All my prints have a strong magenta cast. This appears on the preview as well as the final print, so it’s not a printer issue. No doubt I have some incorrect setting, but I sure can’t figure out what. Any ideas?
Give your photos a professional finish with sharpening in Photoshop. Learn to enhance details, create contrast, and prepare your images for print, web, and social media.
Your monitor profile is corrupted. You need to recalibrate, starting with a fresh canned profile, not your current damaged one, and save the new profile.
Check out this link and follow the instructions therein to the letter:
Thanks, but that didn’t help. I think my message was unclear. The color looks fine on the screen. The problem arises when I try to print. Whether I actually print or use the "preview" button in the print dialog, I get a magenta image. By the way, I’m working on a Mac G4 with OS 10.3.3, Photoshop 7, if that helps.
Did you recalibrate anyway? It could still be the monitor profile at fault. Photoshop uses the data from the monitor profile to do the color conversion (in the background).
Have you run a nozzle check?
What printer are you using? What paper? Which profile?
Have you updated to Photoshop7.0.1?
Are you sure you don’t have the wrong conversion engine selected? Choose Adobe’s.
In Proof View make sure you have the right profile selected and Simulate Paper White and Black Point Compensation selected. Make sure Preserve Color Numbers is NOT checked.
Remember to set Relative or Perceptual (not Absolute) colorimetric intent.
Are you sure you’re not applying color correction twice? It should be OFF on your printer’s driver options.
Read the whole of G Ballard’s site, without missing anything. (Link in post #1 above.)
Thanks again. I did recalibrate and checked the various items you mention, though I’m not sure how to get to the printer driver’s options. I do specify "No Color Controls" in the print dialogue, if that’s what you mean.
Let me clarify further. When I "View proof colors" it looks fine. It is only when I actually use the print dialogue that the problem arises. It arises whether I produce physical print or I "preview," which uses Apple’s Preview software to show the image. I don’t see how this can have anything to do with a clogged nozzle, though I did check and clean the nozzles. My printer is an Epson 2200, and I’m using Epson’s Premium Glossy paper.
I’ll go back and look at Ballard’s site some more.
OK, that leads me to keep suspecting your monitor profile. Apple’s Preview is not color managed, as far as I know. Photoshop is. Check out G Ballard’s site to understand how the monitor profiles consists of two "parts", and how Photoshop uses both of them.
If you use Print with Preview, the image shown there is only for placement purposes, it’s not color managed at all.
Either your monitor profile is damaged, or your Color Settings, Color Conversion Engine settings and Color Management settings are off. If you follow G Ballard’s instructions from the beginning, step by step, without any deviations whatsoever, you should be getting fine prints.
I have the same printer, Epson 2200, and I follow that method. My prints are dead on.
Are you working in some other mode than cmyk? At least that might explain why there’s a shift only when you go to print the file. If you’re working in rgb and try to print it’s going to convert the image to the cmyk inks available on your printer, and depending on the image(s) some colors won’t look the same no matter how calibrated your equipment is. Try manually converting to cmyk and see if you notice the same color shift.
jonf, Bad idea, converting to cmyk will only make matters worse because the printer driver uses rgb then converts to cmyk. If you do it your way the diver will convert to rgb then back to cmyk-an extra conversion (actually 2 extras, yours and the drivers) will only corrupt the colors even more. My 2200 prints dead on, as well, with rgb. Follow Gary Ballards site and you won’t have any problems.
I’m assuming from your response that the Gary Ballard method is supposed to be converting your monitor’s RGB display to emulate the cmyk output available on your printer? So when in RGB mode, no colors would be displayed that can’t be printed on your local cmyk printer? That sounds wrong to me.
I disagree that it’s "wrong" to use cmyk mode if your final output is going to be cmyk. No matter what your driver is doing with the file, you can’t see something correctly approaching cmyk output if you’re working in rgb mode. If there’s a color shift in the conversion to cmyk, no matter when or where it takes place, he’ll know it sooner if he’s seeing the image on his monitor in something that’s at least intended to show what cmyk output will look like. He doesn’t need to work in cmyk mode. But I’m clinging to my belief that a switch to cmyk mode — even if only temporary — might give him some idea of what his image will look like on a cmyk device.
I’m not saying this is his problem. He may not even be working in rgb mode. I’m just saying that cmyk inks will not print colors exactly as you see them in rbg mode.
That’s what the "soft proof" is for-view, edit your rgb image in soft proof>custom and select the color profile for your paper. Do not convert to cmyk, let the driver do it.
That was awful advice, Jonf. Hope you never do that yourself.
When printing to an inkjet printer, specifically the Epson 2200, you need to stay ALWAYS in RGB. The printer driver does the conversion on the fly, transparently. If you try to send a CMYK image to the printer, it will first get converted to RGB, then it will undergo the conversion once again. Not a good idea at all.
Did I say anywhere to send the image to the printer as cmyk?
This whole business of seeing your image in rgb and expecting the colors to print exactly the same on a cmyk device seems like utter nonsense to me. Obviously you all know a lot more about this issue than I do. I feel like I’m speaking to a religious sect that proves everything they say by referring to their holy book without explaining it in any way that makes sense to someone outside their own religion.
RGB is light. CMYK is ink. The gamut is not the same. What you see on screen is RGB and can be nothing else. What you see on paper is CMYK and can be nothing else. Therefore there are inevitable differences between cmyk and rgb color.
Have physics gone awry? Am I living in alternate universe? Can someone please explain how a color that you see on screen which cannot be duplicated with cmyk inks can be seen less clearly by asking your computer to emulate the cmyk output? Or why there is any such thing as cmyk mode at all, if it’s now universally accepted that nobody should ever work in cmyk mode for any reason ever?
Are you using an Epson Profile for their Premium Glossy Photo Paper?
It does that every time!
Try this instead if you are printing from RGB (which you need to be unless you have a PostScript RIP):
Printing RGB out of Photoshop CS on an Epson Make sure that you download the most recent driver from Epson. Assuming that your Photoshop RGB space is Adobe RGB 1998:
Choose Print Options. (Cmd Option P) Check "Show more Options" Color Management: Choose "Document" and set to "Adobe RGB" "Print Space" = "Same as Source" Click on "Output" and choose ASCII
Click on Page Setup to check that you have the correct printer and paper size selected and click "OK". Click the "Print" button.
Make sure that your Epson is showing in the "Printer" pop-up menu. From the bottom of the three pop-ups, cycle through the choices to make sure that everything is set-up correctly.
Choose "ColorSynch" and set palette as follows: Color Conversion = Standard Quartz Filter: None
Choose "Print Settings" and set palette as follows: Media Type = Photo Paper Ink = Color Mode = Advanced Settings Print Quality = 1440 dpi Halftoning = High Quality
Then
Choose "Color Management" and set palette as follows:
Mode: "PhotoRealistic" Select "Color Controls" Gamma = 2.2 (if that is how your monitor is set)
Brightness = 3; Contrast = 1; Saturation = 2; C and M = 0; Y = 7
In the Presets pop-up: Save settings to a new name.
Next time that you want to print: Choose your saved Preset (in the Print dialog’s Preset pop-up) and it click "Print" and your customized settings will automatically be used.
To make changes, choosing "Color Management" will take you directly to your Advanced Settings page showing your current settings. Make any changes as required and Save your new settings in the same way that you did previously.
[And, before everyone else SCREAMS at me for giving you Politically Incorrect advice, — TRY IT!]
Unless you are printing to a RIP, you need to stay in RGB all the time to print to an inkjet printer like the Epson 2200. They designed it and its driver that way.
That is the way Epson teaches it at its Print Academy and how the top photographers urge you to do it.
If you don’t want to believe it, take it up with Epson.
[ADDED:] As for the different color space, that’s what Soft Proof is there for.
Be sure to install the new profiles posted on the Epson site at the beginning of April. They produce excellent results.
They’re a total of seven downloads and seven different profiles. There are even different profiles for printing at 1440 dpi and at 2880 dpi. They show up separately in the Printer Setup Utility too, as if you were dealing with different printers as well.
Don’t use the old ones. Insist on the real McCoy. 🙂
There don’t seem to be any newer profiles than the ones that I already have for older printers like my 1270 — which I am sticking with so that I can also print CMYK files via Pressready. (It still works but you have to pop into Classic (which is easy enough) to use it.)
The printing set-up that I gave above is for printing RGB files ONLY — PressReady is a PostScript RIP that works with CMYK files using Adobe’s color settings.
Ramon … I’m NOT SAYING YOU’RE WRONG. Trust me. But I’ve always adjusted my cmyk colors in cmyk mode, as has every designer I’ve ever known until I started lurking around this forum. I never heard of the RGB-only workflow, and it’s counter to everything I was ever taught about color theory and the physics of light. And I’ve never noticed any problems in getting the output I expect.
Are you saying this primarily in the context of printing digital photographs from an Epson printer? I didn’t understand that to be the prime subject of the original question, so maybe that explains my inability to concede the obsolescence of cmyk.
From now on, if any cohort asks me a question about color shifting when printing to their network printer I’ll definitely refer them to this information, because it’s obviously valuable. Just keep in mind that this doesn’t seem to be either intuitive or the commonly held belief, and telling people they’re idiots for doing what they were taught to do for 30 years doesn’t further the cause very effectively.
<< Just keep in mind that this doesn’t seem to be either intuitive or the commonly held belief, and telling people they’re idiots for doing what they were taught to do for 30 years doesn’t further the cause very effectively. >>
The difference here is that CMYK files are created for PRESS output — just like you have always done it.
Epson (and other inkjet, printers are a different kettle of fish.
If you send a CMYK file to an Epson, it first changes your file back to RGB (using its own algorithm) and then turns that RGB data back into CcMmYK (its own six-color inks — and more on the later models.)
I disagree that it’s "wrong" to use cmyk mode if your final output is going to be cmyk. No matter what your driver is doing with the file, you can’t see something correctly approaching cmyk output if you’re working in rgb mode.
Unless the device’s profile IS in RGB, which is the case for Epson inkjets.
I never heard of the RGB-only workflow, and it’s counter to everything I was ever taught about color theory and the physics of light. And I’ve never noticed any problems in getting the output I expect.
But what you were taught about colour theory did not encompass profiles…
I’m not saying it’s not valid at all, I’m saying it’s wrong in this case. You mention never having heard of an RGB only workflow, but that is what most photographers use and they output on Epsons (or other inkjets) all the time.
Sorry to have started a fight. Thanks for the responses. The problem seems to be related to profiles, especially some images that have monitor profiles embedded, as best I understand it. I don’t have a full handle on this yet, though it does seem that the "Preview," (The one in the print dialog that uses Apple’s Preview) is not particularly helpful.
Once I got the profiles reasonably straight -using Epson’s new profile – I got a decent print. I tried Ann’s suggestion (but where is "halftoning?") and also got a nice print, slightly less magenta and slightly less contrast.
That is one of the options that comes-up in the Print Settings palette for my Epson 1270 — it may not be available for your printer.
You can adjust the color settings in the Color Management palette until you get exactly the output that you want.
To cut magenta more, give magenta a minus value (try -3 as a starter) or increase yellow and cyan — or do a little of both. Then, Save your new settings to a new name.
… telling people they’re idiots for doing what they were taught to do for 30 years doesn’t further the cause very effectively.
First of all, I’m not for or against any cause. Second, I don’t think I or anyone else called anyone an idiot. If anyone has been calling other people names it’s the person who wrote in terms of "religious sects" in post #13.
Third, what you see on your monitor is light. Whether your image is in RGB or CMYK, your monitor still uses phosphors to show you light. My monitor has no "inks", and if yours does it’s a pretty innovative one. That argument is moot. As has been explained to you, the Epson profiles are in RGB; the printer expects to see RGB; and the profiles are used also in Soft View.
Are you saying this primarily in the context of printing digital photographs from an Epson printer?
It makes no difference whether you’re dealing with scanned film negative or slide images, digital photographs, or whatever you’re going to print on your Epson 2200. As long as you’re not dealing with prepress (and I’m certainly not, ever), CMYK doesn’t even exist in this context, except what the printer and its driver do in the background in order to use its seven inks.
While G Ballard has performed an extraordinary public service by compiling all those instructions and tips on his web site, I would not refer to his notes on printing images to an Epson inkjet printer as "G Ballard’s method". It’s simply the correct workflow, the Epson way and the Photoshop method, in my book. Gary Ballard’s merits lie in his openness to all kinds of thinking and in picking the most pertinent information and presenting it in a complete, thorough and easy to follow manner.
When I first began to try to make sense of this whole process, I read all kinds of books, including Bruce Fraser’s, and visited all kinds of web sites, including Ian Lyons’, but it wasn’t until I stumbled onto Gary’s site that a light went on. Everyone else (sorry, Ian) left out little details at the very beginning of the Color Settings procedure which made it very hard for someone with a pure photography background to make much sense of anything afterwards. They simply assumed the reader knew. As others point out all the time, the application is called Photoshop, after all.
Once I learned to ignore anything that has to do with CMYK, life was good once again. That’s the reason I don’t participate in any thread that has anything to do with CMYK, duotones or spot colors on these forums. Those key words are a red flag to warn me not to get involved in subject I know nothing about or don’t need to know at all.
It’s perfectly understandable that you and I focussed on different aspects when reading the original post, but I still see nothing there to indicate that Bernie was or is using his Epson 2200 printer as a proofing device for his CMYK output for prepress. I interpreted and still interpret his use of the term "prints" to mean photographic prints.
We ARE supposed to trust the profiles — my experience with RGB printing to Epsons has been otherwise. And, isn’t it nice to be able to fine-tune your output so easily?
But I’m curious as to why the standard advice seems to be to do no color adjustment. Is this just because we are supposed to trust the profiles?
Because you are performing all your color management ("adjustments") within Photoshop already. If you fail to specify No Color Adjustment in the printer driver ("print window" in your terminology) you would be applying it twice, once in the application and then again in the driver. Results are necessarily catastrophic.
I am downloading them — and will look at them — but they are for a different set of inks and for a different printer: the 2200 (not the 1270 which I have).
Actually my own special settings work with 100% reliability and accuracy for RGB files; while Pressready gives me CMYK output which is spot-on for Press-proofing.
Actually I got the No Color Adjustment workflow from Bruce Fraser and the others here. And I wrote my version because it needed written (for lay persons, like me).
The "adjustment" takes place specifically when the Adobe ACE ColorManagementSystem (CMS) CONVERTS the SourceSpace into the PrintSpace (as set in the print utility).
Enabling the Epson "NoColorAdjustment" setting turns off all the other CMSes and ensures a clean Conversion…
Ann, We are talking the latest technology here – after all you are still wallowing around in the "darkages"> 1270 and Press Ready. 🙂 The Epson profiles and the 2200 are "dead nuts on" if you follow the correct work flow (see G’s site) you will NOT be disappointed!
Brenie, "No color management" only means the printer driver turns over the CMM to PS. Color M. still takes place according to your PS CMM settings> choose Adobe ACE not colorsync (it sucks relatively).
<< Obtaining a price for ImagePrint from the ColorByte web site is now relatively simple, which wasn’t always the case. The LITE version which is really all that is required for desktop printers such as the Epson 2100/2200 is $495. However, this increases significantly when the high-end page layout feature set and annual maintenance agreement is included. The cost of ImagePrint for wide bodied printers such as the Epson 7600 and 9600 ranges from $1495 to $2495 with the annual maintenance agreement available for an additional $495. >>
Phew!
I am just so glad that I have PressReady and a 1270 to work with it.
Yes it was my vague recollection of that exorbitant price that made me think that’s what you were referring to when you wrote about another, much more expensive RIP.
No, I haven’t. I’m still learning this stuff (obviously). Are you suggesting other choices as a way to test, or because you have papers you particularly like?
I’ve noticed no one’s mentioned the actual CMYK inks used in inkjets don’t even come close to SWOP standards, anyway.
The ink density definitions of PS’s SWOP inks are darker and have completely different obsorbtion characteristics on different papers.
I would suggest sending pure 100% CMY patches created in a CMYK file in PS to these inkjets and see if they match to the screen. They didn’t on my Epson 1270 using the printer driver.
The only way I could get my printer to show its pure inks by themselves in its RAW state was to print out the stairstepped dashed ink nozzle check and look at it with a magnifying glass. I’ld like to know if there is another way to get the printer to show its inks in its RAW state without any computer data interpretation.
No, that is not what I am suggesting, reason is I read in another forum about this problem, and many users , not all, had problems with glossy paper on the 2000. I am not trying to lead you astray, but sometimes a simple solution …….
The SP2200 indeed is _very_ paper specific. Some papers are pretty much impossible, others excellent. But it is not an issue of "problems with glossy paper," it is an issue with specific papers and profiles.
Using the right paper and profile the SP200 is capable of excellent photo quality. By definition it is not capable of SWOP proofs.
SWOP has certified various RIP/printer combos that use Epson Ultrachrome inks. There’s certainly nothing inherent in the 2200 that prevents it from making SWOP proofs that are at least as accurate in color (not dot structure) as any other proofing system. I’ve done it many times.
The combination of an Epson 2200 and the ColorBurst X-Photo RIP works well. It has a feature that makes it very easy to simulate a press proof or contract proof (given that you have an accurate press/contract profile).
Thanks for the info – I did not know that SWOP certification for an SP2200 workflow existed. I thought that SWOP compliance required specific non-inkjet inks and papers. I agree that the SP2200 can produce very good "proofs" and do it all the time, but I never dreamed that it was possible to create fully SWOP compliant proofs on an inkjet.
I suspect it will be too complex and expensive for my workflow anyway, but does anyone have a link for exactly how to set up a SWOP compliant proofing process (paper, profiles, color bars, etc.) for an SP2200?
Louise-
Try "Epson Premium Glossy Photo Paper" for glossy 8.5×11 size.
As I mentioned sometime ago, one glossy paper with which I have consistently obtained very good results on the Epson 2200 is Pictorico’s Photo Gallery Glossy Paper using its own ICC profile specifically provided for this particular printer:
Ramón G Castañeda "Best glossy prints from Epson 2200 – a recommendation for fans of glossy" 8/24/03 4:22pm </cgi-bin/webx?14/0>
The 2200 hasn’t been SWOP certified, but its larger siblings, using the same inks, have. Certification is a political thing plenty of solutions that haven’t been certified work just fine in terms of matching/predicting the final color. I suspect the main reason why the ColorBurst/7600 and ColorBurst/9600 combinations have been certifed where the 2200 has not is that the relevant parties make a much bigger markup on the large printers and the RIPs that drive them than they do on the smaller ones.
If you just want to match SWOP output, all you really need is an appropriate paper stock, an accurate SWOP profile, and an accurate profile for that paper on the 2200. There are basically two approaches to proofing. One is to use a proofer with the same colorants and tonal behavior as the final output. The other is to do a conversion from final output space to proofer space. The certified inkjet solutions use the latter approach, and so can you.
