|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
After trying out EZColor on more than 5 types of paper (but all with Epson OEM inks), I would definitely agree with David's comments that with EZColor, its "much better than the hit & miss system" I had also used previously. With EZColor, I get within 2-4 test prints from the results that I find satisfactory. If this helps:- 1. Create profile with EZColor using recombination method (*) 2. first test print using the profile - check results; 3. Tweak iin Photoshop usign adjustment layers (usually Levels and/or Curve and occationally Hue/saturation)* 4. 2nd test print using profile and tweaks added in step 3 above. 5. fine tune tweaks* 6. 3nd or 4th test print usually hits the spot. The "*" denotes 'weak links the above method. The other steps like checking results of test prints ...I am fairly comfortable with my observation skills (at the very least, I am fussy) and I have a few printouts (of the same test image) done with an Andrew Rodney profile (which is very good) so I do have a point of comparison for steps 2,4 and 6. I find that the first test print using the EZcolor created profile is usually within a close range (ie 2-4 test prints depending on my skills) from good results. My main problem is that I am using the Photosmart scanner...which does not alloy a full A4 sheet to be scanned. So I scan the IT8 and target printout in 2 passes and recombine them in photoshop. The 'recombination' is the tricky bit since one can easily 'distort' the data but embeding color spaces, etc. So great care (and lots of paper) was expended in fine-tuning the recombination stage. For users of flatbed, this will be a non-issue. Main color issues:- - slight color casts in the highlights and mids, tilted towards green. - reds are slightly 'off' (somewhat orangish). I fully accept the fact that the above comments of mine are peculiar to my system and setup (because of the 'recombination stage" as well as the scanner). I did try EZColor with a conventional flatbed scanner Microtek E6 (any good?) and the results where different but would still be what I consider within close-shot of good results. I did get a few profiles with EZColor (especially on the Epson papers) which were very good without further tweaking. Paper to paper variation I did notice that though the profiles created with the EZcolor work well with most papers (in the sense that overall, the prints look like they had the same color balance), there were still some slight differences from paper to paper. Again, this could be due entirely to the weak links mentioned above. I think that having a profile editor or a method of tweaking the profiles (look forward to C. David Tobie's techniques!) to achive good results is preferable to the 'shot in the dark' method. Bottom line is: I am able to use all 5 types of paper to get good results with EZcolor (and some tweaks). In the past, I probaby woudl have given up using a partiuclar paper type beyond the first pack if I hadn't already figured out a way to get the settings/tweaks to produce good results. Just my 2cents... Cheers kokleong http://come.to/digitaldarkroom David Cardinal wrote: > My experience has been more positive than Donna's, although it's pretty > clear to me that EZColor is no panacea. I've used it in three ways: > > * Profiling my EX & 1200 for the standard OEM inks, with several different > papers. > > This worked very well, in the sense that I was able to print "snappier" > pictures > with the EZColor profiles, and it didn't require any changes to the way I > work. > > * Profiling Luminos Archival (Platinum) inks & papers on my EX. I had no > choice on this > one, since the Platinum inks have different gamuts & profiles than the OEM > inks, and > there are none supplied. In that light the EZColor profiles were "okay", > but had some > real issues, around reds for example. The real culprit might be the ink > gamut, but > EZColor doesn't help me deal with that (no preview tools or separation > tables generated > so that I could "cheat" and preview in Photoshop). > > * Profiling the Fujix printers at Imagers.com. I wish they provided a > profile, but they > don't. Their service & turnaround is wonderful, so I decided to build my > own profile. > I'm sure it's not as good as what they could do with pro tools, and they > could keep > theirs up to date more effectively, but it was _much_ better than the hit > & miss > system I was using before to color correct before sending to them. I've > reduced my > reprinting costs & time substantially. > > Hope this helps.--dave c. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Mike Dowsett [mailto:email@example.com] > > Sent: Sunday, July 11, 1999 10:47 PM > > To: firstname.lastname@example.org > > Subject: Monaco EZ Color > > > > > > Has anyone had any experience with Monaco Ez Color, good or > > bad, that they > > would like to share with me. I'm thinking of buying the above > > software and > > would really appreciate any feedback that anyone has. Is > > there any similar > > color management software out there that you could recommend? > > Thanks in adavance, the ever present but never full, > > > > Mike. > > > > - > > Please: Stay on topic. Trim quoted messages. > > http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions. > > > - > Please: Stay on topic. Trim quoted messages. > http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions. - Please: Stay on topic. Trim quoted messages. http://www.leben.com/lists for list instructions.
[Photo] [Yosemite News] [Yosemite Photos] [Scanner] [Gimp] [Gimp] Users