what's the best Monitor/Printer profiler?

Simon - in the UK, take a look at Colour Confidence and Bodoni Systems - also Warehouse Express have a Colour Management section under Digital.

All these places have some Gretag Macbeth and Monaco products. I got my OPTIX XR Pro from Bodoni.

David

DavidW wrote:
Simon - in the UK, take a look at Colour Confidence and Bodoni Systems - also Warehouse Express have a Colour Management section under Digital.

All these places have some Gretag Macbeth and Monaco products. I got my OPTIX XR Pro from Bodoni.

David

Thanks David, I'll give them a gander.

It might pay me to speak to someone at WE (warehouse experess) they are in the same city as me! ( but they are phone +online only - no visitors)

I guess my concern is that I can see these different systems at different prices and think - 'you get what you pay for right?' but can't (NO WAY!) afford the top of the range, yet am concerned that those I could afford would do the job. It's a complete unknown for me, completely new ground, I feel SO in the dark here!




Perhaps I should say that what prompted my investigation was my intention to possibly buy ( after saving up for a while) an Epson 4800 to print large B+W, but rerad that you get much better prints with proper profiling thatn even the much lauded software than comes with the printer


I am aware that I have never profiled my monitor ( except for the CS2 Adobe wizard, which I am not too sure about) and as most prints come out pretty ropey colourwise on my current printer ( HP 970cxi - they're OK but not impresssive) I recognise the need to get this profiling issue addressed before seriously contemplating a bigger and better printer

Unfortunately it's some time before I'm likely to be over your way again (my family owns a small place in Stalham), otherwise I'd offer to demonstrate OPTIX XR Pro to you on my laptop.


Maybe a look at the OPTIX XR and XR Pro User Guide will help. This shows you how the Monaco system works, and identifies which options are Pro only. I believe the only difference between the standard and Pro versions is the serial number; the Pro serial number unlocks extra features. Unfortunately, if you want to upgrade standard to Pro you have to buy the software over again, which is extremely expensive (nearly £160 including VAT).

All the features in chapters 5 to 8 of the manual require Pro. If it wasn't for the Pro-only evaluation feature, I wouldn't know just how appalling my old CRT monitor was on my second machine (so bad that I retired it) or that three of the Gretag Macbeth ColorChecker colours are out of gamut on my laptop. In addition, you need Pro if you want to calibrate to D illuminants (rather than just color temperatures - with Pro I can calibrate to D65, rather than 6500K), also read the stuff on page 86 about table based profiles, which is another Pro feature (I use them - they take more time to measure and build, but not that much longer).

The difference in cost between OPTIX XR and OPTIX XR Pro is about £85 when you include the extra VAT.

David

DavidW wrote:
Unfortunately it's some time before I'm likely to be over your way again (my family owns a small place in Stalham), otherwise I'd offer to demonstrate OPTIX XR Pro to you on my laptop.


Maybe a look at the OPTIX XR and XR Pro User Guide will help. This shows you how the Monaco system works, and identifies which options are Pro only. I believe the only difference between the standard and Pro versions is the serial number; the Pro serial number unlocks extra features. Unfortunately, if you want to upgrade standard to Pro you have to buy the software over again, which is extremely expensive (nearly £160 including VAT).

All the features in chapters 5 to 8 of the manual require Pro. If it wasn't for the Pro-only evaluation feature, I wouldn't know just how appalling my old CRT monitor was on my second machine (so bad that I retired it) or that three of the Gretag Macbeth ColorChecker colours are out of gamut on my laptop. In addition, you need Pro if you want to calibrate to D illuminants (rather than just color temperatures - with Pro I can calibrate to D65, rather than 6500K), also read the stuff on page 86 about table based profiles, which is another Pro feature (I use them - they take more time to measure and build, but not that much longer).

The difference in cost between OPTIX XR and OPTIX XR Pro is about £85 when you include the extra VAT.

David

thanks again David,
when you do come over this neck of the woods again , if you have time giz a bell and we can meet up

Interesting thread - like you Simon, I am wondering whether the cost of a colourimeter is worth the certainty that what I am displaying on my screen is consistent with what somebody else has displayed on their (colour corrected) monitor.

I must admit, I was looking more at the 'budget' end of the market - the ColorPlus at £69 and the Spyder2 at £139. Why are the others so much more expensive? Surely something like the Spyder2 will get me most of the way there...?

David - small world, my Aunt and her family live in Stalham and my parents are a few miles away near Hickling. Very nice part of the country, although it could do with a few more hills for my taste!

Andy

If you are thinking about ICC Profiling B&W prints, you can almost forget about the entry level system. Halftone is a complete different beast.

You'll need the Profile Maker package ($2800)

http://www.outbackphot​o.com/artof_b_w/bw_09/​essay.html

Too steep for me!!

yowee

Simon, did you make any decision about the calibration solution? I have been thinking of getting this sorted for a long time but the price puts me off given I'm not 100% sure if I actually need it. It's one of those unknowns. I do know that my shots always look a bit washed out on POTN but look fine on my monitor. I have been looking for an equipment hire but no joy unfortunately. It just seems a lot to pay to buy something that will be used very few times I'd rather pay someone to just do it.

One of the things I've noticed is that profiled or not... when you host files on a site and then link to them the resulting multi-jpg compression artifacts hose up the image a lot of times. Something to think of.

I'm not an expert but it's my guess that the only way... well maybe not only... to determine what a print looks like compared to the monitor is to print it. Comparing it to a web post isn't going to work. Even then... how do you know if the printer is calibrated... unless you use a pro service and even then you don't know (probably a safe bet though)

condyk wrote:
Simon, did you make any decision about the calibration solution? I have been thinking of getting this sorted for a long time but the price puts me off given I'm not 100% sure if I actually need it. It's one of those unknowns. I do know that my shots always look a bit washed out on POTN but look fine on my monitor. I have been looking for an equipment hire but no joy unfortunately. It just seems a lot to pay to buy something that will be used very few times I'd rather pay someone to just do it.

No- no decision made - pretty much for the exactly same reasons you state yourself

Mike6158 wrote:
Colorvision Spyder 2 for monitor calibration. I think that they make printer / scanner calibration tools too...

i have spyder2 and printfix combo....

A different perspective...

http://www.colorvision​.com …ticles/macworld​review.pdf

I just picked up the Spyder 2 Pro Studio and I'm sure it'll suit my needs just fine.

David, thanks for the link to the OPTIX user guide - promo literature on an item doesn't always tell the full story like a niceley presently manual .

Monaco seems to be the best way to go for my situation. I will likely buy the Monaco Optix XR XRCE OPTXR+Mam. This is the unit that my commercial pro lab sells to photographers/clients like myself, for about $239.

I tried the Adobe Gamma method with my LCD monitor and my "intuition" and 50+ year old eye balls tells me I'm missing the mark. At this point I'm just doing basic dodging, burning, healing, etc in CS2 and the lab does all the color correction for me from start to finish. Normally my exposures are pretty good. I shoot medium format, they do high rez scans on each frame, so the final output is very consistent and I've had very few problems. In spite of this I really do want to have the most "visually correct" setup, as I do generate occasional proof prints or landscape enlargements from my Epson R1800. Again, your posts have been extremely helpful and I appreciate the effort you put into them. That's one of the great things about these forums.

DavidW wrote:
Unfortunately it's some time before I'm likely to be over your way again (my family owns a small place in Stalham), otherwise I'd offer to demonstrate OPTIX XR Pro to you on my laptop.

Maybe a look at the OPTIX XR and XR Pro User Guide will help. This shows you how the Monaco system works, and identifies which options are Pro only. I believe the only difference between the standard and Pro versions is the serial number; the Pro serial number unlocks extra features. Unfortunately, if you want to upgrade standard to Pro you have to buy the software over again, which is extremely expensive (nearly £160 including VAT).

All the features in chapters 5 to 8 of the manual require Pro. If it wasn't for the Pro-only evaluation feature, I wouldn't know just how appalling my old CRT monitor was on my second machine (so bad that I retired it) or that three of the Gretag Macbeth ColorChecker colours are out of gamut on my laptop. In addition, you need Pro if you want to calibrate to D illuminants (rather than just color temperatures - with Pro I can calibrate to D65, rather than 6500K), also read the stuff on page 86 about table based profiles, which is another Pro feature (I use them - they take more time to measure and build, but not that much longer).

The difference in cost between OPTIX XR and OPTIX XR Pro is about £85 when you include the extra VAT.


David