Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

suggestions for color calibration?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 10:14:09 AM

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

I take pictures on my Nikon D70 and try to print pics on my Epson 1280
printer. But the color is horrible! And yes, I've checked that the
nozzles are clean, etc. and I'm using Epson ink.

So.... I want to use some kind of color calibration
hardware/software/whatever. What do you suggest? I looked at xrite
(Monaco) on their website, but I can't figure out if they have a product
that will let me easily calibrate from the camera to the printer. I see you
can calibrate from the monitor to the printer, but that's only half the
battle. It seems that I need to calibrate from the camera to the printer.
Anyway, what do you suggest?
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 10:14:10 AM

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

Sorry to ask the obvious, but..

1. Are you using Epson photo-quality paper, and if so, which one/s?
Have you told the printer driver which paper you are using?

2. Have you played around with any colour configuration/profile
settings on your system/printer driver or camera?

3. Are you using a calibrated (at least gamma-calibrated) monitor, and
is it LCD or CRT?

The answers to those questions could be very important indeed - out of
the box, on a reasonably calibrated monitor, that printer should give
pretty dam good results on Epson photo paper...

I suggest you go directly to:

http://normankoren.com/makingfineprints.html
Do not pass Go, do not collect $200...
January 9, 2005 10:14:10 AM

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

AFN wrote:

> I take pictures on my Nikon D70 and try to print pics on my Epson 1280
> printer. But the color is horrible! And yes, I've checked that the
> nozzles are clean, etc. and I'm using Epson ink.
>
> So.... I want to use some kind of color calibration
> hardware/software/whatever. What do you suggest? I looked at xrite
> (Monaco) on their website, but I can't figure out if they have a product
> that will let me easily calibrate from the camera to the printer. I see
> you can calibrate from the monitor to the printer, but that's only half
> the
> battle. It seems that I need to calibrate from the camera to the printer.
> Anyway, what do you suggest?


What application are you printing from? Some seem to totally screw up the
colors while other print perfect. I found if I have the same color space
used from capture to printing with the icc profiles defined right in the
software, it prints just like the screen and the labs prints look just like
my inkjets. I'm using PS7 and a canon 8200 printer.

So I guess what I'm asking is, do the pictures on the monitor look close to
the ones on the camera LCD? Is the WB on the camera set right? Are you
shooting in camera Jpegs or raw? From what I've gathered, the main thing is
to get the monitor and the printer to agree with each other. At least then
you know what you see is going to be how the print looks. My guess is the
monitor looks like the camera but the printer doesn't agree with the
monitor. This is most likely because the printing application isn't seeing
the printer icm/icc profile correctly. You might try some different
printing apps and see if this resolves the problem. If a trial version of
PS (setup right) doesn't print close, you got a weird problem!

--

Stacey
Related resources
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 10:31:18 AM

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

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 07:14:09 GMT, in rec.photo.digital "AFN"
<newsDELETETHECAPSgroupaccount@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote:

>I take pictures on my Nikon D70 and try to print pics on my Epson 1280
>printer. But the color is horrible! And yes, I've checked that the
>nozzles are clean, etc. and I'm using Epson ink.

You haven't upgraded to SP2 under XP have you? Somehow this wrecks havoc on
a lot of Epson printer drivers. Go to the Epson site and dl the corrected
one.
________________________________________________________
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 12:59:31 PM

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

"AFN" <newsDELETETHECAPSgroupaccount@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in
news:5R4Ed.54688$nP1.43766@twister.socal.rr.com:

> I take pictures on my Nikon D70 and try to print pics on my Epson 1280
> printer. But the color is horrible! And yes, I've checked that the
> nozzles are clean, etc. and I'm using Epson ink.
>
> So.... I want to use some kind of color calibration
> hardware/software/whatever. What do you suggest? I looked at xrite
> (Monaco) on their website, but I can't figure out if they have a
> product that will let me easily calibrate from the camera to the
> printer. I see you can calibrate from the monitor to the printer, but
> that's only half the battle. It seems that I need to calibrate from
> the camera to the printer. Anyway, what do you suggest?

It all depends on what you mean with "color is horrible".
If they truly are totally horrible - then something is wrong.
If they don't fullfill your expectations regarding correct color,
then color profiling would be in place.

Color profiling from camera to print is VERY difficult.
It is almost impossible without having total control over
the lightning situation. It is absolutely, totally, 100%
impossible if you use automatic white balance on the camera.

So - I would say that for most paractical purposes, it is
color profiling from monitor to print that is the only useful,
for most of us.

Then you must have a profiled monitor. Spyder is a reasonable
priced solution.

You also must have a profiled printer. This is more troublesome.
The only really working solutions IMHO are those based on (very
expensive) spectral analyzers. Those systems that are based
upon scanners do not work. They are toys, even PrintFIX from
ColorVision.

Fortunately (for me) the Canon i9100 I have does alread have a good
profile and the printing is very independent of paper.


/Roland
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 2:55:14 PM

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

I just set up my spyder and print fix last night. I was having similar
problems with my i9900 in that the colors just seemed to be off from the
monitor.

I was able to justify the system because everyone in the family got
cameras for christmas. There are now 3 different color printers to
worry about. My first big print of the kids snowboarding showed a red
jacket that was more purple and skintones that were off also.

The spyder is realatively easy to use and (you must read the directions
and follow them) the only problem I had with print fix is while reading
the directions I missed one step in printing out the test patch. Once I
did that my next test print was right on from the monitor.

My next step is to find a white card to up in my camera bag inorder to
adjust the color balance of my D70 when I'm shooting in odd lighting.

Roland Karlsson wrote:
> "AFN" <newsDELETETHECAPSgroupaccount@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in
> news:5R4Ed.54688$nP1.43766@twister.socal.rr.com:
>
>
>>I take pictures on my Nikon D70 and try to print pics on my Epson 1280
>>printer. But the color is horrible! And yes, I've checked that the
>>nozzles are clean, etc. and I'm using Epson ink.
>>
>>So.... I want to use some kind of color calibration
>>hardware/software/whatever. What do you suggest? I looked at xrite
>>(Monaco) on their website, but I can't figure out if they have a
>>product that will let me easily calibrate from the camera to the
>>printer. I see you can calibrate from the monitor to the printer, but
>>that's only half the battle. It seems that I need to calibrate from
>>the camera to the printer. Anyway, what do you suggest?
>
>
> It all depends on what you mean with "color is horrible".
> If they truly are totally horrible - then something is wrong.
> If they don't fullfill your expectations regarding correct color,
> then color profiling would be in place.
>
> Color profiling from camera to print is VERY difficult.
> It is almost impossible without having total control over
> the lightning situation. It is absolutely, totally, 100%
> impossible if you use automatic white balance on the camera.
>
> So - I would say that for most paractical purposes, it is
> color profiling from monitor to print that is the only useful,
> for most of us.
>
> Then you must have a profiled monitor. Spyder is a reasonable
> priced solution.
>
> You also must have a profiled printer. This is more troublesome.
> The only really working solutions IMHO are those based on (very
> expensive) spectral analyzers. Those systems that are based
> upon scanners do not work. They are toys, even PrintFIX from
> ColorVision.
>
> Fortunately (for me) the Canon i9100 I have does alread have a good
> profile and the printing is very independent of paper.
>
>
> /Roland
January 9, 2005 3:44:31 PM

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

Colour Management seems very complicated, but once you have got the basic
principles into your head, it becomes very much easier.

In most cases it can be done fairly accurately, without resorting to
expensive tools.

The biggest problem, nowadays, is the use of a non CRT monitor. To the best
of my knowledge none of the reasonably priced Flat Panels, or Laptop Screens
can be calibrated, or even adjusted for colour temperature, contrast or
brightness. All of those need to be done when Calibrating.

If you are using Photoshop, or P'shop Elements, you will already have Adobe
Gamma installed in your Control Panel, and that can make a pretty good job
of producing a Monitor Profile, if some care is taken.

You will also need the Media (Paper) Specific Profiles for your Epson 1280,
and these can be downloaded from Epson. The last time I looked, Epson Europe
does not have Profiles for download, but Epson Australia does.

Your D70 will have installed its Profile onto your system, along with its
Software.

Photoshop, and other good Imaging Programs, will use the D70 profile when it
Imports images, and will use your Monitor Profile to display the Images, and
can use your Media Specific Profiles when transferring data to your Printer.
The thing to watch, is that you do not allow both the Imaging Program and
the Printer Software to Colour Manage. It should only be done by one or the
other - NOT BOTH.

Have a look at www.ayrphoto.co.uk and go to the "Notices and Info" Page, and
open the article on Colour Printing.

Roy



"Roland Karlsson" <roland_dot_karlsson@bonetmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns95D96FD16FF51klotjohan@130.133.1.4...
> "AFN" <newsDELETETHECAPSgroupaccount@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in
> news:5R4Ed.54688$nP1.43766@twister.socal.rr.com:
>
>> I take pictures on my Nikon D70 and try to print pics on my Epson 1280
>> printer. But the color is horrible! And yes, I've checked that the
>> nozzles are clean, etc. and I'm using Epson ink.
>>
>> So.... I want to use some kind of color calibration
>> hardware/software/whatever. What do you suggest? I looked at xrite
>> (Monaco) on their website, but I can't figure out if they have a
>> product that will let me easily calibrate from the camera to the
>> printer. I see you can calibrate from the monitor to the printer, but
>> that's only half the battle. It seems that I need to calibrate from
>> the camera to the printer. Anyway, what do you suggest?
>
> It all depends on what you mean with "color is horrible".
> If they truly are totally horrible - then something is wrong.
> If they don't fullfill your expectations regarding correct color,
> then color profiling would be in place.
>
> Color profiling from camera to print is VERY difficult.
> It is almost impossible without having total control over
> the lightning situation. It is absolutely, totally, 100%
> impossible if you use automatic white balance on the camera.
>
> So - I would say that for most paractical purposes, it is
> color profiling from monitor to print that is the only useful,
> for most of us.
>
> Then you must have a profiled monitor. Spyder is a reasonable
> priced solution.
>
> You also must have a profiled printer. This is more troublesome.
> The only really working solutions IMHO are those based on (very
> expensive) spectral analyzers. Those systems that are based
> upon scanners do not work. They are toys, even PrintFIX from
> ColorVision.
>
> Fortunately (for me) the Canon i9100 I have does alread have a good
> profile and the printing is very independent of paper.
>
>
> /Roland
January 9, 2005 3:56:42 PM

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

I should have said, when talking about NOT allowing both the Program and the
Printer to Colour Manage, that restriction applies to the Printing stage
only.

The Program will Colour Manage from the Camera or Scanner to the Display,
and can also Colour Manage the Printing. OR the Printing Colour Management
can be left to the Printer only.

Roy


"Roy" <royphoty@iona-guesthouse.co.uk> wrote in message
news:p G9Ed.56$4J5.32@newsfe5-gui.ntli.net...
> Colour Management seems very complicated, but once you have got the basic
> principles into your head, it becomes very much easier.
>
> In most cases it can be done fairly accurately, without resorting to
> expensive tools.
>
> The biggest problem, nowadays, is the use of a non CRT monitor. To the
> best of my knowledge none of the reasonably priced Flat Panels, or Laptop
> Screens can be calibrated, or even adjusted for colour temperature,
> contrast or brightness. All of those need to be done when Calibrating.
>
> If you are using Photoshop, or P'shop Elements, you will already have
> Adobe Gamma installed in your Control Panel, and that can make a pretty
> good job of producing a Monitor Profile, if some care is taken.
>
> You will also need the Media (Paper) Specific Profiles for your Epson
> 1280, and these can be downloaded from Epson. The last time I looked,
> Epson Europe does not have Profiles for download, but Epson Australia
> does.
>
> Your D70 will have installed its Profile onto your system, along with its
> Software.
>
> Photoshop, and other good Imaging Programs, will use the D70 profile when
> it Imports images, and will use your Monitor Profile to display the
> Images, and can use your Media Specific Profiles when transferring data to
> your Printer. The thing to watch, is that you do not allow both the
> Imaging Program and the Printer Software to Colour Manage. It should only
> be done by one or the other - NOT BOTH.
>
> Have a look at www.ayrphoto.co.uk and go to the "Notices and Info" Page,
> and open the article on Colour Printing.
>
> Roy
>
>
>
> "Roland Karlsson" <roland_dot_karlsson@bonetmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns95D96FD16FF51klotjohan@130.133.1.4...
>> "AFN" <newsDELETETHECAPSgroupaccount@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in
>> news:5R4Ed.54688$nP1.43766@twister.socal.rr.com:
>>
>>> I take pictures on my Nikon D70 and try to print pics on my Epson 1280
>>> printer. But the color is horrible! And yes, I've checked that the
>>> nozzles are clean, etc. and I'm using Epson ink.
>>>
>>> So.... I want to use some kind of color calibration
>>> hardware/software/whatever. What do you suggest? I looked at xrite
>>> (Monaco) on their website, but I can't figure out if they have a
>>> product that will let me easily calibrate from the camera to the
>>> printer. I see you can calibrate from the monitor to the printer, but
>>> that's only half the battle. It seems that I need to calibrate from
>>> the camera to the printer. Anyway, what do you suggest?
>>
>> It all depends on what you mean with "color is horrible".
>> If they truly are totally horrible - then something is wrong.
>> If they don't fullfill your expectations regarding correct color,
>> then color profiling would be in place.
>>
>> Color profiling from camera to print is VERY difficult.
>> It is almost impossible without having total control over
>> the lightning situation. It is absolutely, totally, 100%
>> impossible if you use automatic white balance on the camera.
>>
>> So - I would say that for most paractical purposes, it is
>> color profiling from monitor to print that is the only useful,
>> for most of us.
>>
>> Then you must have a profiled monitor. Spyder is a reasonable
>> priced solution.
>>
>> You also must have a profiled printer. This is more troublesome.
>> The only really working solutions IMHO are those based on (very
>> expensive) spectral analyzers. Those systems that are based
>> upon scanners do not work. They are toys, even PrintFIX from
>> ColorVision.
>>
>> Fortunately (for me) the Canon i9100 I have does alread have a good
>> profile and the printing is very independent of paper.
>>
>>
>> /Roland
>
>
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 4:57:43 PM

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

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 13:43:41 -0500, in rec.photo.digital Ed Ruf
<egruf_usenet@cox.net> wrote:

>First try simply using ICM. If you haven't set up color management in PS,
>set it up in the printer driver.
>
>Choose Printing Preferences for your 1280. On the Main tab choose your
>paper and then for the Mode option choose Custom and click the advanced
>button. Under Color Management you can choose ICM which will try and match
>the colors on the screen or sRGB, which is the default color space used by
>the D70. Give both of these a try. I'm assuming here the 1280 driver is
>similar to my 1270 driver.

You should also try using the print preview option of the driver and see if
this reflects what you get out of the printer.
________________________________________________________
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 8:37:40 PM

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

1. Yes, I'm using Epson paper - glossy premium, and yes, the printer driver
knows

2. I haven't really changed anything but I've talked to Epson and confirmed
that the settings are pretty correct. Epson blames this problem on the D70
not giving a profile

3. The colors look pretty good on the monitor but I haven't done anything
specifically to calibrate the monitor. I have a dual monitor setup, one
being CRT and the other LCD.



<chrlz@go.com> wrote in message
news:1105257746.839371.213630@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Sorry to ask the obvious, but..
>
> 1. Are you using Epson photo-quality paper, and if so, which one/s?
> Have you told the printer driver which paper you are using?
>
> 2. Have you played around with any colour configuration/profile
> settings on your system/printer driver or camera?
>
> 3. Are you using a calibrated (at least gamma-calibrated) monitor, and
> is it LCD or CRT?
>
> The answers to those questions could be very important indeed - out of
> the box, on a reasonably calibrated monitor, that printer should give
> pretty dam good results on Epson photo paper...
>
> I suggest you go directly to:
>
> http://normankoren.com/makingfineprints.html
> Do not pass Go, do not collect $200...
>
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 8:37:41 PM

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

AFN wrote:
>
> 1. Yes, I'm using Epson paper - glossy premium, and yes, the printer driver
> knows
>
> 2. I haven't really changed anything but I've talked to Epson and confirmed
> that the settings are pretty correct. Epson blames this problem on the D70
> not giving a profile
>
> 3. The colors look pretty good on the monitor but I haven't done anything
> specifically to calibrate the monitor. I have a dual monitor setup, one
> being CRT and the other LCD.

the first step is being sure that the monitor is correct.
for a first test, look at
http://www.vircen.com/rpd/new%20greyscale.jpg

if you can see that each of the steps
from black to white is different from the ones next to it,
and all the steps are grey, not colored, then your monitor is close.

the Spyder from colorvision will fix any problem if there is one.
any image should now look correct on your monitor.

if the printed image does not match the monitor,
you need to profile your printer / paper / ink set.

>
> <chrlz@go.com> wrote in message
> news:1105257746.839371.213630@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > Sorry to ask the obvious, but..
> >
> > 1. Are you using Epson photo-quality paper, and if so, which one/s?
> > Have you told the printer driver which paper you are using?
> >
> > 2. Have you played around with any colour configuration/profile
> > settings on your system/printer driver or camera?
> >
> > 3. Are you using a calibrated (at least gamma-calibrated) monitor, and
> > is it LCD or CRT?
> >
> > The answers to those questions could be very important indeed - out of
> > the box, on a reasonably calibrated monitor, that printer should give
> > pretty dam good results on Epson photo paper...
> >
> > I suggest you go directly to:
> >
> > http://normankoren.com/makingfineprints.html
> > Do not pass Go, do not collect $200...
> >
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 8:39:45 PM

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

"Roland Karlsson" <roland_dot_karlsson@bonetmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns95D96FD16FF51klotjohan@130.133.1.4...
> "AFN" <newsDELETETHECAPSgroupaccount@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in
> news:5R4Ed.54688$nP1.43766@twister.socal.rr.com:
>
> > I take pictures on my Nikon D70 and try to print pics on my Epson 1280
> > printer. But the color is horrible! And yes, I've checked that the
> > nozzles are clean, etc. and I'm using Epson ink.
> >
> > So.... I want to use some kind of color calibration
> > hardware/software/whatever. What do you suggest? I looked at xrite
> > (Monaco) on their website, but I can't figure out if they have a
> > product that will let me easily calibrate from the camera to the
> > printer. I see you can calibrate from the monitor to the printer, but
> > that's only half the battle. It seems that I need to calibrate from
> > the camera to the printer. Anyway, what do you suggest?
>
> It all depends on what you mean with "color is horrible".
> If they truly are totally horrible - then something is wrong.
> If they don't fullfill your expectations regarding correct color,
> then color profiling would be in place.
>
> Color profiling from camera to print is VERY difficult.
> It is almost impossible without having total control over
> the lightning situation. It is absolutely, totally, 100%
> impossible if you use automatic white balance on the camera.
>
> So - I would say that for most paractical purposes, it is
> color profiling from monitor to print that is the only useful,
> for most of us.
>
> Then you must have a profiled monitor. Spyder is a reasonable
> priced solution.
>
> You also must have a profiled printer. This is more troublesome.
> The only really working solutions IMHO are those based on (very
> expensive) spectral analyzers. Those systems that are based
> upon scanners do not work. They are toys, even PrintFIX from
> ColorVision.
>
> Fortunately (for me) the Canon i9100 I have does alread have a good
> profile and the printing is very independent of paper.
>
>
> /Roland



When I say that the color is horrible, I mean that the printer is
functioning but the colors are off. Epson has gone through this with me but
blames Nikon. Gee, isn't that nice. Someone with blond hair will have
blondish-red hair on the printout. If you didn't know the person, you might
think it's natural, but if you saw the original person, you'd say it was
"off".
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 8:39:46 PM

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

AFN wrote:
> When I say that the color is horrible, I mean that the printer is
> functioning but the colors are off. Epson has gone through this with me but
> blames Nikon. Gee, isn't that nice. Someone with blond hair will have
> blondish-red hair on the printout. If you didn't know the person, you might
> think it's natural, but if you saw the original person, you'd say it was
> "off".

The preview on the camera is too small, and uses different algorithms
for its display, to make any meaningful comparisons between it and what
the monitor shows. This in turn suggests that your monitor is off. Maybe
way off.

Color management is the answer, but a long one.

--
John McWilliams
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 9:49:45 PM

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

"AFN" <newsDELETETHECAPSgroupaccount@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in
news:B%dEd.54714$nP1.33582@twister.socal.rr.com:

> When I say that the color is horrible, I mean that the printer is
> functioning but the colors are off. Epson has gone through this with
> me but blames Nikon. Gee, isn't that nice. Someone with blond hair
> will have blondish-red hair on the printout. If you didn't know the
> person, you might think it's natural, but if you saw the original
> person, you'd say it was "off".
>

OK - Epson might be right.

It is almost impossible to make a system where you just can take
pictures, print them and get the correct colors. What was the
settings on your camera when you took the pictures? Was it auto
white balance? In that case - you might get almost anything.
Was it daylight and the picture was taken in the evening, just
before the sun sets. In that case, the picture will be reddish.
Etc, etc ...



/Roland
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 10:14:41 PM

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

I'm thinking of buying the Spyder software/hardware, but here's what leaves
me puzzled...

If my monitor currently shows normal-looking colors, then why should I spent
~$200 calibrating the monitor. It seems that I should spend $25 buying an
ICC profile of my printer instead.

???

"william kossack" <wskossack@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ebCdncMkFMFh4HzcRVn-tg@comcast.com...
> I just set up my spyder and print fix last night. I was having similar
> problems with my i9900 in that the colors just seemed to be off from the
> monitor.
>
> I was able to justify the system because everyone in the family got
> cameras for christmas. There are now 3 different color printers to
> worry about. My first big print of the kids snowboarding showed a red
> jacket that was more purple and skintones that were off also.
>
> The spyder is realatively easy to use and (you must read the directions
> and follow them) the only problem I had with print fix is while reading
> the directions I missed one step in printing out the test patch. Once I
> did that my next test print was right on from the monitor.
>
> My next step is to find a white card to up in my camera bag inorder to
> adjust the color balance of my D70 when I'm shooting in odd lighting.
>
> Roland Karlsson wrote:
> > "AFN" <newsDELETETHECAPSgroupaccount@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in
> > news:5R4Ed.54688$nP1.43766@twister.socal.rr.com:
> >
> >
> >>I take pictures on my Nikon D70 and try to print pics on my Epson 1280
> >>printer. But the color is horrible! And yes, I've checked that the
> >>nozzles are clean, etc. and I'm using Epson ink.
> >>
> >>So.... I want to use some kind of color calibration
> >>hardware/software/whatever. What do you suggest? I looked at xrite
> >>(Monaco) on their website, but I can't figure out if they have a
> >>product that will let me easily calibrate from the camera to the
> >>printer. I see you can calibrate from the monitor to the printer, but
> >>that's only half the battle. It seems that I need to calibrate from
> >>the camera to the printer. Anyway, what do you suggest?
> >
> >
> > It all depends on what you mean with "color is horrible".
> > If they truly are totally horrible - then something is wrong.
> > If they don't fullfill your expectations regarding correct color,
> > then color profiling would be in place.
> >
> > Color profiling from camera to print is VERY difficult.
> > It is almost impossible without having total control over
> > the lightning situation. It is absolutely, totally, 100%
> > impossible if you use automatic white balance on the camera.
> >
> > So - I would say that for most paractical purposes, it is
> > color profiling from monitor to print that is the only useful,
> > for most of us.
> >
> > Then you must have a profiled monitor. Spyder is a reasonable
> > priced solution.
> >
> > You also must have a profiled printer. This is more troublesome.
> > The only really working solutions IMHO are those based on (very
> > expensive) spectral analyzers. Those systems that are based
> > upon scanners do not work. They are toys, even PrintFIX from
> > ColorVision.
> >
> > Fortunately (for me) the Canon i9100 I have does alread have a good
> > profile and the printing is very independent of paper.
> >
> >
> > /Roland
Anonymous
January 9, 2005 10:14:42 PM

