Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: i1 Display Pro and Paper Manufacturers ICCs vs Colormunki Photo  (Read 6588 times)
Gareth ONeill
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 15



WWW
« on: July 19, 2012, 05:38:43 PM »
ReplyReply

I am looking at getting some color management system that costs less than NZ$700.

The only options that really look promising are the X-rite i1 Display Pro (i1D3) and the Colormunki photo.

I have read quite a few people who are unsatisfied with spyder products, although the latest Spyderprint does look worth a try.

I cannot afford the i1 photo pro 2.



I have used an i1d2 and paper manufacturer icc profiles and recommended printer settings and been pretty happy with the results.


I undertand that the i1 Display Pro has more features for monitor calibration than colormunki photo, and that, as it is a colorimeter it profiles shadows better than the munki which is a spectrophotometer.

Obviously the i1 Display only does the display, but wouldn't the professionally made ICCs from the print manufacturer be of a higher quality than what the colormunki can produce?

So I would assume that better monitor calibration, combined with better ICC profiles would lead to better prints. ie; the i1 Display Pro with paper manufacturers ICC.
Logged

digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9191



WWW
« Reply #1 on: July 19, 2012, 06:06:52 PM »
ReplyReply

IF all you want to color manage is a display, go i1D3 (Pro). If you also want to profile papers, go ColorMunki. The quality of the Munki paper profiles are quite good but if you are not going to make many or you feel you want to use an outside service, save some money, go i1D3 which does do a better job on a display.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Gareth ONeill
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 15



WWW
« Reply #2 on: July 19, 2012, 07:51:55 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't want to make printer profiles if they are worse than the Canson and Ilford ones I have. I pretty much only use Canson Rag Photographique and Ilford Gold Fibre Silk.

I do want to make them if they are better than the profiles supplied on the Canson and Ilford websites. Canson and Ilford also supply optimum print settings for my printer (3880) with their supplied ICC.

I don't want to use an outside service.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2012, 07:56:47 PM by Gareth ONeill » Logged

Alan Goldhammer
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1674


WWW
« Reply #3 on: July 20, 2012, 07:07:38 AM »
ReplyReply


I do want to make them if they are better than the profiles supplied on the Canson and Ilford websites. Canson and Ilford also supply optimum print settings for my printer (3880) with their supplied ICC.

I don't want to use an outside service.
Maybe Ilford have posted a new profile for the 3880.  I do all my own profiling and when I looked at the Ilford profile about 16 months ago it was pretty bad.  The colors were washed out in soft proofing and a test print confirmed this (a couple of other users also confirmed this).  Maybe they received some complaints and had it redone.  The Canson profile on the other hand is very good.

Alan
Logged

Gareth ONeill
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 15



WWW
« Reply #4 on: July 20, 2012, 04:47:28 PM »
ReplyReply

thank you sir, that is very good to know.

would it be possible for me to try your ilford profile?
Logged

Electromen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 32


« Reply #5 on: July 21, 2012, 05:12:01 AM »
ReplyReply

If you can hold your Ilford print up to the monitor and are satisfied with the color and brightness then save the money.  If you want the print to be a close as possible to the monitor, buy the PhotoMunki Color. 
Logged
Gareth ONeill
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 15



WWW
« Reply #6 on: July 21, 2012, 04:33:53 PM »
ReplyReply

at the moment I can't do either as I have nothing to calibrate my monitor.

I am surprised that the colormunki, which is an entry level device, creates better profiles than the ones supplied by the paper manufacturers who (I assume) used top of the line gear to create the profiles.
Logged

bill t.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2693


WWW
« Reply #7 on: July 22, 2012, 12:10:26 PM »
ReplyReply

But the manufacturer did not use the particular sample of the printer or the inks or the media you are using.  All those things experience process variations from batch to batch.  And printer heads age, etc.

On one hand, the manufacturer measures slightly non-representative targets not made on your exact printer with very high precision devices.  On the other hand, end users measure exactly representative targets with lower precision devices.  Both those scenarios have built in errors, but from different sources.

My experience has been that my profiles are a little better than the manufacturer's profiles for all of the various canvas media I use, particularly in lighter, low saturation colors and in their ability to exactly represent deep shadow tonality as seen on my calibrated monitor.  And I know a few cases where profiles from highly regarded manufacturers could only have been mislabeled.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2012, 12:12:07 PM by bill t. » Logged
Gareth ONeill
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 15



WWW
« Reply #8 on: July 22, 2012, 01:58:27 PM »
ReplyReply

nicely put. you have almost convinced me to get the munki. but what about shadow colour and tonality on print vs on screen when calibrating your monitor with a low end spectrophotometer?
Logged

digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9191



WWW
« Reply #9 on: July 22, 2012, 02:01:56 PM »
ReplyReply

nicely put. you have almost convinced me to get the munki. but what about shadow colour and tonality on print vs on screen when calibrating your monitor with a low end spectrophotometer?

Shouldn’t be a significant issue if at all. Yes, a tuned colorimeter is ideal for the task of display calibration. It isn’t like a Spectrophotometer is going to suck. Boils down to whether you want one instrument to multi task and it sounds like you do. Lets put it this way, a really good reference display like a SpectraView with a ColorMunki will probably produce a much better result than a lesser quality display calibrated with a super expensive colorimeter.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
mshea
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 102


« Reply #10 on: July 25, 2012, 11:55:02 AM »
ReplyReply

I use Ilford GFS and Harman Hahnemuhle, as well as a few others, on my 3880. Comparing the manufacturers' profiles to those done with my colormunki, I'd say the improvement is quite obvious. I'd spring for it!

Merrill
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad