Calibration, yeah I know, exciting as lint

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

01/31/2006 08:44:09 AM · #1

No you're right thanks for helping me focus, you're entirely right David, if they want to make us jump through hoops they should at least show us how, though it isn't just to satisfy the instructor, I would like to print good prints myself anyways.

David.C

01/31/2006 04:22:29 AM · #2

This may be an off the wall thought -- but since you are going to all this trouble to satisfy some instructor, have you asked him what he suggests as an acceptable printing routine?

Seems to me since it's for a college course, and you are their for them to teach you -- if they want something specific, how to get it should be the first thing they want to show you.

David

Nikon MF 180mm f/2.8 ED AIS

01/30/2006 11:16:09 PM · #3

Thanks again.

mcmurma

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

01/30/2006 09:28:43 PM · #4

I also use an HP printer, the 9800, which can print using the vivera grey and black only cartridges and can be had for around $300 right now.

The quality of the B&W images from this printer is the best I have seen from an inkjet (though, admittedly, I dont get out much:) I'd love to see some of the piezeo prints that Gordon speaks of and comapre them.) Also, I have heard that the Epsons also look incredible.

Long story short. I have printed 12x18 B&Ws onto Illford Satin Pearl that made a mother cry. That's gotta be worth something :)

Note: The Illford works really well with the HP vivera grey inks as far as making a nice, smooth, good looking print. However, they are NOT neutral. The paper introduces a warmth to the prints that is actually kinda nice. For a truly neutral print you need to use the HP paper.

Brent_Ward

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L USM

01/30/2006 08:57:21 PM · #5

Originally posted by pgatt:

Also, I was about to by the ColorVision Printfix Suite, and realised the ip4000 wasn't supported. Is there any way around this?

Yeah, buy a different printer.

01/30/2006 08:46:07 PM · #6

Bump.

01/30/2006 02:47:02 PM · #7

Also, I was about to by the ColorVision Printfix Suite, and realised the ip4000 wasn't supported. Is there any way around this?

01/30/2006 07:14:50 AM · #8

I have done some test prints and have discovered my biggest problem is I can see the effects of the things I have tested, and know which looks better to me, but I have no way of objectively testing whether there is a colour cast. Note I am buying a printer and monitor calibration kit.

01/29/2006 02:09:10 PM · #9

PS: Thank you all for the great amount of help for someone so clueless on this issue

Peleng 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye MC In M42 Mount

01/29/2006 02:05:07 PM · #10

Sorry legal. I didn't really make it clear from the start, but it was very confusing when she said that to me. I will have a go at all that was suggested. I'm going to try and print on my printer, I've found some printer profiles for my printer for different papers, and going to try that this evening. I think I'll also purchase a monitor/printer calibration, as it will probably come in handy, as I also do some design work for free mainly, but still wouldn't hurt to be able to predict what things will look like printed better.

Matthew

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

01/29/2006 08:18:29 AM · #11

double post

Message edited by author 2006-01-29 08:19:08.

Matthew

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Peleng 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye MC In M42 Mount

01/29/2006 08:11:38 AM · #12

I am not quite sure what more to say.

We have explained how to get colour cast free prints (buy & use a printer that uses black and grey ink only).

We/I have explained that the colour cast seen by your professor on yur lab prints is probably caused by the lab using the incorrect paper.

Now you say that you have not even tried a print on your own printer. Try it - see whether there is any colouration at all. If there is, you will probably have to invest in a printer that is designed for b&w printing - ie it accepts a greys cartridge in the colour cartridge slot.

You should probably go through some basic calibration to get the right brightness and contrast for your b&w prints. If part of the course requirements is that you must do yur own printing, it seems bizarre to me that you will not get some instruction as part of the course on how to do that.

Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D

01/29/2006 06:06:33 AM · #13

Doesn't matter what color cast you get, if you only print in black ink...

Sorry I'm more confused now. Surely it does, because they said they wanted to see true b/w's and will consistently mark people down for colour casts?

Bear in mind, I haven't tried printing anything with my printer yet, as I don't even know if that's any use - I'm not sure I could even identify a colour cast unless it was totally obvious. I could only see that they had different colour casts (slightly) when she pointed it out.

David.C

01/29/2006 03:49:27 AM · #14

Originally posted by thread title:

RE:Calibration, yeah I know, exciting as lint

Over 50 informative and enjoyable replies and 600+ views!

Maybe we need a thread on lint. :)

David

Brent_Ward

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L USM

01/29/2006 02:57:14 AM · #15

Originally posted by pgatt:

Thanks, brent again for a really insightful answer. Problem is, I don't know if it can or cannot print neutral prints yet, because I haven't been given advice on how to do so nor how to test if it does or doesn't.

Neutral prints are in the ink. Which has been mentioned here a couple of times. Get a printer with more than one black and you'll find what your looking for ( the 2400 has like 4 blacks). ;o)

Doesn't matter what color cast you get, if you only print in black ink...

01/28/2006 11:33:25 PM · #16

Brent_Ward

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L USM

01/28/2006 03:13:05 PM · #17

Originally posted by pgatt:

any further advice?

...buy a printer that prints better B&W.

ksgant

Canon EOS-20D

01/28/2006 02:21:18 PM · #18

I was in the color pre-press industry for 15 years doing nothing but Photoshop color corrections, retouching etc etc.

We didn't calibrate any of our monitors...ever. Now, things may be different in the world, but back then we had to use brute force and actually learn the numbers of the colors and what we were doing to match a transparency...which was the main thing we were trying to achieve. The client would send in a trans...we would scan it to the size the layout needed...usually at 120 dots per cm. Right after the scan, we would then make a print...back in the old days this would mean running film through the imagesetter and making a Cromalin..which were a pain. We ran through different types of color proofs over the years from Cromalins to Matchprints to Kodak Approvals...it really came down to what the client was used to seeing in the light booth.

ANYWAY...after the scan of the trans, we would make a proof, check it in the light-booth against the original scan and make color corrections from that. All very subjective. It came down to the guy doing the color markup in the booth to make judgement calls. Like "-10m in leaf at the 3/4 tone" and "+15c mid tones in sky". That sort of thing. Then we would make the corrections along with the masks for the scan and output another proof. Then the client sees it, makes their own changes and proof again. The final proof the clients sees and approves is sent off to the press and they use that to match to.

Again, no calibrations in the monitors at all. All very subjective and we were all very good at it...but it took a LOT of training and that's why everything was so expensive back then.

Times have changed now. I personally haven't investigated color profiles or things of that nature because color has been beaten into me so much over the years...but having said that, one can always learn something new. From what I can tell, profiles and matching DO work for the most part and keeps the "test prints"...which cost money...down to a minimum. But just keep in mind that what you see on the screen...transmissive color...will always be a little different from the reflective color you're getting off the print. Though even this has changed quite a bit.

Anyway, that was a trip down memory lane...to let some that may not have known, know how it was back in the old days. I'm semi retired now and am just getting back into photography. I don't even have any equipment yet, so I'll be investigating all the printing and calibrations and things of this nature over the next few months. I'm looking forward for this old dog to learn some new tricks!

01/28/2006 08:52:18 AM · #19

any more info. I'm tempted to order the colorvision printfix and monitor spyder solution? any further advice? been helpful (if a little scattered) so far. If anyone knows of a tutorial go to finish, I'd love to read it

01/27/2006 07:51:09 PM · #20

bump

Message edited by author 2006-01-28 08:49:00.

Peleng 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye MC In M42 Mount

01/27/2006 07:19:33 PM · #21

Are you sure that getting prints done at a lab is not an option? - yep. All the labs here do digital, that's not a problem, it is the course requirements, whether you do digital or film, to do the printing yourself.

th3ph17

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

01/27/2006 07:16:51 PM · #22

this is from a review of your printer. I printed a number of black & white prints and the output was good but not the equal of the Epson 2200 or HP 7960, both of which have special photo gray and black inks. Using double-weight matte paper the B&W prints looked their best.

Message edited by author 2006-01-27 19:18:58.

Matthew

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

01/27/2006 07:02:48 PM · #23

Originally posted by pgatt:

But getting prints done at a lab is not an option. They require home-printed prints if you want to do it all-digital. Thanks for the help,
Now here's a few more questions. Is there a RIP for the Canon Pixma ip4000? And is there neutral-only inkset for the same?

Are you sure that getting prints done at a lab is not an option? Most labs that i know of use digital printing processes.