Calibration for monitor or calibration for both Monitor/printer

Started Sep 30, 2019 | Discussions
ToshDog Forum Member • Posts: 71
Re: Calibration for monitor or calibration for both Monitor/printer
3

Charles2 wrote:

Both are true -- what you state and "for 99 percent of photographers who use color management, it is done as a single process with a hardware/software calibration package." But flame warriors refuse to read carefully (or if they do, willfully distort).

You couldn’t be again more wrong, as many have attempted to explain to you, they are not the same process. But don’t take our word for it, the way this works, and the text that dismisses what you’ve incorrectly written above is seen below. Enough examples or do you need even more (there are plenty of other correct resources to dismiss what you have written?):

https://imagescience.com.au/knowledge/calibration-versus-profiling

Colour management works by two key process - calibration and profiling. Unfortunately these two processes are often confused** with each other.

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/calibration-and-profiling-not-the-same-thing/

Calibration and profiling are not the same thing. Monitor calibration and profiling are terms that mean different things

https://argyllcms.com/doc/calvschar.html

Calibration vs. Characterization. Some of the terminology can be confusing. Many people** are initially confused about the difference between Calibration and Characterization.

https://www.fotospeed.com/blog.asp?SeriesID=51&TextID=1

We all know that colour management is the key to a great print, but what some people** don’t know, however, is exactly what individual steps make up the colour management process. So, what’s the difference between calibration and profiling in colour management?

https://www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/monitor_calibration.htm

After the monitor is calibrated, a profile is made.

https://www.adorama.com/alc/0008525/article/100-in-100-Part-II-Calibrating-vs-profiling

Calibrating vs. profiling. Calibrating a device, such as a monitor or printer, is different from profiling a device. Here’s how they’re different.

** Confused indeed, the text above in red clearly illustrates you fall into that group. Do some research, read the URLs above and learn! That you are confused about this topic in no way justifies your attempt to confuse others here.

DotCom Editor Veteran Member • Posts: 7,612
Re: Calibration for monitor or calibration for both Monitor/printer
1

ToshDog wrote:

Charles2 wrote:

Both are true -- what you state and "for 99 percent of photographers who use color management, it is done as a single process with a hardware/software calibration package." But flame warriors refuse to read carefully (or if they do, willfully distort).

You couldn’t be again more wrong, as many have attempted to explain to you, they are not the same process. But don’t take our word for it, the way this works, and the text that dismisses what you’ve incorrectly written above is seen below. Enough examples or do you need even more (there are plenty of other correct resources to dismiss what you have written?):

He's never going to get it. Don't waste any more of your valuable time trying to make him see the luminance.

 DotCom Editor's gear list:DotCom Editor's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Epson Stylus Pro 3880 +3 more
technoid Senior Member • Posts: 2,295
Question: Is the VCGT tag part of calibration or profiling
1

Background: Calibration is the process of putting the monitor in a known state while profiling is the creation of an ICC profile that describes an accurate color transformation which will be output to the monitor.

The VCGT tag, for less capable monitors that can't be put in an accurate state internally to the monitor, contain LUTs for the RGB channels that fixup (to whatever degree they can) the values that go to the monitor cable. However, the VCGT is NOT PART OF AN ICC PROFILE.

But while the VCGT tag info is not part of an ICC profile. It's a commonly used extension video card makers use to read a lookup table to load into the video driver's hardware. As such the VCGT tag info is sometimes considered to be part of monitor calibration since it isn't officially  part of a profile. But since it lives inside the profile many also consider setting it's values part of "profiling." So some refer to the creation of the VCGT tag info as part of profiling, purists will insist it is not. It is, after all, not an official part of an ICC profile even if it does ride along for the ride inside one.

But some products produce true profiles that provide this adjustment when "profiling." These use LUTs as defined by ICC specifications to map desired colors to the RGB values a video card outputs. This is also the approach printer profiles use. There are some advantages to this approach. The VCGT tag has no ability to adjust for non-linearites while the 3D LUTs have a wide adjustment range and can compensate for non-linearities. But using the 3D LUTs in a profile requires that the monitor be tested with a larger number of patches so most products don't bother and just use the VCGT tag.

Ellis Vener
Ellis Vener Forum Pro • Posts: 14,157
To Get Back To The Original Question

janeames wrote:

Hi, I have calibration for my monitor, have a canon pixma 100 and have tried printer from lightroom, photoshop (changing my set up for those programs to handle colors) and print studio pro, all using icc profiles. I am still not getting prints close to what I see on my monitor even using soft proofing.

If you are still here I might have some useful answers for you  questions but first need to ask a few questions to better understand what you are doing.

1) How is your monitor calibrated and profiled?

2) How old is your display?

3) If you are doing the calibration and profiling of the monitor with a toolset like the current versions of the Xrite i1 Pro or ColorMunki or DataColor Spyder, what are the standards you are using for calibration?

4) Which papers and where  are the printer profiles coming from?

5) Are you using Canon inks, or non-Canon inks?

I have and use  all three of the programs you mention and much prefer printing through the Canon Printshop Pro plug-in for Lightroom. While I use a different printer , a Canon imagePROGRAF Pro-1000, I get an excellent color and luminosity match to screen but I also understand, and I think you do too, that what I see on my monitors is a backlit  version of the photo while a print is reflecting light and that means there are differences, most notably in quarter tone (shadow) detail.

Will I get a better outcome if I buying both a printer/monitor calibration over just the monitor calibration - is the extra money worth it?

-- hide signature --

Ellis Vener
To see my work please visit http://www.ellisvener.com
Or on instagram @therealellisv

 Ellis Vener's gear list:Ellis Vener's gear list
Sony RX100 VII Nikon D850 Nikon Z7 Nikon Z6 +1 more
Ellis Vener
Ellis Vener Forum Pro • Posts: 14,157
Re: Calibration for monitor or calibration for both Monitor/printer

“They make sure that the print looks great to them...”

Proving once again that the quality of a photograph is judged by the quality of the photograph, not the quality of the  tools used to produce it.

-- hide signature --

Ellis Vener
To see my work please visit http://www.ellisvener.com
Or on instagram @therealellisv

 Ellis Vener's gear list:Ellis Vener's gear list
Sony RX100 VII Nikon D850 Nikon Z7 Nikon Z6 +1 more
ToshDog Forum Member • Posts: 71
Re: Calibration for monitor or calibration for both Monitor/printer

DotCom Editor wrote:

ToshDog wrote:

Charles2 wrote:

Both are true -- what you state and "for 99 percent of photographers who use color management, it is done as a single process with a hardware/software calibration package." But flame warriors refuse to read carefully (or if they do, willfully distort).

You couldn’t be again more wrong, as many have attempted to explain to you, they are not the same process. But don’t take our word for it, the way this works, and the text that dismisses what you’ve incorrectly written above is seen below. Enough examples or do you need even more (there are plenty of other correct resources to dismiss what you have written?):

He's never going to get it. Don't waste any more of your valuable time trying to make him see the luminance.

He now isn’t alone but yeah, good point.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads