Profiling Monitor??

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Wyatt80, Nov 19, 2003.

  1. Wyatt80

    Wyatt80 Guest

    When a monitor is profiled does it calibrate brightness and contrast as well
    as colors? Im not sure if its only a color calibration tool. Im tired of
    getting prints back from the lab (wallmart- Frontier printer) that do not
    match the monitor , specially brightness and contrast.
    For anyone who has experience using calibration software , are the higher
    end products (Monaco, Spyder ) worth the $$ ?
    Last question does loading the ICCC profile for a printer resolve the ne ed for
    calibration software?
    T I A
    Wyatt80, Nov 19, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. +++ Effectively yes, and theoretically yes, but with a big caveat...on the
    monitor you are viewing a transmissive image (lit from the back like a
    tranny on a lightbox) and on paper you view a reflective one (lit from the
    front by available light of varying quality)
    +++ Well yes and no...colorimetric calibration is a cross system or network
    calibration - they work just great IF and only IF all the means of handling
    the image, your system and all others, are calibrated the same or very
    closely to the same settings. Calibration of that sort is best done for
    networks of computers and for dealing with colour reproduction between a
    specific computer or network and a print house.

    EXAMPLE: If I calibrate my system, no matter how accurately, and send you an
    image (by disk, e-mail attachment, or via a website) to your system that is
    calibrated differently in any significant way you will NOT see what I see.
    If you post an image on your website, or send it to me in an e-mail, and I
    view it on my monitor I will NOT see it the same way you do. Without the
    original I would never actually KNOW that of course.

    Even the nature of the ambient light intensity and colour spectrum (as well
    as the colour peaks and troughs in the spectrum), in the room in which the
    image is viewed (as seen on a computer monitor or on paper), and that is
    something that is obviously completely divorced from the computer's
    calibration itself, will change it's "apparent" colour / contrast
    characteristics that your, or my, human eye sees. Worse yet if one of us is
    even slightly colour-blind.
    +++ NO! There is still a need to use internal whole system calibration
    methods e.g.Adobe Gamma or something similar applied to your system and
    tweaked at and for the printer. This sets up the profile for YOUR system and
    no other. Thereafter all devices internal to your system need to be using
    the SAME colour profile.

    EXAMPLE: You can set the profile of your scanner, for example, to ICC "sRGB
    IEC6 1966-2.1" and a Gamma setting of "2.0", here, too, you may be asked to
    specify the monitor colour temperature and other data that the profile
    requires. Then, say, you are using Photoshop as an application to pre-print
    (edit) the image - here, again, you also set the same parameters and a gamma
    setting as the Photoshop application's ICC profile. The same again with the

    Within your printer you may have other options or auto modes that will
    override the ICC profile - e.g Photo Enhance modes - that, if set
    incorrectly as defaults, will alter the colour renditions / colour
    management within the printer itself to something other than the ICC profile
    you THINK you are using.

    ICC profiles that are properly coordinated within a WHOLE system allow you
    to move images within YOUR system (scanner > HD / monitor > (to and from
    applications) > HD / monitor > printer) with accurate colour profiles
    INTERNAL to your system.

    Send the images on a CD to the local shop to be printed! -
    different results.

    Here's some light reading on the subject...(no pun intended)

    Color and Vison

    also see

    True Colors & Metamerism (inter-computer colour management)
    journalist-north, Nov 19, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Wyatt80

    Flycaster Guest

    First, calibrate and profile your monitor. Then ask for a profile for their
    frontier ~ if you can't get one from them, you can profiles for these
    devices on the net. Last, make sure you convert to, or simply work from
    start to finish in the sRGB colorspace. Frontiers expect sRGB and are
    calibrated for it.
    Depends. For most folks Adobe Gamma will do just fine, if properly used.
    Are the hardware solutions better. Absolutely, you get what you pay for.
    No. A monitor and printer profile are two completely different apsects of
    WYSIWYG color management. Like all profiles, however, they describe the
    device for which they are made in terms of known ICC standards. One tells
    your CMS aware software how your monitor "sees" known color values, and the
    other tells the software how the printer "sees" the same known color values.
    Used together in a color managed workflow, accurate profiles allow you to
    see the same thing on your screen that you will see come out of your
    printer, or the Fuji for that matter.
    Flycaster, Nov 20, 2003
  4. Wyatt80

    Flycaster Guest

    But that is the *point* of calibrating and profiling to known, device
    independent standards. Use, say, an Eye-One calibrator on both monitors,
    calibrate and profile them, open up identical images on Photoshop and you
    *will* have a match that is close enough to fool just about anyone.
    Perfect, nah. Good enough to do collaborative high-end work? Absolutely.
    (BTW, an Eye-One calibrator is about $200)

    See above.
    Each device has its *own* profile, by definition. Are you perhaps confusing
    this with working color spaces?
    Your scanner should have its own profile which will be tagged to the file.
    Then, in Photoshop, you can open and convert the file to whatever working
    space you prefer; there are pros and cons to this. Photoshop then uses the
    monitor profile to accurately render the file on-screen. (Photoshop itself
    has no "application profile" - unless you want to call the underlying
    working space of CIE L.A.B a profile, which it isn't.) Last, if you have a
    *printer* profile, you tell Photoshop to convert the file to that profile
    and send it to the printer driver, in which you have [hopefully] turned off
    the color management..

    I mean no offense whatsoever, but now I'm pretty sure you're confusing color
    spaces and profiles.
    That's called "double color management" - a total disaster.
    Again, if the profiles and calibration are accurate, you are NOT limited to
    working in just your system. What I see on my screen matches the screen
    output of monitors in service bureaus located in Denver, San Francisco, and
    Portland, and their prints match my screen very, very well. I, and many
    others, do this stuff all the time.
    I even do this from time to time with the local Walmart (Fuji wet-printers)
    for snapshots, and I get prints back that match what I see on-screen,
    everytime. With them, however, it took me a while to figure out that their
    machnes are calibrated for only sRGB (I work in Adobe RGB98), but once that
    was established, zero problems since.

    In closing, I hope you don't think I"m picking on you. This stuff is
    complicated, and I just wanted to point you in the right direction.
    Flycaster, Nov 20, 2003
  5. ------------

    Oh, no, don't ever think you are picking on me. This is a discussion board
    so lets discuss.

    Look here...

    Open Photoshop as only one easy example. Select file>colour settings where
    the top most menu asks FIRST for the profile - one of many listed. Ditto for
    scanners and printers if you look in the right places. Thereafter, Photoshop
    also asks for monitor color temp settings and the monitor phosphor type. In
    Photoshop you set up separate profiling for RGB, for CMYK and for greyscale
    as well - and profile usage overall (defaults) in a separate box.

    The original poster asked about "monitor" calibration. That in itself is
    useless if there is more than one system involved OR more than one piece of
    hardware OR more than one piece of software, that are not coordinated in

    I know the routine as well as you and also work in publishing (magazines).
    When doing work with the print houses I am obligated to use their RIP data
    (print/press profiles = Remote Imaging Protocol = RIP) as well to colour
    match to their press and paper stock. If I were to work up an image on my
    autonomous system as an sRGB, convert it to CMYK, and send it to them
    embedded in a QuarkXPress or PDF file - without considering their RIP - I
    wouldn't have a prayer of a complaint about color shifts in the final print
    run. They would laugh me out of the office. RIPs are "profiles" and are set
    for both the press AND the paper stock to be used.

    I just recently did a consult with a very small British magazine publisher
    (6k print runs) having exactly that problem - it took 4 hours to convince
    him of what was happening, what he was doing right and what he was doing
    wrong, and show him how to correct it. The conversation originally started
    out something along the lines of "...I've been in this business for "X"
    number of years and you are going to show me?...We have had a complaint from
    one of our if you are such a smart sit right down
    and show me how to fix it." After printing the next edition he sent me a
    nice little pressie and a thank you note for saving one of his advertising
    accounts that was nearly lost on account of the formerly crap color repro.
    That was a prime case of a logo that was supposed to be dark blue in the
    layout coming out nearly purple in the printing because of s**t color
    control / management in the layouts.

    You are right about one thing IS a complex problem; it is not
    well understood by most casual users; and it gets more complex when working
    across different systems, across different platforms Mac - Win - Mac, and
    when moving an image from the computer to a printed image, especially where
    much more precise repro colour control is an absolute requirement - that or
    go out of business. If the different systems are not profiled and calibrated
    in a similar fashion, what you see on one is NOT what you will get on the
    other. What you see on the monitor and "may" get on glossy photo paper at
    the desktop printer or the office laser printer, is not what you will see
    and get on the mid-weight coated offset stock.


    Profiles and color spaces are different - color space is a representation of
    the nature of the color patterns of an image and how color is constructed.
    RGB is a colour space, so is CMY, so is CMYK, so is greyscale, so is LAB
    colour mode, ect. Each mode (color space) has a related "gamut" of colour -
    the depth of colour available - RGB on the lower end and LAB space as the
    widest range of possible colour. These colour ranges, gamuts, are also
    generally corrected for linearity of Luminosity and Intensity (of computer
    displays) by the means of Gamma corrections. Gamma is part of the color
    space definition. Gamma insures that the display representation has the
    desired balance between highlight, mid-tone and shadow. Gamma is managed in
    a different way between a PC and a Mac so there are references to Win
    "colour space" and Mac "colour space" for that reason. What that says is
    that a Win RGB+Gamma image may not be rendered the same (on screen) on a Mac
    system managed under a Mac RGB+Gamma system characteristic...and vice versa.

    Profiles, however, are different from colour spaces and define brightness,
    contrast and tonality of the image data NOT the fundamental construction of
    the color patterns within the image when handled in any particular colour
    space mode.

    Don't ever ask me about PPI v DPI v LPI - that discussion runs about
    100,000 words+ ---- LOL

    journalist-north, Nov 20, 2003
  6. Wyatt80

    MikeWhy Guest

    ....<big, big, babbling snip>...

    I really don't think you know as much about this as you think you do.
    Flycaster told it to you straight, but let's just say it simply matches my
    own understanding. Your stuff, though, is really wandering, hopelessly lost,
    tangled, and confused. Maybe it's just a language issue...
    MikeWhy, Nov 21, 2003
  7. -------------

    My comment:

    Maybe the concept that colour space and the actual color profiling of the
    printed output to paper (ink, paper and printer) are two different things
    has escaped your notice. Apples and oranges.

    If I am wrong so are Kodak and all the rest of the printing industry...

    Color Profiling at Work (printers)

    Color Profiling (printers)


    RGB is the color SPACE used by ALL monitors but systems can handle other
    colour spaces (Lab; CMY; CMYK) you just can't view them on your monitor
    screen - they are converted back to RGB for that particular display device.
    Printers on the other hand EXPECT to receive an image as RGB even though
    they then convert it in the print driver to CMYK. A common and widely
    recognised color PROFILE in the RGB colour space is sRGB as normally used by
    Windows and it is recognised by many hardware DEVICES as well - printers,
    scanners, ect. sRGB is NOT the same in Windows and Mac operating systems and
    a conversion is possible to accurately render colors on the monitor and for
    printing...BUT READ ON....

    CMY and CMYK are the color SPACES generally used to print colors. The
    problem is these spaces are extremely device dependent. The kind of paper,
    ink, and printer technology used in the process, heavily impact the final
    color quality.

    The very simple transforms (e.g. the sRGB "profile") used to convert RGB
    data to CMY and CMYK (in the printer drivers), are fine just for very basic
    color printing.

    For professional application, or everywhere color presentation is critical,
    an accurate printer PROFILING, the characterization (PROFILE) of a device
    dependent space (CMYK) to a device independent one (PRINTER RIP PROFILE DATA
    relating to the ink, paper and printer), must be used...


    ON FUJI FRONTIER specifically...

    For those of you concerned with printing photos accurately via Fuji Frontier
    did you even know (?) that you should be visually comparing what you see on
    your monitor to a Fuji supplied (printed on paper) PROOF TARGET for the
    Frontier system and PROFILING your system / output (calibrating) to the Fuji
    Frontier "target" as the one-and-only PROFILE for their laser / optical

    But if you do, guess what happens then when you send your image files to a
    photo lab using Agfa or Kodak PROFILES or send your images to a Heidelberg
    offset press or print them on your desktop printer.

    I said it before and I will say it again...calibrating a monitor, in
    isolation from total color management, doesn't do FA as far as printing
    without considering the calibration and profiles throughout the process and
    across different computer systems in the process stream.

    journalist-north, Nov 22, 2003
  8. Wyatt80

    MikeWhy Guest

    Let's have at it, then. First and foremost, and at the end, remember:
    "Understand" is to "simple", as "confused" is to "babbling".
    Nope. I'm perfectly OK with that statement. Rather than fruits, let's just
    say device independent versus device dependent.

    RGB and CMYK refer to color reproduction technologies. They are not
    themselves color spaces. Emissive devices, monitors for example, typically
    use the additive colors: red, green, and blue; collectively RGB. Printing
    technologies, printers and presses for example, typically use the
    subtractive colors: cyan, magenta, and yellow; collectively CMY and
    sometimes K.

    Lab refers to CIELAB, or L*a*b, which is a color space. You might say it's
    the mother of all color spaces, at least in context of ICC and profiles.
    (Parenthetically, profiling is the bridge between the device independent
    color spaces and your particular device.
    True enough. Desktop inkjet printers drivers pretend to be RGB devices. They
    still print using cyan, magenta, blue, and black inks, which we all know
    from having replaced an ink cartridge or two.
    sRGB is a colorspace, not a profile. There is but one sRGB. Multiple
    "definitions" of an abstract standard defeats its purpose.
    There is no better definition of device dependent, or its inverse, device
    independence. Color spaces are by definition device independent.

    <-- snip -->

    And then you continue to trail farther into babbleland. I can't -- or
    rather, won't -- follow you there.

    Here is my simplistic understanding: Color spaces -- sRGB, AdobeRGB, L*a*b,
    PhotoPro, for example -- are device independent definitions of colors.
    Profiles define the mapping between these abstract definitions and your
    particular device. Calibrating your device means to bring it to the known
    state referenced by that device's profile.

    There; fifty words or less. Understand vs. confused; simple vs. babble.
    MikeWhy, Nov 23, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.