If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#141
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone have experience of High Gamut monitors?
In article , Floyd L. Davidson
wrote: I have multiple different papers, all on 24" rolls. I prefer canvas and have both Canon and Red River rolls. I use Epson for luster, glossy, semimatte and matte papers. Canvas is generally the only "Fine Art" paper I use, but for special purposes will order up whatever a customer wants. Usually for special order papers I'll use Epson. An example would be the higher priced Epson canvas papers such as Exhibition Canvas Satin or Exhibition Canvas Glosss. No wonder you can't tell one color space from another! Obviously you are so clueless there is no way to even talk about it. The fact that I can and do print on a dozen or so different high quality papers actually means nothing at all about a discussion of color space. Of course it means something! Even without changing printers and inks, each of those different media have different color gamuts and few will have the ability to match AdobeRGB. If they didn't have different gamuts you wouldn't need to select their particular print profile when using them. Logic never was your best foot forward, eh? Someone with a broader experience base makes it very likely they have a better chance of having been able to compare differences in colorspace than those with significantly less of a base, such as you and nospam for example... that someone sure as hell isn't you. It is exactly that type of logic that suggests neither of you understand colorspace well enough to make valid observations. while i can't speak for eric, i can assure you i'm *very* knowledgeable about colour management and colour space, having written a couple of photoshop plug-ins (mac/win) as well as native apps (mac). all you've done is pretend you know everything (which you clearly do not) and spout insults. you're a total farce. keeping everything in srgb may be easier (which apparently is all you can manage), but it's *not* the way to get the best results. So other than claim you know everything, and again spouting insults, did you have anything to say that logically connected to this topic? i've done neither. you are delusional. False proclaimation that denys what you just said, and then more Ad Hominem... more bull**** from you. you've yet to discuss the actual topic. you've provided no facts. all you've done is brag that you have an eizo display, an epson printer and various papers, which somehow makes you the expert. you're a joke. We all do feel sorry for you. doubtful, not that it matters. however, what is very clear is that everyone is laughing at you and your ignorant comments and repeated ad hominem attacks. |
#142
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone have experience of High Gamut monitors?
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote: When you construct a print from RGB colors you have access only to colors within the three-pointed three-color RGB triangle. This is fine for an RGB printer but Epson has far more colors than this available. Basically, they have colours which can be generated from within an eight-pointed eight-colour polygon. LR and PS know nothing about these which is why Epson says 'leave it to the printer'. I posted an article about this when I first got the P800 and the results can be astonishing. Very true. It seems to me that one should be able to see pretty close to the printed colors. I have heard that soft proofing accomplishes this. Yet, if you leave color management to the printers, will one be able to see the final image onscreen? I am asking seriously. If you relinquish color management to the printer you are waiving all the work you had done in software, and you are rolling the dice with regard to print results matching your intentions worked for in LR or PS Soft proofing is the best compromise in making final tweaks before producing a print. I don't think that can be quite right. The work you have done in the software manifests itself in the image you see on your screen and this is the image you feed to the printer. At this point you can choose between the computer managing the mixing of the colors of the printing process via an ICC profile or the computer managing the mixing of the printing process. Either way you are not losing "all the work you had done in the software". it's not right. the conversion can be done by the app or by the printer. which one is better is up for debate. just don't do both. |
#143
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone have experience of High Gamut monitors?
