Datacolor User to User Support Group.

Dear Mr. Tobie,

I'm sorry I didn't get back to you sooner, but I was working with Datacolor staff in resolving my problem. I had the opportunity to work with a wonderful staff member. I sent him my xml files for him to review and afterward we had the change to discussed them together. He believes that something may be wrong with the spectro since the xml files look problematic. He is sending new hardware and after I receive the spectro I will measure the targets once again. 

That said, I need to ask you a question, since I softproof and and printed the test image. In two different type of papers the test image came out somewhat dark. Should the print look alike the softproof test image I see in the screen?

Thanks,

Regards from Sacramento,

Jorge

jorgegaj@...  or pegasus@...





________________________________
 From: CDTobie <CDTobie@...>
To: "datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com" <datacolor_group@yahoogroups.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 8:06 PM
Subject: Re: [datacolor_group] Dark pics and dark color targets 8x10
 

  
>>Yes, I inserted the appropriate ICC, for my Epson paper. 

That clarifies your earlier statement. Yu dd not select an ICC, as printing a target through a profile would invalidate the process. What you did was choose an appropriate media setting. This, in turn, would trigger a related ICC profile, if you let the printer manage the color. Since you did not let the ringer manage the color, this does not introduce a paper profile conversion. This is correct for target printing. 

>>After I started Spyderprint I printed a 225 Patch Target page. This printed page looked darker that what I was seeing in my screen. 

Yes, as I noted earlier, this should print much darker and duller than the screen view. This is a good sign, and tends to indicate the target was printed correctly. 

>>I continue by reading the target and building a profile. Afterwards, I used the profile in Lightroom 4. The final print is darker of what I see in the Development and Print modules. I'm not sure what other information can be useful for you to help me, or what exactly I need to do to be able to print exactly what I see on my screen. 

Before moving on to using the profile in third party software, introducing a whole new set of possible errors, it is important to first soft proof, then print, through the profile directly from SpyderPrint, to test the profile. Open your measurement set again (there is a fork in the software where you can chose to open an existing measurement set), and build the profile again. This time, stop at SpyderProof, and print the test image, or one of the sub-images from it. Does the resulting image look dark? If not, then your issue isn't with the profile, it's with using it in Lightroom. If the print does look dark, then go into Lightroom 4, and turn on soft proofing in the Develop module, to be sure you are seeing a print emulation, not just your image, and see if that looks like the resulting print. 

Let me know how these steps work for you.


C. David Tobie
Global Product Technology Manager
Imaging Color Solutions
Datacolor inc. 
cdtobie@...
www.datacolor.com

On Aug 29, 2012, at 7:10 PM, Jorge Gaj <jorgegaj@...> wrote:


Yes, I inserted the appropriate ICC, for my Epson paper.  Do you mean you have skipped entirely describing the process of printing the charts, reading term back in, and building the profile, and jumped to using the profile? Can't do that, and expect assistance.  After I started Spyderprint I printed a 225 Patch Target page. This printed page looked darker that what I was seeing in my screen. I continue by reading the target and building a profile. Afterwards, I used the profile in Lightroom 4. The final print is darker of what I see in the Development and Print modules. I'm not sure what other information can be useful for you to help me, or what exactly I need to do to be able to print exactly what I see on my screen.