minicucci

Sorry to be a doofus about this...but how do you view the TRP from the back? None of the

search criteria seems to get me there.

David: I really do not know what PhotoRa is but if it's a matte finish, you might look into

Moab's Entrada Bright White (versus Natural). It is a very bright, almost cold-toned paper

that works well with the 2200. I don't use IP and I do have a custom profile made for the

paper. I did not like the look of the canned profile at all but the custom profile made all of

the difference.

IP is renowned for having excellent, specifically IP-tuned "canned" profiles for a wide range

of papers and I know that they have them for the Entrada line.

Scott: Bruce Fraser has a great book on the subject called <u>Color Management</u>. I

recommend it.

Thanks for all of the clarifications. Bob, I probably should have read the rules a little more

carefully. On the other hand, there is a difference between rules and etiquette.

Amul, I appreciate your kind words. And I am glad you found the Critique-Only forum!

Rab, I think it is fine to let critiquers know when you'd prefer no alternative or illustrative

postings. I'd certainly honor that. It may dampen more substantive responses, but clearly,

that's something you seem prepared to accept. In the example given above, no such

preference was listed.

Is it generally considered good or bad form to offer a tweaked version of an image

submitted for critique? (Emphasis is on "generally" since there are exceptions for

everything.)

I am a relatively recent member of Photo.net and I actually enjoy contributing critiques

(versus ratings), mostly because I learn a lot by looking at the work of others. My

selections for comment usually fall into three categories: 1.) striking works (IMO) that

merit outright praise; 2.) strong images that appear to me to have some additional

potential; and 3.) images with some glaring faults (IMO) whose author has asked/pleaded

for some input via the critique-only forum.

Categories #1 and #3 are easy. Category #2 is where my question resides. Initially, I would

never have presumed to offer an alternative view of an image. Then, a member here

offered me a revised crop on one of my own photographs that improved the image

significantly. Frankly, I was grateful for the input and realized that the tweaked version

spoke more eloquently than words ever would have. So, thereafter, I began to post some

tweaked versions (usually just cropping/alignment/color balance stuff) <b>if</b> I

thought the artist's request for feedback was best served by a visual example that could

also be critiqued by other reviewers.

Today, I read the following quote from one member who had specifically asked for critique

and had encountered a posted, alternative view of his work: <blockquote> You guys just

don't get it.. I for one do NOT appreciate you taking my photograph and doing what you

feel is the right thing. Please don't ever do that again to my photography.</blockquote>

So, I am wondering if this member is more the exception or the rule?

It also has to do with how the two different printers handle media. The 2200 is excellent

when using matte papers, less so with glossy because of bronzing. THe R1800 is

reportedly excellent for glossy papers but not of serious interest to those who use matte.

Guy;

The profiles for Epson-branded papers (for the 870) should have been installed with the

printer driver. It is not a separate install.

Feli:

Also make certain that you are using the <b>Epson</b> specific selections for USB or

FireWire<div></div>