Realism of printer colours?
Terry Pinnell
a few map images. The deep reddish/purple on the screen has printed as
a rich pink (from a couple of different applications, including PSP
6). The greens, blues and yellows seem roughly OK.
I've managed to survive without a colour printer for many years, so
have virtually no experience of their realism. Is this a common fault
of cheaper printers? Anyone know if this lightening of red a
characteristic of this particular brand or model?
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Jeanne Brynie
frequent discussions that would shed some light for you. Don't expect an easy
answer, tho. It's a very complex problem.
"*^*" Jeanne "*^*"
Kris Zaklika
Enable Windows Color Management. Read this to learn how:
http://campratty.com/1faq/faqpages/b9a.html
Make sure to read the second page as well.
> Terry, West Sussex, UK
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kris Zaklika Jasc Software, Inc. The
Product Ideas: id...@jasc.com Power
Customer Service: customer...@jasc.com To
Technical Support: tec...@jasc.com Create
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terry Pinnell
>Enable Windows Color Management. Read this to learn how:
>http://campratty.com/1faq/faqpages/b9a.html
>Make sure to read the second page as well.
Thanks Kris. I'm at your http://www.jasc.com/monitor1.asp now. The b/w
setting was fine, but I'm not sure I understand your gamma procedure.
I want to get this right before I move on to adding a manual colour
profile to my printer, to replace the current 'automatic' setting.
(That sounds a promising solution to my mis-match.)
"Stand facing the screen. Make sure you are far enough away so you
can't clearly see the numbers in the squares."
That's impossible in my office, but presumably removing my specs is a
suitable alternative?
"Estimate which square best merges with the background and note its
position"
This is the step that's giving me trouble. I assume the texture
of the backround should be hatched with horizontal lines, and the
individual squares should be plain? And there should be no colours on
this chart, just greys? Anyway, with my glasses removed *much* of the
bottom row seems to 'merge' with the background. Probably the best fit
is the highest, 2.70.
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Terry Pinnell
>Enable Windows Color Management. Read this to learn how:
>http://campratty.com/1faq/faqpages/b9a.html
>Make sure to read the second page as well.
Now sorted, thank you. A few minutes after my earlier reply, I went
into PSP's own gamma adjustment window, unlinked the channels, and
adjusted each of the three. Print now looks very similar to display.
Still curious about your web chart though.
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Kris Zaklika
>
> Kris Zaklika <kzak...@jasc.com> wrote:
>
> >Enable Windows Color Management. Read this to learn how:
> >http://campratty.com/1faq/faqpages/b9a.html
> >Make sure to read the second page as well.
>
> Now sorted, thank you. A few minutes after my earlier reply, I went
> into PSP's own gamma adjustment window, unlinked the channels, and
> adjusted each of the three. Print now looks very similar to display.
If this works for you then that's great. However, you
are using a technique from before the days of Windows
Color Management rather than using color management.
> Still curious about your web chart though.
It's pretty straightforward. You want to decide what square
is about the same shade as the hatched background. You need
to stand far enough away (or remove glasses :) so that there
is no obviously visible hatching in the background otherwise
it is hard to judge the overall greyness of the background.
If several squares seem to match the background in shade,
pick the one with the lowest gamma. However, this should not
happen if you are doing things properly. A gamma of 2.7 as
you report is extremely implausible for a PC.
Bob Dietz
By adjusting PSP's gamma setting, you made PSP display images
in a manner that makes (some) images appear more similar to
what is currently coming out of your printer. However, if you
look at those same images in other programs (Internet Explorer),
they will appear differently than you see them in PSP.
If you can follow the directions in both pages of the
previously given http://campratty.com/1faq/faqpages/b9a.html
link, then images will look the same in PSP, Internet Explorer,
... and your printed images will look at least as good as they
do now.
I said "if you can", because you will need to be able to find
.icm color profiles for you monitor and printer. If you have
an older monitor, you may not be able to find a profile.
And some cheap printers don't include .icm profiles with their
print drivers.
Bob Dietz
Terry Pinnell
>Terry Pinnell wrote:
>>
>> Kris Zaklika <kzak...@jasc.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Enable Windows Color Management. Read this to learn how:
>> >http://campratty.com/1faq/faqpages/b9a.html
>> >Make sure to read the second page as well.
>>
>> Now sorted, thank you. A few minutes after my earlier reply, I went
>> into PSP's own gamma adjustment window, unlinked the channels, and
>> adjusted each of the three. Print now looks very similar to display.
>
>If this works for you then that's great. However, you
>are using a technique from before the days of Windows
>Color Management rather than using color management.
Although improved after following that PSP procedure, it seems
I'mstill not getting faithful colours. For example, in general they
seem lighter on paper than in Print Preview.
>> Still curious about your web chart though.
>
>It's pretty straightforward. You want to decide what square
>is about the same shade as the hatched background. You need
>to stand far enough away (or remove glasses :) so that there
>is no obviously visible hatching in the background otherwise
>it is hard to judge the overall greyness of the background.
>If several squares seem to match the background in shade,
>pick the one with the lowest gamma. However, this should not
>happen if you are doing things properly. A gamma of 2.7 as
>you report is extremely implausible for a PC.
Thanks. Based on that and Bob's reply it looks like I need to set
aside some time to get into this whole colour management issue. Sounds
fraught with inherent complications. Is there a foolproof 3rd party
utility to automate most of it, with easy restoration of defaults.
FWIW, the values at present after using PSP's 'Monitor Gamma'
procedure are R=2.06, G=2.34, B=2.13.
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Terry Pinnell
>By adjusting PSP's gamma setting, you made PSP display images
>in a manner that makes (some) images appear more similar to
>what is currently coming out of your printer. However, if you
>look at those same images in other programs (Internet Explorer),
>they will appear differently than you see them in PSP.
>
>If you can follow the directions in both pages of the
>previously given http://campratty.com/1faq/faqpages/b9a.html
>link, then images will look the same in PSP, Internet Explorer,
>... and your printed images will look at least as good as they
>do now.
>
>I said "if you can", because you will need to be able to find
>.icm color profiles for you monitor and printer. If you have
>an older monitor, you may not be able to find a profile.
>And some cheap printers don't include .icm profiles with their
>print drivers.
Thanks Bob. See my reply to Kris.
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Marvin Margoshes
"Terry Pinnell" <terr...@dial.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:1n6qbuc3hdps7dc15...@4ax.com...
Follow the directions at http://campratty.com/1faq/faqpages/b9a.html in
detail. One of the first steps is to set gamma = 1 for all colors.
Terry Pinnell
>Follow the directions at http://campratty.com/1faq/faqpages/b9a.html in
>detail. One of the first steps is to set gamma = 1 for all colors.
OK, I've had another crack at it. No profiles were installed. My
monitor is a Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 920 and this was list offered when
choosing monitor profile:
- adod6522.icm
- appd6518.icm
- Diamond Compatible 9300K G2.2.icm
- Hitachi Compatible 9300K G2.2.icm
- is330.icm
- kodak-dc.icm
- NEC Compatible 9300K G2.2.icm
- sRGB Color Space Profile.icm
- Trinitron Compatible 9300K G2.2.icm
Initially I added both the Diamond and Trinitron, and made the latter
the default.
For the printer I added all of the above, except is330 which wasn't
allowed as it is for scanner/camera.
Now have these settings in PSP Color Management:
Monitor Profile: Trinitron Compatible 9300K G2.2
Printer Profile: Trinitron Compatible 9300K G2.2
Rendering Intent: Pictures
Testing gave no improvement. Printed version of a dark reddish purple
appears lipstick pink.
Tried about half a dozen other combinations, with barely perceptible
differences. Marginally the best was with Color Management restored to
its disabled status!
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Kris Zaklika
>
> "Marvin Margoshes" <physche...@telocity.com> wrote:
>
> >Follow the directions at http://campratty.com/1faq/faqpages/b9a.html in
> >detail. One of the first steps is to set gamma = 1 for all colors.
>
> OK, I've had another crack at it. No profiles were installed. My
> monitor is a Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 920 and this was list offered when
> choosing monitor profile:
> - adod6522.icm
> - appd6518.icm
> - Diamond Compatible 9300K G2.2.icm
> - Hitachi Compatible 9300K G2.2.icm
> - is330.icm
> - kodak-dc.icm
> - NEC Compatible 9300K G2.2.icm
> - sRGB Color Space Profile.icm
> - Trinitron Compatible 9300K G2.2.icm
>
> Initially I added both the Diamond and Trinitron, and made the latter
> the default.
Why? The Trinitron is a Sony monitor and you have a
Mitsubishi. If you are using the Diamond Compatible
9300K G2.2.icm file this means that you must go to
Display Properties in Windows and set the color
temperature to 9300 K (a very bluish white) and the
display gamma to 2.2. The more normal white point for a
monitor is 6500K. Try the manufacturer's web site or a
CD that came with your computer to get a better profile
for your actual monitor with its actual settings. If all
else fails, try sRGB Color Space Profile.icm.
> For the printer I added all of the above, except is330 which wasn't
> allowed as it is for scanner/camera.
> Now have these settings in PSP Color Management:
>
> Monitor Profile: Trinitron Compatible 9300K G2.2
> Printer Profile: Trinitron Compatible 9300K G2.2
Aaargh! You can't use a monitor profile for a printer!
A printer is nothing like a monitor. It uses inks and
subtractive color mixing, not phosphors and additive
color mixing. You must use the profile for your specific
printer at its specific settings (resolution, ink set,
paper type). Get it from the web site of your printer's
manufacturer (i.e. Lexmark) or from the CD that came
with the printer. Don't have it? Then you can't use
color management.
> Rendering Intent: Pictures
The "Pictures" rendering intent is for use with photos.
For a map you'd be better off using "Graphics" as the
rendering intent. Before Win2K this was called "Relative
Colorimetric" intent. It is best for matching a few colors
exactly.
> Testing gave no improvement. Printed version of a dark reddish purple
> appears lipstick pink.
>
> Tried about half a dozen other combinations, with barely perceptible
> differences. Marginally the best was with Color Management restored to
> its disabled status!
If you don't follow the rules and do the correct thing
you can't get good results, any more than randomly
whacking keys on the keyboard produces error-free English
text or connecting an American TV in England lets you
watch the BBC.
The basic idea is this. The manufacturer calibrates the
translation of his monitor's colors to a reference color
space. This is the monitor profile. Another manufacturer
calibrates the translation of his printer's colors to the
same reference color space. This is the printer profile.
Windows uses this reference color space to translate
the color of one device to the color of another device
as accurately as possible (taking into account the
rendering intent). When you make random choices of
device profiles you use the wrong calibrations and
the results are complete rubbish.
Terry Pinnell
>> Initially I added both the Diamond and Trinitron, and made the latter
>> the default.
>
>Why? The Trinitron is a Sony monitor and you have a
>Mitsubishi.
I was going to make it Diamond, but when it came to the printer
profile stage Windows XP's automatic mode selected Trinitron.
"Automatic: Windows will automatically select the best color profile
from the list of associated color profiles [Recommended]"
So I then made that my choice for the monitor too, under the misguided
impression that they should 'match'. I also had a vague idea that the
Mistsubishi, like several other brands, used the 'Trinitron'
principle, characterised by a couple of thin, emebedded horizontal
lines.
>If you are using the Diamond Compatible
>9300K G2.2.icm file
OK, I've now changed it to Diamond Compatible 9300K G2.2.icm.
(The user guide spec sheet says 5000K - 9300K)
>this means that you must go to Display Properties in Windows
>and set the color temperature to 9300 K (a very bluish white)
>and the display gamma to 2.2.
Could you please amplify on how to do that. Display Properties >
Settings >Advanced > Monitor offers only Refresh rate, and the extra
step > Properties just gives basic info and a Troubleshoot button.
>The more normal white point for a
>monitor is 6500K. Try the manufacturer's web site or a
>CD that came with your computer to get a better profile
>for your actual monitor with its actual settings. If all
>else fails, try sRGB Color Space Profile.icm.
Thanks, I will try both. (Puzzled why a PC that's only 4 months old
would not already have an appropriate file though.)
>> For the printer I added all of the above, except is330 which wasn't
>> allowed as it is for scanner/camera.
>> Now have these settings in PSP Color Management:
>>
>> Monitor Profile: Trinitron Compatible 9300K G2.2
>> Printer Profile: Trinitron Compatible 9300K G2.2
>
>Aaargh! You can't use a monitor profile for a printer!
>A printer is nothing like a monitor. It uses inks and
>subtractive color mixing, not phosphors and additive
>color mixing. You must use the profile for your specific
>printer at its specific settings (resolution, ink set,
>paper type). Get it from the web site of your printer's
>manufacturer (i.e. Lexmark) or from the CD that came
>with the printer. Don't have it? Then you can't use
>color management.
That first combination did puzzle me, although, as I said, XP chose
it! As now seems the case, if my list was incomplete in having no
explicit Lexmark entry, then perhaps Trinitron was the best of a bad
bunch? (Implying *none* of the others were 'printer ICMs'?) And as
mentioned, I did then subsequently try several other combinations. All
were indeed somewhat arbitrary, if not quite "random choices". For
example, my next run used sRGB Color Space Profile.icm like your web
example. But anyway, accepting the thrust of your point, is such
arbitrariness so surprising? In the absence of any mention of
'Mitsubishi' or 'Lexmark', on a system with purported P'nP facilities
and all recommended drivers apparently installed by the supplier?
>> Rendering Intent: Pictures
>
>The "Pictures" rendering intent is for use with photos.
>For a map you'd be better off using "Graphics" as the
>rendering intent. Before Win2K this was called "Relative
>Colorimetric" intent. It is best for matching a few colors
>exactly.
That's the setting I used initially (intuitively), but on repeating
the exercise I tried to follow your web instructions rigorously, and
hence chose Pictures as second best.
>> Testing gave no improvement. Printed version of a dark reddish purple
>> appears lipstick pink.
>>
>> Tried about half a dozen other combinations, with barely perceptible
>> differences. Marginally the best was with Color Management restored to
>> its disabled status!
>If you don't follow the rules and do the correct thing
>you can't get good results, any more than randomly
>whacking keys on the keyboard produces error-free English
>text or connecting an American TV in England lets you
>watch the BBC.
Duly chastised. See my points of mitigation above.
>The basic idea is this. The manufacturer calibrates the
>translation of his monitor's colors to a reference color
>space.
I'm trying, I really am, but that lost me right there. '...calibrates
the translation of his monitor's colors to a reference color space'?
>This is the monitor profile. Another manufacturer
>calibrates the translation of his printer's colors to the
>same reference color space. This is the printer profile.
>Windows uses this reference color space to translate
>the color of one device to the color of another device
>as accurately as possible (taking into account the
>rendering intent). When you make random choices of
>device profiles you use the wrong calibrations and
>the results are complete rubbish.
Seems wide open for transparent automation IMO. Given that the OS
knows my monitor and printer, why does it not install the appropriate
optimum ICM files itself? I'd be happy to remain uninvolved. It's an
eye-opener that such complex machinations are apparently necessary to
get realistic colour printing!
I strongly suspect that the Lexmark Z23 installation process by-passed
installation of its own CD-based softweare, allowing XP's own 'Lexmark
drivers' to be installed. If so, one casualty might well have been a
key ICM file. I'll see if I can find one.
I do appreciate your attempts to help me, and I hope you won't give up
on the challenge until my purples are more purple than pink!
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Bill Schnakenberg
This is a hardware adjustment on your monitor, usually accessed by menu
buttons that are built into the monitor case with an on-screen display.
The Color adjustment icon looks like 3 postcards (with 3 little squares
on the top one) slightly overlapping each other.
>
> >The more normal white point for a
> >monitor is 6500K. Try the manufacturer's web site or a
> >CD that came with your computer to get a better profile
> >for your actual monitor with its actual settings. If all
> >else fails, try sRGB Color Space Profile.icm.
[...]
--
Bill - PSP and Media Center Plus Private Beta Tester
PSP Terrorist - D'Lanok de Caresk chapter - Anti-Troll Unit 235
"If you're not making waves, you're not underway!"
______________________________________________________
The Paint Shop Pro 7 Style Palette:
http://www.frontiernet.net/~willshak/style_palette/
______________________________________________________
The USS Salem, CA-139. The World's only preserved Heavy Cruiser
http://www.frontiernet.net/~willshak/salem/
Kris Zaklika
>
> Kris Zaklika <kzak...@jasc.com> wrote:
>
> >> Initially I added both the Diamond and Trinitron, and made the latter
> >> the default.
> >
> >Why? The Trinitron is a Sony monitor and you have a
> >Mitsubishi.
Terry, first let me say that I appreciate the frustration of
all this from your perspective. Windows makes this far more
complicated and mysterious than it needs to be. It is
frustrating from my perspective too. The process is slightly
different under each version of Windows so I can never be
sure that what I say matches dialogs on your screen. (I
have no experience of color management under WinXP.) A
second difficulty concerns actual devices. Apart from some
basic elements, some of what you see in Windows > Display
Properties is determined by the manufacturer of your graphics
card. I have no way of knowing what is available for
adjustment and what isn't. Additionally, the monitor itself
may have something as crude as brightness/contrast dials
or may come with controls to perform all sorts of adjustments.
Finally, in Windows > Printer Properties there are all sorts
of settings that differ from printer to printer and are
entirely up to the author of the driver. I have no way to
know what is available and it isn't standardized in any way.
Before we dive into the rest, let's try and have a go at what
this is all for again. Suppose we have an image with green
in it. On the monitor, the green phosphor is switched on
and red and blue are off. That's fine but if my monitor uses
different phosphor formulations from yours we'd see different
shades of green. We need to agree on what "green" means - does
is have a hint of yellow or a hint of blue, for instance. We
do this by defining green mathematically in a coordinate
system called a color space using three numbers. We take a
sophisticated measuring instrument designed to measure colors
using the numbers of our color space and measure green on
your monitor and mine. Let's say yours reads 52, -103, 85
and mine reads 47, -90, 80 but the "standard" green is
50, -100, 80. Your color must be adjusted by 2, 3 and 5
units respectively to make it equal to the standard and
mine need 3, 10 and 0 units. The monitor profile is the thing
that lists all the adjustments. The color space it what we
define all our color standards in, as well as our method of
making adjustments. So, the process for display is this:
I, the monitor, know my green is off from the "standard
green" and tell the color manager so via my profile. The
color manager calculates I need a hint of blue to make my
monitor green look "standard". When Windows tries to display
green using me, the monitor, it therefore automatically
adds a little blue. That's for my monitor; for yours it
may need to add a little red or lower the green brightness
a bit. Things get considerably more complicated for the
printer. It makes green by white sunlight or electric
light illuminating white paper. The dye on the paper
absorbs red and blue light from the white light, leaving
green to be reflected back into your eye from the white
paper. Because the screen and the print use different
physical methods to make colors it is impossible to display
the same range of colors on both. (A CMYK printer can make
cyans and blues you can't see on your monitor, for instance.)
To get around this problem a whole bunch of colors is
changed at once to disguise the mismatch as much as possible.
The technical name for this is gamut mapping - trying to
make one range of colors match another range of colors
according to some recipe. The recipe is governed by the
rendering intent.
As you can see, the underlying color manipulations are
quite complex but there is no reason the set up of
color management in Windows should be complicated.
> I was going to make it Diamond, but when it came to the printer
> profile stage Windows XP's automatic mode selected Trinitron.
> "Automatic: Windows will automatically select the best color profile
> from the list of associated color profiles [Recommended]"
Yes, but you know you are smarter than Windows :)
> So I then made that my choice for the monitor too, under the misguided
> impression that they should 'match'. I also had a vague idea that the
> Mistsubishi, like several other brands, used the 'Trinitron'
> principle, characterised by a couple of thin, emebedded horizontal
> lines.
>
> >If you are using the Diamond Compatible
> >9300K G2.2.icm file
>
> OK, I've now changed it to Diamond Compatible 9300K G2.2.icm.
> (The user guide spec sheet says 5000K - 9300K)
>
> >this means that you must go to Display Properties in Windows
> >and set the color temperature to 9300 K (a very bluish white)
> >and the display gamma to 2.2.
>
> Could you please amplify on how to do that. Display Properties >
> Settings >Advanced > Monitor offers only Refresh rate, and the extra
> step > Properties just gives basic info and a Troubleshoot button.
As Bill pointed out in his post, there may be buttons on
the front of your monitor that allow you to set the
color temperature of your monitor. (As I said before I
really don't know what your particular set up allows or
what you will see on your screen once you press some
buttons on your monitor.) However, the general idea is this.
Right-click in Windows Explorer on the .icm file and
look at Properties, checking every tab. It will usually
tell you what color temperature and gamma value the
monitor profile is designed for. Use the monitor buttons
or the options in Windows > Display Properties (depending
on your setup) to match the monitor to the profile. If
you are using sRGB Color Space.icm set your monitor to
a gamma of 2.2 and a color temperature of 6500 K.
> >The more normal white point for a
> >monitor is 6500K. Try the manufacturer's web site or a
> >CD that came with your computer to get a better profile
> >for your actual monitor with its actual settings. If all
> >else fails, try sRGB Color Space Profile.icm.
>
> Thanks, I will try both. (Puzzled why a PC that's only 4 months old
> would not already have an appropriate file though.)
New PCs are notorious for coming with old drivers, for
instance. Since many people don't bother with color
management, relevant profiles are often not installed.
If the person who built your computer doesn't understand
color management or didn't know what printer you would
be using any old rubbish could have been loaded for
profiles. One of the biggest hassles in setting up
color management is having to hunt down the exactly
correct profiles on manufacturer's web sites or from
distribution CDs.
> >> For the printer I added all of the above, except is330 which wasn't
> >> allowed as it is for scanner/camera.
> >> Now have these settings in PSP Color Management:
> >>
> >> Monitor Profile: Trinitron Compatible 9300K G2.2
> >> Printer Profile: Trinitron Compatible 9300K G2.2
> >
> >Aaargh! You can't use a monitor profile for a printer!
> >A printer is nothing like a monitor. It uses inks and
> >subtractive color mixing, not phosphors and additive
> >color mixing. You must use the profile for your specific
> >printer at its specific settings (resolution, ink set,
> >paper type). Get it from the web site of your printer's
> >manufacturer (i.e. Lexmark) or from the CD that came
> >with the printer. Don't have it? Then you can't use
> >color management.
>
> That first combination did puzzle me, although, as I said, XP chose
> it!
I told you that you were smarter than some dumb program :)
> As now seems the case, if my list was incomplete in having no
> explicit Lexmark entry, then perhaps Trinitron was the best of a bad
> bunch? (Implying *none* of the others were 'printer ICMs'?) And as
> mentioned, I did then subsequently try several other combinations. All
> were indeed somewhat arbitrary, if not quite "random choices". For
> example, my next run used sRGB Color Space Profile.icm like your web
> example. But anyway, accepting the thrust of your point, is such
> arbitrariness so surprising? In the absence of any mention of
> 'Mitsubishi' or 'Lexmark', on a system with purported P'nP facilities
> and all recommended drivers apparently installed by the supplier?
Well, I just finished describing the problem with missing
profiles. Let me try to put this bluntly: if you do not
have a profile for your specific printer you are completely
wasting your time with color management. In a pinch you
can sometimes substitute one monitor profile for another
since phosphor formulations are increasingly being
standardized. (In fact, the Windows reference color space
that defines our "standard colors" is based on HDTV
phosphors.) Printers vary much, much, much more widely.
It is not just that different inks are used. It is how
they absorb into the paper receptor you are using, how
this paper reflects light, and the algorithms used in the
driver to try and fake 16.7 million colors out of 4 or 6
inks. So, unless you get from Lexmark a correct profile
for your printer and your paper at known printer driver
settings you have no hope whatsoever of using color
management to help you match screen colors to print. None!
Your first task is, therefore, to locate the profile for
your printer or else all other actions are meaningless.
> >> Rendering Intent: Pictures
> >
> >The "Pictures" rendering intent is for use with photos.
> >For a map you'd be better off using "Graphics" as the
> >rendering intent. Before Win2K this was called "Relative
> >Colorimetric" intent. It is best for matching a few colors
> >exactly.
>
> That's the setting I used initially (intuitively), but on repeating
> the exercise I tried to follow your web instructions rigorously, and
> hence chose Pictures as second best.
Again, without the printer profile for your specific
printer any experiments you may have done do not mean
much.
> >> Testing gave no improvement. Printed version of a dark reddish purple
> >> appears lipstick pink.
> >>
> >> Tried about half a dozen other combinations, with barely perceptible
> >> differences. Marginally the best was with Color Management restored to
> >> its disabled status!
>
> >If you don't follow the rules and do the correct thing
> >you can't get good results, any more than randomly
> >whacking keys on the keyboard produces error-free English
> >text or connecting an American TV in England lets you
> >watch the BBC.
>
> Duly chastised. See my points of mitigation above.
This is hard to understand unless you have a clear grasp
of why you are doing what you are doing. It's easy to
make mistakes because Windows treats all this as black
art.
> >The basic idea is this. The manufacturer calibrates the
> >translation of his monitor's colors to a reference color
> >space.
>
> I'm trying, I really am, but that lost me right there. '...calibrates
> the translation of his monitor's colors to a reference color space'?
I hope my example above made things a little clearer.
> >This is the monitor profile. Another manufacturer
> >calibrates the translation of his printer's colors to the
> >same reference color space. This is the printer profile.
> >Windows uses this reference color space to translate
> >the color of one device to the color of another device
> >as accurately as possible (taking into account the
> >rendering intent). When you make random choices of
> >device profiles you use the wrong calibrations and
> >the results are complete rubbish.
>
> Seems wide open for transparent automation IMO. Given that the OS
> knows my monitor and printer, why does it not install the appropriate
> optimum ICM files itself? I'd be happy to remain uninvolved. It's an
> eye-opener that such complex machinations are apparently necessary to
> get realistic colour printing!
Astonishingly complex machinations are needed to for
color matching, especially when two devices are incapable
of displaying the same range of colors. It is the subject
of ongoing research at universities and in industry.
However, the problem in Windows is that older versions
supported color management in a very rudimentary sense,
so few people used it. Now support is better but the
standardization and support by device manufacturers and
the automation by Windows still isn't there. The effort
of creating an independent color management system in
that expensive program is part of why it is so expensive.
Historically, color management has been the province of
the printing industry where systems costing tens of
thousands of dollars (or more) were the norm. Color
management for the masses hasn't quite arrived yet.
> I strongly suspect that the Lexmark Z23 installation process by-passed
> installation of its own CD-based softweare, allowing XP's own 'Lexmark
> drivers' to be installed. If so, one casualty might well have been a
> key ICM file. I'll see if I can find one.
Just try to find .icm files on your CD and copy them to
wherever your version of Windows stores them. If in
doubt about where to put the profile on your disk, do
Windows > Start > Search > Files or Folders and look for
"*.icm" (without the double quotes) and see where all the
files are. This is a good idea anyway since some profiles
may exist on your system in other than the standard location.
> I do appreciate your attempts to help me, and I hope you won't give up
> on the challenge until my purples are more purple than pink!
Remember that color management provides a better perceptual
match between screen and print. It cannot provide a perfect
match because the two devices make colors in different
physical ways and cannot display exactly the same range
of colors.
Terry Pinnell
>Terry Pinnell wrote:
>>
>> Kris Zaklika <kzak...@jasc.com> wrote:
>> >this means that you must go to Display Properties in Windows
>> >and set the color temperature to 9300 K (a very bluish white)
>> >and the display gamma to 2.2.
>>
>> Could you please amplify on how to do that. Display Properties >
>> Settings >Advanced > Monitor offers only Refresh rate, and the extra
>> step > Properties just gives basic info and a Troubleshoot button.
>
>This is a hardware adjustment on your monitor, usually accessed by menu
>buttons that are built into the monitor case with an on-screen display.
>The Color adjustment icon looks like 3 postcards (with 3 little squares
>on the top one) slightly overlapping each other.
Thanks Bill, found it shortly after my post. It was accompanied by
message along lines of 'Locked when FPM on', and took me some time to
recall that was Fine Picture Mode (another monitor button).
>> >The more normal white point for a
>> >monitor is 6500K.
Kris: Can you clarify this please. My starting position on the
Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 920 (a well-regarded and modern monitor) was
temp=9300, contrast=93, brightness=40. With temperature lowered to
6500K my whites look yellowish (a characteristic I recall you
mentioning in one of your many other threads, which I've spent some
hours reading.) Adjusting brightness and contrast doesn't restore the
whiteness.
I next powered up my old W98 PC, and found its Ilyama Vision Master
Pro 400 monitor was also set at 9300, high contrast, middling
brightness (and displaying a good clean image).
So, what is your recommendation for 6500 based upon please?
>>>Try the manufacturer's web site or a
>> >CD that came with your computer to get a better profile
>> >for your actual monitor with its actual settings. If all
>> >else fails, try sRGB Color Space Profile.icm.
Have just downloaded DP900-50.ICM, DP900-65.ICM, and DP900-93.ICM, and
about to 'associate' the latter.
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Terry Pinnell
>Terry, first let me say that I appreciate the frustration of
>all this from your perspective. Windows makes this far more
>complicated and mysterious than it needs to be. It is
>frustrating from my perspective too. The process is slightly
>different under each version of Windows so I can never be
>sure that what I say matches dialogs on your screen. (I
>have no experience of color management under WinXP.) A
>second difficulty concerns actual devices. Apart from some
>basic elements, some of what you see in Windows > Display
>Properties is determined by the manufacturer of your graphics
>card. I have no way of knowing what is available for
>adjustment and what isn't. Additionally, the monitor itself
>may have something as crude as brightness/contrast dials
>or may come with controls to perform all sorts of adjustments.
>Finally, in Windows > Printer Properties there are all sorts
>of settings that differ from printer to printer and are
>entirely up to the author of the driver. I have no way to
>know what is available and it isn't standardized in any way.
Heartily agree. And I do hope you appreciate that you're not the
target of my frustration! Having now read most of the previous threads
on this topic, including many contributions from you and Bob Dietz,
it's clear that it's not clear!
OK, thanks, I think I understand that. And it's obviously essential to
introduce defined and numerically-measurable standards for a rigorous
technical treatment. But why can't we streamline that by an approach
based not on mathematics but on the concept of *sameness*?
Consider John Scan and Jane Screen playing on a see-saw. The beam
settles roughly in mid-air, swaying slightly. They conclude that they
are the same weight. Not one word about their actual weights, the
definition of a pound or kilo, or the different metabolisms of the
genders.
I scanned in a map and my screen is displaying it with good accuracy
to my perception. And, I'd bet, most other people examining the two
would agree. (There are minor variations depending on what application
I use to display it, and I'd like to explore that sometime, but I
think it's a different issue.)
OK, so that's only one stage, one pair, but it seems to me that this
analogy reinforces my conviction that there *should* be an easier
approach!
>Things get considerably more complicated for the
OK, our posts have crossed. I saw Bill's reply and responded just
before reading this.
>However, the general idea is this.
>Right-click in Windows Explorer on the .icm file and
>look at Properties, checking every tab. It will usually
>tell you what color temperature and gamma value the
>monitor profile is designed for.
Don't know about other OSs, but apparently not so in XP. Here's the
detail:
General tab
-----------
DP900-93.ICM
Type of file: ICC Profile
Opens with: Unknown application Change...
