Monitor Calibration and Printing

[Tourmeister]

So the last thread here touching on this subject was from about three years ago. In camera/computer terms, that was a long time ago. I've never done any prints, but now I would like to get some shots printed professionally. I've read lots about the need to calibrate the monitor to be sure the prints come back looking as expected. To that end...

Anyone have experience with recent versions of the various calibration tools available like the Spyder5, ColorMunki, etc,... Anything to watch out for or to look for?

Got any preferences/recommendations for printing services?

 

[WoodButcher]

I had an old version of the spyder, v2, I think. I played with it. Only came with Windows driver so I had to figure something out for the mac. The software I had was sold old that a couple of years ago, I tossed it since I couldn't make it work...nor could anybody.

So, I keep thinking I should get a newer version. That being said, I seldom print, and when I do, it is at home. Or so far. I do plan on doing some larger prints. I've read all sorts of tricks for testing a print place. But monitor calibration is the start of getting it right. Loading the calibration/printer/paper files from the printer is the next step. Lots of steps. The upside to using an outside place is you don't have to deal with clog printers.

My daughter has used Walgreen's several times and for 4x6 shots to share with friends they seem decent. Costco actually has a good reputation and I'll probably go with them. They have some high end printers. Many high end photo hosting sites do prints also. Smugmug and 500px for example.

That's my brain dump.

 

[WoodButcher]

Oh, and this topic borders on bikes and oil if you ask it on a photo forum.

 

[Duke]

Calibrating my monitor is by far the smartest thing I have ever done when it comes to photography. It is crazy how far off I used to be, over saturated and under exposed prints or even when posting on here I would get critiques stating as much but it looked fine.

I have a Spyder4 and am very satisfied with it, and I routinely print at Sams and we recently got a Costco's by the house and have used them a couple of times now without compliant.

 

[Duke]

Oh, and this topic borders on bikes and oil if you ask it on a photo forum.

lol.... yep.

 

[Tourmeister]

So when you print somewhere like Costco/Sams, do you just take the image in on a memory card or do you do it online somehow?

 

[Duke]

So when you print somewhere like Costco/Sams, do you just take the image in on a memory card or do you do it online somehow?

I guess 90% of the time I use the online submitter with both stores, and then pick them up a day later. But you can (and I have) taken in images on SD or Thumb Drives too.

 

[TWTim]

When you talk about "calibrating" a monitor for print purposes, the word should always be set in quotation marks to denote a slight sarcasm. Here is a brief rundown of the myth of monitor "calibration" based on my experiences and training over almost two decades working in visual arts.

Monitors generally operate in RGB or Additive Color Mode. That is to say, as more color is added, the screen approaches white. Printers generally work in CMYK or Subtractive Color Mode, which is the exact opposite. That is to say, as more color is removed, the print approaches white. The gamut of color on even a mediocre monitor is exponentially larger than the color gamut available from even the most advanced printer. Add to that what is widely referred to in the print industry as The Cyan Problem (a molecular issue that, while having been improved on over the past decade or so, still causes color consistency variances), and you can see the problem "calibration" poses.

Go to any high-end photography or graphics studio and you'll see that the test-printing phase of any project, especially on reproductions of paintings and other high-end art, quickly turns into a game of revision, educated guessing, mathematical calculations, and artistic judgment calls. By the time a final color profile is arrived at, there's usually a mountain of prints on the floor ready for the dumpster and -- despite having gotten remarkably close -- the end product still isn't anyone's idea of perfect. In the end, it's about knowing your gear, understanding the numbers related to color correction and grading, and being able to analyze those factors as correctly as possible.

That color channel "info" window in Photoshop, along with histograms and other values are there for a reason. A good colormaster can tell you if a skin tone will print correctly based on the numeric values of the color channels and the slope of a histogram. He'll also know things like the dot gain of his medium and the chromaticity of the monitor he's using in reference to everything else. The bottom line is because exact calibration between a monitor and a printer is, at this point in the history of technology, impossible.

I'm not saying there's no value in having a good, truish monitor and to adjust it well. But some of the nonsense products I see aimed at exploiting people's ignorance when it comes to this issue make me shake my head. In the end, you need a deeper understanding of what's really happening digitally, physically, and mechanically. That's worth more than any gadget or overpriced piece of gear.

 

[WoodButcher]

And just to tease Tim a bit, there's oil discussion.

Scott, remember the bird pictures sitting on my desk? They match my monitor. I printed them at home. I did some test prints and some tweaking to make sure I got them close to each other. As long as I use the same printer, ink and paper, I'll get close results. As Tim suggests, the only sure way is to print and examine. The large, high end print companies spend a lot of time (or should) keeping their printers consistent. So if you send to your local Costco and the print looks good then you will have some confidence that more prints will be. Your local Walgreen's might not be as consistent.

You can drive yourself crazy trying to get perfection. Best to hope for pretty close and realize that there are going to be some days where your print didn't come out as expected and sometimes not your fault.

On the Costco site, in the Photo section, look at the very bottom. There is a Printer Profile tab. It gives you two links for downloading printer profiles so you can prep/soft proof your images. The links are to the external lab that prints large prints and the internal print shop that does local printing of smaller images. Both have explanations of how to install and what they do.

 

[Tourmeister]

I'm not looking for perfect.

I'm just looking for a print that is not radically different than what I see on the screen after I tweak things. In essence, I don't want a print that is overly dark or overly bright if I think the image looks good on the screen. The issue though is screen brightness, contrast, ambient lighting, etc,... all affect that as well. If I can get pretty close to the original shot as seen through the camera, then I'll be happy.

I did try printing on my home HP color laser jet and it SUCKED.

I have one of those little lunch box sized Epson Picturemate printers that is maybe 12 years old. It only does 4 X 6 prints, but it does REALLY well. The big downside is that the ink cartridges are still pricey and don't last long. If it sits for very long, the heads get gunked and it takes a LOT of cleaning cycles to get them good again, which wastes a LOT of ink. Epson claims 100 prints per cartridge, but I think that assumes NO cleaning. Epson won't sell the cartridges without paper. So you end up with a LOT of paper that is never used because you never get 100 prints from a cartridge.

I'm going to head over to the local Walgreen and see what I can get with what I've got right now before I start dropping money on more gadgets. I'm hoping to get about an 8 X 10 size for framing as a gift.

 

[Tourmeister]

Well... I sent a few prints to our local Walgreens via their website and picked them up this evening. It takes a little over an hour from the time of submitting to pickup. Not sure if that will always be the case though. Once home, I held them up next to my monitor and they are VERY different! They seem to have a distinct yellowish/orange color cast to them. They are also a little darker, maybe 1/3-2/3 stops. Other than that, they look great. If someone were to simply look at the prints without ever having seen the originals on the computer, they'd likely not know any better. The problem is that the images I want to print already have a bit of a warm color to them because they were taken in the evening sun. One thing I might try though is allowing for color correction when the images are printed. I opted for NO color correction this time just to see what I would get.

Cost wise, 4 x 6 prints are normally $.29 each. 8 x 10s are $3.99 each. They just happened to be running a special this weekend for 40% off all prints. It was $2.42 for 14 4 x 6 prints.

I'll keep you posted...

 

[Tourmeister]

So I got the Spyder5-Pro. The "Pro" version has the constant room light monitor that will detect if the room lighting changes. It was easy to install and the calibration process was a snap. My monitor brightness could not be adjusted high enough to match the target level per the calibration routine. It would only get about 2/3 of the way there before it was maxed out. When the calibration is done, it lets you flip back and forth between the original settings and the new settings. The final result does indeed look better on screen. However, I have not printed anything yet to see what difference that might make. There is definitely a slightly warmer feel to the screen now.

 

[jredford]

Printing is a process for me. I have calibrated my iMac with a spyder and still have to calibrate printing with test images. Some colors are easier than others. Paper makes a huge difference - I print on Canson Infinity Mi-Tientes art rag. Usually I will line up three to four really small versions of test pic then pick the one closest and modify until I am satisfied.

I print with a Canon 9000 MK II.