On 2017-01-22 19:57:36 +0000, Eric Stevens said:
On Sun, 22 Jan 2017 00:10:36 -0800, Savageduck wrote: On 2017-01-22 07:48:49 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Sat, 21 Jan 2017 19:33:40 -0800, Savageduck wrote: On 2017-01-22 03:06:53 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Sat, 21 Jan 2017 18:21:01 -0800, Savageduck wrote: On 2017-01-22 01:05:47 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Sat, 21 Jan 2017 15:18:29 -0800, Savageduck wrote: No wonder you can't tell one color space from another! Obviously you are so clueless there is no way to even talk about it. The fact that I can and do print on a dozen or so different high quality papers actually means nothing at all about a discussion of color space. Of course it means something! Even without changing printers and inks, each of those different media have different color gamuts and few will have the ability to match AdobeRGB. If they didn't have different gamuts you wouldn't need to select their particular print profile when using them. With the variety of papers I use from Red River, Ilford, and Epson, to get good consistant results I have to use specific printer/paper icc profiles. Red River and Ilford provide specific profiles, whereas Epson seems to provide profiles of a more generic type. Whenever I neglect to match an icc profile to the paper used results can be less than consistant. That said, when properly profile matched and proofed, the prints I produce have been, to my eye, and the eye of most recipients of my prints, exceptional and true to my intention. I rarely print from JPEG and sRGB as all my work is done in Lightroom and Photoshop using ProPhoto RGB. When you use Epson P600 (if I remember correctly) do you manage colours in LR or PS, or do you have the printer manage colors? My Epson photo printer is an R2880, I haven't had a need to upgrade to one of the newer printers yet. There has been no deterioration in performance in the 9 years I have owned it. I probably would have prefered to have bought an R3880 back then, but the print quality from either of those is identical, just an ink cartridge capacity difference. Yep. I thought you had previously said you had a later model printer. Never mind. I would still have my 3800 if half the print head hadn't died. It was going to cost nearly the price of a new printer to replace it and P800 was just arriving ... I have been fortunate not have had any clogged print heads/ink jets. This was an electronic failure. :-( I manage color in LR or PS. The Epson drivers (for Mac anyway) have no provision for using printer/paper specific icc profiles. Don't you have to set the paper type in the print setup page at the same time as you specify the page size? That is the basic paper type setting in the page setup dialog, but not a specific paper. For example, if I print on Red River Polar Pearl Metallic, I set that paper type in the page setup dialog to "Premium Photo Paper Glossy", but in the LR Color Management panel on the right in the Print Module I set the profile to "RRPolPearlMetallic EpR2880.icc". OK, so LR is managing colors. Yup! As for paper size, I keep a supply of 8.5x11, 11x14, 11x17, and 13x19 in different premium papers, and a supply of 4x6, and 5x7 Epson Photo Glossy for casual prints. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1295663/Demo/screenshot_344.jpg In any case, Epson's advice with the newer printers is to let the printer manage colours. Which is basically why I asked the question. Is Epson expecting you to use nothing but their paper with their newer printers? If not how are you supposed to apply paper/printer specific icc profiles? I don't know how this gets on with non-Epson papers but I now understand what Epson is doing with their own papers. By "this" I assume you are referring to a P800. When you construct a print from RGB colors you have access only to colors within the three-pointed three-color RGB triangle. This is fine for an RGB printer but Epson has far more colors than this available. Basically, they have colours which can be generated from within an eight-pointed eight-colour polygon. LR and PS know nothing about these which is why Epson says 'leave it to the printer'. I posted an article about this when I first got the P800 and the results can be astonishing. That doesn't make sense when the R2880 and R3880 are eight color/ink printers which produce "astonishing" results when matching printer/paper icc profiles are used. Further Both Red River and Ilford have produced P800 icc profiles for all their papers, including their "fine art" papers. I don't actually know but I suspect they can only use a triangular color space. However it may be possible that LR/PS have the ability to handle more complicated color spaces. I suspect that might be a distinct possibility considering one starts with ProPhoto RGB and they have the capability to use printer/paper specific profiles. How does Epson handle printing to a third party premium/"fine art" paper when they do not have a specific profile for metallic, canvas, rag or other fiber papers. Once again I don't know but they certainly don't have a color space built into the printer driver. I have used papers where the instruction has been to describe them as an Epson paper but I haven't done that on the P800. I have absolutely no experience with the P800 so I can only speak for what I do with my R2880. In the past I have found that whenever I let the printer handle color management I NEVER get the result I am aiming for, but I do get very inconsistent and disappointing results. That was my experience in the past too, but not with Epson papers on the P800. Quite the reverse in fact. Since I don't have a P800 to play with so as to make a comparison.... Any of my images intended for online sharing are exported from Lightroom as JPEG's in sRGB, the conversion and resizing is done in the Lightroom/PS export dialog. The exception being prints of convenience produced for my iPhone with my Epson XP-610 Artisan all-in-one, which is not a high quality photo printer, but does an adequate job for 4x6 and 5x7 non-critical stuff. That is usually printed on appropriately sized generic Epson photo paper with just the paper settings from the Epson driver. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#144
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone have experience of High Gamut monitors?
