Colour calibration help please.

[craig carr]

I have a epson r3000 and a P800 both running inktec powerchrome k3 pigment inks.
I have downloaded the paper profiles for each specific printer from the paper supplier yet the difference in print is big.
I need to get them to print as close as possible to each other.
Do I need to invest in a colour calibration kit?
Will that get both print results from either printer to look similar?
I've seen a coupe for second hand spyder4studio for approx £300, the newer model is £450 in the UK and the latest colormunki photo is about the same..
I'm just looking for general opinions on what I can do.

Thanks

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

I think you are right that these variances relate to inproper profiles, if it is just this case you could get profiles made by a service provider for that, vendors of refill supplies - inks and papers - tpyically offer as well a profiling service , I remember a supplier offering even a free profile with every ink purchase above a particular $level...
But if you think you rather would like to test and use other papers or other inks now and then or more frequently or even test different driver settings you are better off with a profiling package for your own use. There is very limited information available comparing the features and performance, ease of handling, accuracy of such starter packages like the Spyder Studio or the ColorMunki, it is
my impression from several postings here on this forum that the ColorMunki is the preferred solution. I assume that actual ColorMunki users will comment on that in more detail.
But back to your starting point - I think, I'm very sure that you should be able to get prints from both printers, with the same ink, on the same paper, which are visually indistinguishable, there are typically some smaller variances in such situation - there are driver internal differences between printers responsible for that , such differences are measurable but below a threshold of visibility.
You are using Inktec K3 inks, I was not happy with the photo black of this ink set, it shows a pretty strong metallic shine against reflecting light, a kind of bronzing effect . Using another pigment photo black would eliminate most of that effect, but that's another subject beyond profiling.

 

[craig carr]

I think you are right that these variances relate to inproper profiles, if it is just this case you could get profiles made by a service provider for that, vendors of refill supplies - inks and papers - tpyically offer as well a profiling service , I remember a supplier offering even a free profile with every ink purchase above a particular $level...
But if you think you rather would like to test and use other papers or other inks now and then or more frequently or even test different driver settings you are better off with a profiling package for your own use. There is very limited information available comparing the features and performance, ease of handling, accuracy of such starter packages like the Spyder Studio or the ColorMunki, it is
my impression from several postings here on this forum that the ColorMunki is the preferred solution. I assume that actual ColorMunki users will comment on that in more detail.
But back to your starting point - I think, I'm very sure that you should be able to get prints from both printers, with the same ink, on the same paper, which are visually indistinguishable, there are typically some smaller variances in such situation - there are driver internal differences between printers responsible for that , such differences are measurable but below a threshold of visibility.
You are using Inktec K3 inks, I was not happy with the photo black of this ink set, it shows a pretty strong metallic shine against reflecting light, a kind of bronzing effect . Using another pigment photo black would eliminate most of that effect, but that's another subject beyond profiling.

Thanks for the info, I decided to go with the studio 5 kit as it is £300 new which A LOT cheaper than I can find the colormunki, Regardles it will be a lot better than I have now ha.

I had read a fair bit on the problem with the K3 black, I don't mind it so much, I do a lot of solid black backgrounds and I know what you mean about the shine but I do Art Prints so it doesn't bother me too much. I may get a litre of image specialist stuff next time and mix then to see what it's like

 

[berttheghost]

Trying to fix your problem with profiling is likely to end in frustration. You shouldn't need to profile to get close results between the two very similar printers. I would suspect an ink starvation problem, likely caused by partially clogged dampers. Your color variations may vary with the rate at which you're laying down ink. Profiling won't account for this. I've heard of people running 50 percent Simple Green solution through cleaning cartridges to clear accumulated ink flakes in their dampers.

The Datacolor Spyder and the X-rite Colormunki are very different. the Spyder is a (7 band) colorimeter while the Colormunki is a spectrophotometer with 10(?) nanometer resolution. The Colormunki is well woth its price. I doubt that the Spyder is capable or resolving closely matching colors well enough to converge on a proper profile for an 8 color printer, but that's just my opinion.

As i suggested earlier, get your printers up to snuff before you attempt to profile them. If cleaning doesn't work, you might attempt to replace the dampers, though they aren't considered field replaceable units. Best of luck.

 

[Smile]

Well don't think this post is an advertisement of my services but professionally created profiles if the service provider is not a scammer and by professional they should use an isis at least. The profiles would be superior to manufacturer profiles.

Datacolor Spyder is a toy, very overpriced I might add. You will not be able to get matches between your devices with it.

 

[Andreas S]

I agree about the Spyder. But ther is more than the calibration device, software is very important too. There is some very crapy software around, even included in some very pricy professional rips.

 

[Smile]

Yes you are correct. Software in print is key for quality. However software in profile making is absolute rubbish compared to printing apps.

How can Xrite or other brands get away with it I do not understand. Especially with american attitude to sue everybody in court for silly things.

You literally have to use Excel with custom scripts to manipulate measurements along other things to get decent profiles, it's not push of a single button they make it sound like.

 

[Andreas S]

Let us say that some software does the job if you don't reaches out for "the perfect" profile. A perfect profile will be from interrest in industry, photographers don't really need this.
May I ask you from which country in Europe you comes from ?

 

[Smile]

Let us say that some software does the job if you don't reaches out for "the perfect" profile. A perfect profile will be from interrest in industry, photographers don't really need this.
May I ask you from which country in Europe you comes from ?

A perfect profile does not exist!
A profile that pass certain level of certification routine is a profile you can trust and know you paid money for some value not gimmick.
I'm from Lithuania - geographical center of Europe.