Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more
Can't Access your Account?
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Just added the very lovely Canon ix6500 to work along side my ip4700. I did notice however that printing the same image on both computers gave me quite different colours. My little A4 printer, as always, gave great results with good colour rendition and accuracy. Sadly the A3 was quite a bit out on the colours which has led me on a long journey through Photoshop and beyond to discover the best way to get accurate results. Subsequently I enabled Photoshop to manage the colour and disabled the colour profile of the printer. In the printer settings I set the colour/intensity to manual. In the Matching tab it is now ICM-Adobe 1998-Relative Colorimetric.
Mostly it is good except for dark reds which turn brown.
Does any one else have a similar problem or have resolved something like it or have any ideas as to what else can be done to achieve a better result?
It would be good to get those shades of red back!
Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.
We use an HP Z3200 that has a built-in spectrophotometer. When we press the "calibrate" button, it prints out test patches, reads the colour values and then tweaks the profile.
Some of the Epson printers have a similar facility.
You'd need to do a lot of printing to make it worthwhile. Plenty of punters are looking for a good printing service so you'd have an instant business.
Quote: printing the same image on both computers
Doh! Should say printers not computers.
Quote: Plenty of punters are looking for a good printing service so you'd have an instant business.
Could take a while. I don't have one of them spectrophenomenometer thingys!
Try using "Perceptual" rendering intent rather than relative colorimetric because the results will be more natural.
Most printers can't cope with the whole of the ARGB gamut because they don't have 12 inks like the Z3200 and I'd bet your monitor doesn't display the whole of ARGB either.
You'd get better results using sRGB, not least because you could see what you're going to get. Invest in a monitor calibration device.
I looked into the whole perceptual vs colorimetric and the consensus of opinion was toward colorimetric. I will give it a try.
The difference between Relative Colorimetric and Perceptual can be quite subtle and they can work equally well. Which setting to use will very much depend on each individual image, generally images with lots of bright, saturated colours will benefit from choosing Perceptual rending intent. They basically control how out of gamut colours are printed. The only sure way of telling which setting will produce the better result is to view an on-screen soft-proofed representation using each rendering intent and choose whichever one gives the most pleasing result. To do this though, it means having an accurately profiled monitor, decent icc profiles for each paper type you intend to use (custom made profiles will always be far superior to the generic profiles supplied with your printer and nowadays they can be purchased so cheaply, i.e. under £10, it's foolish not to) and finally, the software colour settings and printer settings must be set up correctly.
Quote: In the Matching tab it is now ICM-Adobe 1998-Relative Colorimetric.
This should be set to None
Edit: Having just re-read the whole thread I now notice that you mention not having a calibrated monitor. Unfortunately, that's a crucial and essential step in the process of being able to get consistent results and being able to match print to screen, along with the other steps mentioned above, without those steps in place it's very much a shot in the dark as to how your prints will turn out compared to how you would like them to turn out.
I didn't say my monitor was not calibrated. I also use an X-Rite colour checker passport to check colours against printing. As I said before the my A4 printer always gives superb results but somehow the A3 printer gives a different result.
Quote: Could take a while. I don't have one of them spectrophenomenometer thingys!
I mistakenly assumed you hadn't.
What version of photoshop are you using?
How I print my photos is I go into my Darkroom where I have three enlargers, a Durst M601, a Durst M305 and a LPL C7700 pro and if I wnat to print 35mm I usually use the Durst M305 with a 50mm f4 El-Nikkor lens -- I set up some dishes to size I want . say 16x12" Exhibition Size and put in about 1 litre of home=made Print Developer in one dish, some Citric Acid Stop Bath in another dish and some print fixer in another dish then check with thermometer that the developer is around 20oC .. With my Safelight on I focus up the negative I want to fit 16x12" on my 'NOVA' easel under the enlarger and do a test strip to get the exposure right on some Ilford Multigrade paper with about 80 Magenta filters in the enlarger to give the contrast -- then after developing and fixing the test strip I can put on the light to examine it -- I decide the TIME for the density of the subject and if I want more CONTRAST I add some more MAGENTA -- if it is too contrasty I take OUT some MAGENTA and do one more small test strip -- then I do the final 16x12" print -- fix, and wash for 2 minutes, dry with hair dryer and Hey Presto !! -- Hope fully another Winner !
Quote: What version of photoshop are you using?
CS6. (Nice hubby bought it for me )
Quote: Hope fully another Winner !
Sounds a lot more complicated than mine but no doubt a winner.
I know it's a bit of a cop out, but rather than use Photoshop to print to my Canon printer, I use Canon's Easy Photo Print because I get better results.
Try it for one of your prints, nowt much to lose.
I'll give it a go. It really is just the large printer that has the colour issues. I have been looking at some different monitor calibrators today but the prices may be a tad out of my reach!
It's hard to blame your workflow if you already output accurate colour to one printer using that workflow. Let's say that it's safe to assume that your monitor is accurate, your colour settings and print choices in Photoshop are accurate too.
I think I'm right in saying that that would leave the printer profile. I know that some people have profiles custom built for their printer and paper. Look here and you can see these services are popular. Possibly the way to go?
I recently changed form a Canon A4 printer, which broke, to the Canon IX 6500. My screen is calibrated with a new ColorMunki Display and as far as I am aware, I have set all the software and printer settings correctly, but the colours printed are wrong. The greens are more a shade of brown. The printer is only a few weeks old and at the moment I am using Canon inks. Frustrated at wasting ink and A3 paper is an understatement.
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
You must be a member to leave a comment
Get the latest photography news straight from ePHOTOzine in your email every month and win prizes!
1st March 2014 - 31st March 2014
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
View March's Photo Month Calendar