On 2017-01-22 20:17:46 +0000, Eric Stevens said:
On Sun, 22 Jan 2017 09:12:55 -0800, Savageduck wrote: On 2017-01-22 17:03:40 +0000, PeterN said: On 1/22/2017 2:48 AM, Eric Stevens wrote: snip When you construct a print from RGB colors you have access only to colors within the three-pointed three-color RGB triangle. This is fine for an RGB printer but Epson has far more colors than this available. Basically, they have colours which can be generated from within an eight-pointed eight-colour polygon. LR and PS know nothing about these which is why Epson says 'leave it to the printer'. I posted an article about this when I first got the P800 and the results can be astonishing. Very true. It seems to me that one should be able to see pretty close to the printed colors. I have heard that soft proofing accomplishes this. Yet, if you leave color management to the printers, will one be able to see the final image onscreen? I am asking seriously. If you relinquish color management to the printer you are waiving all the work you had done in software, and you are rolling the dice with regard to print results matching your intentions worked for in LR or PS Soft proofing is the best compromise in making final tweaks before producing a print. I don't think that can be quite right. The work you have done in the software manifests itself in the image you see on your screen and this is the image you feed to the printer. At this point you can choose between the computer managing the mixing of the colors of the printing process via an ICC profile or the computer managing the mixing of the printing process. Either way you are not losing "all the work you had done in the software". There is something about what you have written there which doesn't read right, especially when it comes to the printer managing color which you have not addressed. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#145
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone have experience of High Gamut monitors?
On 1/22/2017 1:37 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote: I would be very skeptical about claims that one needs Windows 10 to handle 4k displays, because that is managed by the graphics card, and all that is required is a driver compatible with an older version of Windows. Such things do exist; there are many for Windows Vista and 7, for example. it may be possible if you hunt for the appropriate drivers and any other support software that may be needed, but that's a hassle and not everyone will bother (or even know where to look). with win10, support is built in, so other than the occasional edge case, it will work out of the box. Windows 10 is *not* required for 4K displays. i didn't say win10 was required. i said it works out of the box without any fuss. Since this is not an OS-level issue, it absolutely is an os issue. without os level support, it's *not* going to work unless the app explicitly supports it, which is not likely. most people who have done graphics using a PC will not find it difficult to get the requisite drivers for their specific graphics card. some might not, but most will since most users are *not* geeks, particularly those who do graphics for a living. My daughter who uses a PC, and is a creative director, uses Windows 7 at home and a Mac in her office, has no graphics issues. And since she works from home several days a week, she regularly transfers files between her two machines. Does she use 4k screens? No. Very little of her work is for print. Then I don't think this relates to the possible problems of using 4k screens. Does it? It certainly does, as collaboration is a big factor. collaboration has nothing to do with using a 4k display. Also, I should have mentioned that the amount of her work for printing is sold by her agent. Her share ranges from $50 for an 8x10 up to $750. The agent charges a lot more as the agent needs a profit. My daughter really doesn't care what the agent's share is. even more irrelevant. Right. Processing for print is irrelevant. -- PeterN |
#146
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone have experience of High Gamut monitors?
In article , PeterN
wrote: I would be very skeptical about claims that one needs Windows 10 to handle 4k displays, because that is managed by the graphics card, and all that is required is a driver compatible with an older version of Windows. Such things do exist; there are many for Windows Vista and 7, for example. it may be possible if you hunt for the appropriate drivers and any other support software that may be needed, but that's a hassle and not everyone will bother (or even know where to look). with win10, support is built in, so other than the occasional edge case, it will work out of the box. Windows 10 is *not* required for 4K displays. i didn't say win10 was required. i said it works out of the box without any fuss. Since this is not an OS-level issue, it absolutely is an os issue. without os level support, it's *not* going to work unless the app explicitly supports it, which is not likely. most people who have done graphics using a PC will not find it difficult to get the requisite drivers for their specific graphics card. some might not, but most will since most users are *not* geeks, particularly those who do graphics for a living. My daughter who uses a PC, and is a creative director, uses Windows 7 at home and a Mac in her office, has no graphics issues. And since she works from home several days a week, she regularly transfers files between her two machines. Does she use 4k screens? No. Very little of her work is for print. Then I don't think this relates to the possible problems of using 4k screens. Does it? It certainly does, as collaboration is a big factor. collaboration has nothing to do with using a 4k display. Also, I should have mentioned that the amount of her work for printing is sold by her agent. Her share ranges from $50 for an 8x10 up to $750. The agent charges a lot more as the agent needs a profit. My daughter really doesn't care what the agent's share is. even more irrelevant. Right. Processing for print is irrelevant. it is for the topic being discussed, which has nothing whatsoever to do with printing. |
#147
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone have experience of High Gamut monitors?
