If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Colour Management / Calibration / Profiles ?
I'd appreciate some advice if anyone can help? I'm relatively new to digital
photography. My images are distinctly 'muddy' when reproduced on something other than my monitor at home. This is immediately obvious when I print, but I'd assumed I needed a new printer (it's an Epson Stylus Photo 895), but as I got the same 'muddy' quality when I submitted three images for projection at my local camera club last night, I'm wondering whether it could be something to do with Colour Calibration/Management. When I first installed Photoshop ~6 months back, it said (something like) the monitor's profile appears to be corrput, did I want to use it anyway? I said no. This seemed to be born out by the fact that images I viewed in Windows Photo Gallery and Powerpoint all had a terrible sepia tone until I subsequently deleted the monitor profile. Vista Color Management is now configured to use sRGB IEC61966-2.1 as default for monitor and printer. Have I set this up wrong somehow, or should I be using a different colour profile/s? My graphics card is INNO3d NVIDIA GEFORCE 7300GS and monitor is SAMSUNG SYNCMASTER 205BW 20.1" TFT-LCD. I have the latest NVIDIA graphics driver installed. My camera is a Canon EOS 40D Thanks for any help. Mark |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Colour Management / Calibration / Profiles ?
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:31:44 -0000, "Mark Spencer"
wrote: I'd appreciate some advice if anyone can help? I'm relatively new to digital photography. My images are distinctly 'muddy' when reproduced on something other than my monitor at home. This is immediately obvious when I print, but I'd assumed I needed a new printer (it's an Epson Stylus Photo 895), but as I got the same 'muddy' quality when I submitted three images for projection at my local camera club last night, I'm wondering whether it could be something to do with Colour Calibration/Management. When I first installed Photoshop ~6 months back, it said (something like) the monitor's profile appears to be corrput, did I want to use it anyway? I said no. This seemed to be born out by the fact that images I viewed in Windows Photo Gallery and Powerpoint all had a terrible sepia tone until I subsequently deleted the monitor profile. Vista Color Management is now configured to use sRGB IEC61966-2.1 as default for monitor and printer. Have I set this up wrong somehow, or should I be using a different colour profile/s? My graphics card is INNO3d NVIDIA GEFORCE 7300GS and monitor is SAMSUNG SYNCMASTER 205BW 20.1" TFT-LCD. I have the latest NVIDIA graphics driver installed. My camera is a Canon EOS 40D Thanks for any help. Mark You should be able to download a profile from Samsung for that monitor. It won't be tuned exactly to yours but it will probably be closer to it than sRGB. Note, though, that it will likely be tuned for the monitor's default factory settings. Alternately you can see if the monitor settings include an sRGB mode. If so you could switch to that and stick with the sRGB profile you're using. It probably won't quite give you access to the full range of colors your monitor can produce, but it's more of a known quantity. The best option is to get a monitor profiler and produce a custom profile to match your preferred monitor settings. Unlike the options above, this is not free (unless you can borrow one from a friend or fellow club member. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Colour Management / Calibration / Profiles ?
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 10:06:44 -0500, John A.
wrote: On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:31:44 -0000, "Mark Spencer" wrote: I'd appreciate some advice if anyone can help? I'm relatively new to digital photography. My images are distinctly 'muddy' when reproduced on something other than my monitor at home. This is immediately obvious when I print, but I'd assumed I needed a new printer (it's an Epson Stylus Photo 895), but as I got the same 'muddy' quality when I submitted three images for projection at my local camera club last night, I'm wondering whether it could be something to do with Colour Calibration/Management. When I first installed Photoshop ~6 months back, it said (something like) the monitor's profile appears to be corrput, did I want to use it anyway? I said no. This seemed to be born out by the fact that images I viewed in Windows Photo Gallery and Powerpoint all had a terrible sepia tone until I subsequently deleted the monitor profile. Vista Color Management is now configured to use sRGB IEC61966-2.1 as default for monitor and printer. Have I set this up wrong somehow, or should I be using a different colour profile/s? My graphics card is INNO3d NVIDIA GEFORCE 7300GS and monitor is SAMSUNG SYNCMASTER 205BW 20.1" TFT-LCD. I have the latest NVIDIA graphics driver installed. My camera is a Canon EOS 40D Thanks for any help. Mark You should be able to download a profile from Samsung for that monitor. It won't be tuned exactly to yours but it will probably be closer to it than sRGB. Note, though, that it will likely be tuned for the monitor's default factory settings. Alternately you can see if the monitor settings include an sRGB mode. If so you could switch to that and stick with the sRGB profile you're using. It probably won't quite give you access to the full range of colors your monitor can produce, but it's more of a known quantity. The best option is to get a monitor profiler and produce a custom profile to match your preferred monitor settings. Unlike the options above, this is not free (unless you can borrow one from a friend or fellow club member. Oh, and you should also get a profile for your printer. Download or custom - same deal as the monitor. I'm not familiar with printer profilers, though, so you'll have to research that or depend on the good graces of another poster or fellow club member. I figure they're not the same as monitor profilers, though, given that paper doesn't produce its own light. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Colour Management / Calibration / Profiles ?
"Mark Spencer" wrote in message o.uk... I'd appreciate some advice if anyone can help? I'm relatively new to digital photography. My images are distinctly 'muddy' when reproduced on something other than my monitor at home. This is immediately obvious when I print, but I'd assumed I needed a new printer (it's an Epson Stylus Photo 895), but as I got the same 'muddy' quality when I submitted three images for projection at my local camera club last night, I'm wondering whether it could be something to do with Colour Calibration/Management. When I first installed Photoshop ~6 months back, it said (something like) the monitor's profile appears to be corrput, did I want to use it anyway? I said no. This seemed to be born out by the fact that images I viewed in Windows Photo Gallery and Powerpoint all had a terrible sepia tone until I subsequently deleted the monitor profile. Vista Color Management is now configured to use sRGB IEC61966-2.1 as default for monitor and printer. Have I set this up wrong somehow, or should I be using a different colour profile/s? My graphics card is INNO3d NVIDIA GEFORCE 7300GS and monitor is SAMSUNG SYNCMASTER 205BW 20.1" TFT-LCD. I have the latest NVIDIA graphics driver installed. My camera is a Canon EOS 40D Thanks for any help. Mark Start by using Adobe Gamma - this can create a profile for your monitor. Your copy of Photoshop probably put Adobe Gamma onto your machine. If so, it's in the control panel. Run and follow the instructions. If you want more information on Adobe Gamma there are plenty of references to it on Google. Much better is to get someone in your photoclub to lend you their monitor profiling hardware (e.g. a Spyder 3). This will generate a much more accurate colour profile. If you are using Epson ink and paper then you should get reasonable prints. They may well be darker than what you see on the screen because screens transmit light whereas paper reflects it. I run my monitor at 50% brightness to edit photographs and get a good brightness match with the prints. If you are not using Epson ink/paper then you will have to get a print profile made (or fiddle about with printer settings a lot). There are lots of sites that carry information about the profiling process. There is probably someone in your photoclub who can give you a potted tutorial. It is also best to set your camera and Photoshop to the Adobe 1998 colour space - that way you have matched colour spaces and a bigger range of colours. The topic is rather large and occupies two tutorial evenings in my photoclub every year or so. Regards John |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Colour Management / Calibration / Profiles ?
I think you may be experiencing a variation of the "prints too dark"
problem. First set the monitor to its default settings for brightness, contrast and RGB (read the manual). I have one of these and it is a very good monitor for its price point. If you are shooting jpegs they are in sRGB and will have color that is as "correct" as the camera exposure, white balance and processing algorithms can manage. If you are shooting raw you should choose the Adobe RGB color space, which leads to other issues. If you have your monitor set to default settings, you shoot jpegs and you use sRGB as the default setting in PS (or instruct PS to preserve the embedded profile) you should be seeing reasonably accurate color unless your monitor is defective. Non color managed images, which is everything outside of Photoshop, should also look reasonably accurate. The generic PnP monitor profile is not any different than any Samsung would supply, based on my experience. If you do not make any adjustments to your jpeg images they should project and even print correctly. If you make adjustments in Photoshop, based on the overly bright LCD images, problems start. If you want accurate color and brightness levels you need to calibrate your monitor with a reasonably sophisticated device, like the latest Spyder, but you have to aim for a brightness level of around 100 (using both brightness and contrast adjustments)--that is what CRTs provide and reasonably mimics the reflectivity of glossy print paper. This avoids the needs for other workarounds. Most people do not seem to understand that they are working on a consumer grade monitor that is a 6 bit device that fakes an 8 bit gamut and printing with an 8 bit device that cannot fully reproduce 8 bit color and usually exaggerates parts of the gamut exaggerated by the mismatch between inks and lcds. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Colour Management / Calibration / Profiles ?
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 11:31:44 -0000, "Mark Spencer"
wrote: I'd appreciate some advice if anyone can help? I'm relatively new to digital photography. My images are distinctly 'muddy' when reproduced on something other than my monitor at home. This is immediately obvious when I print, but I'd assumed I needed a new printer (it's an Epson Stylus Photo 895), but as I got the same 'muddy' quality when I submitted three images for projection at my local camera club last night, I'm wondering whether it could be something to do with Colour Calibration/Management. This might be caused by images in AdobeRBG being shown/printed without using a color manged application (properly). What color space is the camera set to if shooting jpeg or what is the working colorspace of PS? When printing do you let PS or the Epson driver control color management and with what settings, including the profile you use for the paper/ink combo? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Colour Management / Calibration / Profiles ?
Hi,
sorry for pirating the thread, but I think the question fits well... For quite a while I've been thinking about some kind of home-brew color profiling for hobby use. I don't expect to be ultimately accurate, rather I want to be just better than nothing... My question is, whether some tool exists that allows me to manually profile my monitor(s) and printer by using a sample card I have printed by the photo studio I use most. Basically an image file that I have printed at the studio which I could use to adjust my monitor against. This would include patches of white, black and gray and patches of different colors, I suppose. I would require a GUI to display something on my screen and some sliders to adjust what is being displayed until it resembles the printed version. Finally I would get a profile I could use within my raw converter, whatever... First, is this possible? (I know it won't be too exact, but closer than nothing ;-) Second, where do I find the software (including the reference image)? Something that runs on Linux would be great ;-) Thanks! |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Colour Management / Calibration / Profiles ?
In message , Bernhard Agthe
writes For quite a while I've been thinking about some kind of home-brew color profiling for hobby use. I don't expect to be ultimately accurate, rather I want to be just better than nothing... Then there is no point at all... there is plenty of hardware about that is inexpensive AND calibrated. Monitor profiles can be downloaded from the monitor makers, most printers come with generic profiles for the printer makers paper, most decent independent papers come with free generic ICC profiles for various printers. My question is, whether some tool exists that allows me to manually profile my monitor(s) and printer by using a sample card I have printed by the photo studio I use most. You need colorimeter HW to calibrate the monitor. This needs to be calibrated HW. The low cost entry level calibrators cost less than it will cost you to make the HW. BTW you do not calibrate "the printer" You calibrate the printer and ink on a particular paper. Most printer manufacturers provide generic ICC profiles for their inks and papers. NOTE these profiles are in ASCII To do your own profile you need a test image with all the colour blocks on them, there are plenty about you can download (try anywhere that does the calibrator HW). Then you need spectrograph HW to read the colours on the paper you printed. This need to be calibrated HW. Again this will cost as much to buy as make. SO there is little point in DIY HW particularly as generic ICC profiles are free and will be as good if not better. Basically an image file that I have printed at the studio which I could use to adjust my monitor against. This would include patches of white, black and gray and patches of different colors, I suppose. Yes usually at least 256 colours. These need to be "exact colour" blocks. I would require a GUI to display something on my screen and some sliders to adjust what is being displayed until it resembles the printed version. Finally I would get a profile I could use within my raw converter, whatever... First, is this possible? (I know it won't be too exact, but closer than nothing ;-) Yes... Lots of people have done it. You can buy the HW and SW from lots of places. The trouble is it is a LOT cheaper to buy the HW than do your own "approximate" versions. Second, where do I find the software (including the reference image)? Something that runs on Linux would be great ;-) The SW and images can be downloaded from most of the sites that do the HW. There are many test images about. What I have done is use an Eye-one profiler for the screens. Then I use an Epson printer. This comes with generic profiles for their paper. I use Permajet paper and their generic profiles for their paper and Epson Inks. If you use Permajet Inkflow system then there are not only the Generic ICC profiles for their ink and paper on the Epson printers but they do a FREE bespoke profile service. The difference is they use professional "printer" profiling HW that costs thousands for a very good custom profile. So building my own is pointless (and as I am an embedded Engineer with 30 years experience and have lots of tools and HW at my disposal it is something I could do. ) Look at it another way. What are your camera and lenes worth? How much do you spend on your printer and computer? So why skimp on the one thing you need to make sure the colours are accurate? Something like the http://www.pantone.com/pages/product...ct.aspx?pid=79 or the http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/product...1610&PT_ID=413 is peanuts compared to the rest of your kit. -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Colour Management / Calibration / Profiles ?
Chris H wrote:
In message , Bernhard Agthe writes For quite a while I've been thinking about some kind of home-brew color profiling for hobby use. I don't expect to be ultimately accurate, rather I want to be just better than nothing... Then there is no point at all... there is plenty of hardware about that is inexpensive AND calibrated. Monitor profiles can be downloaded from the monitor makers, most printers come with generic profiles for the printer makers paper, most decent independent papers come with free generic ICC profiles for various printers. My question is, whether some tool exists that allows me to manually profile my monitor(s) and printer by using a sample card I have printed by the photo studio I use most. You need colorimeter HW to calibrate the monitor. This needs to be calibrated HW. The low cost entry level calibrators cost less than it will cost you to make the HW. BTW you do not calibrate "the printer" You calibrate the printer and ink on a particular paper. Most printer manufacturers provide generic ICC profiles for their inks and papers. NOTE these profiles are in ASCII To do your own profile you need a test image with all the colour blocks on them, there are plenty about you can download (try anywhere that does the calibrator HW). Then you need spectrograph HW to read the colours on the paper you printed. This need to be calibrated HW. Again this will cost as much to buy as make. SO there is little point in DIY HW particularly as generic ICC profiles are free and will be as good if not better. Basically an image file that I have printed at the studio which I could use to adjust my monitor against. This would include patches of white, black and gray and patches of different colors, I suppose. Yes usually at least 256 colours. These need to be "exact colour" blocks. I would require a GUI to display something on my screen and some sliders to adjust what is being displayed until it resembles the printed version. Finally I would get a profile I could use within my raw converter, whatever... First, is this possible? (I know it won't be too exact, but closer than nothing ;-) Yes... Lots of people have done it. You can buy the HW and SW from lots of places. The trouble is it is a LOT cheaper to buy the HW than do your own "approximate" versions. Second, where do I find the software (including the reference image)? Something that runs on Linux would be great ;-) The SW and images can be downloaded from most of the sites that do the HW. There are many test images about. What I have done is use an Eye-one profiler for the screens. Then I use an Epson printer. This comes with generic profiles for their paper. I use Permajet paper and their generic profiles for their paper and Epson Inks. If you use Permajet Inkflow system then there are not only the Generic ICC profiles for their ink and paper on the Epson printers but they do a FREE bespoke profile service. The difference is they use professional "printer" profiling HW that costs thousands for a very good custom profile. So building my own is pointless (and as I am an embedded Engineer with 30 years experience and have lots of tools and HW at my disposal it is something I could do. ) Look at it another way. What are your camera and lenes worth? How much do you spend on your printer and computer? So why skimp on the one thing you need to make sure the colours are accurate? Something like the http://www.pantone.com/pages/product...ct.aspx?pid=79 or the http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/product...1610&PT_ID=413 is peanuts compared to the rest of your kit. But for hobby use you can use something like the following simple cheap suck it and see method. Find a good on-line downloadable colour chart. Get a print made of it by someone whose printing you like and trust for good colour accuracy. Then fiddle with your printer and monitor profiling until you've got a reasonably good approximation to that good print on each of them. You'll need to arrange a good white high colour temp light on the print which is not too bright and shaded from your monitor in order to compare print colour side by side with monitor colour. You will need a good colour matching eye and some experience in colour matching to do this well. If you're old enough they may even have taught you how to do that in school art classes in the old days before children became too badly behaved to teach them much. This is far from a perfect or lab quality accuracy calibration, but if it produces results which you find it hard to find fault with, what do you care? :-) -- Chris Malcolm |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Colour Management / Calibration / Profiles ?
In message , Chris Malcolm
writes But for hobby use It is pointless. To get something accurate it is still far cheaper to buy a system. Unless you want to make an inaccurate calibrator.... cheap suck it and see method. Find a good on-line downloadable colour chart. There are dozens of those about to download. Get a print made of it by someone whose printing you like and trust for good colour accuracy. Then fiddle with your printer and monitor profiling until you've got a reasonably good approximation to that good print on each of them. You'll need to arrange a good white high colour temp light on the print which is not too bright and shaded from your monitor in order to compare print colour side by side with monitor colour. You will need a good colour matching eye and some experience in colour matching to do this well. If you're old enough they may even have taught you how to do that in school art classes in the old days before children became too badly behaved to teach them much. This is far from a perfect or lab quality accuracy calibration, but if it produces results which you find it hard to find fault with, what do you care? :-) SO you have a sort of approximate calibration..... how is that better than using the generic printer/paper profiles and adjusting your screen to suite? Or for a few pounds you have an accurate one. Actually all you need to do is borrow a screen calibrator. Then use the generic printer profiles which will do a job better than the method you are suggesting. The OP is suggesting making his own colorimeter and spectrometer. Again pointless. -- \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ \/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/ \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Monitor Calibration/Colour Profiles | Paul[_6_] | Digital SLR Cameras | 16 | October 28th 08 08:40 AM |
Colour management for non-colour-managed apps? | [email protected] | Digital SLR Cameras | 8 | January 9th 07 03:56 PM |
ACER Monitor Colour Profiles | huckleberry | Digital Photography | 8 | March 20th 06 03:12 AM |
Setting up equipment - Colour Profiles | Norfolk and Goode | Digital Photography | 0 | January 3rd 05 10:31 AM |
Setting up equipment - Colour Profiles | Norfolk and Goode | Digital Photography | 0 | January 3rd 05 10:31 AM |