Views
615
Replies
9
Status
Closed
Why, on many of the prints I make, I must use Epson’s color management,
rather than PS’s color management, to get a print that most closely matches my
monitor? I have an Epson 1280 that I’ve profiled using GretagMacbeth’s Eye-One system. I profiled it for Epson’s Premium Photo Glossy paper and MIS inks.
Too frequently, when I run a test on 4×6 Epson Premium Photo Glossy paper (soft-proofing is a waste of time for me), I find that, using my
profile & letting PS manage the printing,
that the print fails miserably to match my monitor’s image. (I recalibrate & profile my monitor monthly.)
When I try letting Epson
manage the printer, the print matches the monitor almost exactly. If I need to tweak the image, using the Epson system, I can do so in the Epson printer controls. With PS, I have to go back to the image in PS & guess & by gosh. This is very inefficient.
I would use Epson color management exclusively if it were not for the fact that on some images, PS control is better than Epson control. So, you could say this is my workflow: If PS is best, use it. If Epson is best, use that. 4×6 paper isn’t that expensive.
I’m just curious why I can’t standardize on one color management printer system. It’s incredible to me that the Epson system, using non-
Epson inks, can produce more accurate results than the PS system with my profile. Maybe some of you have run into the same situation & that what I have to do is all I can do. Maybe I should reprofile my printer, paper, and inks, altho my printer hasn’t changed, my paper hasn’t changed, and my inks haven’t changed.
rather than PS’s color management, to get a print that most closely matches my
monitor? I have an Epson 1280 that I’ve profiled using GretagMacbeth’s Eye-One system. I profiled it for Epson’s Premium Photo Glossy paper and MIS inks.
Too frequently, when I run a test on 4×6 Epson Premium Photo Glossy paper (soft-proofing is a waste of time for me), I find that, using my
profile & letting PS manage the printing,
that the print fails miserably to match my monitor’s image. (I recalibrate & profile my monitor monthly.)
When I try letting Epson
manage the printer, the print matches the monitor almost exactly. If I need to tweak the image, using the Epson system, I can do so in the Epson printer controls. With PS, I have to go back to the image in PS & guess & by gosh. This is very inefficient.
I would use Epson color management exclusively if it were not for the fact that on some images, PS control is better than Epson control. So, you could say this is my workflow: If PS is best, use it. If Epson is best, use that. 4×6 paper isn’t that expensive.
I’m just curious why I can’t standardize on one color management printer system. It’s incredible to me that the Epson system, using non-
Epson inks, can produce more accurate results than the PS system with my profile. Maybe some of you have run into the same situation & that what I have to do is all I can do. Maybe I should reprofile my printer, paper, and inks, altho my printer hasn’t changed, my paper hasn’t changed, and my inks haven’t changed.
Master Retouching Hair
Learn how to rescue details, remove flyaways, add volume, and enhance the definition of hair in any photo. We break down every tool and technique in Photoshop to get picture-perfect hair, every time.