Location: C:\WINDOWS\system32\spool\drivers\color
Size: 100 KB (103,034 bytes)
Size on disk: 101 KB (103,424 bytes)
Created: 18 April 2002, 12:34:14
Modified: 12 October 1998, 19:41:40
Accessed: 18 April 2002, 12:34:14
Attributes: _ | Read-only _ | Hidden Advanced...
Profile Information tab
------------------------
Color Profile Description:
Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 900 9300K
Color Profile Producer:
Copyright (c) Eastman Kodak Company, 1998, all rights
reserved.
Additional Information:
Additional information is not available.
Microsoft Windows 2000 Incorporates:
LinoColorCMM by Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG
Associate Device tab
--------------------
DP900-93
If the profile you are installing is for a device attached to your
computer, associating the color profile with the appropriate device
will increase the color profile's availability for use.
Associated Devices.
(box is empty)
Summary tab
-----------
All basic fields, all empty.
>Use the monitor buttons
>or the options in Windows > Display Properties (depending
>on your setup) to match the monitor to the profile. If
>you are using sRGB Color Space.icm set your monitor to
>a gamma of 2.2 and a color temperature of 6500 K.
>
>> >The more normal white point for a
>> >monitor is 6500K.
OK, guess I risked confusion by replying to you on this point in my
reply to Bill! As I said there, on the Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 920 (a
well-regarded and modern monitor) I started with temp=9300,
contrast=93, brightness=40. With temperature lowered to
6500K my whites look yellowish (a characteristic I recall you
mentioning). Adjusting brightness and contrast doesn't restore the
whiteness. I also powered up my old W98 PC, and found its Ilyama
Vision Master Pro 400 monitor was also set at 9300, high contrast,
middling brightness (and displaying a good clean image).
So, what is your recommendation for 6500 based upon please?
>> >Try the manufacturer's web site or a
>> >CD that came with your computer to get a better profile
>> >for your actual monitor with its actual settings. If all
>> >else fails, try sRGB Color Space Profile.icm.
>> Thanks, I will try both. (Puzzled why a PC that's only 4 months old
>> would not already have an appropriate file though.)
Have done. See reply to Bill. Will test shortly.
OK, still hunting one down. No luck yet.
>> >> Rendering Intent: Pictures
>> >
>> >The "Pictures" rendering intent is for use with photos.
>> >For a map you'd be better off using "Graphics" as the
>> >rendering intent. Before Win2K this was called "Relative
>> >Colorimetric" intent. It is best for matching a few colors
>> >exactly.
>>
>> That's the setting I used initially (intuitively), but on repeating
>> the exercise I tried to follow your web instructions rigorously, and
>> hence chose Pictures as second best.
>
>Again, without the printer profile for your specific
>printer any experiments you may have done do not mean
>much.
Understood.
>> >> Testing gave no improvement. Printed version of a dark reddish purple
>> >> appears lipstick pink.
>> >>
>> >> Tried about half a dozen other combinations, with barely perceptible
>> >> differences. Marginally the best was with Color Management restored to
>> >> its disabled status!
>>
>> >If you don't follow the rules and do the correct thing
>> >you can't get good results, any more than randomly
>> >whacking keys on the keyboard produces error-free English
>> >text or connecting an American TV in England lets you
>> >watch the BBC.
>>
>> Duly chastised. See my points of mitigation above.
>
>This is hard to understand unless you have a clear grasp
>of why you are doing what you are doing. It's easy to
>make mistakes because Windows treats all this as black
>art.
>
>> >The basic idea is this. The manufacturer calibrates the
>> >translation of his monitor's colors to a reference color
>> >space.
>>
>> I'm trying, I really am, but that lost me right there. '...calibrates
>> the translation of his monitor's colors to a reference color space'?
>
>I hope my example above made things a little clearer.
Yes thank you, a glimmer of light is beginning to emerge. (I'll return
to Hawking's 'The Universe in a Nutshell' this evening and browse his
chapter on quantum-gravity 11-dimension superstrings for light
relief!)
Those were my first steps, but proved fruitless. CD is a pure 'setup'
type, with no relevant files accessible anywhere. And no other ICM
files on HD. Have posted a few requests in hope that another Lexmark
user might have an ICM file. Gave up waiting for phone response from
Lexmark tech support, but intend to persist tomorrow.
>> I do appreciate your attempts to help me, and I hope you won't give up
>> on the challenge until my purples are more purple than pink!
>
>Remember that color management provides a better perceptual
>match between screen and print. It cannot provide a perfect
>match because the two devices make colors in different
>physical ways and cannot display exactly the same range
>of colors.
I'd settle for 'close'!
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Terry Pinnell
>>> I strongly suspect that the Lexmark Z23 installation process by-passed
>>> installation of its own CD-based softweare, allowing XP's own 'Lexmark
>>> drivers' to be installed. If so, one casualty might well have been a
>>> key ICM file. I'll see if I can find one.
Have now reached Lexmark tech support (20 mins wait on phone) who are
emphatic that there is no ICM file installed with the Z23. ("Just
checked with senior technician who confirmed; he says the z23 uses a
Windows ICM file.")
During my web research earlier I found this on a Lexmark site, for
Z23:
Print Quality / Driver Features
Resolution : 2400 x 1200 dpi,
Color drop size: K-24pL, CMY-7pL
Color matching : sRGB & ICM 2.0 (Win98/Millenium)
So, based merely on that last line, and despite XP not being
mentioned, I tried the sRGB profile (together with the
newly-downloaded DP900-93.ICM monitor profile. It gave the worst
results so far, including a sort of 'banding effect'.
Then tried monitor = printer = sRGB, which returned me to the similar
poor quality of earlier trials, i.e too much red.
Given up for today.
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Kris Zaklika
>
> Terry Pinnell <terr...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>
> >>> I strongly suspect that the Lexmark Z23 installation process by-passed
> >>> installation of its own CD-based softweare, allowing XP's own 'Lexmark
> >>> drivers' to be installed. If so, one casualty might well have been a
> >>> key ICM file. I'll see if I can find one.
>
> Have now reached Lexmark tech support (20 mins wait on phone) who are
> emphatic that there is no ICM file installed with the Z23. ("Just
> checked with senior technician who confirmed; he says the z23 uses a
> Windows ICM file.")
Of course it uses a Windows .icm file (ICM = Image Color
Management). He just needs to provide you with that very
.icm file, i.e. the profile that you need and that they
haven't provided you with. I told you that people have no
idea what color management is and this is an example :(
Get to his boss and his boss's boss if necessary to find
someone competent and insist on being given the file. You
bought the product and they are responsible for its profile,
not Microsoft. They can e-mail it to you. Don't let yourself
be sloughed off by some ignorant or lazy bozo. Starting
with "Connect me to the person at Lexmark who can e-mail me
the Windows ICM color profile for the Lexmark XXX printer"
is the way to handle this. Don't get involved in some
general discussion of color management.
> During my web research earlier I found this on a Lexmark site, for
> Z23:
> Print Quality / Driver Features
> Resolution : 2400 x 1200 dpi,
> Color drop size: K-24pL, CMY-7pL
> Color matching : sRGB & ICM 2.0 (Win98/Millenium)
>
> So, based merely on that last line, and despite XP not being
> mentioned, I tried the sRGB profile (together with the
> newly-downloaded DP900-93.ICM monitor profile. It gave the worst
> results so far, including a sort of 'banding effect'.
The last line refers to the color space (sRGB) used as
the reference in Windows and ICM version 2.0 is the
standard for the way color management is done in Windows.
It just means that they expect to provide color matching
profiles for Windows and not for some other color
management system, for instance, using CIE Lab as the
reference color space. The profile you need is the one
that translates from printer colors into sRGB colors
according to the Windows ICM 2.0 standard.
> Then tried monitor = printer = sRGB, which returned me to the similar
> poor quality of earlier trials, i.e too much red.
No surprise.
> Given up for today.
Also no surprise :)
Kris Zaklika
[snip]
> OK, thanks, I think I understand that. And it's obviously essential to
> introduce defined and numerically-measurable standards for a rigorous
> technical treatment. But why can't we streamline that by an approach
> based not on mathematics but on the concept of *sameness*?
>
> Consider John Scan and Jane Screen playing on a see-saw. The beam
> settles roughly in mid-air, swaying slightly. They conclude that they
> are the same weight. Not one word about their actual weights, the
> definition of a pound or kilo, or the different metabolisms of the
> genders.
This is a bit of a philosophical discussion that is
not on the direct path to color management success.
Two problems. Color is based on human perception.
No seesaw measures whether something is pink, rose
or cerise. Color measurement is also complex: some
people measure with a ruler and some with a stopwatch,
while right-brain artist types measure it by feel.
It's kind of hard to put those in the same universe.
Color isn't a fundamental physical quantity. Wavelength
is but wavelength is not how we see things. Under one
light source two colors can be the same but under
another they can be quite different (something called
metamerism). A color on one surround can look grey;
change the surround to yellow and the grey patch
becomes infested with bluish purple, the opponent
color to yellow. I told you color is nasty stuff :)
Don't got there.
[snip]
> >However, the general idea is this.
> >Right-click in Windows Explorer on the .icm file and
> >look at Properties, checking every tab. It will usually
> >tell you what color temperature and gamma value the
> >monitor profile is designed for.
>
> Don't know about other OSs, but apparently not so in XP.
Not quite so (see below) but there is no standardization,
hence my use of "usually".
> Here's the
> detail:
[snip]
> Profile Information tab
> ------------------------
> Color Profile Description:
> Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 900 9300K
^
|
Look: 9300K is the color temperature of the display.
Stupidly they didn't specify the gamma, but that is the
2.2 that appears in the file name of the profile:
"Diamond Compatible 9300K G2.2.icm". Go ahead and use
this as the monitor profile. However, you still need
to hunt down the printer profile.
> Color Profile Producer:
> Copyright (c) Eastman Kodak Company, 1998, all rights
> reserved.
> Additional Information:
> Additional information is not available.
> Microsoft Windows 2000 Incorporates:
> LinoColorCMM by Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG
Apparently Kodak was commissioned to measure this
particular profile for Mitsubishi because they have
the color skills. (I told you color was difficult :)
And Heidelberg (a printing press company) built the
color management stuff for Microsoft because they
have long experience in the area. (I told you color
was difficult :)
[snip]
> >Use the monitor buttons
> >or the options in Windows > Display Properties (depending
> >on your setup) to match the monitor to the profile. If
> >you are using sRGB Color Space.icm set your monitor to
> >a gamma of 2.2 and a color temperature of 6500 K.
> >
> >> >The more normal white point for a
> >> >monitor is 6500K.
>
> OK, guess I risked confusion by replying to you on this point in my
> reply to Bill! As I said there, on the Mitsubishi Diamond Pro 920 (a
> well-regarded and modern monitor) I started with temp=9300,
> contrast=93, brightness=40. With temperature lowered to
> 6500K my whites look yellowish (a characteristic I recall you
> mentioning). Adjusting brightness and contrast doesn't restore the
> whiteness. I also powered up my old W98 PC, and found its Ilyama
> Vision Master Pro 400 monitor was also set at 9300, high contrast,
> middling brightness (and displaying a good clean image).
If it works for you, use a color temperature of 9300 K,
especially since that is also the color temperature for
which your monitor profile was developed.
> So, what is your recommendation for 6500 based upon please?
That recommendation applied only to the situation where you
do not have a correct monitor profile (but you do) and used
the sRGB Color Space.icm profile instead. The sRGB color
space is based on a 6500 K white point so that is the monitor
white point most appropriate for use with this substitute
profile. However, since you actually have a Mitsubishi profile
at 9300K and your monitor is set for 9300 K you do have the
right profile and you can completely ignore this issue.
[snip]
Bob Dietz
>
> when it came to the printer
> profile stage Windows XP's automatic mode selected Trinitron.
> "Automatic: Windows will automatically select the best color profile
> from the list of associated color profiles [Recommended]"
"from the list of ASSOCIATED color profiles"
You should understand that Windows XP didn't automatically create
the list. (My guess would be that whom ever assembled your system
didn't understand color management and associated the Diamond monitor
profile with your printer.)
In order for Automatic Color Matching to work, there must be a list
of different profiles where each profile is designed for a different
type of paper and print quality (dpi).
In an attempt to make this clearer, I've uploaded a couple of screen
captures from the Properties sheets of my Epson SC800 to
http://community.webshots.com/photo/35552704/35945668JBFYwk
On the left side you see the Color Management tab of the
Properties dialog. Automatic is selected and there is
a list of profiles currently associated with my printer.
These profiles have cryptic names like EDOE53A4, EDOE5542.
If I look for those .icm profiles on my machine; right
click on them and choose properties; and select the
Profile Information tab, I'll find these descriptions:
EDOE53A4: EPSON StylusCOLOR800 GlossyFilm 1440
EDOE5542: EPSON StylusCOLOR800 360Paper 360
Now here is where the Automatic part comes in...
On the "Main" tab of the Properties dialog, if I select
a Media Type of "360 dpi Ink Jet Paper" then the
EDOE5542 profile will be used automatically.
On the other hand, if I select a Media Type of
"Photo Quality Glossy Film" and "Quality" rather
than "Speed" (upper right corner of dialog), then
the EDOE53A4 profile will be used automatically.
HTH
Bob Dietz
Terry Pinnell
Kris, Bob: Thanks both. Just realised I've spent virtually the whole
DAY on this issue! Will study both latest replies tomorrow. No doubt
I'll be dreaming in colour tonight...
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Bob Dietz
> Have now reached Lexmark tech support (20 mins wait on phone) who are
> emphatic that there is no ICM file installed with the Z23. ("Just
> checked with senior technician who confirmed; he says the z23 uses a
> Windows ICM file.")
>
> During my web research earlier I found this on a Lexmark site, for
> Z23:
> Print Quality / Driver Features
> Resolution : 2400 x 1200 dpi,
> Color drop size: K-24pL, CMY-7pL
> Color matching : sRGB & ICM 2.0 (Win98/Millenium)
Based on the above, I'd say the driver supports use of color
profiles, but Lexmark has chosen not to supply any profiles
for this low end printer.
Your options would seem to be:
1) Live with the poor color.
2) Buy a different printer.
3) Spend a few hundred for software/hardware to make your
own color profiles.
4) Have color profiles made for you by a third party
supplier - They send you a picture of a color chart.
You print it and send them the prints (one for each
type of paper). They send you a profile for each print.
I think this typically runs about $100 per profile.
Sorry for the bad news.
Bob Dietz
Cliff
news:3CBF3D77...@yahoo.com:
[...]
> Your options would seem to be:
> 1) Live with the poor color.
> 2) Buy a different printer.
> 3) Spend a few hundred for software/hardware to make your
> own color profiles.
> 4) Have color profiles made for you by a third party
> supplier - They send you a picture of a color chart.
> You print it and send them the prints (one for each
> type of paper). They send you a profile for each print.
> I think this typically runs about $100 per profile.
You can do this yourself (at least with Epson printers--the only no-Epson
printer I have ever owned was a nine-pin dot-matrix printer so I don't know
how otehr manufacturers' software works). This site has a lot of useful
information on this and related subjects:
http://www.normankoren.com/makingfineprints1A.html
--
Cliff
baseb...@hotmail.com
Bob Dietz
The actual section of that page that describes the printer adjustment -
http://www.normankoren.com/makingfineprints1A.html#Printer
The adjustments made are across the board. Increase of decrease
a parameter (for example cyan ink) by a fixed amount.
That procedure for adjusting printer settings is NOT the same thing
as creating a printer profile from a the print out of a calibrated
color chart. In the later case, a piece of hardware is used to
measure the color content of the output and a profile is constructed
based on the differences between input and output. In the color profile
for a certain range of color output cyan might be increased by 10%,
while for another part of the range of color output cyan might be
increased by only 5% or even decreased by some amount.
Provided the print driver provides for such adjustments, this could
be regarded as a 5th option.
Bob Dietz
Uni
You probably have a nice computer with a nice Iiyama monitor, but the
Lexmark printer has got to go!! :-)
Buy a Epson 6 color printer and all your colour problems will disappear.
Uni
> Terry, West Sussex, UK
Cliff
>> http://www.normankoren.com/makingfineprints1A.html
>>
>
> The actual section of that page that describes the printer adjustment -
> http://www.normankoren.com/makingfineprints1A.html#Printer
>
> The adjustments made are across the board. Increase of decrease
> a parameter (for example cyan ink) by a fixed amount.
>
> That procedure for adjusting printer settings is NOT the same thing
> as creating a printer profile from a the print out of a calibrated
> color chart. In the later case, a piece of hardware is used to
> measure the color content of the output and a profile is constructed
> based on the differences between input and output. In the color profile
> for a certain range of color output cyan might be increased by 10%,
> while for another part of the range of color output cyan might be
> increased by only 5% or even decreased by some amount.
>
> Provided the print driver provides for such adjustments, this could
> be regarded as a 5th option.
Perhaps it is not the same thing as using hardware to determine the
profile, but if you print out the color chart, then compare the print with
color chart on your monitor and adjust the cyan, yellow, and magenta
accordingly, you can get a fairly accurate profile that can be saved. It
might take a lot a paper and ink, and time, but I've developed some that
work well with my system and sifferent papers this way.
--
Cliff
baseb...@hotmail.com
Kris Zaklika
drivers on this page and see if they come with color
management profiles:
http://drivers3.lexmark.com/drivers.nsf/SelectPrinter?OpenForm&Lexmark+Z23+Color+Jetprinter
This page suggests that they might:
http://www.lexmark.com/US/products/info/windows_xp/xpinfo.html
Kris Zaklika
>
> Just a follow up. You might try to download the first two
> drivers on this page and see if they come with color
> management profiles:
> http://drivers3.lexmark.com/drivers.nsf/SelectPrinter?OpenForm&Lexmark+Z23+Color+Jetprinter
> This page suggests that they might:
> http://www.lexmark.com/US/products/info/windows_xp/xpinfo.html
And this appears to be another solution offered by Kodak:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/digital/inkjet/oneTouch/index.jhtml
Terry Pinnell
12 hours in front of PC yesterady, just heading off for a walk/hike.
Will study tomorrow and report back after further experiments.
Just one quick point re drivers. As mentioned, I'm reluctant to
install and risk affecting current 'satisfactory apart from colour
mismatch' printing. Last night downloaded 8.7 MB Lexmark Z23 XP driver
called cjxp33le.exe, but considering next step carefully. May install
on my W98 PC to see if there is or is not an ICM file created. From
conversation with Lexmark (I *was* pretty insistent!), plus that brief
web extract, I'm inclined to Bob's view that there isn't one. In which
case, makes me wonder why use of sRGB shows no improvement - at least,
not with any of the monitor profiles I've so far tried.
One other quickie: r-clicking an ICM file gives me a shortcut menu
headed by (in bold) 'Install', and then followed by 'Associate...'
What exactly does Install do please, and when should it be necessary
to use it?
BTW, Bob, that longish drop-down list of profiles was a result of *my*
using Add, so that I could try various options.
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Kris Zaklika
>
> Kris, Bob, Cliff: Thanks for all that potentially helpful input. After
> 12 hours in front of PC yesterady, just heading off for a walk/hike.
> Will study tomorrow and report back after further experiments.
>
> Just one quick point re drivers. As mentioned, I'm reluctant to
> install and risk affecting current 'satisfactory apart from colour
> mismatch' printing. Last night downloaded 8.7 MB Lexmark Z23 XP driver
> called cjxp33le.exe, but considering next step carefully. May install
> on my W98 PC to see if there is or is not an ICM file created.
You are right to be careful. However, judging by the "xp"
in "cjxp331e.exe" this is a Windows XP driver so sticking
in Windows 98 might now be the best move.
> From
> conversation with Lexmark (I *was* pretty insistent!), plus that brief
> web extract, I'm inclined to Bob's view that there isn't one. In which
> case, makes me wonder why use of sRGB shows no improvement - at least,
> not with any of the monitor profiles I've so far tried.
>
> One other quickie: r-clicking an ICM file gives me a shortcut menu
> headed by (in bold) 'Install', and then followed by 'Associate...'
> What exactly does Install do please, and when should it be necessary
> to use it?
My Windows Help says "Installing a profile modifies the
registry and makes it available to the color management
system." I interpret that statement as follows. When you
are choosing a device profile for your monitor or printer
Windows doesn't list every .icm file anywhere on your
system. Instead, it only lists the ones that have been
"installed". The act of choosing one profile from this
list "associates" the profile with the device, i.e. the
profile becomes the one that is actually used to correct
color for that device.
> BTW, Bob, that longish drop-down list of profiles was a result of *my*
> using Add, so that I could try various options.
>
> Terry, West Sussex, UK
--
Kris Zaklika
>
> Kris, Bob, Cliff: Thanks for all that potentially helpful input. After
> 12 hours in front of PC yesterady, just heading off for a walk/hike.
> Will study tomorrow and report back after further experiments.
>
> Just one quick point re drivers. As mentioned, I'm reluctant to
> install and risk affecting current 'satisfactory apart from colour
> mismatch' printing. Last night downloaded 8.7 MB Lexmark Z23 XP driver
> called cjxp33le.exe, but considering next step carefully. May install
> on my W98 PC to see if there is or is not an ICM file created.
You are right to be careful. However, judging by the "xp"
in "cjxp331e.exe" this is a Windows XP driver so sticking
in Windows 98 might not be the best move.
> From
> conversation with Lexmark (I *was* pretty insistent!), plus that brief
> web extract, I'm inclined to Bob's view that there isn't one. In which
> case, makes me wonder why use of sRGB shows no improvement - at least,
> not with any of the monitor profiles I've so far tried.
>
> One other quickie: r-clicking an ICM file gives me a shortcut menu
> headed by (in bold) 'Install', and then followed by 'Associate...'
> What exactly does Install do please, and when should it be necessary
> to use it?
My Windows Help says "Installing a profile modifies the
registry and makes it available to the color management
system." I interpret that statement as follows. When you
are choosing a device profile for your monitor or printer
Windows doesn't list every .icm file anywhere on your
system. Instead, it only lists the ones that have been
"installed". The act of choosing one profile from this
list "associates" the profile with the device, i.e. the
profile becomes the one that is actually used to correct
color for that device.
> BTW, Bob, that longish drop-down list of profiles was a result of *my*
> using Add, so that I could try various options.
>
> Terry, West Sussex, UK
--
Bob Dietz
> Kris, Bob, Cliff: Thanks for all that potentially helpful input. After
> 12 hours in front of PC yesterady, just heading off for a walk/hike.
> Will study tomorrow and report back after further experiments.
>
> Just one quick point re drivers. As mentioned, I'm reluctant to
> install and risk affecting current 'satisfactory apart from colour
> mismatch' printing. Last night downloaded 8.7 MB Lexmark Z23 XP driver
> called cjxp33le.exe, but considering next step carefully. May install
> on my W98 PC to see if there is or is not an ICM file created. From
> conversation with Lexmark (I *was* pretty insistent!), plus that brief
> web extract, I'm inclined to Bob's view that there isn't one. In which
> case, makes me wonder why use of sRGB shows no improvement - at least,
> not with any of the monitor profiles I've so far tried.
sRGB is the color space that Windows references monitors to.
If you had an old monitor with no color profile, then you might
want to try using sRGB as the profile for that monitor.
Using the sRGB as your monitor profile would in some sense be equivalent
to telling Windows to assume that you have a "perfect" monitor.
You would of course realize that your monitor wasn't "perfect."
You'd simply be hoping that your monitor was "good enough" to give
you better results than having Windows make no assumptions at all.
Using sRGB as a printer profile is guaranteed to give you poor results.
Try this little Paint Shop Pro experiment.
File > New... > Width:320, Height: 480: Pixels, Background color: White
Set your background color to Black.
Image > Canvas Size... > Width: 640, Height: 480, Right: 320
Take a blank sheet of paper out of your printer and hold it up
next to the "white" portion of the image on your screen. Hmm, your
"white" printer paper is really just a feeble shade of gray.
Now make a print out of the image on your screen. Hold it
up next to the image on your screen so you can compare the
"black" printed rectangle with the "black" rectangle on your
screen. Hmm, the printed "black" is blacker than the "black"
on screen. If you use the same profile for your monitor and
printer, you are asking windows to assume that your "white"
paper is the exact same shade of "white" as the "white" on
your monitor. And that the "black" in your print out is the
exact same shade of "black" as the "black" on your monitor.
And that all of the colors between black and white will match
exactly.
>
> One other quickie: r-clicking an ICM file gives me a shortcut menu
> headed by (in bold) 'Install', and then followed by 'Associate...'
> What exactly does Install do please, and when should it be necessary
> to use it?
I don't know where Windows XP keeps it's color profiles.
Windows 98 keeps it's color profiles in C:\Windows\System\Color
If you have an .icm file located in some other place (like a
floppy or CD), you can right click on it and choose install
and it will be copied to the correct folder and something
gets twiddled in the registry. I'm not sure if the registry
changes do anything more than determine how icon is displayed
(ghosted or not) when you explore the Color profiles folders.
If you associate a profile (which isn't currently installed)
to a device, that will also cause the profile to become installed.
>
> BTW, Bob, that longish drop-down list of profiles was a result of *my*
> using Add, so that I could try various options.
When I installed my monitor drivers (KDS AV195TF), three profiles
were automatically copied to the color profiles folder, but only
one of the three (AV19tf93.icm) was automatically associated
with my monitor. I had to manually associate the other two profiles -
AV19tf65.icm and AV19tf50.icm. Although the monitor defaulted to
9300K, I've choosen to operate at 6500K since my secondary monitor
has fewer controls and will only operate at 6500K.
When I installed drivers for my printer, seven profiles were automatically
copied to the color profiles folder and all seven were automatically
associated with my printer. Which is to say that when I looked at
START > Settings > Printers > Epson SC800 > File Properties > Color Management,
the profiles were already in the list. I didn't have to click Add... and
Automatic was already selected.
Bob Dietz
Terry Pinnell
>You are right to be careful. However, judging by the "xp"
>in "cjxp331e.exe" this is a Windows XP driver so sticking
>in Windows 98 might not be the best move.
I was hoping maybe to just get all files extracted and see if there
was an ICM.
>My Windows Help says "Installing a profile modifies the
>registry and makes it available to the color management
>system." I interpret that statement as follows. When you
>are choosing a device profile for your monitor or printer
>Windows doesn't list every .icm file anywhere on your
>system. Instead, it only lists the ones that have been
>"installed". The act of choosing one profile from this
>list "associates" the profile with the device, i.e. the
>profile becomes the one that is actually used to correct
>color for that device.
Thanks, that makes sense.
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Terry Pinnell
Did it mentally (I'm running low on ink!) and was convinced.
>> One other quickie: r-clicking an ICM file gives me a shortcut menu
>> headed by (in bold) 'Install', and then followed by 'Associate...'
>> What exactly does Install do please, and when should it be necessary
>> to use it?
>
>I don't know where Windows XP keeps it's color profiles.
Here, they're in C:\WINDOWS\system32\spool\drivers\color
>Windows 98 keeps it's color profiles in C:\Windows\System\Color
>If you have an .icm file located in some other place (like a
>floppy or CD), you can right click on it and choose install
>and it will be copied to the correct folder and something
>gets twiddled in the registry. I'm not sure if the registry
>changes do anything more than determine how icon is displayed
>(ghosted or not) when you explore the Color profiles folders.
Thanks. When I get time, I'll try to determine what registry data gets
changed.
>If you associate a profile (which isn't currently installed)
>to a device, that will also cause the profile to become installed.
>
>>
>> BTW, Bob, that longish drop-down list of profiles was a result of *my*
>> using Add, so that I could try various options.
>
>When I installed my monitor drivers (KDS AV195TF), three profiles
>were automatically copied to the color profiles folder, but only
>one of the three (AV19tf93.icm) was automatically associated
>with my monitor. I had to manually associate the other two profiles -
>AV19tf65.icm and AV19tf50.icm. Although the monitor defaulted to
>9300K, I've choosen to operate at 6500K since my secondary monitor
>has fewer controls and will only operate at 6500K.
>
>When I installed drivers for my printer, seven profiles were automatically
>copied to the color profiles folder and all seven were automatically
>associated with my printer. Which is to say that when I looked at
>START > Settings > Printers > Epson SC800 > File Properties > Color Management,
>the profiles were already in the list. I didn't have to click Add... and
>Automatic was already selected.
In practical terms, I'm close to settling for disabling color
management. But curiosity will probably prompt further experiments,
including similar ones to yours.
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Terry Pinnell
>Bob Dietz <rbdiet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>I don't know where Windows XP keeps it's color profiles.
>
>Here, they're in C:\WINDOWS\system32\spool\drivers\color
>
>>Windows 98 keeps it's color profiles in C:\Windows\System\Color
>>If you have an .icm file located in some other place (like a
>>floppy or CD), you can right click on it and choose install
>>and it will be copied to the correct folder and something
>>gets twiddled in the registry. I'm not sure if the registry
>>changes do anything more than determine how icon is displayed
>>(ghosted or not) when you explore the Color profiles folders.
>
>Thanks. When I get time, I'll try to determine what registry data gets
>changed.
Someone e-mailed me an ICM file, called LEXZ51.ICM. After clicking
Install from its shortcut menu, I found that it had appeared in the
correct folder and there was just one reference to the file in my XP
registry. The key
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\WindowsNT\CurrentVersion\ICM\prtr
contained this:
LEXZ51.ICM REG-BINARY 00 00 00 00 4c 45 58 4d 5a 35 31 20
Terry, West Sussex, UK
Kris Zaklika
[snip]
> Someone e-mailed me an ICM file, called LEXZ51.ICM. After clicking
> Install from its shortcut menu, I found that it had appeared in the
> correct folder and there was just one reference to the file in my XP
> registry. The key
> HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\WindowsNT\CurrentVersion\ICM\prtr
> contained this:
> LEXZ51.ICM REG-BINARY 00 00 00 00 4c 45 58 4d 5a 35 31 20
OK, so now you have installed a color profile for a
Lexmark Z51 printer that you don't own. You have a
Z23. If, for some reason the two printers work very
similarly, you could get lucky; otherwise you waste
more time. (The supposed "Tech Specs" on the Lexmark
site shed absolutely no light on the degree of
similarity.) There is no substitute for having the
correct profile. Depending on printer ink drop volume,
dye set and driver rendering algorithm it is perfectly
possible to make things MUCH worse by using the wrong
profile.)
Terry Pinnell
>Terry Pinnell wrote:
>[snip]
>
>> Someone e-mailed me an ICM file, called LEXZ51.ICM. After clicking
>> Install from its shortcut menu, I found that it had appeared in the
>> correct folder and there was just one reference to the file in my XP
>> registry. The key
>> HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\WindowsNT\CurrentVersion\ICM\prtr
>> contained this:
>> LEXZ51.ICM REG-BINARY 00 00 00 00 4c 45 58 4d 5a 35 31 20
>
>OK, so now you have installed a color profile for a
>Lexmark Z51 printer that you don't own. You have a
>Z23. If, for some reason the two printers work very
>similarly, you could get lucky; otherwise you waste
>more time. (The supposed "Tech Specs" on the Lexmark
>site shed absolutely no light on the degree of
>similarity.) There is no substitute for having the
>correct profile. Depending on printer ink drop volume,
>dye set and driver rendering algorithm it is perfectly
>possible to make things MUCH worse by using the wrong
>profile.)
My post was a follow-up to Bob's, confirming the effect of using
Install and identifying the particular registry key changed. When I
try it out, I'll have no particular hopes for success.
Terry, West Sussex, UK