What does "Media Type" in driver do with/without profile?

[l_d_allan]

I'm not getting all that satisfactory WYSIWYG from my calibrated monitor to prints, and wondering if I have a flawed understanding of what the printer driver option for "Media Type" accomplishes.

Here is my understanding, and more experienced printers may be able to "correct the error of my ways".

* In Photoshop, If I select the option for "Printer manage Color", then based on the "Media Type" selected in the print driver, a default profile for that paper will be applied. If my choice is "Plus Glossy II", a certain profile is applied. If my choice is "Glossy Paper", a different profile is applied. In this situation, the "Media Type" influences factors such as how much ink is assumed to be assorbed, whether it needs more or less ink to accomplish appropriate density, etc. Different "media types" have different preferred "spray mechanics".

* However, if I select the option of "Photoshop manages Color", then I need to explicitly turn off Color Management in the print driver. If I do it right, the profile I pick is "in force" and over-rides the Canon provided profile for that Media Type. My impression is that the selected "Media Type" still has a significant influence on how much ink is laid down. The print driver "knows" that Plus Glossy II should be sprayed a certain way for standard/preferred results. It "knows" that a different "Media Type" of paper should be sprayed somewhat differently for standard/preferred results.

Correct? Flawed? Incomplete? Clueless?

The implication might be that maybe I have guessed at the wrong "Media Type" for the Kirkland paper I am using. Or I shoud be using Canon paper with the OCP ink to reduce the altered number of variables from two to one. Once I diverge from a standard Canon Ink + Canon Paper, it becomes too much trial and error. I had thought the profile took care of that, but maybe not? Or maybe not as much as I thought?

 

[mikling]

The media type can be critical during the creation of a profile.

In the extreme case scenario, if you choose a media type of plain paper for a profile for a high quality glossy paper you will get a profile but it will be not very good.

The media type selects the use of preprogrammed instructions within the printer firmware as to how much ink to eject as well as the dot matrix chosen. The instructions of the profile, rides on top of that. So if the media type instructions put out less ink than the paper can use then you are compromising the output potential. So understand that even when profiling we are dealing with trying to guess what setting is best for a given paper. Trial and error.

This is one reason why using a profiling service can be hit or miss if you want the ideal profile. For example sometimes glossy paper can benefit from a profile using a luster setting and vice versa. Ideally you create the profile using a range of media settings and then you view a bunch of images that test for different aspects and then decide which profile created with which media type is the best.

Also be aware that the PROFILE is NOT the holy grail. There are certain ink/printer/paper combinations that simply do not work well and if we hit upon that, we have to accept the situation and try another combination.

You better start stocking up on paper!

 

[l_d_allan]

You better start stocking up on paper!

Thanks!

Do you mean various brands of paper, and various selections within brands? Or lots of one brand/selection of paper?

For the short-to-moderate term future, I anticipate staying with Kirkland paper, using OCP ink. It's affordable as I trial-and-error my way to emerging from clue'lessness. My short term objective is to have WYSIWYG with my calibrated monitor, OCP ink, and Kirkland paper. Then I will feel more prepared to evaluate more expensive and/or larger paper.

Two speculations: I've been using an inappropriate Media Type for the Canon 9000-2 print driver. I'll try a number of other Media Type settings in the drop-down box, plus advice from others greatly appreciated. But I'm unclear how to evaluate which is preferred.

Something like the following?
* I have a Datacolor print profiler, so I can make my own profiles. However, the learning curve is non-trivial, and my perception is that several people got pretty disgusted with their Datacolor Sypder-3 printer profiler. It is exasperating, and repeatibility may be less than adequate.
* But in any case, make the profile target on the same paper type (Kirkland), but with each option of Media Type (3 to 4+).
* Let dry ... thoroughly ... and make the 3 to 4+ profiles.
* Then make prints of a Kodak-like test print with the associated profile, let dry, and see which one looks best, based on WYSIWYG to the test print on the monitor.
* Use that combination of Media Type and print profile.

Or perhaps I should also (or instead) use the "Printer Manages Color" option with the different options of Media Type. The Kodak-like test print hasn't had any Photoshop post processing done by me, so it is "fixed".

Or maybe the "preferred practice" is to have the printer loaded with a complete set of Canon OEM ink, and use a reasonably high quality Canon paper like Plus Glossy II that is probably pretty close to Kirkland. Then I can use "Printer Manages Color" and the Media Type "Plus Glossy II". By definition, a test print from this would be a "Gold Standard" ... this is what it is supposed to look like. The monitor better look a lot like the print, within the limits of paper vs monitor. Then the objective is to get the Kirkland + OCP + selected Media Type to look very close to the Gold Standard from the Canon ink + Canon Plus Glossy II paper.

Another speculation is that I may be premature to have a valid profile. I am just getting ready to replace a refilled cart that has PM OCP ink with a Canon OEM CLI-8-PM cart that has Canon ink. At any one point, I've got a "shifting sands" mix of OCP and Canon ink in various carts. Out of confusion and disorder, I ended up with 5 Magentas and 2 Photo-Magentas, which seems backwards as I believe PM is used up faster than Magenta.

When the "dust settles" and I've got a complete set of Canon OEM carts filled with OCP ink, then it might be time to pay attention to making accurate profiles.

But I may very well be making this too difficult. Printing is more frustrating than rewarding at this stage. My impression is that eventually you get Photoshop to post process the image to where you want it, do a print, and it looks like what you expected and observed on the monitor. Not that much, if any, trial and error. Maybe a test print for an expensive sheet of paper as confirmaiton.

 

[pharmacist]

For example on the IP8500/i9900/i9950/Pro 9000 when you choose other photo papers, the green and red inks are not used. Only if you choose photo paper pro (II) and glossy photo paper extra (II) in high quality setting these two pantone colours are used to increase the gamut.