Printing Digital

I would like to start this thread (I do not know if it is the right topic, but I did not find any more suitable) because I belive the only way to see a picture is printed. And of course I would like to know how any of you could have the maximum from your pentax camera and lenses.
Of course, first of all I'll tell what I'm doing and any suggestion would e appreciated.
My WhiteRoom is composed by a Eizo CG21 calibrated by a Spyder 3 Colourmeter + Epson 3880 for colour print + Epson 2100 per B/W print.
Steps;
1) I shoot JPEG in 90% of the cases , and 10% in RAW but I always open the images with Lightroom.
2) I adjust light and expsosure with Lightroom and open the result with CS5
3) I adjust levels
4) I adjust curves
5) I change the image from RGB to CYMK
6) Normally I add black in the channel where there is not much of it in order to increase the plot. For istance when I use a Flash on portraits It frequently happens that the face of the subject is quite flat.
7) Save
Print using CS5 settings and loading the correct paper profile. Sometimes I do paper profyling by myself depending if I change some B/W inks or type of paper (I used a fantastic Fabriano watercolour paper for BW and It was really great).

If you have some tips answer this thread.

Ciao

Alberto

Why do you change to CMYK? The printers are working with RGB. They print with CMYK ink (and, sometimes, a few other colors), but they work with RGB. Changing to CMYK is just an unnecessary step. Changing to CMYK is only necessary for printing, as with a printing press, not a computer printer.

What do you mean with they work in RGB ? As far as I know the printer transform RGB into CMYK because those are the inks used. I do not let the printer control the process but I want to control the workflow and modify the CMYK channels instead of the RGB with CS5.

CMYK is for use in the printing industry for making books and magazines and the conversion from RGB to CMYK is a very skilled part of the process. Leave it to the professionals becsue they know what they are doing and will get the optimum results.

As for home printing, our printers are indeed RGB devices so there is no point putting an extra conversion stage in. Stay in sRGB and the printer will be receiving the input that it is designed for.

Sorry John

But in this way what you see in the monitor is not what you get in the print.
Or in a different way if you leave the printer the control of your images you leave to somebody else the control of your image.

If it is as you suggest me I can send my picture to a standard shop to develop.
And If I send the same picture to 5 different shops I have 5 different results (and in 90% of the cases it is not what the picture it was in my mind).
Then the working space.
My camera works perfectly in sRGB and my Lacie cover 99% of such space. But both my printer cannot reproduce it.
So why do I have to work in a sRGB if the final result isnot covered by the printer. In the monitor I could see colours I will not find in the print.
So I decide to use Adobe1998 in my camera and calibrate the monitor on such ws.
The problem on digital is that what you see must be what you print.

Yes, the printer does use CMYK in it's output (or CMYK+other inks, sometimes referred to as CcMmYK). However, I think the printer drivers are written to take RGB-type colours and convert to CMYK (or CcMmYK) internally. That means that your CMYK image is converted to an RGB-like colour profile and sent to the printer where it is converted to the printers ink colours.

In that respect converting to CMYK before printing doesn't really make anything more controllable.

It's very well to use AdobeRGB in camera, I'm surprised, though, to read that you calibrate the monitor especially for that. Surely the monitor calibration doesn't depend on whether you use sRGB, AdobeRGB or any other colour space. Calibration creates the profile for your monitor. The colours of your image (be it sRGB or AdobeRGB) are then converted into the monitor profile colours for viewing (while your post processing software does all operations on colour in the selected working colour space (presumably AdobeRGB in your case).

You can send your files for printing without problems, if the print service uses calibrated hardware (and many bog standard printing services do not). The ones that do even provide colour profiles for different papers to soft proof before sending the images to them.
One general problem remains, that is that the colour systems of monitor and printing are physically different. The monitor is using an additive colour model while the printer uses a subtractive colour model. And that is why you never get exactly the same on the print that you see on the monitor. All that colour management is to get as close as possible.

Bottom line is, though: If it works well for you then don't change your system.

Prieni

cintelli67, You've got a number of things mixed up there. It's hard to know where to start with it.

You are using a colour space that gives much more information than you can print, so generally this results in weak colours on your monitor and certainly so if Photoshop isn't also adjusted to be the same. Your CMYK conversion won't do much harm but is unecessary. You're not leaving it to someone else to do a conversion, you are providing a home printer with its designed input.

