|
Post by katynoelle on Mar 2, 2012 17:04:58 GMT
I don't think that I've ever posted in the Tech Corner, before. I have a goal for this month. (Indeed, I'm a bit embarrassed because I've had this monthly goal for several months.) I need to get some prints made of my images. I seem to have a block about it. Now, that I'm telling you, I'll HAVE to do it. I know which ones and in which size. I've just downloaded a beautifully informative little ebook: craftandvision.com/books/making-the-print/ to help me think the details through. I have the phone number of a man who is supposedly good at this - has a business up in Dartmouth (an hour away but most things are, around here.) I, also, have the name of a few online services: www.mpix.com/?gclid=CODRr-7XyK4CFUPc4AodpTNTBwwww.whcc.com/?gclid=CKHD_dvXyK4CFUPc4AodpTNTBwI have my finger hovering over the 'submit order' button to order a spyder4 (the simple version - $114). My heart's beating fast about the spyder....it's a lot of money for me but I am a serious perfectionist and I could see it being a waste of money because I don't like the color, etc. Also, it just bothers me - I know that others don't have their monitors necessarily calibrated but I'd like to know FOR SURE that I'm somewhere in the middle of reasonable. (mental, I know! ) I'm expecting a learning curve from all of this and know that, even if it's not right the first time, at least, I broke the ice. Advice, please, for this anxiously biting her nails girly?
|
|
|
Post by Barry on Mar 2, 2012 17:18:26 GMT
Hi Katy, I only have a monochrome laser printer for text, so all of my printing is done on line. But if you have never used a on-line printing service, then I would suggest that you only order a few prints to start with to see how there colours print, (When I first started using on-line printing, my prints came back quite dark and dull, so I then adjusted my monitor to match these prints as close as I could, then I readjusted the prints and got them reprinted by the same on-line printers, then they came back a lot better. I have only just recently installed a Spyder 3, just to confirm, that what I'm seeing on my monitor is correct.
|
|
|
Post by katynoelle on Mar 2, 2012 17:24:36 GMT
Barry, did you find that your monitor was far off?
I've done the 'on board' calibrations but feel really iffy when I look on another computer at my images vs. others. People love my colors - it's possibly part of my style and I love them, too. But it makes me almost hyperventilate when I think of what some people might be seeing.
Good advice, btw., thanks!
and, I only thought that I would get a few for the same reason.
|
|
|
Post by Barry on Mar 2, 2012 17:30:39 GMT
My monitor was only slightly too bright, so I had to dull it down a bit.
I use a 24in HP ZR24w IPS monitor as my main screen for editing.
|
|
|
Post by maryloveslucy on Mar 2, 2012 17:33:39 GMT
Hi Katy, I don't have Spyder or anything like that, just calibrated my monitor as best I can with information I've gathered etc. I have printed several images and the first time I printed after using CS5 and Lightroom was horrible. It was because of not setting the color profile correctly. After doing that I did a test print and it was about as close as I could have hoped. I compared it to what my monitor showed and it was a perfect match, at least as close as my eyes could tell. I have a lot of photog friends that use Mpix and are very pleased... there's another one, but I can't remember the name. I know Chris uses a place that he is very pleased with.
|
|
|
Post by Barry on Mar 2, 2012 17:36:18 GMT
People love my colors - it's possibly part of my style and I love them, too. But it makes me almost hyperventilate when I think of what some people might be seeing. I know what you mean, I will be out this evening giving a talk at a camera club, and at the start of my presentation I always use a test card, just to check the brightness on my projector against the surrounding room light and make any adjustments as required before starting.
|
|
|
Post by katynoelle on Mar 2, 2012 17:42:20 GMT
Thanks, Mary and Barry! This is really useful and I can't tell you how glad I am to have someone to just talk this out with. I just ordered the spyder. (I can afford it - just have to fore go a few things - no prob! I just don't want you to worry that my kids are eating gruel for the next month.) After the past two months of looking at images that I've edited on the old screen and thinking some of them are pretty ghastly, I feel relief that I won't worry anymore that I'm very off!
|
|
|
Post by The Wirefox on Mar 2, 2012 19:06:08 GMT
Katy Apple monitors are set to run at Gamma 2.2. If you are using the native iMac profile it will look odd compared to a PC..it is specifically designed for optimum viewing but for colours nearer to how PC users will see them (at least those with a critical eye) you should use sRGB IEC1966-2.1 as a baseline display profile. Remember though on any monitor (well ones we can afford) any adjustment to the native gamma set point will result in the loss of some of the 256 shades that are displayable. It is a trade off so to render colours that will look the same as your prints you can in fact lose some of the shades available when viewing on a monitor. To switch your display profile do Command bar Apple/System Preferences/Displays Barry, did you find that your monitor was far off? I've done the 'on board' calibrations but feel really iffy when I look on another computer at my images vs. others. People love my colors - it's possibly part of my style and I love them, too. But it makes me almost hyperventilate when I think of what some people might be seeing. Good advice, btw., thanks! and, I only thought that I would get a few for the same reason.
|
|
|
Post by katynoelle on Mar 3, 2012 14:09:24 GMT
Hi, Steve! Actually, the on board calibration that I was talking about is the same one you're mentioning - in system preferences. I have the gamma turned down just a bit from 2.2 (for some reason that I can't quite remember but it has to do with contrast.) It's hard for me to understand but I get the general gist. Is sRGB IEC1966-2.1 just the standard sRGB? or is there more than one 'standard'? (please, say no!) I work in Adobe colors in Lightroom but, then, it's set to translate everything to sRGB when it goes out. It's always a bit disappointing.... Anyway, I understand, generally, what you're saying - there's just going to have to be an adjustment of expectations when I switch viewing mediums. btw, I LOVE this imac!!! Katy Apple monitors are set to run at Gamma 2.2. If you are using the native iMac profile it will look odd compared to a PC..it is specifically designed for optimum viewing but for colours nearer to how PC users will see them (at least those with a critical eye) you should use sRGB IEC1966-2.1 as a baseline display profile. Remember though on any monitor (well ones we can afford) any adjustment to the native gamma set point will result in the loss of some of the 256 shades that are displayable. It is a trade off so to render colours that will look the same as your prints you can in fact lose some of the shades available when viewing on a monitor. To switch your display profile do Command bar Apple/System Preferences/Displays Barry, did you find that your monitor was far off? I've done the 'on board' calibrations but feel really iffy when I look on another computer at my images vs. others. People love my colors - it's possibly part of my style and I love them, too. But it makes me almost hyperventilate when I think of what some people might be seeing. Good advice, btw., thanks! and, I only thought that I would get a few for the same reason.
|
|
|
Post by jeeperman on Mar 3, 2012 14:55:49 GMT
Nothing wrong with a little gruel! I have been somewhat lucky in that when I have printed, they have come out pretty much spot on. I say lucky because I do all my editing on a laptop and have been told the spyder does not work so well on one, thus calibrating it the best I could by eye with a few online tutorials. I have used two differnt printers, one which is my quick need an hour turn around and one that Smugmug offer called Bay Photo {which I am very happy with}. There is a bit of a quaility difference but it is mostly due to what medium is used to print on. The quick hour turn around is Costco, I have used this at times to make a quick check before ordering the better quality job. One of these days I will get another proper desktop for editing. Now that I have an alarm in the house! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Kit on Mar 5, 2012 9:19:38 GMT
Katy, I do all my Photoshop work etc with a Compaq laptop and print with a somewhat elderly Canon iP4500, which is a photo specific printer ie, designed primarily for printing pix, rather than being a print printer.
When I first started printing, I was always very disappointed with the colour, particularly with skin tones. They were always dismal and far too greyish, even on young skin. I got the Spyder 2 (I think, but it is not where I am atm, so can't check) and very nervously did my first monitor calibration. I was sure when it was finished that something had gone way wrong as the background to Photoshop suddenly looked tan-ish instead of the usual grey. But when I printed - wow - such a difference! For the first time, I was getting skin that actually looked like skin, rather than some dreadful disease...
I think you are making the right decision, despite the gruel dinners. Let us know how you get on, eh.
|
|
|
Post by katynoelle on Mar 5, 2012 13:38:37 GMT
That is tremendously encouraging, Kit, because, it's simply helpful to hear others' experiences. I'm really glad that I ordered it - it has to help cut one thing out of the confusion and wondering that keeps circling back to me. On a recent blog post about color, my brown walls were called purple and my green chair was called blue. I remember in history class, in college, the professor began the first session with class members giving their opinion on what color a certain class member's shirt was. There were so many different takes on it. Perhaps, they all needed their eyes calibrated? It was a wonderful little illustration about how people perceive things differently and there are so many reasons why but, at least, now, I will be able to say that my monitor is calibrated....
|
|
|
Post by chrisc on Mar 5, 2012 14:04:56 GMT
Just as an aside, it never hurts to have your eyecare professional check you for colorblindness...you'd be amazed at the number of people who are and don't know it.
|
|
|
Post by nickjohnson on Mar 5, 2012 21:11:35 GMT
Katy, I strongly recommend that you make use of a printer evaluation target image - from here:- www.jirvana.com/printer_tests/PrinterEvaluationImage_V002.zipYes, I know that it says printer - but you can use it for monitors as well. You need it for at least two reasons. 1 It's based on an industry standard and is now a standard in it's own right. 2 It's not your image - so no emotional attachment and no "But I know it should look like this".
|
|
|
Post by katynoelle on Mar 7, 2012 17:32:47 GMT
Ack! I'm not sure if the spyder is doing the trick, here. I LOVE this imac but it has been SO bright since the start. But it's gorgeous glossy and clear. Now, I'm not sure if it shows things in aRGB.....although, it gives the option for it so doesn't that mean that it CAN display those colors? Am I wide gamut or, er, 'regular'? Am I RGB LED screen or white LED? I cannot find these answers and, it's ridiculous, I don't know what year my computer is (we got it used). I just found this article and am considering if it might not be wise to keep a paper bag, nearby, to breathe into....you know....in case of emergency.... blog.bretedge.com/2010/01/12/the-imac-calibration-conundrum/
|
|