Bright and vivid on Canon prograf 1000

Started 3 months ago | Discussions
Jason Dailey New Member • Posts: 11
Bright and vivid on Canon prograf 1000

Hi All,

I'm a long time printer, typically printing my own commercial portfolio and having good results mostly. Lately I've been working on pop-art type of images and coming up with bright vivid colors that look great on the computer. Of course. Getting them through the printer is a different matter.

Here's a rough gallery: https://www.jasondaileyphoto.com/kansas-icons

So far the magenta and greens are coming out perfect. The darker blues are coming out really, really dark. I was able to push the brightness up on the magenta/greens to get a good print with detail. I don't seem to be able to do the same with the blue. If I brighten it enough in PS the detail is overwhelmed and disappears.

Printing on mac catalina, photoshop, canon print studio pro on Moab Entrada rag bright 300...

Maybe a different paper might not suck up all the ink so much?

Before I keep test printing my bank accounts dry thought I'd ask here.

Any thoughts, ideas on how to get some of the darker colors to punch up and keep detail? Or should I start reworking the images and avoid problematic colors?

Thanks!

-- hide signature --
Maximilian59 Forum Member • Posts: 77
Re: Bright and vivid on Canon prograf 1000
1

You can start with comparing ICC profiles.

In the picture you see Moab Entrada 300 natural (solid colors) compared to Moab Juniper Baryta. You can clearly see the difference. If you don't want to use RC glossy papers, maybe  the so called baryta papers will help.

 Maximilian59's gear list:Maximilian59's gear list
Canon Pixma Pro-100 +3 more
Ken60 Senior Member • Posts: 2,998
Re: Bright and vivid on Canon prograf 1000

Move on from Rag, and have a read on Keith Coopers paper tests. He has tried all sorts for reviews, I think it's pretty safe to say the rags are not the most punchy. ...  though Canson Platine is more like Baryta  than rag.

If its real money perhaps even have a word with Andrew Rodney  about a tweaked profile for that specific work , he may also have ideas about paper stock.

-- hide signature --

Gear ... what I need to get the job done , after all you don't see mechanics listing their brand of spanner as a qualification .

NAwlins Contrarian Veteran Member • Posts: 6,345
Re: Bright and vivid on Canon prograf 1000
3

The darker blues are coming out really, really dark. I was able to push the brightness up on the magenta/greens to get a good print with detail. I don't seem to be able to do the same with the blue. If I brighten it enough in PS the detail is overwhelmed and disappears.

Printing on mac catalina, photoshop, canon print studio pro on Moab Entrada rag bright 300...

Maybe a different paper might not suck up all the ink so much?

Before I keep test printing my bank accounts dry thought I'd ask here.

Any thoughts, ideas on how to get some of the darker colors to punch up and keep detail? Or should I start reworking the images and avoid problematic colors?

Some thoughts that you may (or, may not!) find helpful, some of them already suggested:

* Rendering intent can make a big difference, especially on the edges of the gamut. What rendering intent are you using? Have you tried both relative colorimetric and perceptual to see how they affect the results? For that matter, maybe even try some small test prints with the saturation rendering intent.

* Paper / paper type makes a big difference. You are just not going to get the largest gamut, or even close to it, on a matte paper--even one with OBAs like Moab Entrada Rag Bright. I suspect your best bet for a larger gamut (without going to a very different surface) is Red River Palo Duro Softgloss Rag and/or Canson Platine.

* You may be approaching the limits of the gamut achievable with the inks. In many printers the very dark but very saturated blues are among the hardest to print. The achievable mix of cyan, magenta, and black is just not up to it. Your Pro-1000 adds a "blue" ink, which should improve things, but based on what the nozzle check looks like, the ink may be closer to violet than to an actual blue.

 NAwlins Contrarian's gear list:NAwlins Contrarian's gear list
Nikon Coolpix S30 Canon PowerShot S120 Sony Alpha DSLR-A580 Sony DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD +5 more
OP Jason Dailey New Member • Posts: 11
Re: Bright and vivid on Canon prograf 1000

Yes, as I was typing that out yesterday I realized the paper might be my first stop. Thanks for the tip on baryta.

-- hide signature --
Petruska Veteran Member • Posts: 9,099
Use the PS Gamut warning......
2

with different PRO-1000 paper ICC profiles until you achieve the most gamut colors to your liking.

This is a much cheaper way than actually buying paper to test.

Here is a gamut warning done to your photos using Red River Palo Duro Rag ICC profile.

The grey areas indicate what photo colors that your PRO-1000 will have a problem reproducing.

Bob P.

OP Jason Dailey New Member • Posts: 11
Re: Bright and vivid on Canon prograf 1000

Thanks for the information. I'll start looking into other papers. I'm not locked into the rag and am happy to try any other wide-gamut papers. Other than the Red River and Canson mentioned above, any others I should look into?

Also, any successful way to soft proof these?

-- hide signature --
OP Jason Dailey New Member • Posts: 11
Re: Use the PS Gamut warning......
1

Thanks! Exactly what I was thinking, I'll start grabbing profiles and checking them out.

-- hide signature --
Gesture Veteran Member • Posts: 8,868
Re: Use the PS Gamut warning......

My thoughts.  Also, good notes NAwlins.

Are you out of gamut?  Just how much can the ink set do?

Every final image is a translation.  We learn to tweak things to make the output realize our best intention.

OP Jason Dailey New Member • Posts: 11
Re: Use the PS Gamut warning......
1

And interestingly (I guess) enough, I did already print these barn photos and they turned out fine. No issues at all.

Maybe the color intensity in the file was lower?

-- hide signature --
Petruska Veteran Member • Posts: 9,099
I used a screen grab...
1

Jason Dailey wrote:

And interestingly (I guess) enough, I did already print these barn photos and they turned out fine. No issues at all.

Maybe the color intensity in the file was lower?

of your photos not the actually photo files. I was just trying to make a point that the PS gamut warning "could" help you understand why your prints are not a vivid or wrong colors compared to the monitor. Also gamut warning is just an estimate, not real world.

I struggle with my portrait skin tones, they look sooooo good on the monitor and blah in prints. It's almost impossible to print good skin tones on paper.

As Gesture stated, you just edit until the prints looks good to you, or your clients. Don't try to match screen to print perfectly.

Bob P.

mujana Veteran Member • Posts: 7,521
Re: Bright and vivid on Canon prograf 1000

Jason Dailey wrote:

Thanks for the information. I'll start looking into other papers. I'm not locked into the rag and am happy to try any other wide-gamut papers. Other than the Red River and Canson mentioned above, any others I should look into?

Hahnemüle

Also, any successful way to soft proof these?

-- hide signature --
 mujana's gear list:mujana's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sony a7R IV Zeiss Batis 85mm F1.8 Sony FE 16-35mm F2.8 +9 more
mike earussi Veteran Member • Posts: 9,156
Re: Bright and vivid on Canon prograf 1000

Are you using the ProPhoto RGB color space? If not you're limiting your gamut potential.

 mike earussi's gear list:mike earussi's gear list
Sigma SD1 Merrill Sigma 70mm F2.8 DG Macro Art Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG Macro Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM Sigma APO Macro 180mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM +1 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads