SpyderPrint - anyone use this?

On 2017-06-19 17:17:37 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/18/2017 12:34 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jun 17, 2017, Bill W wrote
(in ):

On Sat, 17 Jun 2017 20:23:30 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On Jun 17, 2017, Bill W wrote
(in ):

Does anyone know anything about this device? I didn't look through all
the details, but I guess it calibrates your printer (by creating ICC
profiles), much like their display devices calibrate those. If it
actually works, it might be very helpful. I just can't seem to find a
lot of consistent, persuasive reviews.

http://www.datacolor.com/photography...w/spyderprint/

To start with what printer are you currently using for producing high
quality
prints?

What paper(s) do you use, or intend to use?

Is your display/monitor correctly calibrated?

Does the software you use for printing facilitate using custom specific
printer/paper icc profiles?

The time you truly need this is when a paper manufacture does not provide
specific printer/paper icc profiles. Then you will have to build your own
custom profiles with a tool such as SpyderPRINT.

Personally, I use Epson, Red River, and Ilford papers, and they provide
printer/paper icc profiles for their various paper types. Those are freely
available from their web sites.

The SpyderPRINT might be a great tool for folks who truly need it, but your
money would be better spent on a display/monitor calibration system from
either DataColor, or X-Rite.

I have the Spyder Pro display calibrator, and use it.

Good. Keep up the practice.

I use only common papers - Canon & Epson mostly.

That is fine. Just remember that both Canon and Epson have a few exotic
papers which do not have generic profile support in their respective drivers.
those you might have to hunt down.

Like I told nospam in another
reply, I'm not doing much of anything at the moment with photography,
and I really haven't had many issues with printing.

So, what printer do you use?

I don't getexactly what I see on the display, and some prints drive me up the
wall, but nothing I've done is important in any way.

Do you use any “soft proofing� feature on your software print dialog?
I find that occasionally soft proofing can give you the opportunity to make
subtle adjustments for the print output.


Soft proofing can work to give yo a pretty close idea about the final proof. .
IMHO the problem with soft proofing is similar to the problem with
using a 4x6 as a test proof. We can rarely be certain what the final
viewing conditions will be.

Ultimately a print is not an absolute representation of what is seen on
a display. For example, a print on any metallic finish, matte, or satin
paper is not going to fully replicate what is seen on the display.
Lighting, viewing environment, and medium is always going to produce
perceivable differences from what is viewed on the display. However,
calibration and softproofing can help get you close.
--
Regards,

Savageduck