Boring calibration thread....
Discussion
Sorry for a tech thread but I'm required to tap the PH fount of knowledge once again.
Having prints come back that didn't match my screen never really bothered me but as I'm about to send of a couple of hundred quids worth of enlargements I want to be sure they are going to come out the way I want them - thus I need to calibrate my screen.
Colorvision seem to do a range of spyders costing from £70 to £200+ and I can't really understand the difference, other than that the more expensive ones have more features. Which confuses me, if they all calibrate the screen, why do the other features matter?
Anyone got a spyder or alternative that works and doesn't cost the earth?
Having prints come back that didn't match my screen never really bothered me but as I'm about to send of a couple of hundred quids worth of enlargements I want to be sure they are going to come out the way I want them - thus I need to calibrate my screen.
Colorvision seem to do a range of spyders costing from £70 to £200+ and I can't really understand the difference, other than that the more expensive ones have more features. Which confuses me, if they all calibrate the screen, why do the other features matter?
Anyone got a spyder or alternative that works and doesn't cost the earth?
Not really helping. But I need to sort my monitor out so If anyone gets one and lives near Hampshire and I they can lend it to me, willing to pay for.
I will in the mean time look up the section there is on them in a photography mag somewhere about the place.
Then I will return armed with my mind bogglerling knowledge.
I will in the mean time look up the section there is on them in a photography mag somewhere about the place.
Then I will return armed with my mind bogglerling knowledge.
I use spyder2 on my screens. my prints at home are quite accurate if a little darker than the screen (to be expected) the problem you run into is when the print does not use the embeded profile eg fuji frontiers (potobox, ASAD etc). the way round that is to look at the pics in a program which does not colour manage - windows picture view to get an idea of how the machine sees them.
If you are going to get big prints can you not get a proof first? With photobox I generally get good correlation between screen and print. there large format printers are colour managed so you should get a good match.
If you are going to get big prints can you not get a proof first? With photobox I generally get good correlation between screen and print. there large format printers are colour managed so you should get a good match.
The whole process of calibration is more than just the screen, you need to calibrate from camera to printer for true accuracy and don't forget that the camera, the screen and the printer all have there own colour space. In the pre digital age if we wanted true accuracy we would put a colour bar on one or more of the photo's.
Viewing conditions also have a big influence, our calibration device does an ambient light check on the room as well.
If what you see on the screen is as good or better in the print then your calibration is as good as it gets, however if it's not your printer then you are never going to know if your screen is correct or there printer.
It's a minefield.
Viewing conditions also have a big influence, our calibration device does an ambient light check on the room as well.
If what you see on the screen is as good or better in the print then your calibration is as good as it gets, however if it's not your printer then you are never going to know if your screen is correct or there printer.
It's a minefield.
I do wish someone could explain this to Mrs LongQ in a way that would stop her complaining about colour differences on reprints of 6th rate snaps when she has just had a hundred each of 40 mindnumbingly bad images reprinted and they 'look different to the originals'.
Why would I care? They will be distributed arond family who will never see the originals and and who probably car even less. My guess is the last fleeting glimpse of daylight the prints will ever see is when the envelope is opened.
It's usually quite bad when she takes the damn things to the only Boots printing location she trusts. If she goes to anothger boots - and definitiely if she goes anywhere else - I hear about it for days. In desperation I bought a little Canon Selphy thing so she could see what happened and try a few adjustments herself. Anyone want one? I think it has run about 5 prints in total. All by me.
The idea of suggesting she uses Photobox or any of the online services is a total no-no. Life would not be worth living. Now she has 'gone digital' (actually I think she takes less shots now than she used to with the old 35mm) the only thing I get involved with, reluctantly, is organising the copying of files to her 'spare for taking to the printers' SD card and sometimes removing old files she no longer wants to print. Think I wil try to keep it that way.
Sorry for the thread diversion .... back on topic now.
I'd be interested to know where people see the optimum price break points for calibration devices (and which devices seem best at them) for different users - say hobbyist, Semi-pro, Pro and finicky bastard who does more pixel peeping than image creation.
Forewarned is forearmed as they say and I can definitely see a need for some sensible calibration processes especially for some of the more challenging images where a slight apparent difference in even one colour can make a huge difference to the resulting print.
Why would I care? They will be distributed arond family who will never see the originals and and who probably car even less. My guess is the last fleeting glimpse of daylight the prints will ever see is when the envelope is opened.
It's usually quite bad when she takes the damn things to the only Boots printing location she trusts. If she goes to anothger boots - and definitiely if she goes anywhere else - I hear about it for days. In desperation I bought a little Canon Selphy thing so she could see what happened and try a few adjustments herself. Anyone want one? I think it has run about 5 prints in total. All by me.
The idea of suggesting she uses Photobox or any of the online services is a total no-no. Life would not be worth living. Now she has 'gone digital' (actually I think she takes less shots now than she used to with the old 35mm) the only thing I get involved with, reluctantly, is organising the copying of files to her 'spare for taking to the printers' SD card and sometimes removing old files she no longer wants to print. Think I wil try to keep it that way.
Sorry for the thread diversion .... back on topic now.
I'd be interested to know where people see the optimum price break points for calibration devices (and which devices seem best at them) for different users - say hobbyist, Semi-pro, Pro and finicky bastard who does more pixel peeping than image creation.
Forewarned is forearmed as they say and I can definitely see a need for some sensible calibration processes especially for some of the more challenging images where a slight apparent difference in even one colour can make a huge difference to the resulting print.
as for how much you need to spend it really depends on what you are needing to do with the images. if they are happy snaps a pantone huey will suffice at around £60 plus vat. if you are providing images to designers etc you will want at least the eye one display 2 from gretag macbeth which will give far superior results although that device will set you back twice as much. of course this depends on the quality of the monitor, if you are using a cheap lcd dont expect anything too accurate.
Andy M said:
_dobbo_ said:
My Spyder2 express should arrive today, so I'll fire it up tonight and send off some prints, then report pack.
Excellent, will be interested to hear your thoughts...
Well someone at Amazon screwed me as I paid for next day delivery, and they returned my money due to an "incomplete address" - this despite htem having previously sent hundreds of pounds worth of stuff to the same address.
I've now re-ordered but this time gone with a pantone huey for no particular reason.
I have a loan of a spyder2pro thing over the weekend . . .
What does it actually do - create a monitor profile ? - and most importantly (for me) is it reversable ?
reversible as actually I'm not that unhappy at the moment with my setup and if this thing bu66ers it up I want to be able to back it out . . .
?
Fd
What does it actually do - create a monitor profile ? - and most importantly (for me) is it reversable ?
reversible as actually I'm not that unhappy at the moment with my setup and if this thing bu66ers it up I want to be able to back it out . . .
?
Fd
Well that was interesting . . .
Whites are now very white, and the less than subtle changes actually look a lot better than something I was happy with before ;-)
More vibrant vibrant colours and more subtle subtle ones . . .
I guess that camera club membership (from whence the spider thing came from) was worth it after all ;-)
cool
Fd
Whites are now very white, and the less than subtle changes actually look a lot better than something I was happy with before ;-)
More vibrant vibrant colours and more subtle subtle ones . . .
I guess that camera club membership (from whence the spider thing came from) was worth it after all ;-)
cool
Fd
fergusd said:
I have a loan of a spyder2pro thing over the weekend . . .
What does it actually do - create a monitor profile ? - and most importantly (for me) is it reversable ?
reversible as actually I'm not that unhappy at the moment with my setup and if this thing bu66ers it up I want to be able to back it out . . .
?
Fd
What does it actually do - create a monitor profile ? - and most importantly (for me) is it reversable ?
reversible as actually I'm not that unhappy at the moment with my setup and if this thing bu66ers it up I want to be able to back it out . . .
?
Fd
It does indeed save the calibration as a seperate profile (you are asked to name it as part of the calibration process), so reverting back is easy. I bought a Spyder2 Suite and have to say I was astonished at how different my monitor displayed after using it, and could not believe that I had left it for so long without proper calibration. Now it's not all good as calibrating your printer is a different matter. If you have purchased well, you may find ready built printer/paper profiles available on the web (from the manufacturers website for example), but if not then the fun begins. The Spyder2 suite also comes with what it claims to be the industry's first software only printer profiling tool - it's rubbish! You are expected to keep making print after print (whilst making manual colour balance changes etc) until you have subjectively decided that calibration is correct - Phoey! The test image they give you is really poor (and small) and hence it's very dificult (to say the least) to even get close to making decent improvements.
I was not up for spending about £1000+ on a decent printer calibration tool and software so decided instead to stick with the same printer paper and experiment with different printer profiles until I was reasonably happy. I got there in the end, but it took a while (and a lot of wasted photo paper).
Take a look at http://shop.colourconfidence.com/inde and download their "colour confidence guidance to digital photography". It will help make sense of the whole digital workflow minefield.
Gixxer
ps - even some of the manufacturers printer and paper profiles are poor. I have a Canon MP830 printer and the canon supplied profile for the printer and canon paper combo I was using was poor. I got better results using other profiles.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff