----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom C" Subject: Re: Epson 2200
> I'm got just enough knowledge to be dangerous in this area... > > This is a wide open question, to which the answer is obvious, but why did > you find it a waste? I assume you felt that it did not accurately profile > your monitor in such a manner that made a difference by the time your print > came out of the printer? Dumb question, I'm sure. > In a digital printing environment such as is typical to the home user, the system is, by definition, a closed loop. You input a file, you manupilate the file until it is visually acceptable, and then you print the file. If the print doesn't match the screen image, then you can adjust the printer driver until a match has been accomplished, usually in a few small prints. A lot of the stuff that is out there, such as monitor calibrators, are inventions of computer people who don't have a clue about what they are doing, and so insist on taking a paint by numbers approach to the problem of matching print to screen. I can see the need if you need to match your screen to a reference standard that has been arbitrarily set by a particular industry (graphic artists and stock photographers fit this category), but for the home user who wants to knock off a few inkjet prints now and again, it isn't needed. Go and buy another lens instead. If you are working with a photo lab, and are trying to get good colour from a file, then a bit of work by both parties is involved. However, it is still a visual reference, not a paint by numbers reference that will get you close to what the lab is outputting. William Robb
