Canon i9900 Printer Profile

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

x-posted to comp.periphs.printers

Evening All,

About a week ago I was asking about printers and the consensus /
recommendation was for the Canon i9900. Found one in-stock today at a local
store so I brought it home with me this evening and started playing with it
(belated Christmas gift...;-).

Although I have some matte and glossy papers the Cannon came with a small
sample pack of Photo Paper Pro and what a difference it makes! My problem
now is the typical color management one but here's an oddity for you. I use
PS CS and have an LCD monitor which was set using the Adobe Gamma setup.
Prior to getting this printer, I would edit my prints using the standard
Adobe profile (default setting) and my camera is set for the Adobe profile.
I would burn the files to a CD and off to my local photo shop where the
owner has a dye-sub printer ($500 variety but I don't recall the name of
it). Whenever he prints my 8x10's he uses PS v7 and the imbedded profile in
the files I gave him. Pictures have come out spot on. I can hold an 8x10
print from him up to my screen and if there's any difference, I can't tell
you what it is.

So now enters the Canon i9900 which uses dye inks, I'm using the Canon
glossy paper and the same Adobe profile and the prints are not even close.
Canon has several profiles to select from (PR1, PR2, MP1, SP2 and several
Adobe plus some others) and I tried all but SP2 - ran out of paper
tonight.....

So without a Spyder monitor / printer calibration (or other model) what is
the drill here to start narrowing down the difference? Not everyone in the
world uses a monitor calibrator, and they get their prints to match their
monitor - somehow. Trial and error but where do I start? I need a test
photo from my printer that I can then hold up to my monitor and adjust and
I'm assuming that must be a standard of some sort that I should be able to
download and print straight from a file without any adjustments - no?

I'll be checking the Canon site tomorrow as well as the many Help files but
knowing that probably a few of you have been down this road once or twice,
you just might have some sage advice to pass along.

Appreciate your help,

Bob S.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Bill,

Yes I did but I was using some GP Image Plus+ glossy paper and got some
heavy tinting. Decided to go into PS and use the sample pack of paper Canon
included. I've found several sites that have some advice about setting up a
color profile with the obvious statements of "you really should have a
hardware/software monitor calibrator".

Bob S.


"Bill Crocker" <wcrocker007@comcast.net> wrote in message
newsL6dnZOpaIcHUk3cRVn-2g@comcast.com...
> Have you tried printing from Canon's Easy-PhotoPrint (that came with the
> printer)? It might surprise you!
>
> Bill Crocker
>
>
> "BobS" <spam@eliminator.com> wrote in message
> news:M14Ad.46576$DQ3.36927@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> > x-posted to comp.periphs.printers
> >
> > Evening All,
> >
> > About a week ago I was asking about printers and the consensus /
> > recommendation was for the Canon i9900. Found one in-stock today at a
> > local
> > store so I brought it home with me this evening and started playing with
> > it
> > (belated Christmas gift...;-).
> >
> > Although I have some matte and glossy papers the Cannon came with a
small
> > sample pack of Photo Paper Pro and what a difference it makes! My
problem
> > now is the typical color management one but here's an oddity for you. I
> > use
> > PS CS and have an LCD monitor which was set using the Adobe Gamma setup.
> > Prior to getting this printer, I would edit my prints using the standard
> > Adobe profile (default setting) and my camera is set for the Adobe
> > profile.
> > I would burn the files to a CD and off to my local photo shop where the
> > owner has a dye-sub printer ($500 variety but I don't recall the name of
> > it). Whenever he prints my 8x10's he uses PS v7 and the imbedded
profile
> > in
> > the files I gave him. Pictures have come out spot on. I can hold an
8x10
> > print from him up to my screen and if there's any difference, I can't
tell
> > you what it is.
> >
> > So now enters the Canon i9900 which uses dye inks, I'm using the Canon
> > glossy paper and the same Adobe profile and the prints are not even
close.
> > Canon has several profiles to select from (PR1, PR2, MP1, SP2 and
several
> > Adobe plus some others) and I tried all but SP2 - ran out of paper
> > tonight.....
> >
> > So without a Spyder monitor / printer calibration (or other model) what
is
> > the drill here to start narrowing down the difference? Not everyone in
> > the
> > world uses a monitor calibrator, and they get their prints to match
their
> > monitor - somehow. Trial and error but where do I start? I need a test
> > photo from my printer that I can then hold up to my monitor and adjust
and
> > I'm assuming that must be a standard of some sort that I should be able
to
> > download and print straight from a file without any adjustments - no?
> >
> > I'll be checking the Canon site tomorrow as well as the many Help files
> > but
> > knowing that probably a few of you have been down this road once or
twice,
> > you just might have some sage advice to pass along.
> >
> > Appreciate your help,
> >
> > Bob S.
> >
> >
>
>

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

If you do not calibrate your monitor, preferably a CRT, you really can't do
color management with a high end printer.
Also you have a Canon printer and Canon just does not "get" color management
(personal experience--I love the printers, hate the drivers). Their
procedures are non-intuitive (if your manual does not spell out their
methods e-mail Canon for the instructions) and do not work as reliably as
Epson's: in my experience they are very, very unreliable. For best results
you really need to calibrate the 990 with different paper surfaces,
particularly since Canon only makes matte and glossy paper so those are the
only canned profiles you get with the printer. This is expensive (you need
the calibration hardware) and time consuming.
If your monitor is reasonably accurate, and with an LCD monitor what you are
looking at could be wildly off color and contrast, you would be better off
using the printer driver only and not Adobe color management. Turn off color
management in the print preview.
If your pre-print profile and prints look excessively pink you are using
color management twice somewhere in your workflow. This is a frequent
problem because of Canon's color management procedures.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Thank you to all that responded. Did *a lot* of reading and searching the
web and in the end, I got a ColorVision colorimeter to end the frustration
and wasting of materials. Just finished about an hour ago calibrating my
monitor and selecting the right profiles to use on the printer - and it
works now.

Lessons learned....

1. You may not need the hardware sensor to calibrate your monitor but it
does take the frustration out of the process. It did in 10 minutes what I
couldn't do in two days of putzin around wasting ink and paper.

2. The paper used makes a *significant* difference in the results achieved
and the cheap stuff is only good for snapshots.

3. After finally getting everything aligned / calibrated, the Canon i9900
certainly appears to live up to the reviews I've read and your comments.

4. Some of the ink cartridges for the i9900 (BCI-6) are not readily
available yet at the major stores (Best Buy, CompUSA) - missing the PM and
PC cartridges.

5. Quality paper is 'xpensive.....!

Again, thanks for your help - greatly appreciated,

Bob S.




"BobS" <spam@eliminator.com> wrote in message
news:M14Ad.46576$DQ3.36927@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
> x-posted to comp.periphs.printers
>
> Evening All,
>
> About a week ago I was asking about printers and the consensus /
> recommendation was for the Canon i9900. Found one in-stock today at a
local
> store so I brought it home with me this evening and started playing with
it
> (belated Christmas gift...;-).
>
> Although I have some matte and glossy papers the Cannon came with a small
> sample pack of Photo Paper Pro and what a difference it makes! My problem
> now is the typical color management one but here's an oddity for you. I
use
> PS CS and have an LCD monitor which was set using the Adobe Gamma setup.
> Prior to getting this printer, I would edit my prints using the standard
> Adobe profile (default setting) and my camera is set for the Adobe
profile.
> I would burn the files to a CD and off to my local photo shop where the
> owner has a dye-sub printer ($500 variety but I don't recall the name of
> it). Whenever he prints my 8x10's he uses PS v7 and the imbedded profile
in
> the files I gave him. Pictures have come out spot on. I can hold an 8x10
> print from him up to my screen and if there's any difference, I can't tell
> you what it is.
>
> So now enters the Canon i9900 which uses dye inks, I'm using the Canon
> glossy paper and the same Adobe profile and the prints are not even close.
> Canon has several profiles to select from (PR1, PR2, MP1, SP2 and several
> Adobe plus some others) and I tried all but SP2 - ran out of paper
> tonight.....
>
> So without a Spyder monitor / printer calibration (or other model) what is
> the drill here to start narrowing down the difference? Not everyone in
the
> world uses a monitor calibrator, and they get their prints to match their
> monitor - somehow. Trial and error but where do I start? I need a test
> photo from my printer that I can then hold up to my monitor and adjust and
> I'm assuming that must be a standard of some sort that I should be able to
> download and print straight from a file without any adjustments - no?
>
> I'll be checking the Canon site tomorrow as well as the many Help files
but
> knowing that probably a few of you have been down this road once or twice,
> you just might have some sage advice to pass along.
>
> Appreciate your help,
>
> Bob S.
>
>

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hi John,

Back in the good old days........ (B/W), Ilford had some great paper but
today, they're not stocked like the Kodak, Canon, Epson, and Fuji papers and
I can't honestly remember seeing any Ilford papers in a loooong time. I did
check their site.

Thanks,

Bob S.



> You might want to also gander at Ilford's site. They make good profiles
> with excellent directions for a number of printers. I like the Classic
> Pearl, and they even have a profile for the Epson R300 for Mac.....
>
> --
> John McWilliams

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

BobS wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> Back in the good old days........ (B/W), Ilford had some great paper but
> today, they're not stocked like the Kodak, Canon, Epson, and Fuji papers and
> I can't honestly remember seeing any Ilford papers in a loooong time. I did
> check their site.

Did they not have printer profiles for the i9900 on a PC? I know they
have some for the 9500 on Mac .... oh o.k., I just went there. They do
have 'em for your printer on a PC.
<http://ilford.com/html/us_english/prod_html/Galerie/IJProfiles/default.asp?RIP=PC&Printer=Canon+i9900%2F9950&Ink=Canon+Dye&Submit.x=24&Submit.y=15
Or just go to Ilford.com and navigate.

As to the paper itself, at least in the SF Bay Area, good photog shops
carry it. I think you'll be pleased with the paper and certainly the
directions.

--
John McWilliams

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ben,

Thanks for your observations on the papers. I did pick up some of Kodak's
latest "Ultima" glossy and although I haven't made that many prints with it
yet - I've not noticed any problems. I agree with your observation though
about the Canon paper providing the best looking prints - so far. So many
papers - so little time...;-)

As for that panorama - take a look at the Epson SP4000
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/ [...] date.shtml .
I gave this some serious consideration but could not find one anyplace
around so I could touch 'n feel - and for $1800 USD I want to see a print
being made. It is perhaps a bit over the top for hobby use but I was
considering doing some "outsource" work for others if I did go with that
printer. As it is, I have a number of family and friends lining up to use
this Canon printer! Can't wait to try it at the 13"x19" (33cm x 48cm)
size - that should put the snapshots to shame....

Bob S.


> Hi Bob,
>
> I've tried Ilford paper with my i9950 (an i9900 with CD printing
capability)
> and I found that the ink pools. I've seen the same thing happen on HP
paper (in
> a much worse fashion) and also on Kodak paper. The Canon Paper is the only
stuff
> I can use that results in perfectly sharp prints.
>
> I was not expecting to be able to see the printer dots seeing as the i9950
has a
> 2 picolitre droplet size, yet I can. I suspect I won't upgrade until Canon
> offers an A3+ width printer that can do 1 metre or longer prints for some
nice
> big panoramas.
>
> --
> --
> Ben Thomas - Software Engineer - Melbourne, Australia
>
> My Digital World:
> Kodak DX6490, Canon i9950, Pioneer A05;
> Hitachi 37" HD plasma display, DGTEC 2000A,
> Denon 2800, H/K AVR4500, Whatmough Encore;
> Sony Ericsson K700i, Palm Tungsten T.
>
> Disclaimer:
> Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
> relate to the official business of my employer shall be understood as
neither
> given nor endorsed by it.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Ben Thomas" <nosp@m.thanks.mate> wrote in message
news:46avqc.9nl.ln@192.168.11.2...
> BobS wrote:
> > Hi John,
> >
> > Back in the good old days........ (B/W), Ilford had some great paper but
> > today, they're not stocked like the Kodak, Canon, Epson, and Fuji papers
and
> > I can't honestly remember seeing any Ilford papers in a loooong time. I
did
> > check their site.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Bob S.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>You might want to also gander at Ilford's site. They make good profiles
> >>with excellent directions for a number of printers. I like the Classic
> >>Pearl, and they even have a profile for the Epson R300 for Mac.....
> >>
> >>--
> >>John McWilliams
> >
> >
> >
>
> Hi Bob,
>
> I've tried Ilford paper with my i9950 (an i9900 with CD printing
capability)
> and I found that the ink pools. I've seen the same thing happen on HP
paper (in
> a much worse fashion) and also on Kodak paper. The Canon Paper is the only
stuff
> I can use that results in perfectly sharp prints.

I've been using the Ilford Classic Pearl with my 9900 and have been getting
great results. I set it for "glossy photo paper".

>
> I was not expecting to be able to see the printer dots seeing as the i9950
has a
> 2 picolitre droplet size, yet I can. I suspect I won't upgrade until Canon
> offers an A3+ width printer that can do 1 metre or longer prints for some
nice
> big panoramas.
>
> --
> --
> Ben Thomas - Software Engineer - Melbourne, Australia
>
> My Digital World:
> Kodak DX6490, Canon i9950, Pioneer A05;
> Hitachi 37" HD plasma display, DGTEC 2000A,
> Denon 2800, H/K AVR4500, Whatmough Encore;
> Sony Ericsson K700i, Palm Tungsten T.
>
> Disclaimer:
> Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
> relate to the official business of my employer shall be understood as
neither
> given nor endorsed by it.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>
>I've tried Ilford paper with my i9950 (an i9900 with CD printing capability)
>and I found that the ink pools. I've seen the same thing happen on HP paper (in
>a much worse fashion) and also on Kodak paper. The Canon Paper is the only stuff
>I can use that results in perfectly sharp prints.
>
>I was not expecting to be able to see the printer dots seeing as the i9950 has a
>2 picolitre droplet size, yet I can. I suspect I won't upgrade until Canon
>offers an A3+ width printer that can do 1 metre or longer prints for some nice
>big panoramas.
>
>--

Which Ilford paper?

I've used the Galerie Glossy (purple box) with great success on the
i9900. There is a different Ilford Galerie Glossy paper designed for
HP style printers, too. It has a different absorbtion rate.

I've had exactly the same problem with the HP paper,

Philip

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <m5o1rc.6p.ln@192.168.11.2>, Ben Thomas <nosp@m.thanks.mate>
wrote:

> Philip Procter wrote:
> >>I've tried Ilford paper with my i9950 (an i9900 with CD printing
> >>capability)
> >>and I found that the ink pools. I've seen the same thing happen on HP paper
> >>(in
> >>a much worse fashion) and also on Kodak paper. The Canon Paper is the only
> >>stuff
> >>I can use that results in perfectly sharp prints.
> >>
> >>I was not expecting to be able to see the printer dots seeing as the i9950
> >>has a
> >>2 picolitre droplet size, yet I can. I suspect I won't upgrade until Canon
> >>offers an A3+ width printer that can do 1 metre or longer prints for some
> >>nice
> >>big panoramas.
> >>
> >>--
> >
> >
> > Which Ilford paper?
>
> Classic Pearl and Smooth Pearl. I'm reluctant to try the gloss if the pearl
> doesn't work.
>
> >
> > I've used the Galerie Glossy (purple box) with great success on the
> > i9900. There is a different Ilford Galerie Glossy paper designed for
> > HP style printers, too. It has a different absorbtion rate.
> >
> > I've had exactly the same problem with the HP paper,
> >
> > Philip

I use both the Canon 9900 and the Epson 1280 with Tetenal Spectrajet
Premium Glossy 290gm super high gloss as well as Tetenal Spectra Jet
Canvas 350gm and Tetenal Spectra Jet Pearl Luster 240gm and dup Print
Matte/Matte 130 gm with absolutely no problems on either machine other
then the canvas is much easier to run through the Canon then the Epson.
I have also run some Tetenal Spectra Jet Fine Art Aquarell water color
paper, 230 gm, through both with no problems other then more relaible
feeding on the Canon.

No pooling of inks, no bronzing, no smudging.

--
To reply no_ HPMarketing Corp.