Post by mkochschGetting back to the rest of your post: My monitor was calibrated
with a buddy's Optical 3.7, so the monitor is fine.
OK. I assume gamma 2.2 and D65 white point?
Post by mkochschThe scanner was than calibrated using an actual Kodak Q60 card.
When comparing the results of that calibration Epson's own profile for
my 3200 looked just a tiny bit closer to the Q60 card so I went with
Epson's -- they were very close.
When you say calibrated, I assume you mean following the VueScan
scanner profiling proceedure?
When you say comparing, I assume you mean rescanning the Q60 target in
VueScan and applying the VueScan scanner profile to create an image of
the Q60 target and the Epson scanner profile to create an image via
the Color tab|Scanner color space & Scanner ICC profile and then
comparing side-by-side in PhotoShop to the actual Q60 target?
What were you Color tab setting when you rescanned the Q60 target?
Color balance
Black point %
White point %
Brightness
Output color space
If I didn't guess your workflow correctly, let us know exactly what
you did step-by-step.
Post by mkochschSo I'm at the point now where my scanner is calibrated and so is my
monitor but my output still looks washed out, unsaturated compared to
a proof I got back from the lab.
I assume by 'output' you mean your printer output?
How did we jump from calibrating your 3200 scanner with a reflective
target (therefore assuming reflective scanning) to getting back proofs
from the photo lab? What media is it that you are trying to scan and
print?
Does the onscreen image either before or after you get done tweaking
the histogram B/W points, adjusting curves, saturation etc.in
PhotoShop, compare well with the photo lab output? [What I'm trying
to do here is isolate the printer as the problem.]
What inkset and paper are you using?
What printer settings did you use to create the poor quality print?
One the first screen after you hit Print in PhotoShop (Print dialog),
what Print Space did you select? Did you also select Setup and then
Properties on the Page Setup dialog?
What settings did you select on the Color Properties dialog (the
dialogs may vary depending on which printer you are using)? What
Advanced settings did you use if any?
should I be using the ICM function on my printer or not? Since I don't
have a working calibration for the printer it seems pointless to use
the ICM.
If you are using the Epson printer profile that came with your
printer, then select the appropriate Epson printer profile for your
ink/paper combo in the Print dialog Print Space Profile box. Choose
Color Controls in the Color Properties|Advanced dialog.
If using a custom printer profile, select it in the Print dialog,
Print Space Profile and choose No Color Controls in the Color
Properties|Advanced dialog.
I recommend that if you are using Epson papers and the compatable
inkset, then stick with the Epson driver -- it usually is pretty good.
Also, as you can see with the Advanced controls, you can tweak
brightness, contrast, saturation, and C, M, Y color using the Epson
driver so you should be able to achieve a faily close match between
monitor and printer output. Also remember, that when viewing any
print, the colors can look significantly different depending on the
light source.
Post by mkochschQuestion: once I do achieve a calibration (profile) for my printer will
photoshop (or elements) "dumb down" my monitor as to be predictive in
regards to my output on the printer?
Once you have your printer profiled with a custom profiled, the
application of the profile to an image is done by the Epson driver and
does not affect what you see in PhotoShop, unless you set the printer
profile as an onscreen proofing profile.
Post by mkochschDo I have to convert everything to CMYK in photoshop?
No, the Epson print driver does all the RGB to CMYK conversions.
Post by mkochschMy understanding is that my monitor and scanner are far superior in
their ability to show me details in the photo than I can every hope to
see on the printed paper -- the gamut is what we talking about here
right?
Depends. The gammut of your scanner (meaning range of colors) is most
likely much greater than that of your monitor or printer. Depending
upon the ink/paper combination you are using, the gammut of the inkjet
print could be greater or lesser than you monitor.
Typical photographic reflective media only contains about 300-400 ppi
(pixels per inch) of information. I'm sure someone will argue this
point :) Slides and color negatives contain much more information,
somewhere between 2000 and 4000 ppi. Your monitor can show about 72
ppi. Even though your printer may print at 1440 or 2880 dpi (dots per
inch) it can only reproduce up to about 300-400 ppi for typical
photographic prints, hence there is typically no need to send the
printer huge files. Note, a dot of CYMK color ink is smaller than a
pixel-it can take several dots of ink to reproduce a pixel.
Post by mkochschAlso, you said the vuescan IT8 is a RGB profile. What then is the point of
doing a "printer profile" with Vuescan?
Exactly my point. Also as mentioned above, if you are using a
compatable Epson paper and inkset combo, the Epson profiles that came
with the printer are pretty good.
Post by mkochschIt indeed seems to be attempting to use my scanner as a
spetrophotometer as
you suggest. I do notice that the Vuescan IT8 generated target is much
hotter or purer way more saturated when compared to the actual Q60
target.
I meant this for generating a custom printer profile. Printer
profiling programs can be found for sale at www.monacosys.com ,
www.colorcal.com , www.praxisoft.com
Post by mkochschDo you think Vuescan would be able to calibrate my printer if I
used a print
out of the actual Q60 target to generate the "printer.icc" file? I'm
soooo close...it's painful.
Seems a bit circular don't you think?
Good luck.
Jeff Randall