Color Questions

sara505sara505 Registered Users Posts: 1,684 Major grins
edited June 28, 2016 in Digital Darkroom
Hey, everybody. I'm looking for some advice. I have a Dell 2209wa monitor which is calibrated on a regular basis with a Spyder3 Elite. I print sometimes from Lr, sometimes from Ps, most recently using Hahnemuele Bamboo paper and profile. My printer is the Canon Pixma Pro9500MkII. My prints usually come out really nice - at first glance, without looking too hard - the tones and colors are a pretty good match to what I see on-screen, but upon closer examination, my prints are usually a bit warmer than the screen version. That being said, the prints look really good - if you were not trying to make a perfect match, you'd say - damn, nice print. However, I would like to get a closer match - I'd like much more control than I have. I can make a 4x6 print and, a la darkroom days and test-printing, I can tweak the image to get closer to the screen version - but I'd love to not have to do this. Luminance is no problem, by the way. Oh, and I should mention, I recently had calendars printed by Bay Photo, no color correction by them, and the calendar images do match what's on my screen, color-wise, within a hair - this seems to indicate that my monitor is accurate.
So, what is it, my printer, or what? Do I need a better monitor? Different calibration software? What is the missing link?

Comments

  • SamSam Registered Users Posts: 7,419 Major grins
    edited February 6, 2016
    Short answer is yes, all of the above plus some more. :D

    You are using a $300.00 consumer monitor. I am having difficulty trying get specs that I can compare with other high end monitors., but it seems this monitor can display 83% of the srgb color space. Also note I don't have any idea about your graphics card.

    High end wide gamut monitors can cover 146% of the srgb color space and 99% of the Adobe 1998 color space.

    Also what color temp are you using to calibrate your monitor? If you print the same image that comes out warmer than what you see on the monitor using the Hahnemuele Bamboo paper what happens on a satin or semigloss photo paper, does it also come out to warm?

    If both papers produce a warm image then consider calibrating your monitor to a warmer color temp to more closely match the color temp of your prints. I use 5000K for calibration.

    If the Hahnemuele Bamboo paper is warm and the photo paper is neutral then the issue is with the Hahnemuele Bamboo paper and the profile. Are you soft proofing? Does the soft proof show a warmer image?

    Note the Hahnemuele Bamboo paper is designed to produce a warmer image.

    Canned icc profiles provided by paper manufacturers can vary substantially with regard to what you will see out of your printer. I have had very nice to absolutely horrible prints from canned icc profiles.

    Best bet here is to have custom icc profiles made for your go to papers.

    If you had one outside printing vendor do all your printing and the prints matched your monitor you would be gold. For prints.

    The problem with this is you have no idea if your system is correct (close to the calibrated standard) and the print vendor is correctly interpreting your file info to produce a print that matches your monitor or if the print vendor is off and your system has been adjusted to match their inaccurate calibrated system.

    Printing is both art and science. Skimp on ether and you can not produce the highest quality prints.

    Skip soft proofing, and let the printer determine color and your doomed to less than optimal prints. You should print using the same steps every time. Consistency is the key to the science part.

    You should be able to get the science to produce a very close match using your go to papers. Then comes the art part to tweak the image file to extract the last 3% 5% out of the image.

    Sam
  • sara505sara505 Registered Users Posts: 1,684 Major grins
    edited February 6, 2016
    Thanks, Sam, but you've already told me this stuff over the phone and I know where you stand on every detail - and I do respect your expertise - very much - but I was hoping to hear from a few others. :-) :-) :-)
  • SamSam Registered Users Posts: 7,419 Major grins
    edited February 6, 2016
    sara505 wrote: »
    Thanks, Sam, but you've already told me this stuff over the phone and I know where you stand on every detail - and I do respect your expertise - very much - but I was hoping to hear from a few others. :-) :-) :-)

    Sara,

    I posted this so others who might have similar questions could get one more viewpoint.

    Sam
  • sara505sara505 Registered Users Posts: 1,684 Major grins
    edited February 6, 2016
    Sam wrote: »
    Sara,

    I posted this so others who might have similar questions could get one more viewpoint.

    Sam

    I know - and well done, too, btw clap.gif

    (still would love to hear what others' experience is)
  • SamSam Registered Users Posts: 7,419 Major grins
    edited February 6, 2016
    sara505 wrote: »
    I know - and well done, too, btw clap.gif

    (still would love to hear what others' experience is)

    Me three. :D

    Sam
  • sara505sara505 Registered Users Posts: 1,684 Major grins
    edited February 6, 2016
    Sam wrote: »
    Skip soft proofing, and let the printer determine color and your doomed to less than optimal prints. You should print using the same steps every time. Consistency is the key to the science part.


    Sam

    Actually, letting my printer determine the color also gives me a good print, and for whatever reason, soft proofing doesn't always yield optimal results. So far, the above-described process yields the most consistently pleasing prints. What you said about Bamboo being a warm paper is helpful. I have samples of Hahnemuele, and other, papers, will try those. The thing is, I'm not that far off, usually. In fact, the average person would probably not necessarily notice the discrepancy, and I don't even mind the test-print-then-tweak method. But there's a part of me that thinks it should be closer right out of the printer. Sometimes I think I'm just over-thinking it all.
  • sara505sara505 Registered Users Posts: 1,684 Major grins
    edited February 7, 2016
    Has this thread died or is it only sleeping?
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 23,764 moderator
    edited February 17, 2016
    For accurate and pleasing prints I basically ignore the screen/monitor and develop the image "by the numbers".

    If I can get accurate whites and light grays, and blacks and dark gray/greys, and skin tones accurately, as well as green grass (when it actually was green) and blue skies, then I have an accurate print.

    How do I know where to find accurate color samples from which to gauge skin tones, grass and skies?

    I use sample images from respected sources, both monitor and print reference/calibration images:

    http://www.colour-science.com/quality%20test%20tools/test%20files/test%20files%20overview.htm

    http://www.gballard.net/photoshop/pdi_download/

    http://digitaldog.net/files/Printer%20Test%20file.jpg

    http://spyder.datacolor.com/wp-content/gallery/spyder5express/SpyderProof-Spyder5EXPRESS.jpg

    https://cdn.smugmug.com/img/help/calibration-print-1400-2.jpg

    Take color samples from these images and then use those data points to make decisions about colors from your computer. Print resulting images and then view aggregate prints under sunlight together to see if your color process is under control.

    Human eyesight is incapable of discerning accurate color by itself, and is far to easily confused by surrounding colors in a scene. Room illumination readily poisons print colors, unless you use very expensive and color controlled lighting.

    Processing and printing By-The-Numbers is the best way to gain full control over your color print process and produce color accurate results.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • sara505sara505 Registered Users Posts: 1,684 Major grins
    edited February 17, 2016
    ziggy53 wrote: »
    For accurate and pleasing prints I basically ignore the screen/monitor and develop the image "by the numbers".

    If I can get accurate whites and light grays, and blacks and dark gray/greys, and skin tones accurately, as well as green grass (when it actually was green) and blue skies, then I have an accurate print.

    How do I know where to find accurate color samples from which to gauge skin tones, grass and skies?

    I use sample images from respected sources, both monitor and print reference/calibration images:

    http://www.colour-science.com/quality%20test%20tools/test%20files/test%20files%20overview.htm

    http://www.gballard.net/photoshop/pdi_download/

    http://digitaldog.net/files/Printer%20Test%20file.jpg

    http://spyder.datacolor.com/wp-content/gallery/spyder5express/SpyderProof-Spyder5EXPRESS.jpg

    https://cdn.smugmug.com/img/help/calibration-print-1400-2.jpg

    Take color samples from these images and then use those data points to make decisions about colors from your computer. Print resulting images and then view aggregate prints under sunlight together to see if your color process is under control.

    Human eyesight is incapable of discerning accurate color by itself, and is far to easily confused by surrounding colors in a scene. Room illumination readily poisons print colors, unless you use very expensive and color controlled lighting.

    Processing and printing By-The-Numbers is the best way to gain full control over your color print process and produce color accurate results.

    Ziggy - thank you, this looks very interesting, just what I was hoping for - another avenue. I will take some time later to explore this method. Again, I'm pleased with most of the prints I'm getting now, often on first try, using paper profiles - I don't even mind my small-test-print-and-tweak method, but sometimes I think the colors can match better - particularly important if I'm trying to match the orange of a sunset (often too warm in print), or blue of sky (sometimes has a purple tinge), all of which I can fix before making a final print, but I hear stories of perfect matches between screen and print, and I wonder... BTW, I use 4000K light bulbs in my office/work space (recommended someplace, can't remember where), not expensive by any stretch, but I think it gives a good rendering of colors.
    Anyway, thanks for this - can't wait to explore this method. Stay tuned for questions. :D
  • SamSam Registered Users Posts: 7,419 Major grins
    edited February 17, 2016
    Ziggy,

    How does this color by the numbers account for, different color spaces, different printers, and different papers?

    Sam
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 23,764 moderator
    edited February 17, 2016
    Sam wrote: »
    Ziggy,

    How does this color by the numbers account for, different color spaces, different printers, and different papers?

    Sam

    Those things still must be "color managed" by your image processing software, soft-proofing LUTs, operating system and device drivers. There is no short cutting with color management if you want to maintain color control.

    When I say, "develop the image 'by the numbers'" I am talking about the fact that human vision and color perception is seriously flawed in most regards, and cannot be trusted for color accuracy or color fidelity on a computer screen. Making absolute color judgments based on a computer screen is just asking for trouble.

    It is much better to use the color sampling capability of most image processing software to give real data, which is independent of human judgment, to define the colors present and then use the software again to correct the colors to known good values.

    Most of us understand the importance of "white balance" and "color temperature" in setting base image colors, correct? All I am suggesting is extending that concept to "black balance" and skin tones plus specific "memory colors". If you gain control over those things in the image, more than likely you will also render the entire scene very accurately.

    At that point of the process, when you have color control within your image processing software, and assuming that you have an otherwise color managed output, you have a much better chance of accurate print colors too.


    It is important to also understand that trying to exactly match the monitor screen rendering with a color print is not a worthwhile endeavor.

    A computer screen uses transmissive light process where a photographic print uses reflective ambient light. Obviously the two light sources are not the same so trying to match their output is fairly futile, although some monitor calibration and color management systems collectively come pretty close.
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • SamSam Registered Users Posts: 7,419 Major grins
    edited February 17, 2016
    Thanks Ziggy,

    This additional clarification helped me to make sense of your initial post. :D

    When it comes to starting with accurate colors my go to method is to take a photo of a color checker passport under the same lighting conditions as the photograph then make a custom camera color profile.

    This covers a lot more colors than sky and grass. Skin tones are a whole other discussion. :D

    Sam
  • ziggy53ziggy53 Super Moderators Posts: 23,764 moderator
    edited February 18, 2016
    Sam wrote: »
    Thanks Ziggy,

    This additional clarification helped me to make sense of your initial post. :D

    When it comes to starting with accurate colors my go to method is to take a photo of a color checker passport under the same lighting conditions as the photograph then make a custom camera color profile.

    This covers a lot more colors than sky and grass. Skin tones are a whole other discussion. :D

    Sam

    Yes, the X‑Rite ColorChecker Passport is a wonderful tool when it is applicable. thumb.gif
    ziggy53
    Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
  • AlliOOPAlliOOP Registered Users Posts: 72 Big grins
    edited June 26, 2016
    sara505 wrote: »
    But there's a part of me that thinks it should be closer right out of the printer.

