F
false_dmitrii
Hi again,
When I scan color photographs on my Epson 4870, many colors come in
properly. However, reds (& pink, orange, brown, etc) typically shift
noticeably. After some careful evaluation, I've reached the tentative
decision that most of the discrepancies are due to the fluorescent
light source. When I held my test photo near the light source, the
colors were closer to the scanner's onscreen output than their
appearance under normal viewing conditions. I was unable to correct
the red via PSP8 or PSE2--it was too complicated a problem for my
knowledge level--and while I'm sure there's a way I'm not aware of,
I'd prefer to solve the problem at the source via color profiling.
My scanning is for personal use with an eye toward long-term viability
of the initial files. I'm willing to put some extra money toward the
scans themselves that I can't justify for image editors, printing,
etc. I don't want to spend hundreds on a colorimeter if possible.
With that in mind, what sort of color management should I be looking
for?
Specifically, is buying an IT8 target and profiling the scanner
through Vuescan or freeware truly useless without an accurately
calibrated monitor? I've never done a profile and don't know exactly
what's involved. I'm using a default manufacturer profile right now
and am satisfied with its output. Good digital camera photos display
with colors that appear to be correct; if I can match their color
quality with the scanner I'll be happy. Is there any reason ICC
profiling the scanner would make things worse rather than better?
Even if the monitor is uncalibrated, does it make a difference to the
initial scanner output? Does a user-created scanner ICC profile
depend on his monitor profile for accuracy, or does an inaccurate
monitor profile merely prevent him from making accurate postscan
adjustments to the original scan output? In other words, if the
original profiled scan output is viewed later on a profiled monitor,
will everything look right?
Otherwise, does it sound like I'm doing something else wrong with my
scans to cause the problem?
Thanks in advance,
false_dmitrii
When I scan color photographs on my Epson 4870, many colors come in
properly. However, reds (& pink, orange, brown, etc) typically shift
noticeably. After some careful evaluation, I've reached the tentative
decision that most of the discrepancies are due to the fluorescent
light source. When I held my test photo near the light source, the
colors were closer to the scanner's onscreen output than their
appearance under normal viewing conditions. I was unable to correct
the red via PSP8 or PSE2--it was too complicated a problem for my
knowledge level--and while I'm sure there's a way I'm not aware of,
I'd prefer to solve the problem at the source via color profiling.
My scanning is for personal use with an eye toward long-term viability
of the initial files. I'm willing to put some extra money toward the
scans themselves that I can't justify for image editors, printing,
etc. I don't want to spend hundreds on a colorimeter if possible.
With that in mind, what sort of color management should I be looking
for?
Specifically, is buying an IT8 target and profiling the scanner
through Vuescan or freeware truly useless without an accurately
calibrated monitor? I've never done a profile and don't know exactly
what's involved. I'm using a default manufacturer profile right now
and am satisfied with its output. Good digital camera photos display
with colors that appear to be correct; if I can match their color
quality with the scanner I'll be happy. Is there any reason ICC
profiling the scanner would make things worse rather than better?
Even if the monitor is uncalibrated, does it make a difference to the
initial scanner output? Does a user-created scanner ICC profile
depend on his monitor profile for accuracy, or does an inaccurate
monitor profile merely prevent him from making accurate postscan
adjustments to the original scan output? In other words, if the
original profiled scan output is viewed later on a profiled monitor,
will everything look right?
Otherwise, does it sound like I'm doing something else wrong with my
scans to cause the problem?
Thanks in advance,
false_dmitrii