jimdittmer
New Member
- Joined
- 2006
- Posts
- 1
- Geo
- Portland, OR USA
I just had the pleasure of listening to, meeting and speaking with the Photoshop guru and author, Barry Haynes, at our latest Pacific Northwest Color Management Users Group gathering (co-sponsored by our local ASMP chapter). You may remember him from his Photoshop Artistry book series. All in all it was a rewarding evening. Even though I consider myself to be quite accomplished in Photoshop, I found myself listening and takng notes intently: picking up new takes on existing techniques left and right. As a dedcated proponent of ICC Profiles and profiling, I was challenged by his assertion that he feels that, because of the improvement in printer technologies and much better ink and paper quality controls, that the "canned" profiles that come with modern inkjet printers more than adequately do the job. Then he proceeded to show how he uses Photoshop to "correct" one printer's output to match another. This would seem to belie what he had just proposed! That's the purpose of profiling - to optimize the printer so that data is portrayed as similarly as possible on any output device. I realize that certain provided profiles are excellent (ie Bill Atkinson's Profesional Epson profiles), but many printers are simoly not consistant enough to have an accurate generic profile.
So my questions are thus:
1) Have you had good luck with canned profiles, if so on what machines?
2) If you are using custom profiles, are you doing them yourselves or using a service like Chromix?
3) Are you using profiles with consumer printers like the small Epson desktop models, and are they working to your satisfaction?
Thanks!
So my questions are thus:
1) Have you had good luck with canned profiles, if so on what machines?
2) If you are using custom profiles, are you doing them yourselves or using a service like Chromix?
3) Are you using profiles with consumer printers like the small Epson desktop models, and are they working to your satisfaction?
Thanks!