Need Input Re My Output/Monitor/Color Management

IraParis · #1 08-06-2007, 09:22 PM

Heres my problem. I have to supply my commercial clients with files that are as accurate as possible, in regard to color, density, etc. At the moment I'm using a Dell 2405, calibrated w/the Gretag Macbeth Eye One 2. After selecting a Pantone color from my swatch book, I was absolutely horrified how inaccurately it was displayed on my monitor. I'm ready to purchase an Eizo CG 241W as soon as they are available, @ about $2500.00. Any comments, insight, and opinions would be greatly appreciated.
Please note that I am not interested in printing any photos, just obligated to provide the most accurate files possible. Thanks, Ira

AndrewRodney · #2 08-07-2007, 09:53 AM

It's possible the color is out of display gamut. The Eizo isn't going to help if that's the case. You do need to calibrate and profile your display but buy a new one? Not sure that will necessarily solve the problem. Then, you'll hand off what is just a big pile of numbers and what will the client do? Will they see the color the same way or alter the numbers? Will you or they have an output profile for proper soft proofing of these numbers? I think you should keep your money in your pocket for a bit longer and decide what's failing here and what the entire workflow will be. Without a good output profile to soft proof the numbers, the most expensive Eizo will do nothing to help you.

Tim Smith · #3 08-07-2007, 10:27 AM

I'm not an expert in color management but I have done a fair amount of work using Pantone colors. I'm don't think using a swatch from one of your software porgrams as a comparison for accurate color is the best way to judge your color managed setup. For years the way a Pantone color swatch looked onscreen in Adobe Illustrator or Photoshop has been vastly different from what it looks like in Quark XPress (for example) or when output to a PDF. It was tolerable only because you could feel certain that the final, offset printed piece would actually match the swatch from the sample book.

I would guess that perhaps a better method of judging your color management would be to use the profiling method that incorporates the Macbeth Color chart. I have never done that, but believe it involves capturing the Macbeth chart under controlled conditions and using it for reference to fine tune your system.

IraParis · #4 08-07-2007, 11:32 AM

Sorry, but I just don't understand. My client will view the file on their system, which I know is not calibrated. They then send the file to the printer, or designer, neither of which have any clue what the colors, density, etc should look like. I believe that they are using my "values". I've seen some of the finished printed brochures, etc. and sometimes the images are horrible. I feel that it is my responsibility to give my client the most accurate file possible. I've calibrated & recalibrated my monitor using the Gretag Macbeth Eye One 2, with the same results. What to do?

John_Vito · #5 08-07-2007, 12:21 PM

Are you a photographer? If so why are you choosing Pantone colors? My own experience working with designers many, many Pantone colors on screen will not match the swatches. Since there are others that touch the file after you, that know nothing about color management, I would suggest to go by the Pantone numbers and not how the colors look on screen as Andrew mentioned the colors could be out of display gamut.

Tim Smith · #6 08-07-2007, 12:41 PM

I believe the color space profile that you choose to deliver the final photos in could also be very important. Pro Photo is popular when editing and making prints in one's own environment, but when handing off to others, something more "universal" (like sRGB) might make more sense.

IraParis · #7 08-07-2007, 01:30 PM

Yes, I am a pro photographer. In this particular case, I had to fill a selection with a color. I had the product, and had the idea to find the closest Pantone color, select it, and fill the selection. Made sense to me. The way that the color was displayed actually frightened me! I'm working in the Adobe 1998 RGB Color Space. Although I have no control after I deliver the files to my client, I want to do all I can to deliver a file as accurate as possible. It seems like it should be a fairly easy process, given the correct software/hardware. Capture the image, work the file so it looks like the actual product, burn the file, and deliver. My Nikon D2X does the raw capture, Nikon Capture and Photoshop works the file, as displayed on my monitor, and I burn the CD. It makes sense that if the monitor is not displaying an accurate image, it is impossible to work the file with any confidence.
Although I don't profess to be anywhere near an expert, It seems a pretty straightforward process. When we shot film, the printer always had the original transparency to use as a go-by.
Where am I going wrong? Its not my intention to come across as argumentative, its just that I'm extremely frustrated by what seems to be a relatively easy problem, given the narrow parameters of my scenerio.
P.S. I just ordered Andrew Rodney's book.