Epson ET-8550 printer profiling Making custom ICC printer profiles with a i1Studio spectrophotometer 

Thanks If you have not seen it, do check the proper [i.e. written] review. It links all my related videos and articles and unlike videos is updated/corrected over time www.northlight-images.co.uk/epson-et-8550-printer-review/

Thanks

@@KeithCooper My pleasure, I just got an old ColorMunki and this is an essential must watch before starting out. Profiling papers now, and soon a UV printer.

One plus of having the old CM is that you can still use all the functionality of the old software - they removed the individual patch reading ability in the i1Studio. Probably not many use it, but if you did it was not a welcome change

Thanks!

Yes, the small sizes are best avoided unless you absolutely need them. The Colormunki gives useful profiles, which can be nearly as good as the ones I can produce with kit costing 10x as much

There is trick to make a standard profile including 2 optimizations ( I choose a picture with a lot of real life colours and one with out of gamut colours and a myriad of gray scales) on just one sheet of 8.5x11 or A4 paper and that is to choose the printer to print multiple pages on 1 sheet of paper (4 on 1) and make a custom ruler to guide the Colormunki over the paper surface (the scanning hole is rather small so it can be done). From the multiple pages menu I choose first left and then right and afterwards I turn the paper upside down and then again left and then right. On Printerknowledge I explained the procedure and the 2 optimizations do indeed improve the profile quality, especially in the gray ramp scale and the shadows.

Thanks - the 8550 is an excellent general purpose photo printer. Of course, it's (mostly) dye inks, so there is that difference. Oh, and the P900 does A2, and the impact of the odd A2 print is not to be underestimated ;-) I like printers like the 8550 (and the Canon PRO-200) for making bright extra glossy prints for portfolio use, where its instant appeal you're after, not museum archival properties.

Thanks - it definitely makes you look at prints more carefully...

Thanks!

Thanks - It's one of those things that was a lot more necessary 10-15 years ago, but printer drivers have improved a lot in reducing the need for complex profiling. The ET-8550 is different in that it brings a new mixed ink set (on some settings), so profiling and paper choice becomes a lot more important. That said, the spectro is a good buy for camera clubs and the like where the cost can be shared.

I've been using the original Colormunki for a few years now, with excellent results. It did take me a while to realise the surface I was scanning the print on was influencing the profile! Also, the more recent software can be used with it. Very good demonstration of how to use the device, Keith.

Thanks!

Yes, although I always sound a note of caution in that making your own profiles is sometimes more than I'd generally advise for people starting out, until they have enough experience to be able to see the benefits. Screen calibration/profiling is still the key initial step, and helpful for however your prints are produced. A problem can be that people make profiles, don't see some desired 'improvement' and blame it on some aspect of their workflow without having the experience to spot where issues might lie, such as in the common but mistaken belief that prints should 'match' their screen and profiling is part of this process. Of course a lot depends on your budgets ;-)

Thanks

Yes, you may need an older version of i1Studio. [the X-rite site usually has older versions] The Colormunki software was the original, then x-rite updated it to i1Studio. It supported the CM but the CM software didn't work with the i1S device Calibrite then occurred and rebadged stuff again... At some point they will introduce properly new software, no doubt offering some form of 'upgrade' [$$] for CM/i1S users This is one reason I keep several virtual Macs running older systems - I can still use the likes of ColorPort and even ProfileMaker.

@@KeithCooper Thanks for confirming I thought as much. After clearly outlining this problem with Calibrite, they responded with "One thing to try is a complete clean uninstallation/installation of the ccStudio application just in case it's a driver issue." (they then proceeded to describe how to manually uninstall their software). This Implies that the colormunki photo device 'should' work with ccStudio, I seriously doubt this - unless someone knows different. I'll need to resurrect my old laptop running 11.7.10 Big Sur and try an older version of i1Studio on that as an older version on My M1 machine crashes on launch. Thanks again Keith.

Excellent - glad it was of help

Thanks The thing to remember is that all printers like this (and bigger/smaller) are RGB devices. They are profiled as RGB devices and the image data fed to the driver is RGB. The colour management process takes care of whatever flavour RGB you send through to the printer. the ICC profile is what is used to produce RGB for the printer driver - the driver takes care of all the RGB to ink dots stuff. Also - CMYK is a colour space, and just like RGB it has versions/profiles. This has nothing to do with the actual inks in use by the printer. Basically, CMYK has nothing whatsoever to do with the process from a user point of view - there is no use for it whatsoever for most people. Yes, there are specific uses, but if you don't know what they are take it as something to avoid.

Thanks Sorry - profiles are specific to a printer/paper combination They provide the profiles for soft proofing purposes only

@@KeithCooper wow that was a swift reply thx, but after reading your review on the 8550 I'm looking and reading your info on the Epson SC-P700 printer but see the 900 print cost is way better. How would you compare the print quality and print cost (ink/paper) between the 8550 and SC-P900. thx will appreciate this reply even more

The 900 cost per print is way lower than the 700 - given current prices it takes about 180 A3+ prints and the costs match - and of course, the 900 lets you do the odd A2 print as well... I don't know the costs for the 8550 - noticeably lower I'd expect. As to print quality, the 700/900 full pigment set is better than the 8550 in some respects, but the dyes of the 8550 will [with good profiles] make better looking ultra glossy type prints [no gloss differential] All depends on what you want to do... I've detailed written reviews of all these covering much more detail...

@@KeithCooper awesome thx

Only in some commercial printing applications might new profiles be useful. Certainly not with desktop printers

@@KeithCooper Thanks Keith

Yes - I make V4 profiles by default - they seem fine on all my machines, but I am aware of some issues

@@KeithCooper In fact, I've been using my ColorMunki Photo since 2009 with iOne studio since it's compatible and it's perfect. But fortunately I am conservative of my old Macs which allows me to still use ColorPicker as a densitometer ( fine for linearizations ) and which no longer exists with Studio, ColorMunki not being compatible MacOS beyond El Capitan, as well as adobe color printer utility for printing without Epson color calibration, beyond from Catalina. Have a nice evening.

Thanks - I still print my targets from the Mac ColorSync Utility - but my main work Mac is 10.15 and the MacBook Pro seen in the videos is 10.13. The iMac on my desk has MacOS 13 but that's just for testing

@@KeithCooper To make B&W profile, i1studio" black and white" option is OK?

On my 1400 and 1500w, it's not really bad, but not fantastic...

Depends on the paper/printer/ink. The i1Studio relies on most printers these days, with common papers, having a relatively predictable performance. That means the i1Studio can produce better profiles with fewer patches. It also means that it's less flexible with no significant adjustments in profiling parameters available. Also the i1Studio only offer M2 (UV Cut) measurements, which can have issues in handling OBAs. So, for many papers, the i1Studio profiles very well and works just fine. Indeed for some papers not using too many patches may even be better. In general, differences are not not huge, but can show in colour transitions and other tricky areas of print. The more expensive options let me fine tune targets and measurement/ profiling options much more. However I'd note that I've not really analysed the i1Studio profiles in any detail - the black and white option to my mind is a positive step in features, but still has significant issues - see my (written) i1Studio review notes for more.

Thanks

See the main [written] review for papers tested: www.northlight-images.co.uk/epson-et-8550-printer-review/ email me for details...

Sounds faulty - should not do that with a good paper. I've only ever seen that with a paper which was not suitable for the printer - but there it was the ink not drying properly. If you contact Epson, be sure to note that you were using Epson paper, else they may hang up on you ;-)

@@KeithCooper I finally got some sticker paper in and it did great, i have some semi gloss from epson coming in in a few days. Going to give that a try.

Glad it helped! The ink use is based on spectral analysis of printed patterns when making custom profiles I discuss this in the main (written) review www.northlight-images.co.uk/epson-et-8550-printer-review/ All my more technical or advanced stuff tends to go into the written articles - it often just doesn't work well in videos

You won't - HM don't do profiles for the 8550

An ICC profile is for a specific paper/ink/printer combination. This video specifically addresses the question... ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-g4CP2WtUyBk.html

Thanks Buy paper from a supplier which makes them for you, or has profiles for the paper [less likely] Oh, and check my written printers reviews for profiles I've created for the review...

Thanks - only the papers listed in the review... I've never actually seen any of this paper - I can generally only test stuff I'm sent from suppliers/manufacturers. Oh, and it needs to be available in the UK!

Not here it isn't - check with your local Epson

Not that I know of - one is just a wider version. The icc profiles are interchangeable I have detailed written reviews of each one because they were here at different times ;-)

@@KeithCooper thanks Keith for the quick response. Somewhere you'll find a 10$ donation I made today. Your videos are excellent .

Thanks! If you ever need the profiles, see my written review - they are available on request [email]

Maybe - but it depends on having software to work with the device. I've never seen any though.

@@KeithCooper thanks! Nor have I. Does the software you use in the video cost extra, separate from the cost of the device?

No, it come with the device - but only works with the device. This might helps, but I don't know that device you mention... argyllcms.com

Thanks. The OEM profiles can give a different look - not usually that much these days, since printers are a lot more linear and there is less unit to unit variation. OEM profiles are also built to give 'pleasing' results and these can vary in different markets. I'm referring to the installed icc profile, not any 'profile like' behaviour baked into driver software. Remember that there is no more such a thing as a 'correct' profile, than the aim of profiling being to make all prints on different papers look the same. Differences can be quite tricky to spot. When I build a profile like the ones I do for the reviews I have a number of adjustments I can build into the profiles, in particular, my relcol and perceptual rendering intents can look quite different (with some images). I1Studio just gives you a profile... A lot of assumptions and 'secret sauce' goes into commercial profiling packages and there are distinct differences that show in extremes - so smoothness of transition of a dark colour to black, or how blown highlights are handled. See my recent video about using a test image for more. I've some test images (on the Northlight site) which will 'break' any profile - remember that any profile is a collection of compromises ;-) If the i1Studio was all I had then I'd happily use it. However I might then also have a look at ArgyllCMS (well worth a look if you want an inexpensive profiling solution and don't mind the steep learning curve).

@@KeithCooper You answer is cover me 1000%. I have the i1studio, i am not a professional, the cost of your instrument is way to high for me so i will stick with i1studio. Just love the photography (usually landscape) and the printing. I get a lot of enjoyment of that. Usually give prints to my friends. I will try to do the best i can with my Canon Pro-200 and i1studio. I also thinking to buy and this Epson just for making cheaper prints than the Pro-200. Thank you again for you detailed answer and all the videos you are making, we learn so much from you and from the www.northlight-images.co.uk 👍👍👍 George from Greece.

I've not got experience of this on the latest system - I'm staying with 13 for the time being on my Mac Studio. I do prefer PME if it works - I noticed that I needed it for the SW2700 and the new s/w for the SW272 - These are the two monitors in the background of my current videos. All a bit of a mess I'm afraid - I'd also suggest asking on the print forum at DPReview.com - still quite a lot of activity there

Yes it can - I've no profile for this one though

@@KeithCooper Great! Thank you.

Sorry - the profiles are never available for download - you need to email me with exactly which ones you need (they are listed in the review article) The printer has nothing to do with profiles, just media settings I just leave it to turn off - it uses minimal power

No, TV adjustment is not included with any x-rite or calibrite device I've ever seen The last device I tested for TV use was this www.northlight-images.co.uk/spyder4tv-hd-review/

Thanks - I have not got it here to test any more, but the remote interface (phone) may do it, also, access the printer's web page. It may have some feature I'd overlooked.

No - I'm afraid I know of people trying that for nearly 20 years. Scanners are simply not accurate enough, nor have the spectral acuity to provide the data needed. I've used scanners to help linearise B&W printing, but even then it relies a lot of the scanner being up to it. The absolutely cheapest way is to buy a used i1 spectrophotometer from eBay and learn the ArgyllCMS software - very good, but never an approach I've had the time or inclination to learn (it's mostly command line driven)

@@KeithCooper I understand, perhaps the flatbed produces too much light contamination between color tiles from the flood light. I’ll check the spectrometer in the used section. Thanks for the heads up!

The scanners are R/G/B with ill defined spectral responses for each channel - it's this that really stymies attempts at profiling (of any quality)

No, can't be done - the printer is an RGB device. Grey use is integral to how the printer works. Unless you can find a RIP that has full channel control, it's not going to happen - and no-one writes full RIPs for printers at this (consumer) level

@@KeithCooper thank you

Yes, it's technically possible to create profiles - the limitations of an RGB scanner suggest they are unlikely to be good ones, and will also suffer if papers have OBAs or you want neutral B&W So yes, possible, but not (IMHO) a workable solution. This has been tried for at least 20 years that I've seen and the fact that it's not widely used drops a big hint to me ;-)

@@KeithCooper Thank you for the quick and useful reply. :) Maybe the color gamut is not large enough to cover the full gamut of the printed image? Another option would be to use a camera. I've got an old DLSR with color profiles (Nikon D810) that could be used for both printer and monitor profiling. The lightbulb in my office lamp has adjustable color temperature from 3300 to 6500, so I will need to make new camera profile for a specific light temperature, but at least the camera has quite good color resolution (native ISO64 and 3x14bit color resolution in RAW mode). Would that be a better option?

It's not the gamut, it's the actual measurement data. The spectrophotometer reads the brightness at 10nm intervals as it steps through the spectrum from 380-730nm Cameras/scanners read 3 broad bands of R, G and B - the exact details of bandwidths and sensitivities are not published It matters not one jot how good your camera or scanner is - there is simply not enough data for printer profiling. Think of a scanner/camera sensor with 45 different colour channels as opposed to 3 For monitors it's a different problem in that using a camera as a colorimeter is also not easy, in particular how its spectral response matches up to the display primaries.

Thanks, that makes sense. :) I'm trying to figure out what I can do with the things I've got lying around. I've got an ANSI IT8.7/2 color calibration chart from coloraid.de together with a calibration file where my specific chart was measured with professional grade lab equipment (specifications unknown to me). It has 264 different color squares with different color and hue plus 24 steps of greyscale from white to black. My idea was that by scanning or photographing the chart I could get a "fingerprint" of how each square is represented by the RGB pixel values, and compare this with the true values in the calibration file. If I understand you correctly then the risk is that I'm loosing information in the conversion to RGB pixels, such that two different wavelengths bight produce the same RGB fingerprint and the camera would not be able to separate the two - but the photo of the chart looks very similar to the actual chart and I can clearly see the specific color of each square. That's why I was thinking it might be possible. Anyway, I've also got an old DataColor Spyder 2 calibration device that I used to calibrate my monitors, but I'm really unsure about the quality of the measurements, and I really doubt that it's got a real spectrometer. The quantum efficiency spectral response curves of the Nikon D810 is available online, but I don't know about the spectral response of the different lenses I put in front of it. It is my not very scientifically based gut feeling that the camera color response is superior to the Spyder 2 calibrator, but again - that is not something I know for a fact. :) The camera seems to produce quite accurate color representations with RAW 64 ISO when displayed on my monitor (Samsung Odyssey C49RG90S). Will any of this be usable or do I need a new spectrometer to profile my printer, scanner, monitor and camera?

The cal chart is for scanners A similar chart can be used for cameras (colorchecker or checker SG for DNG or ICC) A colorimeter is all you need for monitors - a spectrophotometer can be used Printers - I've never seen a good profiling system that doesn't use a spectro So yes, you could produce printer profile from photographing a printed chart - it heaps uncertainty upon uncertainty and lack of precision, but yes you could do it :-) As I noted, the fact that you don't see any of this actually done is the big hint ;-) However I always say, experiment! See what can be done or not. I've seen discussions of this on forums for many years, but do take time to really learn what profiles actually are and what they do. The book Real World Color Management is the key for this. And no, I'd not go near explaining all this stuff in a video. This is one for a real book!

Glad it was of interest

The profiling uses i1studio (ccprofiler) See the description in the video for details

Ah, this one has been going for years... The problem is that _no matter how well set up_ a scanner is it has just three channels of unknown spectral response characteristics. That means you cannot expect good results for making colour icc profiles - especially if a paper contains _any_ OBAs It's not so bad for B&W linearisation (I have several articles about this) and it might produce usable colour icc profiles in some circumstances - the emphasis is 'might' It's one of those things which seems intuitively like it 'ought' to work, but generally doesn't. There has been software around for years which perhaps seems to sell more on what it seems 'should work' than does ;-) In terms of target measurement usefulness, a scanner is worse than any specific profiling hardware/software I've come across

Hi Keith, thank you for your fast and detailed reply. In this case, I will continue using a profiling service until I BELIVE in needing my own profiling instrument ;) Thanks, Raphael

Most interesting info on flatbed scanners. I’ve used a calibrated Epson v850 with SilverFast to produce ICC printer profiles for a Pro-100 and a P900 with, what I thought, were excellent results. Now, I wonder what I’m missing!!

@@michaelduffy5796 Where it can work is with 'well behaved' ink/paper/print combinations - much of the work is done in advance in the software. Where it runs against issues is when the paper is not so well matched and for things like greyscale performance. As it happens, this March is the 20th anniversary of my first proper review on the Northlight site, of the Printfix - a small scanner based profiling system www.northlight-images.co.uk/review-of-the-colorvision-printfix/ When it worked it was quite reasonable, but when it didn't... well it didn't ;-)

It should never ever match! I'm trying to kill this persistent myth bit by bit :-) See my recent video about using a test image - it's relevant for every printer I've ever reviewed. Currently my biggest printer here is an Epson P5000 - really good for B&W I'm not allowed to live in a printer warehouse - the printers go back to Epson and Canon once I'm done. There's no way I could afford to actually buy them - especially with the lack of (paying) photography work over the last year - that and the reviews go back ~15 years ;-)

Ah, first up, ignore the softproofing - it's rarely of any help in this situation - it just tells you the profile is likely working, not whether it is of any use. The most common issue is in the target printing with media choices and print settings. I only really used the i1Studio the once (on my old Mac) to show it was possible, since I don't normally use it at all (I've lots more advanced kit/software) so I probably can't help much. I'd suggest asking on the printing forum at DPReview - lots more actual users there Oh, and be sure to include the exact papers, the media settings and the system you are using (mac/PC + o/s version) There are lots of potential issues which may depend on just what you are actually using for the process.

Hi Keith, thanks for the tip with Dpreview. Will try it there

@@KeithCooper Hi Keith, after a lot of trial, I found the problem. I printed the target sheets through Adobe Color Print Utility. The profile came out perfect. It seems like the i1Studio software which comes with ColorMunki does not print correctly without any color management. The printer driver settings look completely the same in both, but don't know what the i1Studio does on the target images before print.

@@dettty71 Thanks for noting that - it's one of those aspects where there is a lot of inconsistency between systems...

No Some might try installing them initially, but it's a great way to mess up a printer - certainly voids any warranty.

Thanks!