    Nope, doesn't work that way.

    I'm really not trying to be snarky...it is possibly sounding snarky when I say, since you can't control 100% of the variables 100% of the time with printing, when is good enough good enough?

    Based on what you've described, it could be the profiles in use, the Spyder, the color of your walls when calibrating, the time of day when the monitor was calibrated, the time since last calibration (color drifting), the batch of ink, the batch of paper, the type of paper, the selections in your software, the settings on the printer, the monitor settings, the color spaces, on, and on, and on...And just because the prints are closer by a pro shop today, doesn't mean they will be tomorrow. They too have no way of 100% guaranteeing the prints will match from day to day.

    One of the most beautiful beginner landscape shots I had printed was an anomaly printed by a pro shop back in the days of film. I didn't realize the print had been "artisized" during the printing process until several years later when I went to have it reprinted and enlarged off the original negative for a national contest. To make this a shortened story, I learned a great deal that day about printing and print color matching and learned that I wasn't going to "get" a match off the original negative no matter how much I wanted to for the contest. There was no exact matching possible.

    Could you narrow down the criteria of what you are trying to control? With your system as described, you actually have a great amount of control and can correct the prints in numerous ways. If you are looking for an answer of actually "where/why" the prints are always warm and want a quick fix, sorry -- don't have one of those answers.

    Soft-proof, adjust and never, ever, ever expect a monitor matching print straight from the printer.
  • sara505sara505 Registered Users Posts: 1,684 Major grins
    edited June 28, 2016
    AlliOOP wrote: »
    Nope, doesn't work that way.

    I'm really not trying to be snarky...it is possibly sounding snarky when I say, since you can't control 100% of the variables 100% of the time with printing, when is good enough good enough?

    Based on what you've described, it could be the profiles in use, the Spyder, the color of your walls when calibrating, the time of day when the monitor was calibrated, the time since last calibration (color drifting), the batch of ink, the batch of paper, the type of paper, the selections in your software, the settings on the printer, the monitor settings, the color spaces, on, and on, and on...And just because the prints are closer by a pro shop today, doesn't mean they will be tomorrow. They too have no way of 100% guaranteeing the prints will match from day to day.

    One of the most beautiful beginner landscape shots I had printed was an anomaly printed by a pro shop back in the days of film. I didn't realize the print had been "artisized" during the printing process until several years later when I went to have it reprinted and enlarged off the original negative for a national contest. To make this a shortened story, I learned a great deal that day about printing and print color matching and learned that I wasn't going to "get" a match off the original negative no matter how much I wanted to for the contest. There was no exact matching possible.

    Could you narrow down the criteria of what you are trying to control? With your system as described, you actually have a great amount of control and can correct the prints in numerous ways. If you are looking for an answer of actually "where/why" the prints are always warm and want a quick fix, sorry -- don't have one of those answers.

    Soft-proof, adjust and never, ever, ever expect a monitor matching print straight from the printer.

    It's been a few months since my original question. I'm pretty happy with with my prints these days, for the most part. My method is similar to my old days in the darkroom = test printing.

    My prints are pretty good, using a calibrated monitor and paper profiles (I've been printing with Hahnemuehl fine art papers of late). I start with a 4x6 print. At first glance, the print is perfect and matches the monitor. If I take the time to fastidiously study and compare, sometimes the blues are a little more purple than I'd like, or the orange might have a bit too much red - so all I do is go back into LR and adjust the tones. It doesn't take too many 4x6s to get what I want - maybe 3, at most - before I go large, and often I can even happily live with the original discrepancy.

    I'm pretty sure my monitor is right on the money. For one thing, the calendars I had Bay Photo print for me in January with no color correction on their part match my prints and my monitor within a hair.

    I know others love the science and the numbers and the technology, but my method is working very well. Thanks for the reply.
Sign In or Register to comment.