Monitor issues??

[philmac2]

Hi all
I use a Hewlett Packard 1907 widescreen monitor which I reguarly calibrate using a Spyder. I use a well-known print company for all my image reproduction and am always finding their images come back somewhat darker than I see on my monitor - this is both anxiety-provoking and frustrating. I then edit each image accordingly and save for future use.
This seems to me to be both time consuming and again frustrating.
How can I attend to this problem in the future?
Ought I purchase a better monitor? (an Eizo S2243 has been recommended but I would need to feel reassured that I would not simply be tranferring my current problems onto a new monitor)
Am I calibrating the brightness incorrectly?

I need to enable my monitor settings and the settings used at the Print Company to talk the same language therefore increase my confidence in print returns especially with new images.

Thanks in anticipation
Phew!!
phil

[chris-p]

It sounds like the profiles used by the print company and your calibration method aren't the same. Have you asked the printers what settings and calibration methods they use?

[philmac2]

Hi, Chris - thanks for the response, appreciated.
I have asked and i remember some time ago (years) being given a profile they use, which did help a wee bit. They encourage me now to send in images (which I have just done) as calibration checks. They can then send back to me two copies, one set will be 'colour corrected' and the other will be left alone. I would much prefer to not have my images corrrected at any stage, truth be told. They then encourage me to calibrate my monitor using a spyder accordingly. However, I never feel its the colour that is the issue rather it is the density of the image that is the problem, they always look like they are two or three stops darker than I would want.
This has been an ongoing issue for me, I am very reluctant to change printers as they have always been fair with me over the years. I simply wonder if I'm not missing something fundamental!!
I find this to be the most anxiety provoking thing of all!!
Regards
phil

[chris-p]

I must admit that I'm not particularly knowledgable about calibration (I don't have a calibrator myself). I agree that it seems a bit odd that, if you're running a fully calibrated and compliant system, the pictures come out darker than you expect.

Does it vary with the type of print (different papers or materials etc)?

[Forseti]

Originally Posted by philmac2

Hi all
Am I calibrating the brightness incorrectly?

Quite possibly Phil. Ideally your monitor should be calibrated to a luminance value of 120 and a gamma value of 2.2 (1.8 on Macs for some reason or other).

[philmac2]

Originally Posted by Forseti

Quite possibly Phil. Ideally your monitor should be calibrated to a luminance value of 120 and a gamma value of 2.2 (1.8 on Macs for some reason or other).

Hi, Forseti
Can this value be predetermined? If so, how please.
And done via the Spyder 2 calibration process or is it an entirley different process?
Regards
phil

[Forseti]

Sorry Phil I can't help you with that one not using the Spyder myself. I use the EyeOne2 and at the beginning of the calibration process one has the option of having the device complete an auto calibration or you have the option of setting things manually. I don't opt for the auto function because it uses the monitors native white point which I find far too bright. I'd check the instructions once again and/or the support site for the Spyder because I feel sure that there must be an option of the user setting both the luminance and gamma manually.

Edit: I've just checked colourvisions site for myself and their is a pdf file there showing the screen setup for the Spyder 3 - presumeably the latest model. Yes, it would appear that from the beginning of the calibration process you are able to enter values manually. You want a white point of 6500K, Luminance of 120 and a gamma of 2.2 (1.8 if on a Mac).

[KeithT]

Why not change your print company. I use One Vision Imaging for all my prints which come back perfect. In fact, if you email them they will usually send you a proof first if you arrange it, usually a 9x6 before printing the final image. They have done this for me more than once and haven't charged. They use an optical print method rather than ink and this also eliminates the dreaded magenta cast you get with b/w. The odd thing is they are a pro lab, but their prices are incredibly reasonable and the finish exceptional. See here: http://www.onevisionimaging.com/

[Oly Paul]

The Spider2 (which I have) does not calibrate the brightness and it recomends that all monitor controls are set to default. Saying that the easiest way is to get a test print and digital file from your printing company (which i did) and match the brightness manually.This works for me and strangly enough and as a bonus also produces prints of the correct brightness on my Epson printer as well.

Since getting Windows 7 and a new LG monitor I find the inbuilt calibration of the monitor works better than my Spider 2 did, its suprising how good monitors are these days

[KeithT]

I agree with Oly. I have a HP w2207 monitor which is superb for photo editing and has its own photo editing setting. Now with Windows 7 colour calibration being very good too, I can calibrate before each photoshop session with ease. Worth having W7 just for that.