On Sun, 22 Jan 2017 20:48:49 +1300, Eric Stevens
wrote: On Sat, 21 Jan 2017 19:33:40 -0800, Savageduck wrote: On 2017-01-22 03:06:53 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Sat, 21 Jan 2017 18:21:01 -0800, Savageduck wrote: On 2017-01-22 01:05:47 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Sat, 21 Jan 2017 15:18:29 -0800, Savageduck wrote: --- snip --- If not how are you supposed to apply paper/printer specific icc profiles? I don't know how this gets on with non-Epson papers but I now understand what Epson is doing with their own papers. When you construct a print from RGB colors you have access only to colors within the three-pointed three-color RGB triangle. This is fine for an RGB printer but Epson has far more colors than this available. Basically, they have colours which can be generated from within an eight-pointed eight-colour polygon. LR and PS know nothing about these which is why Epson says 'leave it to the printer'. I posted an article about this when I first got the P800 and the results can be astonishing. I've just downloaded an uptodate driver and Epson seems to have slightly changed their tune. Meantime the following article throws an interesting light on the subject. http://theonlinephotographer.typepad...0-printer.html or http://tinyurl.com/gkwaar4 I will return with more information if I find any. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#148
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone have experience of High Gamut monitors?
On 2017-01-22 23:35:34 +0000, Eric Stevens said:
On Sun, 22 Jan 2017 20:48:49 +1300, Eric Stevens wrote: On Sat, 21 Jan 2017 19:33:40 -0800, Savageduck wrote: On 2017-01-22 03:06:53 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Sat, 21 Jan 2017 18:21:01 -0800, Savageduck wrote: On 2017-01-22 01:05:47 +0000, Eric Stevens said: On Sat, 21 Jan 2017 15:18:29 -0800, Savageduck wrote: --- snip --- If not how are you supposed to apply paper/printer specific icc profiles? I don't know how this gets on with non-Epson papers but I now understand what Epson is doing with their own papers. When you construct a print from RGB colors you have access only to colors within the three-pointed three-color RGB triangle. This is fine for an RGB printer but Epson has far more colors than this available. Basically, they have colours which can be generated from within an eight-pointed eight-colour polygon. LR and PS know nothing about these which is why Epson says 'leave it to the printer'. I posted an article about this when I first got the P800 and the results can be astonishing. I've just downloaded an uptodate driver and Epson seems to have slightly changed their tune. Meantime the following article throws an interesting light on the subject. http://theonlinephotographer.typepad...0-printer.html or http://tinyurl.com/gkwaar4 I will return with more information if I find any. That was very interesting especially when it came to the color management question. It seems that he got better results with printer management with MacOS, though he hedged by saying there were times that better results could be obtained by using computer control and matched profiles. Also that with MacOS he was able to obtain a wide gamut with printer management. What was interesting was that with Windows and printer color management there was no wider gamut available than sRGB, so for Windows users he recommends using software color management with appropriate profiles. My current experience on this Mac with the R2880 is, my best, and most consistant results come with assigning color management to LR or PS with a matched profile, so I am not going to fix things which ain't broke. The bottom line, it seems to me is that for that reviewer, the P800 produces perceptibly better prints than the Rx880 printers, but those differences are subtle. Both you and he seem to be very happy with the performance of the P800, and that is a good thing. For now my R2880 has not faltered, and the P800 or P600 are going to be worthy replacements when my workhorse R2880 is put out to pasture. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#149
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone have experience of High Gamut monitors?
On Sun, 22 Jan 2017 18:49:55 +0100, android wrote:
In article , Eric Stevens wrote: For the last several years I have relied on an (almost) matched pairs of Dell 2410 monitors - and now one has died. Not really surprising, considering it was +8 years old, but it was a bloody good monitor. I am now faced with the task of replacing it. I don't want to just replace it as it would amount to no more than installing 8 year old technology and I have been frantically beating around the bush trying to decide what to do. I am considering all kinds of options but I don't want to go into them now. One possibility which is raising sweat to my brow is the use of a high gamut monitor such as the Dell Ultrasharp 25 UP2516D http://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-...remiercolor-up 2516d/apd/210-agjq/monitors-monitor-accessories or http://tinyurl.com/hdpepts My reading on the subject suggests that monitors such as this can have problems with non-color-managed applications such as many that can be found on the Internet and can also create problems when editing images in all kinds of software. I would like to know if anyone has had any experience with such monitors and what their comments may be. Should I consider them and, if so, with what caveats in mind? I have an US and is reluctant to get another. Got you plleeeease test this one for me? http://www.canonrumors.com/reviews/review-benq-sw320-32-inch-adobe-rgb-monitor/ Sorree - out of my price range. :-( -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#150
|
|||
|
|||
Does anyone have experience of High Gamut monitors?
nospam wrote:
In article , Floyd L. Davidson wrote: I have multiple different papers, all on 24" rolls. I prefer canvas and have both Canon and Red River rolls. I use Epson for luster, glossy, semimatte and matte papers. Canvas is generally the only "Fine Art" paper I use, but for special purposes will order up whatever a customer wants. Usually for special order papers I'll use Epson. An example would be the higher priced Epson canvas papers such as Exhibition Canvas Satin or Exhibition Canvas Glosss. No wonder you can't tell one color space from another! Obviously you are so clueless there is no way to even talk about it. The fact that I can and do print on a dozen or so different high quality papers actually means nothing at all about a discussion of color space. Of course it means something! Even without changing printers and inks, each of those different media have different color gamuts and few will have the ability to match AdobeRGB. If they didn't have different gamuts you wouldn't need to select their particular print profile when using them. Logic never was your best foot forward, eh? Someone with a broader experience base makes it very likely they have a better chance of having been able to compare differences in colorspace than those with significantly less of a base, such as you and nospam for example... that someone sure as hell isn't you. It is exactly that type of logic that suggests neither of you understand colorspace well enough to make valid observations. while i can't speak for eric, i can assure you i'm *very* knowledgeable about colour management and colour space, having written a couple of photoshop plug-ins (mac/win) as well as native apps (mac). all you've done is pretend you know everything (which you clearly do not) and spout insults. you're a total farce. keeping everything in srgb may be easier (which apparently is all you can manage), but it's *not* the way to get the best results. So other than claim you know everything, and again spouting insults, did you have anything to say that logically connected to this topic? i've done neither. you are delusional. False proclaimation that denys what you just said, and then more Ad Hominem... more bull**** from you. you've yet to discuss the actual topic. you've provided no facts. all you've done is brag that you have an eizo display, an epson printer and various papers, which somehow makes you the expert. you're a joke. We all do feel sorry for you. doubtful, not that it matters. however, what is very clear is that everyone is laughing at you and your ignorant comments and repeated ad hominem attacks. Again, nothing from you but proclamations and Ad Hominem. -- Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/ Utqiagvik (Barrow, Alaska) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
ICC gamut mapping | Dale[_4_] | Digital Photography | 4 | March 8th 14 06:50 AM |
Wide gamut vs less wide gamut monitors | Alfred Molon[_4_] | Digital Photography | 93 | March 1st 13 05:58 PM |
wide gamut monitor? | peter | Digital Photography | 15 | February 22nd 07 08:22 PM |
color gamut conversion | Peter Vermeer | Digital Photography | 5 | April 20th 05 11:38 AM |
Are LCD Monitors Brigter than CRT Monitors | Al | Digital Photography | 2 | September 8th 04 05:09 PM |