If you are going to shops to get prints done then quality may well be variable, but most will give best results from sRGB and JPEG files. If you want professional prints then use a professional printer and discuss with them what file properties they work best with.

If you are using online libraries, likewise follow the instructions and provide say sRGB JPEG files if they ask for them (fotoLibra, for example).

If submitting to magazines likewise. They will convert to CMYK, you have no idea what profiles and equipment they are using.

If you are not getting a match between monitor and print, then go back to basics as something has been adjusted incorrectly.

Since when does your monitor display CMYK they can only simulate CMYK but will never be able to display it since it's a RGB device.

You can work in aRGB there is nothing wrong with that if your devices can handle that space.

For printing there are a few options but you shouldn't convert your images to CMYK if you don't send it to a producer.
For home use just use the RGB space since that's what the monitor can display and is the native colour space of your image. Photoshop will automatically convert the colours between the spaces when you print it.

The thing you might want to do is to proof your colours.
The best way to do that is to click on view>proof-setup and chose the printing profile you use.
The file will still be in RGB and you will work in that space but the image will be soft-proofed to the chosen profile.
And when you print the image make sure that Photoshop handles the profile and the profile you use for soft-proofing is select, that way you should get pretty accurate colour result if the profiles are good that is.
So don't use just any profile for the printer but use a profile specially make for the printer, the inkt and the paper you use or else the proofing is of little meaning.
Epson probably provide profiles for their inkt and papers so use those profiles, if you use different inkt or paper you need a different profile.
Ilford provide some profiles on their side for example and you can create your own profiles if you've a device for that.

ps. brightness is quite hard to get right because with a montior you're looking into a light while paper merely reflects it. so if you want to be very accurate you even need a calibrated light to check the colours and contrast visually.

sorry

but do you think my epson 3800 works in a different way then a "professional one" ? So if I have to send my image to a prof lab I could transform it in CYMK , otherwise it is not necessary.
It sounds absurd.

When I open a paper profile I do not see Red , Green and Blue Channels , but Cyan , Yellow , Magenta and Black.

So if you deselect the Printer Colour managment as suggested by Ilford and Canson how can I know if the quantity of colours in RGB are converted properly ?

The problem is controlling the process not producing "beautiful images". Or the picture I see on my monitor will be the same produced by my printer leaving the image in RGB ?

I will do some tests but as I said before I am not totally convinced.

Then to John Riley ... you are right... I inverted the ws .... I use sRGB not Adobe1998 on my camera and even on my monitor for Epson2100 printing and Epson3800 , even if in this case I could use a larger ws.

Ciao

Cintelli67, you are being told the right things, but of course it's up to you what you do.

I would have thought that producing beautiful images was the objective of every photographer?

Yes John

But beautiful images born in the head of the photographer not for a casual setting of your printer.
I want to reproduce what is in my head not in yours or any other ... and above all not the image of the hardware.

Otherwise John ... it is your printer that makes beautiful images not you.

Controlling the proces is the only way I know to repeat MY IMAGE. If it is beautiful or terrible is something subjective. But if you like it or not It is my image not the PRINTER IMAGE.

Ciao

The printer can control that process better than you will ever. Since you don't know the exact density of the ink used by your printer (yes, the ink density varies from one manufacturer to the other), you can't do a proper transformation that will give good results. Your printer probably doesn't use the CMYK info, but the RGB info.

By the way, my full time business is commercial printing, so in this department, I know what I'm talking about.

You are right .... but I normally profile per paper and per ink . I do not change frequently paper and inks . So once you did it you can reproduce it.

I could be right or wrong ..... but If I see one of my images in 3 different monitor I have three different images. And as well if I print the same file with three different shops I have three different images again.
So which one is the MINE ?????

If I leave part of the workflow to the hardware It will be the hardware image not the mine.
I want to control the process otherwise it is not my image. And even in your case. When you print your images the results will be a mixing between your head and you printer. Not something born completely from you.

Ciao

Well, the point of colour management systems and profiling your monitor is that on three different monitors you get the same image. (Results in the real world may vary.)

If you and the printing shops use colour management in the right ways then the three prints should not be different.

All of them.

Well, you don't have a choice but have to leave part of the workflow to the hardware. Who else will convert the bits and bytes to colourful ink drops on the paper?

That's why you do post processing, to get the resulting image to match the image that you imagine (pun intended) as closely to the resulting print as possible.

Prieni