Digital BW, The Print

Hey all,

As for reading the prints, a lot of people seem to
recommend the x-rite 810 (used, of course :-)) but I
don't see lifting that thing up to my monitor's glass.
(Just kidding!) Anywho, what should I use to make sure
what I'm seeing on my screen matches the print as
closely as possible?

Thanks
Dimitri Katsaros

=====
Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

* -----Original Message-----
* From: Dimitri Katsaros [mailto:dcka@...m] 
* Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 6:08 AM
* To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
* Subject: [Digital BW] Getting everything calibrated and profiled
* 
* 
* Hey all,
* 
* As for reading the prints, a lot of people seem to
* recommend the x-rite 810 (used, of course :-)) but I
* don't see lifting that thing up to my monitor's glass.
* (Just kidding!) Anywho, what should I use to make sure
* what I'm seeing on my screen matches the print as
* closely as possible?

Dimitri,

First you have to start with a calibrated monitor. These means creating a
monitor profile which is best done with something like ColorVision's OptiCal
or PhotoCal software with their Spider color sensor.

Then for grayscale you can use the X-Rite 810 to take readings off of step
wedges and create custom dot gain curves for each ink/paper combination to
apply in Photoshop under View>Proof Setup. You then have on screen a
reasonably accurate rendition of what will come out of the printer. It will
never be quite the same since you are comparing a glowing screen to a matte
piece of paper.

With more advanced (expensive) equipment and software you can create a
printing profile that accurately represents the hue of the grayscale inks as
well.

Martin Wesley
http://www.carolyn.cc/Guests/MartinWesley/pages/MW_01.html
http://www.borderless-photos.de/guests.html

Dimitri wrote, in part:

>* ... what should I use to make sure
>* what I'm seeing on my screen matches the print as
>* closely as possible?

Martin wrote, in part:

>First you have to start with a calibrated monitor.
>These means creating a monitor profile which is
>best done with something like ColorVision's OptiCal
>or PhotoCal software with their Spider color sensor.
>...

Or, if you're as cheap as I am, you just use the Adobe Gamma procedure (in
the Control Panel for Windows 98).  When I match the gray bars, I find it
useful to blur my eyes.

Then to get the monitor image to match the print, I used the Photoshop 6
preview feature/procedure.  A very good description of it has been done by
Tyler Boley at

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/piezography3000/message/17849

This procedure uses the Edit, Color settings to make a custom dot gain
curve, and saves the curve in a manner that it can be used in a View, Proof
Setup preview system that does not alter the working space and affect the
RGB values when the image is converted to RGB for printing.

Here is the guts of Tyler's post:

"1) Open the file, go to image/ mode/ assign profile, select "don't
color manage this document".
2) Go to edit/ color settings. Check Advanced Mode, check preview. At
working spaces, scroll gray up to "custom dot gain".
3) Adjust the curve so that the image on the monitor matches your
print, name the curve in the space provided. Click OK.
4) You should now see your curve as the gray working space, click on
it and scroll up to save gray, it should automatically
have selected your colorsync profile folder on the Mac, no idea
where it goes on a PC, hopefully PS automatically brought up the
right location by default. No need to rename it, save.
5) You should now still have the color settings box open, don't hit
ok! Hit cancel so all you working spaces will remain as
before, this new curve will only be used for preview.
6) Go to View/ Proof setup/ Custom. Scroll down to the bottom, your
new curve should be there, select it. Check "preserve
Color Numbers", unlike previewing with color profiles. Hit ok."

The only thing I recommend in addition to this procedure is to record a
Photoshop "Action" so that the preview/monitor profiling steps become a
simple, single-keystroke function (a function key on my PC was designated).
That makes the procedure easy to apply to images after they are opened.

I use variable-tone inksets and find that having the monitor hue match the
print is unnecessary.  We're talking about subtle B&W color biases.  I find
small proof prints are where I make all my final decisions.  I can't imagine
I'd ever go to a large display print on cotton paper before doing 8x10
proofs on EAM.  So, I find the manual procedure just outlined to be more
than adequate to get first rate B&W prints.

But, of course, for those who like the ultimate there is always more that
can be done.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com

... to some degree you have to realize that it is ultimately 
hopeless.  A luminous screen will never look exactly like your 
reflective print... take everyone's suggestions and in the end be 
content if you can anticipate your printed output well enough to 
produce controlled prints that you are happy with.

mark

* -----Original Message-----
* From: Paul Roark [mailto:paul.roark@verizon.net] 
* Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 12:35 PM
* To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
* Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Getting everything calibrated and profiled
* 
* Dimitri wrote, in part:
* 
* >* ... what should I use to make sure
* >* what I'm seeing on my screen matches the print as
* >* closely as possible?
* 
* Martin wrote, in part:
* 
* >First you have to start with a calibrated monitor.
* >These means creating a monitor profile which is
* >best done with something like ColorVision's OptiCal
* >or PhotoCal software with their Spider color sensor.
* >...
* 
* Or, if you're as cheap as I am, you just use the Adobe Gamma 
* procedure (in the Control Panel for Windows 98).  When I 
* match the gray bars, I find it useful to blur my eyes.

Paul,

I don't know. You can do it this way but I am way happier with the results I
get using hardware calibration. My eyes just aren't good enough. I would opt
for a monitor spyder and software if at all possible. Almost a must if you
do any color work.
* 
* Then to get the monitor image to match the print, I used the 
* Photoshop 6 preview feature/procedure.  A very good 
* description of it has been done by Tyler Boley at
* 
* http://groups.yahoo.com/group/piezography3000/message/17849
* 
You can also find Tyler's post in a PDF format in the Files section in
folder:

Files > Image Processing

(snip)
* 
* The only thing I recommend in addition to this procedure is 
* to record a Photoshop "Action" so that the preview/monitor 
* profiling steps become a simple, single-keystroke function (a 
* function key on my PC was designated). That makes the 
* procedure easy to apply to images after they are opened.

Good idea. Do you have one for each ink/paper combo?
* 
* I use variable-tone inksets and find that having the monitor 
* hue match the print is unnecessary.  We're talking about 
* subtle B&W color biases.  I find small proof prints are where 
* I make all my final decisions.  I can't imagine I'd ever go 
* to a large display print on cotton paper before doing 8x10 
* proofs on EAM.  So, I find the manual procedure just outlined 
* to be more than adequate to get first rate B&W prints.

In actuality of course you don't need WYSIWYG for printing at all.  In the
traditional darkroom you are always making adjustments to the printing
process based upon the previous version of the print. I think people get
very lost in the fact that their prints don't match the monitor which isn't
the point. The goal is a nice print which as odd as it may seem has nothing
to do with what may be on your screen.

I think a good on screen color match with tone and hue can help you get
there faster but in the end I wind up making full size prints and then
tweaking the final adjustment in "blind".

When I was running MIS-VM on the 1280 Tyler created an RGB profile for the
ink set and it really was amazing to see on screen the effect of the
different curves on the color of the image. I think it is a very useful tool
that shortens the path to a final print but whether it is worth the ~$2,000
investment for a spectrophotometer and profiling software is another matter.
In retrospect I would put the money somewhere else but if you can afford it
I recommend it.
* 
* But, of course, for those who like the ultimate there is 
* always more that can be done.
* 
Yep. With the caution that you will spend more and more for smaller and
smaller improvements.

Martin Wesley
http://www.carolyn.cc/Guests/MartinWesley/pages/MW_01.html
http://www.borderless-photos.de/guests.html

Paul, (or others...)

A curiosity I have with the approach outlined in Tyler's approach is 
its ability (or inability) to work with the Conetech Piezography 
plugin in Photoshop.

I have played with this approach on numeroous occasions without any 
success. I have found that I need to actually load (hit the OK 
button) in the colour preferences and set the custom dot-gain as my 
greyscale working space.

Obviously, the result of this is images appear on screen and print 
fine within MY closed Photoshop system, however, in order to move 
images outside of the system I need to convert to RGB, for example, 
to re-map the tonal values back into something more mainstream.

Being able to move this custom dot-gain "transfer function" from the 
frontend of Photoshop to the backend has definate benefits. 
Unfortunately, I have had NO success while using the Piezography 
plugin. Has anyone else overcome this problem...

regards
Craig 

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:

>
> 
> Here is the guts of Tyler's post:
>......................
> working spaces, scroll gray up to "custom dot gain".
> 3) Adjust the curve so that the image on the monitor matches your
> print, name the curve in the space provided. Click OK.
> 4) You should now see your curve as the gray working space, click on
> it and scroll up to save gray, it should automatically
> have selected your colorsync profile folder on the Mac, no idea
> where it goes on a PC, hopefully PS automatically brought up the
> right location by default. No need to rename it, save.
> 5) You should now still have the color settings box open, don't hit
> ok! Hit cancel so all you working spaces will remain as
> before, this new curve will only be used for preview.
> 6) Go to View/ Proof setup/ Custom. Scroll down to the bottom, your
> new curve should be there, select it. Check "preserve
> Color Numbers", unlike previewing with color profiles. Hit ok."
> 
>...........
> 
> Paul
> http://www.PaulRoark.com

Martin,

I agree that to do color work a monitor spyder and appropriate software is
very important.  But then, that's one reason I like B&W so much.  I don't
have to worry about the color being "right."

I think B&W remains a medium in digital printing that can be done with very
little equipment.  A cheap PC and a printer (1280 preferred, refurbished
works) are about the only significant outlays one needs (or will soon need)
to make to produce archival B&W that is visibly as good as the best.

Paul
http://www.PaulRoark.com
____________________________________

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Wesley [mailto:mwesley250@...]
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 7:11 PM
To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Getting everything calibrated and profiled




* -----Original Message-----
* From: Paul Roark [mailto:paul.roark@...]
* Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 12:35 PM
* To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
* Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Getting everything calibrated and profiled
*
* Dimitri wrote, in part:
*
* >* ... what should I use to make sure
* >* what I'm seeing on my screen matches the print as
* >* closely as possible?
*
* Martin wrote, in part:
*
* >First you have to start with a calibrated monitor.
* >These means creating a monitor profile which is
* >best done with something like ColorVision's OptiCal
* >or PhotoCal software with their Spider color sensor.
* >...
*
* Or, if you're as cheap as I am, you just use the Adobe Gamma
* procedure (in the Control Panel for Windows 98).  When I
* match the gray bars, I find it useful to blur my eyes.

Paul,

I don't know. You can do it this way but I am way happier with the results I
get using hardware calibration. My eyes just aren't good enough. I would opt
for a monitor spyder and software if at all possible. Almost a must if you
do any color work.
*
* Then to get the monitor image to match the print, I used the
* Photoshop 6 preview feature/procedure.  A very good
* description of it has been done by Tyler Boley at
*
* http://groups.yahoo.com/group/piezography3000/message/17849
*
You can also find Tyler's post in a PDF format in the Files section in
folder:

Files > Image Processing

(snip)
*
* The only thing I recommend in addition to this procedure is
* to record a Photoshop "Action" so that the preview/monitor
* profiling steps become a simple, single-keystroke function (a
* function key on my PC was designated). That makes the
* procedure easy to apply to images after they are opened.

Good idea. Do you have one for each ink/paper combo?
*
* I use variable-tone inksets and find that having the monitor
* hue match the print is unnecessary.  We're talking about
* subtle B&W color biases.  I find small proof prints are where
* I make all my final decisions.  I can't imagine I'd ever go
* to a large display print on cotton paper before doing 8x10
* proofs on EAM.  So, I find the manual procedure just outlined
* to be more than adequate to get first rate B&W prints.

In actuality of course you don't need WYSIWYG for printing at all.  In the
traditional darkroom you are always making adjustments to the printing
process based upon the previous version of the print. I think people get
very lost in the fact that their prints don't match the monitor which isn't
the point. The goal is a nice print which as odd as it may seem has nothing
to do with what may be on your screen.

I think a good on screen color match with tone and hue can help you get
there faster but in the end I wind up making full size prints and then
tweaking the final adjustment in "blind".

When I was running MIS-VM on the 1280 Tyler created an RGB profile for the
ink set and it really was amazing to see on screen the effect of the
different curves on the color of the image. I think it is a very useful tool
that shortens the path to a final print but whether it is worth the ~$2,000
investment for a spectrophotometer and profiling software is another matter.
In retrospect I would put the money somewhere else but if you can afford it
I recommend it.
*
* But, of course, for those who like the ultimate there is
* always more that can be done.
*
Yep. With the caution that you will spend more and more for smaller and
smaller improvements.

Martin Wesley
http://www.carolyn.cc/Guests/MartinWesley/pages/MW_01.html
http://www.borderless-photos.de/guests.html







Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- Include your full name with your message.
- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames
- Complete your Yahoo profile.
- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage.




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

I would agree here.  My simple profile using Adobe Gamma is better 
for b&w than what a friend was able to do with his Monaco system 
stuff... the Monaco profile is way better for color though.  Also, 
when I used Adobe Gamma I put up a stepwedge and iterated until all 
the Adobe stuff looked right and the stepwedge looked right.

mark

--- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
<paul.roark@v...> wrote:
> Martin,
> 
> I agree that to do color work a monitor spyder and appropriate 
software is
> very important.  But then, that's one reason I like B&W so much.  I 
don't
> have to worry about the color being "right."
...

Craig,

In Photoshop go to View>Proof Setup>Custom.

Under "Profile" select the curve you created and saved in steps #4 and #5 of
Tyler's instructions. Click on "Save" and give this "Proof Setup" a name
that you will remember like "Selenium PT on PhotoRag".

Then when you have a file open click on View>Proof Setup the custom proof
setup name you just created will appear at the bottom of the drop down.

What you are seeing is on screen is now a correction of your file to more
closely match your printer output.

Martin Wesley
http://www.carolyn.cc/Guests/MartinWesley/pages/MW_01.html
http://www.borderless-photos.de/guests.html

 
* -----Original Message-----
* From: craig [mailto:craygc@...] 
* Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 7:39 PM
* To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
* Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Getting everything calibrated and profiled
* 
* 
* Paul, (or others...)
* 
* A curiosity I have with the approach outlined in Tyler's approach is 
* its ability (or inability) to work with the Conetech Piezography 
* plugin in Photoshop.
* 
* I have played with this approach on numeroous occasions without any 
* success. I have found that I need to actually load (hit the OK 
* button) in the colour preferences and set the custom dot-gain as my 
* greyscale working space.
* 
* Obviously, the result of this is images appear on screen and print 
* fine within MY closed Photoshop system, however, in order to move 
* images outside of the system I need to convert to RGB, for example, 
* to re-map the tonal values back into something more mainstream.
* 
* Being able to move this custom dot-gain "transfer function" from the 
* frontend of Photoshop to the backend has definate benefits. 
* Unfortunately, I have had NO success while using the Piezography 
* plugin. Has anyone else overcome this problem...
* 
* regards
* Craig 
* 
(snip)

* -----Original Message-----
* From: Paul Roark [mailto:paul.roark@verizon.net] 
* Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 7:48 PM
* To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
* Subject: RE: [Digital BW] Getting everything calibrated and profiled
* 
* 
* Martin,
* 
* I agree that to do color work a monitor spyder and 
* appropriate software is very important.  But then, that's one 
* reason I like B&W so much.  I don't have to worry about the 
* color being "right."

Paul,

I think you are missing a lot by not getting the best monitor calibration
you can. My experience is that I get to a finished print more easily. It may
not be strictly necessary, but why not take advantage of good tools if you
have the option? 
* 
* I think B&W remains a medium in digital printing that can be 
* done with very little equipment.  A cheap PC and a printer 
* (1280 preferred, refurbished
* works) are about the only significant outlays one needs (or 
* will soon need) to make to produce archival B&W that is 
* visibly as good as the best.

I don't know, you can get by without Photoshop or your own means of digital
input (scanner or digital camera) but I don't think that there are many of
us who willingly go that route or wouldn't want a fast CPU, lots of RAM and
a good monitor. In theory I completely agree with you but in practice I am
skeptical. With poor tools or a shortage of tools achieving success is too
likely to be frustrating and ultimately expensive in materials.

Martin

* -----Original Message-----
* From: Mark Hahn [mailto:markhahn2000@yahoo.com] 
* Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 9:28 PM
* To: DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com
* Subject: Re: [Digital BW] Getting everything calibrated and profiled
* 
* 
* I would agree here.  My simple profile using Adobe Gamma is better 
* for b&w than what a friend was able to do with his Monaco system 
* stuff... the Monaco profile is way better for color though.  Also, 
* when I used Adobe Gamma I put up a stepwedge and iterated until all 
* the Adobe stuff looked right and the stepwedge looked right.
* 
Mark,

I tried Monaco was not happy with the results. The ColorVision software and
hardware did a much better job of monitor calibration. Remember that monitor
calibration is the matching of the monitor to your working color space not
to the print. In a sense having a calibrated monitor means that you are
seeing the file the same way Photoshop "sees" it. The monitor to print
matching is done by profiling the printer to match the same color space or
by using a proofing curve to simulate a match on screen. At this point in
time a good proofing curve it the best we can do. The new Piezo software
that does use standard printer profiles would also give you very exact on
screen views but only if your monitor is properly calibrated.

Apparently none of the low or medium priced color profiling software
packages are up to creating usable printer profiles of the grayscale inks to
actually print with. Some of them will give you profiles that are good
enough to be used for proofing profiles though.

Martin Wesley
http://www.carolyn.cc/Guests/MartinWesley/pages/MW_01.html
http://www.borderless-photos.de/guests.html

 




* 
* --- In DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Roark" 
* <paul.roark@v...> wrote:
* > Martin,
* > 
* > I agree that to do color work a monitor spyder and appropriate
* software is
* > very important.  But then, that's one reason I like B&W so much.  I
* don't
* > have to worry about the color being "right."
* ...
* 
* 
* ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
* ---------------------~--> Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits 
* for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark Printer at Myinks.com. 
* Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada. 
* http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
* 
http://us.click.yahoo.com/l.m7sD/LIdGAA/qnsNAA/ucIolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Please visit the Group Homepage to check the Files, Bookmarks, Polls and
other resources as they are often being updated. The page is at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DigitalBlackandWhiteThePrint

If you wish to receive no emails or just a daily digest, or you wish to
unsubscribe, please edit your Membership preferences by visiting this same
page.

Please follow these basic guidelines:
- Include your full name with your message.
- Include the address of your website, if you have one.
- As threads develop, trim off excess portions of earlier messages to keep
them short.
- As the topic of a thread changes remember to change the subject header.
- Good manners are required at all time. No personal attacks or flames
- Complete your Yahoo profile.
- Before posting a question, search the message archives and the various
resources on the homepage. 


 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

I wasn't saying that it was the best, but since my friend has it and 
used it on my machine for free I can't really complain, but I will 
say that he's used it to calibrate his scanner/monitor/2200 and when 
I do color work on my computer and take it over to his house to print 
the prints seem quite accurate to me (note that I am not a color 
photographer so I may not be as critical some).  The out of the box 
profile it created also makes a decent stepwedge as well during the 
day... even in a room with shades drawn the monitor looks noticably 
different in the day and at night.

Paul's curves gives me a near perfect calibration between pixel 
values and printed values (1160+VM)... but I still think I need to 
add a minor curve to seperate the darks better...

mark

...
> I tried Monaco was not happy with the results. The ColorVision 
software and
> hardware did a much better job of monitor calibration. Remember 
that monitor
> calibration is the matching of the monitor to your working color 
space not
> to the print. In a sense having a calibrated monitor means that you 
are
> seeing the file the same way Photoshop "sees" it. The monitor to 
print
> matching is done by profiling the printer to match the same color 
space or
> by using a proofing curve to simulate a match on screen. At this 
point in
> time a good proofing curve it the best we can do. The new Piezo 
software
> that does use standard printer profiles would also give you very 
exact on
> screen views but only if your monitor is properly calibrated.
> 
> Apparently none of the low or medium priced color profiling software
> packages are up to creating usable printer profiles of the 
grayscale inks to
> actually print with. Some of them will give you profiles that are 
good
> enough to be used for proofing profiles though.
> 
> Martin Wesley
> http://www.carolyn.cc/Guests/MartinWesley/pages/MW_01.html
> http://www.borderless-photos.de/guests.html
...