Photoshop Color Management vs. Printer Color Management

[Empedocles]

Don't know if this is the right forum for this. Anyway, why on many of
the prints I make, I must use printer color management, rather than
PS's color management, to get a print that most closely matches my
monitor? I have an Epson 1280 that I've profiled using GretagMacbeth's
Eye-One system. I profiled it for Epson's Premium Photo Glossy paper
and MIS inks.

Too frequently, when I run a test on 4x6 Epson Premium Photo Glossy
paper, I find that, using my profile & letting PS manage the printing,
that the print fails miserably to match my monitor's image. (I
recalibrate & profile my monitor monthly.) When I try letting Epson
manage the printer, the print matches the monitor almost exactly. If I
need to tweak the image, using the Epson system, I can do so in the
Epson printer controls. With PS, I have to go back to the image in PS
& guess & by gosh. This is very inefficient.

I would use Epson color management exclusively if it were not for the
fact that on some images, PS control is better than Epson control. So,
you could say this is my workflow: If PS is best, use it. If Epson is
best, use that.

I'm just curious why I can't standardize on one color management
printer system. It's incredible to me that the Epson system, using non-
Epson inks, can produce more accurate results than the PS system with
my profile. Maybe some of you have run into the same situation & that
what I have to do is all I can do. Maybe I should reprofile my
printer, paper, and inks, altho my printer hasn't changed, my paper
hasn't changed, and my inks haven't changed.

 

[Empedocles]

it has been my experience both with a 1280 and now with a R1800, turn off
all color management with the Epson and allow Photoshop to drive the
process.

What I have found is that each will do something and you end up chasing your
tail, as it were, to make the corrections.

Steve, thanks for your response.

Maybe I'm missing something, here, in turning off Epson color
management. In "Preview" in PS, for "Print Space," I select my
profile. In the final "Print" dialog box, I select "No Color
Adjustment." Should I be looking for something else to turn off Epson
adjustment?

When I do the same two things to give Epson the control, I select,
"Printer Color Management" in the Preview dialog, and "Color Controls"
in the final Print dialog.

 

[Arthur Entlich]

Something isn't making sense here. In a fully CM system where all parts
of the workflow chain are calibrated, you should be getting consistent
color and not require to move between two differing CM systems.

It almost seems like you are double color managing, which is quite
possible to do, at some times. Is it possible you have something in
your color managed image (something in a header or elsewhere) which is
triggering a color management switch back on.

Did you mention which OS you are using, and what service packs might be
installed? Any other printing software that might be onboard that can
alter CM switches or settings?

It would help to try to isolate what images trigger this poor CM
situation. Change of res, source, processing, paper stock?

Art

If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste,
I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog:

http://e-trashtalk.spaces.live.com/

 

[Empedocles]

Something isn't making sense here. In a fully CM system where all parts
of the workflow chain are calibrated, you should be getting consistent
color and not require to move between two differing CM systems.

Art, thanks for your response. I agree & why I posted.

It almost seems like you are double color managing, which is quite
possible to do, at some times. Is it possible you have something in
your color managed image (something in a header or elsewhere) which is
triggering a color management switch back on.

If by "header" you mean whether the image is tagged with a profile or
not ("Untagged vs. "Adobe RGB,") the possibility occurred to me last
night when I went to print an 11x14 image & discovered it was
untagged. I tagged it with Adobe RGB (1998), printed it & the print
was no different than the 4x6 test print I made with the untagged
profile. I used Epson color management for both prints.

Did you mention which OS you are using, and what service packs might be
installed? Any other printing software that might be onboard that can
alter CM switches or settings?

I'm running Apple's OS 10.3.9 (Panther) on a Mac G5. You may have a
point in that the OS has Apple's ColorSync, but PS ignores that &
Epson offers ColorSync as a printing option, which I ignore. I don't
think ColorSync affects my printing, at all. I do have iPhoto,
Preview, Word, TextEdit, and Stickies, which all have printing
capability. But, when I print from PS, none of these apps are open.
When I work with PS, all other apps are closed to have as much memory
available as possible for my huge files.

It would help to try to isolate what images trigger this poor CM
situation.

It's impossible, I find. I thought of that, but there's no predictor
before running a test. I also find that in printing, say, a sunset
with graduated colors emanating out, banding occurs that produces a
series of halos instead of a smooth gradation, whether I use PS
control or Epson control. I take these images to a local shop.

Change of res, source, processing, paper stock?

I try to keep everything consistent in my workflow. I know that a
change in any element requires a profile change, etc.

I found on a search of this ng (or the photoshop.apps ng) that the
1280 is difficult to profile. I can't find that post. #@X&*! Someone
here may have successfully developed a consistent workflow with the
1280, using PS control.

Thanks for your attention, Art. I guess one value of a CM system is
discovering the failures in that system & being able to compensate for
them.

David

 

[Roger Moss]

Art, thanks for your response. I agree & why I posted.

If by "header" you mean whether the image is tagged with a profile or
not ("Untagged vs. "Adobe RGB,") the possibility occurred to me last
night when I went to print an 11x14 image & discovered it was
untagged. I tagged it with Adobe RGB (1998), printed it & the print
was no different than the 4x6 test print I made with the untagged
profile. I used Epson color management for both prints.

Adobe RGB is what I use for commercial repro (magazines, etc.) but not for
inkjet printing; for that I'd use sRGB.

I had problems in the past with 'double- colour management' but once I
disabled all printer driver CM and let Photoshop get on with it everything
finally fell into place...

Let us know how thing progress.

RM

 

[Arthur Entlich]

sRGB is actually a screen color LUT based upon the limits of CRTs and
other display output devices, so it may not have the full gamut for
printing that Adobe RGB or others might. SRGB is basically a subset of
Adobe RGB.

May work for some situations, but may be somewhat restrictive to the
full gamut capable for inkjet printers with the proper ink and paper
options.

Art


If you are interested in issues surrounding e-waste,
I invite you to enter the discussion at my blog:

http://e-trashtalk.spaces.live.com/

 

[Empedocles]

Adobe RGB is what I use for commercial repro (magazines, etc.) but not for
inkjet printing; for that I'd use sRGB.

I had problems in the past with 'double- colour management' but once I
disabled all printer driver CM and let Photoshop get on with it everything
finally fell into place...

Let us know how thing progress.

RM

Roger,

Hopefully, in a wk or 2 I can report back on results of using sRGB as
opposed to Adobe RGB (1998). I will test it. Arthur has cited the
limited gamut of sRGB, well documented in the literature. Anything is
worth a try at this point.

I want to cross-reference to a thread on this topic that I posted in
another ng:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.graphics.apps.photoshop/browse_frm/thread/
6d9d322024272f2a?hl=en#

I already pointed out that others have stated the difficulty in
profiling the 1280. This thread in "comp.apps.photoshop" reveals many
people (professionals?) dismiss PS controlling the printing, using
custom profiles. These posts describe the unreliability of custom
profiles and PS control, which is a revelation to me. I thought custom
profiles & PS control were gospel. Not so, according to these people.
They standardize on Epson printer control. Wish I could too, & maybe
I'll get there if I get this mantra of PS control out of my head &
work more with Epson's system.

All I'm saying is, the capability of the Eye-One system I'm able to
afford may not be up to generating the kind of profile I need for my
images, my 1280, my paper, and my inks. (In some situations & that's
the problem.) I guess in future, I'll run tests with the Epson system
& learn more how to adjust Epson's sliding color controls, because I
know they are directly controlling the 1280. If that doesn't work,
I'll test out using PS control. It's getting to be a crap-shoot, but
on the advice I've gotten here & the other ng, what I need to do and
can do is more in focus.

BTW, I understand RGB vs. CMYK very well, by color correcting my
enlarger in a wet color darkroom, which I no longer have. It's no
problem to tweak those colors, etc., with the sliding Epson color
controls. I've just not used those Epson color controls very much. It
just seems when I've done so in the past on some images, I got better
results when I reverted to PS control. At this point, I don't know.
Maybe I need to give Epson more of a chance.

 

[Empedocles]

Here's another shot at the Web addr:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.graphics.apps.photoshop/browse_fr...
6d9d322024272f2a?hl=en#

 

[Empedocles]

Here's another go at that Website addr:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp...hop/browse_frm/thread/6d9d322024272f2a?hl=en#