to match the print. Under what conditions do you view your prints to assess a match?

Kirk

kirkt wrote in post #15593016
Just remember that you are trying to get your display to match your print. You just completely changed your print, so you need to figure out what your new target is to get your display to match the print. Under what conditions do you view your prints to assess a match?

Kirk

I think that my viewing conditions is part of the problem Kirk. I took some of the prints from room to room ... sun-lit, tungsten, halogens, and as expected there was a lot of variation. The even lighting in my kitchen (halogen recessed lighting) seems to be the best viewing environment. However, if I made my proof copy look "good" the result is still too contrasty under every lighting condition. The best result is close to what the image looks like with Simulate Paper & Ink unchecked (just need to add about 5 units of contrast and +5 for Lights and Darks in the tone curve) ... which is weird.

At least I'm having fun with my new printer, and when the recipe is good the prints are amazing

OK, after playing with this more it really looks like I'm getting accurate prints only when Simulate Paper and Ink is UNchecked. Could this be due to using a monitor that uses hardware calibration (my NEC PA241W) and the ability to target a contrast ratio?

I calibrate the monitor to use a contrast ratio that is pretty close to the paper/printer combination so I would have thought that checking or unchecking Simulate Paper and Ink should do very little, however the change is large.