Calibration - Any use Spyder? - DPChallenge Forums

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED

02/12/2007 07:36:01 PM · #1

Hello,

Now that I'm moving towards learning HRD, I now see a big difference in what is on my screen and what is coming out of my printer. I always had a difference, but now that my photog and editing skills are increasing, I am starting to see the difference on screen vs printing.

How is the sypder? Does it make a big difference?

All opinions will help!

Thanks,

Kenskid

Tycho

Nikon D70

02/12/2007 07:48:07 PM · #2

I used to calibrate my monitor using Adobe Gamma and think that it was good enough. Then, I bought a Spyder2, calibrated the monitor and realized that the photographs which I thought had good color and contrast actually sucked big time. Recently, I bought an Epson R800 printer, and even though the printer gave me some hard time in the beginning, now my prints nicely match what I see on my monitor.

ursula

Fujifilm X-T2

Fujifilm XF 55-200mm f/3.5-4.8 R LM OIS

02/12/2007 07:50:44 PM · #3

I use it. I like it a lot. It made a huge difference when I still had my old monitor, it makes less of a difference now (with the iMac monitor), but that might be in part because I started out on the iMac with Spyder.

There used to be a huge difference in what I saw on my monitor and what I printed, now there's little difference, which is exactly how I want it.

It's very easy to use BTW.

scarbrd

Leica M10

Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux M Aspherical MF - Black

02/12/2007 07:57:59 PM · #4

Ditto for me.

I used the Spyder2Express, the least expensive. They all use the same device, just more options with the software as you go up in price.

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

02/12/2007 08:35:15 PM · #5

I'm a fan of the Spyder2Express...

Louis

Nikon D800

02/12/2007 08:36:43 PM · #6

I use the Spyder2 with PrintFix. The result is that what's on the screen comes out verbatim on the printer. Can't work without it.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

02/12/2007 08:39:36 PM · #7

I use the Eye One from Pantone/gretagmacbeth.

Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D

02/13/2007 12:39:03 PM · #8

Bump...I'm about to purchase a Spyder. If I don't get the $149 with Print fix can I safely assume that once calibrated, my prints will match the screen using my Canon IP5000 and/or if I bring a disk to a professional printing operation...camera store etc...?

Thanks,

Skid

Message edited by author 2007-02-13 12:39:47.

Louis

Nikon D800

02/13/2007 01:11:48 PM · #9

Originally posted by kenskid:

If you don't get PrintFix? Not sure you'll get good screen-to-printer matching with calibration alone, since the variables are the paper, individual ink cartridges and runs, the age of the cartridge, etc.

jemison

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

02/13/2007 01:50:51 PM · #10

Originally posted by kenskid:

I have the Spyder2 without printfix. I get custom printer profiles made for each important paper/ink combination that I use, and that works great. I can't see how printfix can match a $100,000 photospectrometer for making printer profiles. I get mine made by Cathy's Profiles.

BTW, while I have a Spyder2, I would not get another one. I have read reviews that are less than favorable compared with the Eye One and others. I can't seem to locate any of the reviews though, and you might want to research it out. I must say though that I have gotten excellent results using my Spyder2 and paper/ink combination for several years now.

jemison

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

02/13/2007 01:57:36 PM · #11

Originally posted by kenskid:

Ken, how are you getting along with your IP5000? I just saw a demonstration and talked with the sales person and was really impressed. It seems to have solved many of the issues that the Epson4800 has. Have you had any problem at all with the heads clogging or anything else? It seems to have quite a few paper profiles included, but are you able to add new ones to the list? It seems like I read of issues along those lines, IIRC.

The output compared to the 4800 at best quality in a blind test was pretty remarkable. While both the printers produced quite fantastic prints, the 5000 won hands down...something like 97% prefered it over the 4800's result.

I am really tempted to go with the Canon if I decide that I need a 17" printer.

Artifacts

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

02/13/2007 01:59:51 PM · #12

Originally posted by kenskid:

... can I safely assume that once calibrated, my prints will match the screen using my Canon IP5000 and/or if I bring a disk to a professional printing operation...camera store etc...?

No. What you can assume is that prints will be closer to what you see on your monitor if it is calibrated. It will never be exactly the same.

Color management is a complex process that only begins with a calibrated monitor, not end with it.

Among other things, having a correct printer/paper profile that can be simulated on your monitor is an equally essential ingredient.

02/13/2007 02:03:46 PM · #13

Without a claibrated monitor, I tend to get a slight color cast on my prints. This usually happens when I use "color balance" in photoshop. What seems perfect on the screen tends to cast on the print. This usually corresponds to the color I am using in color balance.

Can I expect at least to have an accurate cast?

Skid

Originally posted by stdavidson:

Originally posted by kenskid:
... can I safely assume that once calibrated, my prints will match the screen using my Canon IP5000 and/or if I bring a disk to a professional printing operation...camera store etc...?

No. What you can assume is that prints will be closer to what you see on your monitor if it is calibrated. It will never be exactly the same.

Color management is a complex process that only begins with a calibrated monitor, not end with it.

Among other things, having a correct printer/paper profile that can be simulated on your monitor is an equally essential ingredient.

Artifacts

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

02/13/2007 02:34:13 PM · #14

Originally posted by kenskid:

Ideally you want the appearance on-screen to exactly match what prints regardless of the image editing adjustments that you make. Calibrating your monitor is absolutely an essential first step to take.

Where there are differences it is likely the color cast is 'consistent'. It is just that adjustments for some colors may bring out the cast problem moreso than others and vary from image to image.

What you want to avoid more than anything is having to fall back into experimental guesswork mode to get your prints to look right. You are going to have to learn color management in order to stand a chance of avoiding that.

Prof_Fate

02/13/2007 03:24:26 PM · #15

I have the Spuder 2 Pro - I run dual monitors and need the Pro to calibrate a 2 screen system.
I think it came with printfix, but i use a lab for 100% of my prints, and it matches 100% of the time - 3 different labs.