what to believe monitor or printed output?

[lisa_lowden]

<p>i would imagine ideally the monitor colors should match the printed output. the output on my printer does not match my monitor. how do i fix this? also, what do i believe or accept as real or truer in regards to colors? the output of a printer or the monitors output? thks, ll</p>

[Jeff Lear]

<p>If you are using a high quality pigment, dye-sub or multi-cartridge photo printer then I would calibrate your monitor. If you're having your prints done at a lab then I would calibrate your monitor. If you're using a cheap-o all-in-one printer then I would calibrate your monitor :)</p>

<p>Bottom line is that you should calibrate your monitor. Visually, you make adjustments to your image there, not in the printer. If you're monitor is porperly calibrated you will know what the image should look like in print and if it doesn't, then you can blame your printer or lab.</p>

<p>Calibrating your monitor uses a series of objective adjustments that have nothing at all to do with a subjective image so when you're done with the calibration you know that what you see on screen should be what you see in print. I'm avoiding mention of <em><a href="../learn/digital-photography-workflow/color-management">color management</a></em> here, baby steps first. But if you really want to know, click on the blue letters above (actually, they're sort of purple-ish on my calibrated monitor), its a great article on color management by Jay Kinghorn for PN.</p>

[lisa_lowden]

<p>hey thks jeff. i will take your advice. what is a good calibrator? is spyder good? thks, ll</p>

[Jeff Lear]

<p>Calibrators are sort of like cameras. Ask which one is best and you'll get as many answers as there are manufacturers. Spyder, Eye-One, Color Munki... they're all good and get the job done. I've heard that some are easier to use than others but I only have experience with Spyder and the tools provided by Spyder are pretty straight forward.</p>

[c_wyatt]

<p>The photo lab I use gives you a callibration image - a print with many different shades and colours, and then the same image on a CD so you can see it on your monitor. Using that I callibrated my screen using my graphics card settings. I also got a few of my photos printed and used them to tweak the callibration.</p>

<p>Haven't had a problem with it since.</p>

[lisa_lowden]

<p>thks guys,ll</p>

[garydem]

<p>which is right the monitor or the printer? answer-NEITHER. the printer can only print what it is being sent, no more no less. the monitor's accuracy and your end result image depends on the whether the monitor is calibrated and if the monitor is calibrated correctly. if the monitor is not calibrated right then your prints coming from a monitor that was not accurate in the first place will not match the printed output. and would be wong in representing the real image since the monitor is never displaying that. the only way around this problem is to calibrate the montor via a calibration program that has software/hardware.<br>

i started with spyder express and learned the hard way that it will not work ona lcd monitor. it cannot set the brightness for lcds and you cannot set the RGB values before you set the brightness. perhaps the sypder pro or elite can set the rgb values. i do not know. but i was not willing to take the chance; i went with the eyeone display2 calibrator. it worked fine. i ran it in advanced mode first the first time to set the RGB values then the brightness and then let the program run to finish the calibration. the prints match the lcd monitor screen exactly. it is extremely important to have a calibrator that does the RGB then the brightness. i know the eyeone does maybe the spyder elite and/or pro does to. but the way the lcds are coming to you is with brightness turned up far beyond what anyone needs. my dell lcd came with a brightness of 180 candles while the standard is for lcd 120 candles. for crt it is 100 candles. i would strongly advise getting a calibrator that does the RGB values and brightness and recalibrate.<br>

note the darker the output from the printer in comparison to the monitor screen the farther the calibration of the monitor is off.</p>

[tommyinca]

<p>2 cents worth. You have three can of worms in front of you. They are call, Monitor Calibration, Color Management & Print Calibration. Open only one can at a time and start with the smallest, Monitor Calibration. Have fun sorting :-)</p>

<p>BTW: At the end (few month and $$$ later), you could only get the monitor, film/sensor, and printer closer to each others. They are not the same and never will be (until there are new science).</p>

[john_a5]

<p>The issue can be all and more of the above. Some monitors will never calibrate well, they just aren't of a quality to ever get it right. Second, your prints, unless printed with a quality printer and with total understanding of how to use color management in your workflow, will not be a valid tool for you either.</p>

<p>A good monitor is really pretty important if you hope to get it right. Yes, you can always work it out to get your prints to match your monitor, maybe, but your files will not necessarily be of any use outside of your own closed system or if you ever get a new monitor or printer!</p>

<p>All is not hopeless, but you need to consider all of these factors as you move ahead and upgrade equipment. I have friends who are constantly fighting this battle because they haven't been willing or able to shell out the extra for higher end equipment. A good monitor is most important, as you can always get printing down through a lab. Also, once you are making good files, most printers will give you satisfactory results if you use the manufacturers papers and profiles that are supplied with the printers drivers.</p>

 

[lisa_lowden]

<p>i just want to get this right. it is the file on the card that determines the output to the printer and not the monitor, right? so the printed output really depends on the printer , right? i mean if you cancel out what the camera is doing. ll</p>

[Jeff Lear]

<p>Assuming no changes were made to the image, you are correct. However, let's say that you download images from your card to your computer and you view them on your monitor. The images appear (on your monitor) to be tinted sort of a blue-ish color and over-exposed so you adjust the color and highlight recovery, then print.</p>

<p>Both issues (over-exposure and color cast) could be a result of your monitor and NOT the file you downloaded from your camera. Therefore, the adjustments you made were counterproductive because you were being deceived by your monitor. What was a correctly exposed image is now underexposed and what was previously an accurate color rendition now appears predominantly green.</p>

<p>On the other hand, let's say that you take the card out of your camera and plug it into your printer or a kiosk at a lab and the prints are not what you expected based on what you saw TTL or on the display. In this case you should check the adjustments being applied to the image by your camera.</p>

<p>I am working in a semi-color managed system. That is to say that my monitor is calibrated, my prints look just like I expect them to, and my clients are happy. I shoot in RAW using <em>Standard</em> picture style (sort of like setting the EQ on your audio system to <em>Flat</em>) and I use both the software that came with my camera and a very old version of Photoshop to develop the RAW image into what I want it to be. That is the color management part of my workflow and while it may not be for everyone, it works for me ;)</p>

[lisa_lowden]

<p>ah, thks jeff</p>