bmoag said:
First understand color management, which is not reliable without calibrating
your monitor with an external device-software things like the Adobe Gamma
applet are totally unreliable.
Canon has several ways to try to use color management and you should get the
instructions directly from them as they are the least intuitive of any
printer driver I have seen. Why Canon has to use labels like SP1 instead of
naming the paper is beyond reason.
If you have calibrated your monitor and set up your color managed photo
software correctly you will get superior results allowing Photoshop to
manage colors even with Canon's canned paper profiles. You will achieve far
better results with both Canon and non-canon papers, you will have to use
non-Canon papers if you want to use anything other than matte or glossy made
by Canon, if you can create your own profiles. I have found the least
expensive way to do this is with the Monaco Optix XR system: the
self-generated profiles I have made for Canon printers are dramatic
improvements over Canon's profiles although not much different than the
profiles Epson supplies for its papers and printers.
Thanks to all who replied to my query. My monitor is pretty well
calibrated, and I have a good understanding of color theory, at least as
far as wet printing of color papers goes, but the idea of profiles is
new territory, though I do understand the idea of a profile to translate
colors from one device to another. What trips me up is the several ways
of doing it, by printer, by Photoshop, and by Canon's printer driver
software, which by offering different paper types appeared to me to be
choosing a profile for that paper, but apparently all it does is apply
the correct amount of ink for that paper. I would have thought that a
profile would automatically allow for correct ink quantities, since its
aim is to reproduce the color as seen on a calibrated monitor, which
would necessarily involve ink management.
Canon's website is not much use, as it gives a step-by-step sequence of
what to do, but their advice seems contrary to other advice, like Canon
says to use ICM, others say do not use ICM. And nothing I can find tells
me what the various software does, or why.
I am still confused {:-(
Colin D.
*** ***