After ColorMunki Calibration

[PalaDolphin]

I can't remember such a painful feeling of buyer's remorse worse than when I just received my X-Rite ColorMunki via UPS, calibrated my monitor, then viewed a sample matrix and it was too dark. Oh, that's right, this happened right after printing on my new Pro-100; everything was dark. Hence the reason for monitor calibration.

So we're all on the same page, I'm using these two images:
Web Link: http://pics.paladolphin.com/samples/

Individual Images:
Matrix Large

PDI Test Image

After calibration with ColorMunki...
1. Windows 7 Preview makes the images look very dark.
2. So, I opened them in Ps CS6 and they look okay, but just a little dark.
3. Then I create a web page and they look perfect. I'm viewing using Chrome.
4. Printing on the Canon Pro-100 both images on 4x6 Epson Premium Photo Paper Glossy looks unacceptably dark (not really dark, just too dark is dark areas to see detail); I failed to use their exact ICC profile, so I'll deal with that after figuring out monitor calibration. First things first.

What the hell is going on here? I accept that Windows Preview fails; I'd like to know why? But, why is there any difference on the same monitor right next to each other (Ps next to Chrome)?

And here's something else, when Ps displays actual pixels, the darkness goes away and the colors match the web page viewed in Chrome browser (also zoomed into actual pixels).

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

You may be 'victim' of this effect
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/why-are-my-prints-too-dark/
You'll find more similar entries if you search for 'printouts too dark' or similar

 

[PalaDolphin]

Lr has the ability to lighten things up at print time, but Ps does not. Anyone have a suggestion for an ICC editor, one that I can open an existing ICC file, modify it, and save it as my own?

 

[Roy Sletcher]

After calibration with ColorMunki...
1. Windows 7 Preview makes the images look very dark.
2. So, I opened them in Ps CS6 and they look okay, but just a little dark.
3. Then I create a web page and they look perfect. I'm viewing using Chrome.
4. Printing on the Canon Pro-100 both images on 4x6 Epson Premium Photo Paper Glossy looks unacceptably dark (not really dark, just too dark is dark areas to see detail); I failed to use their exact ICC profile, so I'll deal with that after figuring out monitor calibration. First things first.

Trouble shooting colour, profiling and image reproduction problems from a distant or remote location is almost certainly doomed to failure. Too many variables not obvious at the remote location.

I will let others more qualified than myself give a more knowledgeable analysis but cannot resist a few obvservations as follows:

ITEM 1 - Windows and many of its apps are notoriously bad at "correct" colour management. I would not put too much reliance on your item 1 comparison

ITEM 2 - Bears out my comment above - I would trust Adobe's implementation of CM - If it looks correct in CS6, AND YOU HAVE THE ADOBE COLOUR PREFERENCES CORRECTLY SET your monitor profile is PROBABLY OK.

ITEM 3 - Answer again is - "depends". To my knowledge website colour reproduction is limited to sRGB unless there is an ICC file header denoting otherwise. Not a very high bar for ICC compliance.

ITEM 4 - Unless you are using a good and correct ICC output profile for the print, you have NO idea what a correct printed image looks like. Remember your printer reproduces what is on the file filtered through the ICC profile. NOT what you see on your monitor.

As I said remote trobleshooting fraught with confusion. Others may have more productiove suggestions.

WARNING - Colour Management can drive you mad. But when the magic works it is an incredible tool to productivity and quality.


rs

 

[apetitphoto]

Rule of thumb: Your monitor is probably lying to you. Ignore it to start with.

Print the reference images and have the printer manage the colors. Let the print dry for a while. Hours are better than minutes. As the ink dries it may change colors slightly.

Compare the print to your monitor and adjust the monitor's brightness to match the print. The colormunki may not have done that. After you've got the brightness set you can begin to trust the monitor a bit.

What applications do to images is unknown...

 

[apetitphoto]

Lr has the ability to lighten things up at print time, but Ps does not. Anyone have a suggestion for an ICC editor, one that I can open an existing ICC file, modify it, and save it as my own?

Lr print time brightness adjustment is a guess. You can figure it out by trial and error or you can ignore this feature and set the brightness where it should be in the develop module.

 

[PalaDolphin]

ITEM 3 - Answer again is - "depends". To my knowledge website colour reproduction is limited to sRGB unless there is an ICC file header denoting otherwise. Not a very high bar for ICC compliance.

My webpage is barebones with no CSS.

 

[mikling]

My webpage is barebones with no CSS.

As Roy indicates, I think you are walking into a swamp and not know it.

A little reading and your head might start hurting a bit. If you're just starting out, it is best to stick with sRGB especially if you cannot determine how many of your readers will understand color management and not know how to accommodate the wide gamut images you might have inserted.

Now the next thing is the web editing software you are using, is it color aware? Hmm... how does it proof the creation.

http://www.color-management-guide.com/web-browser-color-management.html

A little dated considering the above article.
http://cameratico.com/guides/web-browser-color-management-guide/

Then you need to try this
https://chromachecker.com/info/en/page/webbrowser

Also you might need to check how color management is set up on your PC.

Next make sure your brightness and contrast setting are done properly. Your monitor MUST pass at least this test.
http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/

If you want something done right, use your purchased hardware and step up to
https://displaycal.net/
It does it right unlike what the standard software issued by the mfrs who must consider user issues and time taken to calibrate. If your monitor is "calibrated" properly then the characterization process begins. Xrite and Datacolor try to merge these two distinct steps into one. But it is a shortcut and will not work on some monitors. Also calibrating requires you adjust the hardware controls on your monitor and hopefully your monitor allows that. Also in setting the white point, it can get fiddly as each adjustment of one color channel will likely affect the other already adjusted channel. You will need to be patient and get a feel for how the other channels will react. Hence why most mfrs will not suggest users perform this.....most will not be patient enough. But it is the correct way to do it. You want your monitor to start at a position it is best capable of before using software to correct.

For many many years I have stuck with Firefox mainly for the color management control.

Here's the course of action. Remove all the profiles and management by the Color munki.
Then calibrate the monitor with hardware controls to get a pass on the brightness and contrast.
Install the displaycal and get the white point close. The brightness level should be in the area of 100-120 Max. and the room lighting must be not light up brightly, a bit subdued is best.
After that you can continue to use Color munki or continue on with Displaycal but be prepared it takes a Looooong time. The complexity of the curve fitting is horrendous as compared to what the other mfrs do. But this Argyll CMS... written with no regard to consumer issues, it brute forces its way to the solution.

Thereafter, you should be good.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

I think there is a misconception that a print should match the look on the monitor - why not the other way around ? The Monitor has a higher brightness than the viewing light for your prints unless you use a lightbox , the monitor offers a higher contrast range than any print, you may use a program like Qimage to raise the gamma at the time of print to your preference, you may place your print side by side to your monitor and just turn down the brightness to get closer to the look of the print. Spyder by Datacolor is profiling software which allows you to tweak a profile not just to the viewing light color temperature but as well the brightness. I don't think it's a job for a profile to do that.

 

[martin0reg]

Yes - a printer profile should be correct by itself, because the process of measuring the target and computing the icc is like a closed loop: errors occur probably before this process, while printing the target (wrong settings) or after, when applying the icc .

So it may be a good idea to ...

..
Print the reference images and have the printer manage the colors. Let the print dry for a while. Hours are better than minutes. As the ink dries it may change colors slightly.
...
Compare the print to your monitor and adjust the monitor's brightness to match the print. The colormunki may not have done that. ...

Because by printing a test photo with "printer manages colors" you can find out wether there are basic errors in the printing process. But you would need OEM cartridges AND OEM paper to do this.

Adjusting the monitor by looking at a print seems to be unusual, but it's possible. There are many test images online which can also help to get a decent adjustemnt of the monitor.
Just one thing I want to point out: No spectro is adjusting the monitor to match the print - nor vice versa.
There is no link between monitor and printer, both are output devices and have to be profiled correct, one after the other.
No matter which comes first, you even could profile only the printer (paper) without the monitor... Remember a profiling service is doing the same: profiling your printer paper - without looking at your monitor.