Dermit wrote:
I have the R1800, have had it for a year. .......I am convinced it's the Epson/profile. If anyone comes up with a solution to this problem I would love to hear it. I am tired of bumping my file brightness up just for printing... a lot of hit and miss.
Thanks......for the confirmation/validation info of this issue!
I have run into this problem as well. When I use Epson paper with their profiles, my photographs are close to what is on my calibrated monitor. However when I put in my Moab Lasal paper on the R1800 using either the Epson or the Moab ICC profile, I have no success. All of my pictures are too dark. If I let the printer manage the image, the photographs come out too bright. I am probably not doing something right and will have to sit and figure this one out. Perhaps my Moab ICC profiles aren’t adequate for the R1800? In the meantime, I send my best prints to WHCC.
PS - I am using Lightroom/CS2/Windows Vista and XP Pro
I recently upgraded to an NEC 25490 monitor. Due to shipping error the spectra kit was not shipped, so I calibrated with Monaco and the calibration was too light for the 1800.... On noting that here I got several responses indicating that profiling was too light/bright from others.
I use an 1800 and find it completely consistent for me with the premium profiles on matte and luster epson papers and galerie smooth gloss with the Ilford profile.
To me, the larger question is who is really off: Monitor calibration or printer profilees. Is it reasonable to ask that the discussion be broadened to c onsider both issues?
Today I printed by by-passing Photoshop. I just used the Windows Print Utility, and then allowed the printer to manage the colors using the +1.8 Gamma setting for one photo and used a different setup for another...... Unfortunately it's been trial and error.
My R800 always printed too dark whether on wintel or iMac. With the stock profiles (tried many over the years) I just pulled my hair out..
Custom profiles are the only way to go and let PS color manage... What many don't realize is that with a custom profile, you still need to adjust for tonality and color shifts (esp b&w). Also, this where the art comes in to play since what you see is different from display to printer...
Ken-L wrote:
...... Unfortunately it's been trial and error.
hence the problem of not using a sound color management setup. Allowing PS to control the color by using good printer/paper profiles goes a long way to eliminate the trial and error printing.
2 items needed....calibrated/profiled monitor and good profiles for the paper/printer you're using. 3rd would be making sure you have the settings properly set.
I have an R1800 running on a PC and have never had this problem, however I have also not used the Moab paper either. Perhaps the profiles from this manufacturer are just not up to scratch?
Until recently I was using the stock Epson profiles for my glossy prints, and the Hahnemuhle profile the Photorag BW that I use. The Photorag prints were quite close, and the Epson glossy profile was ok, though I wasn't overly happy with it (slightly dark). A few weeks ago I got customs profiles done professionally for the Epson glossy and also the Photorag and they are fantastic. They print so close to what is shown on my screen it is not funny.
My recommendation would be to try a custom profile for the paper you are using and go from there.
Trekka273 wrote:
I have an R1800 running on a PC and have never had this problem, however I have also not used the Moab paper either. Perhaps the profiles from this manufacturer are just not up to scratch?
Until recently I was using the stock Epson profiles for my glossy prints, and the Hahnemuhle profile the Photorag BW that I use. The Photorag prints were quite close, and the Epson glossy profile was ok, though I wasn't overly happy with it (slightly dark). A few weeks ago I got customs profiles done professionally for the Epson glossy and also the Photorag and they are fantastic. They print so close to what is shown on my screen it is not funny.
My recommendation would be to try a custom profile for the paper you are using and go from there. ...Show more →
Where did you get your profiles done? I'm convinced that custom profiles are the only way to get this under control with any consistency.
I don't have the darkness problem on my R1800, but had it with my 1280. dye inks.
I tried the Inksaver program, www.inksaver.com And it helped a lot. They offer
a free trial download, so it might be worth a try.
ohenry wrote:
hence the problem of not using a sound color management setup. Allowing PS to control the color by using good printer/paper profiles goes a long way to eliminate the trial and error printing.
2 items needed....calibrated/profiled monitor and good profiles for the paper/printer you're using. 3rd would be making sure you have the settings properly set.
Thank you for the input!
My monitor is calibrated and I'm using Epson's paper profiles......as I mentioned, when the same photo is printed by an Internet printing company the image is just as on my monitor, so the monitor is calibrated okay.
I set up everything under the "tutelage" of a Professional Landscape photographer (of some repute) exactly the way he does his work but have always had this dark issue.
I'm going to try "PrintFix Plus" by Colorvision to set up my own profile for the Epson 1800. From all the posts I have read, on several forums including Epson's, there is a widespread issue with this printer output being dark.
I suspect it is a printer/profile problem, and since I've been using Epson's profiles, they seem the most likely culprit since Photoshop's capabilities are "never" in question for such a rudimentary function as printing.
Tinner wrote:
I don't have the darkness problem on my R1800, but had it with my 1280. dye inks.
I tried the Inksaver program, www.inksaver.com And it helped a lot. They offer
a free trial download, so it might be worth a try.
Thanks! If PrintFix does'nt help I will try Inksaver.
ohenry wrote:
hence the problem of not using a sound color management setup. Allowing PS to control the color by using good printer/paper profiles goes a long way to eliminate the trial and error printing.
2 items needed....calibrated/profiled monitor and good profiles for the paper/printer you're using. 3rd would be making sure you have the settings properly set.
ohenry, I think it has long been established that this problem is not a color management problem, nor is it a settings problem. Many of us here have mentioned that we do have calibrated monitors and we are using the correct profiles and setting the color management tools properly. We've also established that the EXACT same image file prints fine on other printers and at pro labs. All the evidence is pointing to bad Epson profiles... but then again some people are not having the problem, which leads me to believe that some printers are not handling the profiles properly. This looks like there are 'bad copies' of the R1800 out there and these bad copies maybe need a custom profile to offset what ever problem they are having.
I use an R1800 which does not match the calibrated monitor. However, I use Epsons premium profiles, Ilford's Galerie Profiles, One from Moab and several customs from Cathy.
All these profiles are consistent with each other, which is to say that what I print on Galerie or Moab or HP or Epson paper matches very well. Obviously a matte and a glossy print are not identical, but the tonal density and color is as close as anyone could wish.
This makes me think that monitor calibration is the issue, not printer calibration.
I always print color managed, either from CS3 or InDesign and results are interchangeable.
As mentioned earlier, calibration has left good color and about right saturation but the lower part of the curve is too high--the mid darks are too klight.
dermit...that's why I said "good" profiles, not the canned, generic ones. I have a R1800 and use custom profiles with it. If I use the canned profiles, I have to increase brightness quite a bit.
I use windows XP and callibrate my monitor. I've also noticed that the R1800 prints way dark. I also use the Epson profiles with Epson paper (original profiles and updated from the Epson website profiles).
What I do is print pictures real small with various brightness boost (level dialog, adjust midpoint), and chose which setting works best for each picture.
It's not a satysfying "long term" solution but it seems to work, and surely reduces the hit and miss process, and the ink and paper waste.
I have good things to report about Profile Prism. Dark prints are a thing of the past and colors now accurately match my monitor. Without a doubt the best $80 I spent in a while.
Before you assume your printer is off....download a test image or two and print them. Norman Korens site links to several including a photodisk image that is specific to adobe 1998 .......
Lucky_Dog wrote:
Where did you get your profiles done? I'm convinced that custom profiles are the only way to get this under control with any consistency.
Sorry to take so long to come back to this.
I got my profiles done at a place here in Melbourne, Australia, called Image Science. You print a target image, under very strict instructions over settings, etc, provide it to them and they use a colorometer (not idea on the spelling!!) to check the output against what it should be, and then they create a profile based on that. I can honestly say that the two profiles that I got are amazingly accurate to what my calibrated screen shows. The two profiles cost me $110 and it is the best money I have spent. After experiencing these customs profiles, I cannot recommend highly enough that people look at this as an option.
