des adams Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 I run a Windows 10 computer. I want to buy a printer and monitor. Currently I’m considering an Epson SureColor P800 and an Eizo ColorEdge CG2420. When I printed previously I used a calibrated monitor but it was, for me, difficult to match what was on the monitor and what came out of the printer. Ink costing more than some champagne this was frustrating. Would the combo I mentioned above solve that problem? I would prefer to spend less on the monitor and if possible get something a little bigger than the Eizo. Maybe I should say too that I’m not selling prints …… I simply want to make some of my images into prints for myself. Thanks in advance for any advice. Best wishes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Smith Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 You could save a lot of money by getting a Dell Ultrasharp, it's not a wide gamut monitor like the Eizo, but somehow I don't think it will worry you in the slightest. You can calibrate this quite satisfactorily. 1 Robin Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBen Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 The Dell UltraSharp line is very good, both in image quality and price. The Dell Ultra HD is even better, about 50% more expensive. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitaldog Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 I run a Windows 10 computer. When I printed previously I used a calibrated monitor but it was, for me, difficult to match what was on the monitor and what came out of the printer. It’s all about HOW You calibrate and profile the display! And the Eizo or similar product from NEC (SpectraView) has the tools to do so, see: Why are my prints too dark? A video update to a written piece on subject from 2013 In this 24 minute video, I'll cover: Are your prints really too dark? Display calibration and WYSIWYG Proper print viewing conditions Trouble shooting to get a match Avoiding kludges that don't solve the problem High resolution: http://digitaldog.net/files/Why_are_my_prints_too_dark.mp4 Low resolution: 1 Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitaldog Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 You could save a lot of money by getting a Dell Ultrasharp, it's not a wide gamut monitor like the Eizo, but somehow I don't think it will worry you in the slightest. You can calibrate this quite satisfactorily. Calibrate satisfactorily means what? 1 Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodeo_joe1 Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 "Ink costing more than some champagne this was frustrating." Try - Ink costing more than most champagne. Fine champagne at that! At over $500 for 750ml, Epson ink is one of the most expensive fluids on the planet. I don't know why we put up with such nonsense from printer manufacturers. It's just ink. Get over yourselves. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
des adams Posted May 23, 2017 Author Share Posted May 23, 2017 Thanks so much everyone for taking the trouble to respond. The Eizo cg 2420 really is at the top end of my budget and it seems to feature a built-in auto calibrator and reference system and I was hoping it would be accurate. I suppose I could get a separate calibrator and a cheaper screen but would it do the business? I can’t afford to experiment with different monitors. Digitaldog thanks so much for the video full of tips, would this monitor qualify as a good one bearing in mind my financial restrictions? Yes … the price of ink is obscene. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
des adams Posted May 23, 2017 Author Share Posted May 23, 2017 Calibrate satisfactorily means what? Thanks so much everyone for taking the trouble to respond. The Eizo cg 2420 really is at the top end of my budget and it seems to feature a built-in auto calibrator and reference system and I was hoping it would be accurate. I suppose I could get a separate calibrator and a cheaper screen but would it do the business? I can’t afford to experiment with different monitors. Digitaldog thanks so much for the video full of tips, would this monitor qualify as a good one bearing in mind my financial restrictions? Yes … the price of ink is obscene. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Smith Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 (edited) I suppose I could get a separate calibrator and a cheaper screen but would it do the business? Yes, a Dell UltraSharp will be fine for most purposes. Edited May 23, 2017 by Robin Smith Robin Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supriyo Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 I use the Dell Ultrasharp U2414H, which came individually calibrated from the factory with the calibration data in a piece of paper. Technicalities aside, I never had an issue with color matching when printing on a Canon inkjet printer. I bought the monitor for around $200. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
des adams Posted May 24, 2017 Author Share Posted May 24, 2017 Sorry for delay in responding, I live in European time zone. Okay thanks everyone for tips and advice. I guess I'll continue to research before I spend the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles_Webster Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 I use the Dell Ultrasharp U2414H, which came individually calibrated from the factory with the calibration data in a piece of paper. Technicalities aside, I never had an issue with color matching when printing on a Canon inkjet printer. I bought the monitor for around $200. Calibration data on a piece of paper is not much good. As the monitor ages, it will change it's color response and brightness. You need to use a calibration instrument to create a color profile that your software reads to compensate for those changes. A color calibrator is not expensive compared to a new lens or a good monitor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supriyo Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 Calibration data on a piece of paper is not much good. As the monitor ages, it will change it's color response and brightness. You need to use a calibration instrument to create a color profile that your software reads to compensate for those changes. A color calibrator is not expensive compared to a new lens or a good monitor. Thats true. I haven't yet noticed any mismatch between printed colors vs displayed colors, my monitor being a few years old now, but eventually it has to be recalibrated. What the calibration data indicates is that the monitor was individually calibrated in the factory before being shipped, which means it is calibrated at least in the new state, while most monitors don't have much color consistency to begin with, hence aging leads to even more degradation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitaldog Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 What the calibration data indicates is that the monitor was individually calibrated in the factory before being shipped, which means it is calibrated at least in the new state, while most monitors don't have much color consistency to begin with, hence aging leads to even more degradation. Calibrated to what, for what purpose? Calibration is a process of putting a device into a desired and repeatable state. The reason we have so many options for the calibration (just white point and blacklight intensity) is because desired varies depending on what you want to achieve from the display calibration. So calibrated from the factory for what goal? Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supriyo Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 So calibrated from the factory for what goal? -See the OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitaldog Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 -See the OP. Calibration (or lack thereof) to the desired results is the problem. Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supriyo Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 Calibrated to what, for what purpose? Calibration is a process of putting a device into a desired and repeatable state. The reason we have so many options for the calibration (just white point and blacklight intensity) is because desired varies depending on what you want to achieve from the display calibration. So calibrated from the factory for what goal? The calibration was done to reproduce the sRGB color space. U2414 can reproduce 96% of the sRGB color space according to the specs. There is a special sRGB mode which I switch to while photo editing, and there is hardly any problem in matching colors or grey shades in prints. To elaborate, here is the sample calibration datasheet that came with my monitor. It states, " ... every unit is shipped incorporating a pre-tuned sRGB mode which offers an average DeltaE of <4 and fine-tuned grey scale tracking." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitaldog Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 IF you believe it’s calibrated to sRGB, what makes you think that’s a desired calibration? It isn’t for me, if I wish to match a soft proof to a print (on a wide gamut display); nothing like sRGB even if you believe it’s calibrated for that circa 1993 CRT with P22 phosphors! Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supriyo Posted May 26, 2017 Share Posted May 26, 2017 (on a wide gamut display Mine is not. The Dell display can produce at most 96% of the sRGB color space. If the monitor had a wider color gamut, it would be pointless to calibrate it to reproduce sRGB, like the newer displays that reproduce 99% of Adobe RGB. But those are also more expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitaldog Posted June 4, 2017 Share Posted June 4, 2017 Mine is not. The Dell display can produce at most 96% of the sRGB color space. . Color Gamut; not the same. And no, if you have a display like a SpectraView, you can toggle on the fly between sRGB and wide gamut in seconds. Best of both worlds. Having a percentage of sRGB gamut doesn’t equal sRGB! Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_hill11 Posted June 21, 2017 Share Posted June 21, 2017 sRGB??? Why? with the new 2K and 4K monitors use a wider gamut...as for ink..I refill the carts on my pixma pro 100...refill kits are VERY reasonable compared to the $130 robbery of new ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Ingold Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 Fifteen years ago, I had to pay over $1500 for an i1 Photo spectrophotometer which would calibrate my monitor and printer. Now you can do the same job with equipment costing less than $300. Monitors and printers are a lot better now, but calibration makes them better yet and more consistent. Sometimes the differences are subtle, but clearly visible on an A/B comparison. Images look a lot brighter on the screen than when printed, and that has an effect on color balance as well. This is true even if you reduce the luminance of the screen. I find 120 Cd too bright and fatiguing, so I set my monitor (iMac 27") to 80 Cd. Even so, I have to lighten the image for the best prints. Lightroom is convenient in this respect, because you can set a master level as a default, so that prints come out close to their appearance on the monitor. The kind of light you use to view prints matters too. In theory you need a light booth with a certain intensity and color. In practice, I would be the only one of my many customers to have one. Prints should look good (enough) in room light, much as audio recordings should sound good in a car. At the time sRGB was developed, many monitors had 8 bit color and printers 16 colors, not bits. Digitaldog can be a bit of a curmudgeon, but I've never found him wrong in these matters. I recently bought a Canon Pixma Pro-10, to replace my long-defunct Epson 2200. For the moment, I'm printing enough that more ink goes on paper than in automatic cleaning cycles. The good thing about Canon is that the print heads are replaceable and relatively inexpensive. Should they clog, or if I experiment with other inks and fail, replaceable heads are a very good thing to have. I replace the imaging unit in my color laser about every 3 sets of cartridges (50,000 pages), and the heads in my CD printer about the same (5000 CDs). I seem to go through black, grey and clear coat twice as fast as the other colors. These are available as a 4 color sub-set from Canon for about $40, cheaper than buying single cartridges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitaldog Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 I consider sRGB an output color space. For output to the web (for the time being). Otherwise, useless IMHO. Note that NO printer can produce all of sRGB! It is based on an emissive theoretical display. But nearly every printer I've ever examined in terms of color gamut (in 3d) exceeds sRGB somewhere in it's color space. sRGB is red, actual colors that fall outside it's color gamut show below: http://digitaldog.net/files/sRGB_vs_SilverPrinters.jpg Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitaldog Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 Images look a lot brighter on the screen than when printed, and that has an effect on color balance as well. They don't when you calibrate the display for a print matching: Why are my prints too dark? A video update to a written piece on subject from 2013 In this 24 minute video, I'll cover: Are your prints really too dark? Display calibration and WYSIWYG Proper print viewing conditions Trouble shooting to get a match Avoiding kludges that don't solve the problem High resolution: http://digitaldog.net/files/Why_are_my_prints_too_dark.mp4 Low resolution: [/Quote] At the time sRGB was developed, many monitors had 8 bit color and printers 16 colors, not bits. While the first part is true, the color gamut is totally separate from the bit depth. VERY very few print drivers send 16-bits of data to the printer nor is it necessary. Digitaldog can be a bit of a curmudgeon That statement is absolutely accurate! Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now