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

It depends on how picky you are. If what you see on the monitor does
not agree with your printer tweaking images can become an extremely
tedious process. I know because I used to do it that way.

If you don't bother with adjusting your images before you print then you
don't need to have your monitor agree with the printer. If you do then
your life will be much easier if you keep your monitor and printer
calibrated (as the monitor ages the colors will tend to shift so it is
not a one shot deal).

I know lots of people that are happy with the colors fromt their printer
and I know others that are just plain frustrated.

With 5 computers, 3 color printers, 4 digital cameras used by various
members of the household the color vision stuff will come in handy. On
top of that I build a new computer from parts about every 6 months.
Change a video card? The colors change. New monitor? The colors
change. New printers? etc etc

AFN wrote:
> I'm thinking of buying the Spyder software/hardware, but here's what leaves
> me puzzled...
>
> If my monitor currently shows normal-looking colors, then why should I spent
> ~$200 calibrating the monitor. It seems that I should spend $25 buying an
> ICC profile of my printer instead.
>
> ???
>
> "william kossack" <wskossack@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:ebCdncMkFMFh4HzcRVn-tg@comcast.com...
>
>>I just set up my spyder and print fix last night. I was having similar
>>problems with my i9900 in that the colors just seemed to be off from the
>>monitor.
>>
>>I was able to justify the system because everyone in the family got
>>cameras for christmas. There are now 3 different color printers to
>>worry about. My first big print of the kids snowboarding showed a red
>>jacket that was more purple and skintones that were off also.
>>
>>The spyder is realatively easy to use and (you must read the directions
>>and follow them) the only problem I had with print fix is while reading
>>the directions I missed one step in printing out the test patch. Once I
>> did that my next test print was right on from the monitor.
>>
>>My next step is to find a white card to up in my camera bag inorder to
>>adjust the color balance of my D70 when I'm shooting in odd lighting.
>>
>>Roland Karlsson wrote:
>>
>>>"AFN" <newsDELETETHECAPSgroupaccount@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in
>>>news:5R4Ed.54688$nP1.43766@twister.socal.rr.com:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I take pictures on my Nikon D70 and try to print pics on my Epson 1280
>>>>printer. But the color is horrible! And yes, I've checked that the
>>>>nozzles are clean, etc. and I'm using Epson ink.
>>>>
>>>>So.... I want to use some kind of color calibration
>>>>hardware/software/whatever. What do you suggest? I looked at xrite
>>>>(Monaco) on their website, but I can't figure out if they have a
>>>>product that will let me easily calibrate from the camera to the
>>>>printer. I see you can calibrate from the monitor to the printer, but
>>>>that's only half the battle. It seems that I need to calibrate from
>>>>the camera to the printer. Anyway, what do you suggest?
>>>
>>>
>>>It all depends on what you mean with "color is horrible".
>>>If they truly are totally horrible - then something is wrong.
>>>If they don't fullfill your expectations regarding correct color,
>>>then color profiling would be in place.
>>>
>>>Color profiling from camera to print is VERY difficult.
>>>It is almost impossible without having total control over
>>>the lightning situation. It is absolutely, totally, 100%
>>>impossible if you use automatic white balance on the camera.
>>>
>>>So - I would say that for most paractical purposes, it is
>>>color profiling from monitor to print that is the only useful,
>>>for most of us.
>>>
>>>Then you must have a profiled monitor. Spyder is a reasonable
>>>priced solution.
>>>
>>>You also must have a profiled printer. This is more troublesome.
>>>The only really working solutions IMHO are those based on (very
>>>expensive) spectral analyzers. Those systems that are based
>>>upon scanners do not work. They are toys, even PrintFIX from
>>>ColorVision.
>>>
>>>Fortunately (for me) the Canon i9100 I have does alread have a good
>>>profile and the printing is very independent of paper.
>>>
>>>
>>>/Roland
>
>
>
January 10, 2005 12:31:10 AM

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

"AFN" <newsDELETETHECAPSgroupaccount@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5R4Ed.54688$nP1.43766@twister.socal.rr.com...
> I take pictures on my Nikon D70 and try to print pics on my Epson 1280
> printer. But the color is horrible! And yes, I've checked that the
> nozzles are clean, etc. and I'm using Epson ink.
>
Well, something is wrong with your setup because I have a D70, and my prints
on my 1280 are great with Epson ink and Epson paper.

So, how do I go about it?

First of all, I created a profile for my monitor using Monaco.

Next, I created a profile for my 1280, Epson inks, and my paper (for large
prints I use Red River paper) using Monaco. This step did remove a greenish
tint that had developed over time in all prints from all sources.

I can't comment on printing directly from Explorer or Windows Paint because
I never use them for this purpose.

Instead, I use PS7. First of all, I tell PS to use the custom profile.
Next, I tell the Epson printer driver to use no color adjustment. The
results suit me.

Jim
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 1:02:39 AM

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

"Jim" <j.n@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:yohEd.8284$F67.7132@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "AFN" <newsDELETETHECAPSgroupaccount@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:5R4Ed.54688$nP1.43766@twister.socal.rr.com...
> > I take pictures on my Nikon D70 and try to print pics on my Epson 1280
> > printer. But the color is horrible! And yes, I've checked that the
> > nozzles are clean, etc. and I'm using Epson ink.
> >
> Well, something is wrong with your setup because I have a D70, and my
prints
> on my 1280 are great with Epson ink and Epson paper.
>
> So, how do I go about it?
>
> First of all, I created a profile for my monitor using Monaco.
>
> Next, I created a profile for my 1280, Epson inks, and my paper (for large
> prints I use Red River paper) using Monaco. This step did remove a
greenish
> tint that had developed over time in all prints from all sources.
>
> I can't comment on printing directly from Explorer or Windows Paint
because
> I never use them for this purpose.
>
> Instead, I use PS7. First of all, I tell PS to use the custom profile.
> Next, I tell the Epson printer driver to use no color adjustment. The
> results suit me.
>
> Jim
>
>


I agree something is wrong :)  That's why I posted asking about
software/hardware to create profiles. You're using a custom profile, but I
am not and that difference probably explains everything. Are you happy
with Monaco? Did you compare to Pantone's Spyder product? Thanks.
January 10, 2005 2:16:29 AM

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

AFN wrote:

> I'm not lazy, but my time is worth something. Printing 20 4x6 photos is
> much faster from Windows Explorer,

Top poster who wants to print from windows explorer and also expects good
prints?

Sounds lazy to me. :-)

BTW have you reade manual/help file in the printer to learn about ICM or the
help file in PS about getting good color? If you expect "automatic" perfect
prints with zero effort, you're dreaming. Take the flash card to a lab.

--

Stacey
January 10, 2005 2:37:55 AM

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

"AFN" <newsDELETETHECAPSgroupaccount@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3ShEd.54763$nP1.32081@twister.socal.rr.com...
>
> "Jim" <j.n@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:yohEd.8284$F67.7132@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>> "AFN" <newsDELETETHECAPSgroupaccount@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote in
>> message
>> news:5R4Ed.54688$nP1.43766@twister.socal.rr.com...
>> > I take pictures on my Nikon D70 and try to print pics on my Epson 1280
>> > printer. But the color is horrible! And yes, I've checked that the
>> > nozzles are clean, etc. and I'm using Epson ink.
>> >
>> Well, something is wrong with your setup because I have a D70, and my
> prints
>> on my 1280 are great with Epson ink and Epson paper.
>>
>> So, how do I go about it?
>>
>> First of all, I created a profile for my monitor using Monaco.
>>
>> Next, I created a profile for my 1280, Epson inks, and my paper (for
>> large
>> prints I use Red River paper) using Monaco. This step did remove a
> greenish
>> tint that had developed over time in all prints from all sources.
>>
>> I can't comment on printing directly from Explorer or Windows Paint
> because
>> I never use them for this purpose.
>>
>> Instead, I use PS7. First of all, I tell PS to use the custom profile.
>> Next, I tell the Epson printer driver to use no color adjustment. The
>> results suit me.
>>
>> Jim
>>
>>
>
>
> I agree something is wrong :)  That's why I posted asking about
> software/hardware to create profiles. You're using a custom profile, but
> I
> am not and that difference probably explains everything. Are you happy
> with Monaco? Did you compare to Pantone's Spyder product? Thanks.




I agree with Jim.

If the Image on Screen looks good, then it very unlikely that your Camera
and Monitor are all that far out, but run Adobe Gamma and check, just in
case.

If the Colour casts are serious and are only visible on Prints, then your
Printer Colour Management is probably at Fault. The most common reason is
doing CM twice - Once in the P'shop and again in the Printer.

Jim is doing Colour Management the right way, by turning off the Printer CM
and allowing P'Shop to do it. He is using very specific Profiles which he
has created for his system, probably because he can not get "Canned
Profiles" for his choice of Paper in his 1280.

As I have already said, it can still be done pretty accurately without
buying more hardware. But only if you are using Paper, for which you can
download the correct ICC Profile. Epson used to supply them for their Papers
and Printers, for free, but I suspect from what you say they may now be
expecting to get paid.

Tetenal and other Paper Manufacturers, who do not happen to sell Printers,
will supply Media (Paper) Specific ICC Profiles for some of the Epson
Printers, notably the 1280, for Free. These "Canned" Profiles may not be
quite as exact as those Jim has produced, but they will still produce very
good colour quality Prints. I know because that is what I use, and I am
rather picky about colour correction. I happen to think that Tetenal
Spectra Jet is much better than any Epson Paper, it's heavier, glossier,
whiter and more water resistant. It is more expensive, alas.

If Epson are saying that the D70 does not supply a Profile, then they are
talking rubbish. That Camera provides users with a choice of 3 Output
Profiles, 2 versions of SRGB and Adobe RGB, you choose which one you want it
to use.

Roy
January 10, 2005 3:09:06 AM

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

>
> I agree something is wrong :)  That's why I posted asking about
> software/hardware to create profiles. You're using a custom profile, but
I
> am not and that difference probably explains everything. Are you happy
> with Monaco? Did you compare to Pantone's Spyder product? Thanks.
I am quite satisfied with Monaco. Colorvision is cheaper (and does the same
thing). I chose Monaco because the 1280 came with a discount package from
Monaco.

You also need to check the color space through the entire chain. I use
AdobeRGB as my working space; I enabled AdobeRGB for output from the D70.
The printer profile takes enables PS to output to the printer space.

As neither Explorer not Windows Picture and Fax Viewer are color manged, it
is pot luck whether you get acceptable results from them or not.
Jim
January 10, 2005 5:54:11 AM

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

Crownfield wrote:

>>
>> >I don't want to go into
>> > Photoshop just to print 20 4x6s.
>>
>> Why not? Are you THAT lazy? Any other way is going to produce sub
>> standard results.
>
> (on an improperly set up system...)
>
> photoshop is not required to easily get good color prints.
> thats wallpapering over system problems.
>


So you think -right click on a file and print- is going to get good results?
You might be able to get walmart quality but if that's all your after just
take the flash card to walmart. That's a lot cheaper.
--

Stacey
January 10, 2005 5:59:56 AM

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

Jim wrote:


>
> As neither Explorer not Windows Picture and Fax Viewer are color manged,
> it is pot luck whether you get acceptable results from them or not.
>

That's what I was trying to tell him, printing from windows explorer using
the "right click print" isn't going to produce acceptable results. That's
for printing documents not quality photographs. My bet is he's got a
problem with changing colors spaces in his workflow chain or a missing ICM
file/setting, not a need to buy more software/hardware.
--

Stacey
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 7:44:33 AM

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

"Stacey" <fotocord@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:34edsuF4a77iiU1@individual.net...
> AFN wrote:
>
> > I'm not lazy, but my time is worth something. Printing 20 4x6 photos
is
> > much faster from Windows Explorer,
>
> Top poster who wants to print from windows explorer and also expects good
> prints?
>
> Sounds lazy to me. :-)
>
> BTW have you reade manual/help file in the printer to learn about ICM or
the
> help file in PS about getting good color? If you expect "automatic"
perfect
> prints with zero effort, you're dreaming. Take the flash card to a lab.
>
> --
>
> Stacey

If I expected zero effort, why am I posting here about buying
software/hardware to calibrate my printer and/or monitor? But thanks for
lashing out.
January 10, 2005 7:44:34 AM

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

AFN wrote:

>
> If you expect "automatic"
> perfect
>> prints with zero effort, you're dreaming. Take the flash card to a lab.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Stacey
>
> If I expected zero effort, why am I posting here about buying
> software/hardware to calibrate my printer and/or monitor?

Because that's probably not what's wrong, have you read the manual or read
up about ICM profiles and how to use them?

> But thanks for
> lashing out.

Just seems odd someone is expecting right click print in windows explorer to
produce nice results. Like I said if you don't want to be bothered with
checking the images individually, take the flash card to a lab. At least
there a machine will be doing it.
--

Stacey
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 11:42:29 AM

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

Stacey wrote:
>
> Crownfield wrote:
>
> >>
> >> >I don't want to go into
> >> > Photoshop just to print 20 4x6s.
> >>
> >> Why not? Are you THAT lazy? Any other way is going to produce sub
> >> standard results.
> >
> > (on an improperly set up system...)
> >
> > photoshop is not required to easily get good color prints.
> > thats wallpapering over system problems.
> >
>
> So you think -right click on a file and print- is going to get good results?

if the system is properly set up, usually.

> You might be able to get walmart quality ...

1-profile the monitor
2-profile the printer
(now your system prints what your monitor shows.)
3 use thumbs plus to quickly and easily print
a whole directory of images as 4x6 or whatever you want.

for simple things, photoshop is a moose in a china shop.


> --
>
> Stacey
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 12:31:01 PM

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

AFN <newsDELETETHECAPSgroupaccount@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote:

> I agree something is wrong :)  That's why I posted asking about
> software/hardware to create profiles. You're using a custom profile, but I
> am not and that difference probably explains everything. Are you happy
> with Monaco? Did you compare to Pantone's Spyder product? Thanks.


You haven't provided much details about what you're doing to achieve
poor results. One of the most common problems people have when printing
from Photoshop is not turning off the printer's color conversion so that
the image is converted twice (once by Photoshop and once by the
printer). This will ALWAYS give you poor results; people try all sorts
of solutions, but the simplest (and only reasonable) solution is to just
make sure you have turned this off when you print.

Once you have gotten past that, then you should look at monitor
profiling (Spyders are quite good and less expensive than Monaco's
products), as it will get you 90% of where you want to be. Just because
the image "looks good" on your screen is meaningless, the only way to
achieve consistent color is by profiling.

Generic printer profiles are usually quite good, profiling your specific
printer should be one of the last steps taken. Buying a printer profile
before calibrating your monitor is just throwing money away.
January 11, 2005 12:11:50 AM

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

Crownfield wrote:


>
>> You might be able to get walmart quality ...
>
> 1-profile the monitor
> 2-profile the printer
> (now your system prints what your monitor shows.)
> 3 use thumbs plus to quickly and easily print
> a whole directory of images as 4x6 or whatever you want.
>
> for simple things, photoshop is a moose in a china shop.
>

Again if all you're going to do is print the images as they came out of
the camera, just drop the flash card at walmart. It's a lot cheaper and
none of the hassles. Using windows explorer to print doesn't use any
specific colorspace or color management so it's unlikey they will be even
as good as walmart can produce.

--

Stacey
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 7:13:50 PM

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

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 17:37:40 GMT, in rec.photo.digital "AFN"
<newsDELETETHECAPSgroupaccount@DELETETHISyahoo.com> wrote:

>1. Yes, I'm using Epson paper - glossy premium, and yes, the printer driver
>knows
>
>2. I haven't really changed anything but I've talked to Epson and confirmed
>that the settings are pretty correct. Epson blames this problem on the D70
>not giving a profile
>
>3. The colors look pretty good on the monitor but I haven't done anything
>specifically to calibrate the monitor. I have a dual monitor setup, one
>being CRT and the other LCD.

What setting exactly are you using? If you don't tell us this, we can't
begin to help. I've been printing photos taken with a Nikon CP-990 and
CP-5700 on a 1270 for years with pretty good color rendering.
----------
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
Anonymous
January 12, 2005 11:39:11 PM

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

"Stacey" <fotocord@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:34gqv6F4bemdjU1@individual.net...
> Crownfield wrote:
>
>
> >
> >> You might be able to get walmart quality ...
> >
> > 1-profile the monitor
> > 2-profile the printer
> > (now your system prints what your monitor shows.)
> > 3 use thumbs plus to quickly and easily print
> > a whole directory of images as 4x6 or whatever you want.
> >
> > for simple things, photoshop is a moose in a china shop.
> >
>
> Again if all you're going to do is print the images as they came out of
> the camera, just drop the flash card at walmart. It's a lot cheaper and
> none of the hassles. Using windows explorer to print doesn't use any
> specific colorspace or color management so it's unlikey they will be even
> as good as walmart can produce.
>
> --
>
> Stacey


When you've got the family over, and they say "oh, I want a copy of these 10
pics", you want to be able to go to the computer and do [whatever] quickly
so you can go back to being social. This can't be too uncommon.
Anonymous
January 13, 2005 12:10:15 AM

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

love it

its the reason why I got my wife a separate printer

AFN wrote:
> "Stacey" <fotocord@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:34gqv6F4bemdjU1@individual.net...
>
>>Crownfield wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>>You might be able to get walmart quality ...
>>>
>>>1-profile the monitor
>>>2-profile the printer
>>>(now your system prints what your monitor shows.)
>>>3 use thumbs plus to quickly and easily print
>>> a whole directory of images as 4x6 or whatever you want.
>>>
>>>for simple things, photoshop is a moose in a china shop.
>>>
>>
>> Again if all you're going to do is print the images as they came out of
>>the camera, just drop the flash card at walmart. It's a lot cheaper and
>>none of the hassles. Using windows explorer to print doesn't use any
>>specific colorspace or color management so it's unlikey they will be even
>>as good as walmart can produce.
>>
>>--
>>
>> Stacey
>
>
>
> When you've got the family over, and they say "oh, I want a copy of these 10
> pics", you want to be able to go to the computer and do [whatever] quickly
> so you can go back to being social. This can't be too uncommon.
>
>
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 1:13:43 AM

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

and surely she opens all the pics in photoshop, individually, and sets the
color management profile when printing, right? ha ha

if she's too lazy to do all that (smile), I don't know why you even bought a
printer because lazy people should go to walmart and don't deserve printers
of their own. at least so goes the theory earlier in this thread :) 


"william kossack" <wskossack@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:-LqdndLC3NQ9aXjcRVn-hw@comcast.com...
> love it
>
> its the reason why I got my wife a separate printer
>
> AFN wrote:
> > "Stacey" <fotocord@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:34gqv6F4bemdjU1@individual.net...
> >
> >>Crownfield wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>>You might be able to get walmart quality ...
> >>>
> >>>1-profile the monitor
> >>>2-profile the printer
> >>>(now your system prints what your monitor shows.)
> >>>3 use thumbs plus to quickly and easily print
> >>> a whole directory of images as 4x6 or whatever you want.
> >>>
> >>>for simple things, photoshop is a moose in a china shop.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Again if all you're going to do is print the images as they came out
of
> >>the camera, just drop the flash card at walmart. It's a lot cheaper and
> >>none of the hassles. Using windows explorer to print doesn't use any
> >>specific colorspace or color management so it's unlikey they will be
even
> >>as good as walmart can produce.
> >>
> >>--
> >>
> >> Stacey
> >
> >
> >
> > When you've got the family over, and they say "oh, I want a copy of
these 10
> > pics", you want to be able to go to the computer and do [whatever]
quickly
> > so you can go back to being social. This can't be too uncommon.
> >
> >
>
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 1:13:44 AM

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

One of the things that she specifically asked for was a photoprinter for
Christmas. When you wife makes a direct request for Christmas only a
fool ignores it.

She also to a canon S60 and a gold necklass that was wrapped around the
camera. I've had an S50 for a couple years.

this was by the way a very expensive christmas for me.

I still need to get something like paintshop for her to use because
photoshop would be too much

AFN wrote:
> and surely she opens all the pics in photoshop, individually, and sets the
> color management profile when printing, right? ha ha
>
> if she's too lazy to do all that (smile), I don't know why you even bought a
> printer because lazy people should go to walmart and don't deserve printers
> of their own. at least so goes the theory earlier in this thread :) 
>
>
> "william kossack" <wskossack@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:-LqdndLC3NQ9aXjcRVn-hw@comcast.com...
>
>>love it
>>
>>its the reason why I got my wife a separate printer
>>
>>AFN wrote:
>>
>>>"Stacey" <fotocord@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:34gqv6F4bemdjU1@individual.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Crownfield wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>You might be able to get walmart quality ...
>>>>>
>>>>>1-profile the monitor
>>>>>2-profile the printer
>>>>>(now your system prints what your monitor shows.)
>>>>>3 use thumbs plus to quickly and easily print
>>>>> a whole directory of images as 4x6 or whatever you want.
>>>>>
>>>>>for simple things, photoshop is a moose in a china shop.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Again if all you're going to do is print the images as they came out
>
> of
>
>>>>the camera, just drop the flash card at walmart. It's a lot cheaper and
>>>>none of the hassles. Using windows explorer to print doesn't use any
>>>>specific colorspace or color management so it's unlikey they will be
>
> even
>
>>>>as good as walmart can produce.
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>
>>>> Stacey
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>When you've got the family over, and they say "oh, I want a copy of
>
> these 10
>
>>>pics", you want to be able to go to the computer and do [whatever]
>
> quickly
>
>>>so you can go back to being social. This can't be too uncommon.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
!