Canon Pixma Color Mismatch

[The Hat]

Sorry, getting Grandads & Hats mixed up!
You ask for a nozzle check...how do I post that? [or is it now irrelevant due to the new cartridge?]

A nozzle check is more than just a printout it can tell a lot about your printers current state of health.

Just scan your nozzle check (only the printed area) not the full sheet and save it as a JPEG or PNG.

Click on the word Uploads on the top bar and follow the instructions by using these setting,
click on the browse button locate your file and then click the submit button.

Your image will then appear once its uploaded then just click on the Image box and copy then paste into your reply.
It helps it you have the two window open (Nifty pages) at the same time so you can perform this task much easier..

 

[jondave]

Why do colors on photo-prints differ from on-screen image when printing with Canon-Pixma Ip2770? With HP what colors you see on screen is what you get on the photo. I get around the problem by calibrating the print program for each individual photo, but doesn't always work and takes masses of time, ink and test prints. This happens with original color cartridge and refills, so not an ink problem.
Any ideas please?
P.s. despite this problem I will avoid going back to HP at all costs, the continual print-driver errors and being held to ransom by their ink-cartridge policy infuriates me.

Your experience with HP printers may just have been a coincidence, in general no printer out-of-the-box will accurately print the colors you see on your screen.

You have to realize that the printer has no idea whatsover what colors you're seeing on your screen. Think about it - you can tweak the brightness/contrast/color settings of your monitor, you could be using a black and white CRT, or your monitor might be busted and display false colors, yet all of these will not affect your print output. Heck, you can print with your monitor turned off, but that doesn't mean your print will be a completely black page.

The answer to your problem is to have your monitor and printer calibrated if you want screen-to-print color consistency.

 

[The Hat]

jondave in general no printer out-of-the-box will accurately print the colors you see on your screen.

Sorry but I have to take a different point a view on that, printers in general do pretty well reproducing what you see on your screen,
the true and unaltered data comes from your camera after all.

I would also like to put to bed this spectre of you must calibrate your screen first to print your photos correcly.

A camera shoots the picture, the screen displays the print position and the printer puts it onto paper for you,
so dont blame the printer or your screen If the picture is not what you quite expected (you took the shot).

It is just ridiculous to say you cant get a beautiful picture from your bog standard A4 printer,
well you can and that is why so many guys print their own photos now and are very happy with the results.

A keen or professional photographer who and this is the important thing to remember insists on
tinkering, tweaking or altering their pictures to suit their particular tastes, NEEDS a calibrated monitor..

 

[jondave]

Sorry but I have to take a different point a view on that, printers in general do pretty well reproducing what you see on your screen,
the true and unaltered data comes from your camera after all.

Your experience is subjective, I can't dispute that. But @reet obviously isn't satisfied with the results he's getting, and you're misleading him by suggesting that the solution to his problem can be found through nozzle checks and software workarounds.

I would also like to put to bed this spectre of you must calibrate your screen first to print your photos correcly.

Calibration is not a spectre. It's a fact that you have to calibrate your monitor if you want accurate colors.

A camera shoots the picture, the screen displays the print position and the printer puts it onto paper for you,
so dont blame the printer or your screen If the picture is not what you quite expected (you took the shot).

You'd be stupid to blame the printer if a blurry photo on your monitor doesn't come out sharp when you print it. But it's fair to blame your monitor/printer if something red on your monitor comes out pink on paper.


@The Hat, you don't seem to be a fan of color management and ICC profiles. But the fact remains that the only way to match the colors you see on the monitor down to the print is to have a calibrated monitor and a matching ICC profile for your ink/paper/printer combination.

 

[The Hat]

Well well just have to differ on that subject wont we..

 

[fotofreek]

We have encountered a semantic issue here. Yes, the original photo file initially dictates the colors in the print. The quality of the print is dependant on many things including the quality of the printer itself, the "health" of the printer, the manner in which the printer driver software is configured, and the match of ink and paper.

The monitor becomes an issue when editing software is used to alter or improve a print. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to accurately edit color balance, contrast, brightness, and other visual issues without having a monitor that reflects what the printer will produce. A variable is introduced when we tweak the color output of the printer within the printer driver software. The selection of any specific ICC profile, either in the printer software or the editing sofware is another vatiable that alters what the print looks like as opposed to what you see on the monitor.

Many people use simple software for printing that virtually eliminates the ability to edit many qualities that are posessed by a photo print. Thus, the original file that is created by the camera and the default settings on the printer are the predonimant controls that dictate the end result, regardless of how the image looks on the monitor. For those who wish to do editing that is more complex than selection of size of the print, cropping, or very simple changes that basic photo printing softare permits, calibration of the monitor is preferred. Otherwise, obtaining the most desirable print becomes an exercise in trial and error.

 

[The Hat]

We have encountered a semantic issue here. Yes, the original photo file initially dictates the colors in the print. The quality of the print is dependant on many things including the quality of the printer itself, the "health" of the printer, the manner in which the printer driver software is configured, and the match of ink and paper.

The monitor becomes an issue when editing software is used to alter or improve a print. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to accurately edit color balance, contrast, brightness, and other visual issues without having a monitor that reflects what the printer will produce. A variable is introduced when we tweak the color output of the printer within the printer driver software. The selection of any specific ICC profile, either in the printer software or the editing sofware is another vatiable that alters what the print looks like as opposed to what you see on the monitor.

Many people use simple software for printing that virtually eliminates the ability to edit many qualities that are posessed by a photo print. Thus, the original file that is created by the camera and the default settings on the printer are the predonimant controls that dictate the end result, regardless of how the image looks on the monitor. For those who wish to do editing that is more complex than selection of size of the print, cropping, or very simple changes that basic photo printing softare permits, calibration of the monitor is preferred. Otherwise, obtaining the most desirable print becomes an exercise in trial and error.

I would have to agree with your colour assessment 100% as its purely down to each individuals taste..

 

[stratman]

I think everyone is in agreement on the parts they agree about.


fotofreek - you forgot to mention the graphics card's capacity to be profiled.

 

[jondave]

There's only one way to settle this - a (shootout) 'print-out'. In the red corner, the purists (stock profiles, manual monitor/printer adjustment). In the blue corner, the technicians (calibrated monitors and custom-profiled printers). Who will win?

 

[fotofreek]

fotofreek - you forgot to mention the graphics card's capacity to be profiled.

since this was not a tech heavy discussion I just hit the high spots!