Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (
More info?)
"measekite" <inkystinky@oem.com> wrote in message
news:YRmue.2774$Bx6.488@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
>
> Burt wrote:
>
>>Satoshi - The two light dye load inks, photo magenta and photo cyan, are
>>used up faster than the other inks under normal circumstances when
>>printing most photos. I have a Canon i960 and especially with pictures
>>that have people with skin tones that are more red than average I either
>>adjust the overall intensity to -4 or -6, or I adjust the magenta to a
>>minus value that gives the best print. I have seen one post that
>>suggested -7 setting for Magenta. Do not use the two higher quality paper
>>settings - stay with the glossy photo paper setting as you described.
>>Print all pictures in manual color setting. I found that the automatic
>>setting came up very red. You may or may not have to adjust the intensity
>>or magenta as described above. I use photoshop elements 2 and calibrated
>>my monitor with the adobe gamma program. When I first bought the printer
>>I played with various settings and papers to get the best color balance to
>>my eye. When I started using non-OEM inks I redid my tests and found that
>>the test prints were comparable to the OEM inks with every combination of
>>settings and papers.
>
> I guess the word comparable does not mean nearly exact.
Nearly exact is an oxymoron. Exact is exact. To state that they are
exactly the same would have required evaluation with extremely sophisticated
equipment. I use the word comparable because to the naked eye (I can't wait
to see how Measekite twists this phrase) the photos I have printed with OEM
and with MIS inks both look the same, absent close scientific evaluation.
One or another of the areas may look very slightly more or less saturated or
very slightly more or less yellow, magenta, or cyan, but the key word here
is that the differences are so slight as to beg a closer evaluation. I am
not concerned if the OEM and MIS inks are or are not EXACTLY the same. Both
make extremely pleasing prints that reflect, as well as can be expected
without sophisticated customizing of the color profiles of monitor, printer,
camera, and paper/ink combinations, the colors of the original scenes. It is
apparent that Canon's profiles need a little adjustment with some of their
printers, but, in their "wisdom" they made a manual setting with adjustment
capability.
For those of us who were involved with color photography before the era of
point and shoot automatic cameras and the overwhelming use of Kodak 100,
200, or 400 negative film, we are acutely aware of the leaning of certain
films to the blue spectrum, others with oversaturated colors, etc. The
original 10 ASA Kodachrome slide material produced beautiful, albeit
oversaturated color slides. The first Ektachrome 25 ASA slide material had
a not so subtle shift to blues. We bought Pro packs of color negative film
(20 rolls, as I recall) and shot test prints of a known color chart to zero
in on that particular batch of film's characteristics before using it in the
field. The other 19 rolls were then stored in the refrigerator until used
as there could be color shifts with less-than-ideal storage conditions. I
mention all of this to reflect on Measekite's criticism that I did not say
the ink color matches were EXACT. Nothing in photograpy is EXACT, and
everything has to be tested and calibrated, even the most highly rated
professional negative film. Users of any ink, even OEM inks, must know that
different batches will almost never be EXACT, but they will, hopefully, be
pretty damned close. In other words, close enough that there is no
difference to the naked eye. I think this is where I started. Can we stop
beating this one to death?
>
>> I presently use Costco Kirkland glossy photo paper with an :-(
>> aftermarket :-( ink and the settings I described above. Someone else
>> answered your post with the suggestion that you may have more than one
>> software program trying to adjust your colors. If the settings I
>> suggested don't help[ then that may be your problem.
>>
>>"Satoshi" <machocraig@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:d9c1a8$mmp$1@reader2.nmix.net...
>>
>>>I am printing outdoor pictures on Canon i950 using Canon Glossy Photo
>>>Paper. On screen, pictures were sharp and great. When printed, pictures
>>>were reddish overall. Black stuff came out purple on prints. (All
>>>pictures were taken with Sony 5 MP digicam.). I don't see any problem
>>>with camera and screen color.
>>>
>>>Using Photoshop, I tried to change the color balance: I changed color
>>>level from red to cyan ( to the level of cyan -60). Printed pictures
>>>were still reddish, though less reddish this time. I am wondering what
>>>is the problem? Should I change magenta ink cartridge or print head?
>>>Need your help. Satoshi
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
Diue.127255$a67.7010345@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram