Home Printing - Monitor & Printer Calibration
Discussion
I (like many on here), just use online printers these days. They work out much cheaper and deliver the next day in sizes one can't do at home. I still have two photo printers here, but they make no financial sense for prints - the ink costs more than the online service.
Most of us use www.Photobox.co.uk ... though there are others.
Most of us use www.Photobox.co.uk ... though there are others.
I use online printers (can't be bothered with the expense of having my own printer), but do have a Spyder 3 to calibrate my monitors. Without a calibrated monitor you really don't have a reference to then decide if the prints are right or not. IMO it's well worth investing in a Spyder or equivalent when your adventure with photography has got to the point where you're questioning the quality of the prints that you get.
JJM,
Printing is a minefield if you weant to nearly exactly match things and it starts with the camera )or scanner) moves to the monitor and then confuses you at the printer end along with variability from the media onto which you are printing.
It's a very big subject to cover and most people here seem to use on-line services that get a 'good enough' result.
If you want to dig more for your own interest try the Luminous Landscape site (Canada) and Northlight-Images (UK)
If all colours are mostly wildly wrong the chances are that your process is 'double profiling'. I have a Canon printer which can produce excellent results (though not necessarily identical to what I think I see on screen) but for which the printer driver/UI seem to have some odd quirks that I am never certain I have mastered.
If you use an on-line resource you may wish to soft proof using their recommended profiles depending on the paper selection you make.
If most of that sounds like gobbledygook (it likely will) brew a strong flask of your favourite hot drink and dive into the world of digital printing.
Plan B would be to use (Canon) camera jpgs and print directly. You may well find that works as expected. Not necessarily the best you can get from a high tech print but 'as expected'.
Printing is a minefield if you weant to nearly exactly match things and it starts with the camera )or scanner) moves to the monitor and then confuses you at the printer end along with variability from the media onto which you are printing.
It's a very big subject to cover and most people here seem to use on-line services that get a 'good enough' result.
If you want to dig more for your own interest try the Luminous Landscape site (Canada) and Northlight-Images (UK)
If all colours are mostly wildly wrong the chances are that your process is 'double profiling'. I have a Canon printer which can produce excellent results (though not necessarily identical to what I think I see on screen) but for which the printer driver/UI seem to have some odd quirks that I am never certain I have mastered.
If you use an on-line resource you may wish to soft proof using their recommended profiles depending on the paper selection you make.
If most of that sounds like gobbledygook (it likely will) brew a strong flask of your favourite hot drink and dive into the world of digital printing.
Plan B would be to use (Canon) camera jpgs and print directly. You may well find that works as expected. Not necessarily the best you can get from a high tech print but 'as expected'.
Edited by LongQ on Wednesday 3rd August 06:49
I'm just trying to get an accurate print of a photo of a painting.
Now most of my stuff prints OK but for some reason this is a nightmare, not helped by having no local printers who can do the size I require.
Have ended up printing small proofs that I think are correct and sending with the file!
Now most of my stuff prints OK but for some reason this is a nightmare, not helped by having no local printers who can do the size I require.
Have ended up printing small proofs that I think are correct and sending with the file!
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff