- Aug 23, 2006
- Reaction score
- Europe EU
- Printer Model
- Canon, Brother, HP, Ricoh etc.
While you are correct, it's true only if the user has time and is willing to learn. Otherwise it's cheaper and you get better result with a decision to buy professionally made profile. Now this is also a thing that's not easy. Not everyone creates profiles the same way as a result quality is not the same too. IMHO 50% of profile quality depends on operator not software or hardware. If you don't know how to do it you can make bad profiles with expensive hardware too.mikling said:While Spyder3Print might not be lab level, these new products are becoming gamechangers since they allow hobbyists, amateurs and even pros to affordably accomplish things that they were never able to do before. A fraction of the cost of lab equipment, it fulfills the needs of a significant proportion of the users it is intended for and then some. That's technology for you, just like the desktop inkjet printer that can produce superior output to lab processing. Amazing.
Similar things happened when PCs were introduced, they did not replace minis, mainframes. Laughed at, snickered at but eventually look at what they did to the world and what users could do with them. I think products like the Spyders are having the same effect.
The spyder series has slowly been refined and improved where they must be taken seriously now unlike some their earlier products
Now I see many sites pop up that advertises that they make profiles, even have i1 spectrophotometers, but wait 300 or 400 basic targets? Manual scanning techniques that they fail to say about? cheap prices that leave quality behind? Or does anyone think that profile making is charity? No thanks.
So I agree that “spiders” have a market like “color munki”, but that they are better