Profile for Canon i9900, OEM ink, Ilford Classic Pearl?

[Jeff L.]

The Ilford profile is very good, but I can see where it needs some improvement- it's a bit warm, and bit green, and the shadows block up. Has anyone created their own profile for this paper?

Thanks for any tips!
Jeff

 

[Grandad35]

Jeff,

This section has 2 profiles for ICP, but not with OEM ink.
http://www.nifty-stuff.com/forum/viewforum.php?id=8

Here is a profile for OEM ink and Kirkland paper (made by Ilford). If you don't mind doing a little testing, this profile may help in the shadows, and you might be able to fine tune the color cast with the driver's color settings.
http://www.nifty-stuff.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=129

Normally, the profiles from the paper suppliers for OEM inks are fairly close. How are your colors with Canon paper and their default profiles? If these colors are off, you may have a partially clogged print head. Also, if the print head isn't aligned properly it can throw off your colors.

 

[Jeff L.]

Hi Grandad,
Yes, I saw those posts, but didn't realize that Ilford made the Costco paper. So I've gone ahead and tried it, but it's not quite right. Actually, it's just as cool as the other was warm! Just have to find that point in-between.

The Ilford profile was fairly close, but I guess I'm a perfectionist. This is my living! I had been trying to make the Mediastreet CIS and inks work, but I'm still not totally happy with the color, even with a Dry Creek Photo custom profile (this helped a lot, but we reached the gamut limit of the inks, and couldn't get any closer to OEM quality). Not to mention sheen differential, ink pooling (graininess), and a terminally clogged head. And I think I'm seeing some metamerism... Anyone else noticed this with OEM or other inks on the Canon printer? Going to make more prints with OEM ink and compare.

So my whole point is to get a decent profile that I can use with the OEM ink, compare it to my Mediastreet prints, and decide if I want to ditch the MS kit. If I do that, at that point I'll have another custom profile made to get every last bit of quality out of that expensive Canon ink!

Thanks for your reply, and anything else you can add!
Jeff

 

[Grandad35]

Jeff,

Every print head has individual characteristics that control how much ink is ejected/dot, and if you want the absolute best color performance you will need a custom profile for your specific printer.

You could download several profiles for Kirkland paper and various inks and compare their "Soft Proofs" with the OEM ink profile on the same paper to get an idea of the gamut that is possible with other inks. Of course, none of this addresses the issue of longevity.

Let us know if you get a CIS system to work reliably on a Canon printer - at this point in time, many people consider this to be "Mission Impossible". By way of contrast, many people have good success with refilling and 3rd party prefilled carts.

 

[Jeff L.]

Hm, I don't think I give much weight to differences in individual printers/heads. I would guess that could be maybe a 2-3% difference in color, but the results I'm seeing I would describe being more like 15% off (of course % doesn't refer to anything objective, just my eye and my experience in digital and conventional C-41 printing). Besides, my printhead was changed out last week due to a clog, and I don't see any change in color.

So anyway, I tried all 7 of the profiles you have that have either the paper or ink I'm using, and none of them seem to work. The closest was the Kirkland new IG ink, but it had too much contrast. I'm sure they are very nice when used as intended, of course! I'm going back to the Ilford profile for now, and making some changes in the Color Options of the printer driver (so far -15y +3m seems to be pretty good).

I'm not sure I understand why it would be a problem to use a CIS on the i9900. Many here seem to be happy with 3rd party inks. Why would it matter if it comes in a cart or through a tube? My problem with my 3rd party ink was in the quality of the ink itself (mostly lack of saturation, I believe). The delivery system always worked perfectly smooth.

Jeff

 

[cjm]

Go to www.ddisoftware.com/prism and buy Profile Prism. You can create your own profiles for any ink and paper. Works for me, John

 

[Jeff L.]

I looked at that site, but I'm on a Mac, so that won't work. I'm thinking of getting the Monaco EZ color kit for $200. Either that or try Cathy's profiles. Can anyone comment on the quality of a profile produced by a scanner system vs. a colorimeter? Not to mention the experice of the operator...

Thanks,
Jeff

 

[Grandad35]

Jeff,

According to Monaco's EZ Color website, "This affordable color management software utilizes scanner-based printer and scanner profiling", so it is also a scanner based system. AFAIK, colorimeters can be used to profile monitors, but not printers.

A scanner based system's results are dependent on the scanner, since the R/G/B values that are reported are dependent on the color spectra "seen" by the scanner's color sensors. A spectrophotometer measures the entire spectrum and therefore accurately sees the colors generated by the printer, allowing more accurate profiles. Unfortunately, a spectro based system costs a lot more than a scanner based system and is not a realistic option for most non-professionals.

There are two camps regarding scanner based profile generation systems:
1. Those who love them.
2. Those who consider the results to be unacceptable. This post is typical of those who are in this camp:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1003&message=15056882

In general, professionals and people who are fussy about their printed colors tend to use spectro systems or have their profiles done by services that use spectro systems. People on a budget and who want to be able to change inks/papers/etc. at will tend to use a scanner based system. If you only use a few papers and one (consistent) ink, the best solution may be to pay to have profiles generated for your printer/ink/paper.

 

[Jeff L.]

Oh, right, I meant to say spectrophotometer instead of colorimeter.

That's a good thread you pointed to. I guess the most valid point is that I'm really only using one paper/ink combo (once I get it right), so just go to a pro. Now I just have to decide on OEM or MS ink... If I hadn't already spent +$350 on MS stuff, I would just stick with OE. But I can't stand to throw out something that expensive!! More testing and contemplating to do, I guess. Someone help me make up my mind, so I can move forward!

Jeff