B9180 Prints not matching preview (MUCH darker), tiff from Photoshop [ Edited ]

[HLansing]

As the title says, printing this image from CS4 results in a dramatically darker print than it should.

-Original Image is a TIF-format, at 8 bits, 60.2 megs (NOTE: Image sen to print at both 16 and 8 bits, while sending as 16 bit took forever, the output's brightness is not meaninfully different in either mode)

-Color profiled (Spider 3 elite) monitor,calibration verified 10 minutes prior to print with controlled ambient light

-HP ICC profile (factory) for APP (Advanced Photo Paper) glossy

-Photoshop (CS4) settings:  Photoshop manages color, proper icc profile selected, color space adobe rgb, rendering intent=perceptual, blackpoint compensation is on. Color settings are: Adobe RGB, FOGRA27, Gray Gamma 2.2, Dot Gain 20%, RGB/CMYK/Gray all set to "Preserve Embedded Profiles", Mismatch and missing warnings on

-Printer settings:  [Printing Shortcuts Tab-HP APP glossy selected, Quality=Best, Color Management=Application Managed Colors][Features Tab-HP APP glossy selected, quality=Best, preview is on] [Color Tab-Color Management=Application Managed Colors] NOTE: Printer calibration is current, heads and ink levels all report fine, printer is <2 weeks in operation.

- Print Preview is, if anything, even more vivid than the Photoshop version. NOTE: Image soft-proofed using HP ICC profile being used to perform the print. Every indication prior to hitting the Print button is that this should be an excellent print. Link to screenshot of HP preview and Photoshop view side by side is: 

Link to screenshot of HP preview and Photoshop view side by side

Following the...what I am coming to expect...extremely long wait time (even on a file that is only 60 megs) for printing to start, the resulting print is easily 30% darker than it should be (and looks washed out as well)!  Here is a link to a scan of the finished product, which I have validated online (color-managed Firefox browser) to reasonably reflect (the scanner is not pro) the accuracy of the issue. (NOTE: The scan did wash out the colors, but the scan is sent for brightness comparisons)

Link to screenshot of scanned output

I would really appreciate some help with this.

Thanks

H

Message Edited by HLansing on 08-13-2009 03:44 PM

[itotmike]

In case someone at HP looks at this forum, I have exactly the same problem with my OJet 6310.  Prints are WAY too dark, no matter what brightness increases I apply in CS4.  I've tried different combos of ICC profiles, application managed, etc, etc & have succeeded in nothing but wasting ink & photo paper!

THere's a similar post here http://h30434.www3.hp.com/psg/board/message?board.id=Printing&message.id=6351&query.id=114390   and I'm gonna try these settings (where applicable) & see what happens.  I have NOT contacted HP Support yet, hoping instead to find my own answers from experienced users...

[HLansing]

No thoughts on this?

[itotmike]

I spent close to 2 hours with HP Tech Support last night, including them taking remote control of my system.  He checked my drivers, ICC profiles, Photoshop settings, etc.  He viewed my on-screen photo & then had me scan my output.  He agreed that I did have a problem...

Bottom line for me is that my "OfficeJet series printer (6310) was not designed for photo printing.  You should buy a PhotoSmart printer instead".  Although he was very polite, apparently knowledgable (he navigated PhotoShop better than I can!!), and went out of his way to help me (2 hours!), I was VERY disappointed with the answer, ESPECIALLY in light of the fact that YOU have a PhotoSmart, pretty hi-end at that, and still have the same problem.

For now, I'm sending my digital ouput to Costco & having them print.  10 cents for a 4x6!!!  I don't think I can print that cheap.  I'll see their results after noon today.  If I still have a problem, I guess I'll need to look at my monitor colour profile in PhotoShop instead.

[HLansing]

I think the biggest single issue here comes down to this:  If the printer is configured properly, and color management is solid, WYS-should-be-close-to-WYG.  I would not be posting here with this issue if the print preview for this image showed as dark as the output...they are not even close. 

As you say, I'm using a printer built for one purpose and one purpose only; to turn out production quality prints comparable to the Pixma 9500 and the Epson R2880.  That means if I am doing my job from a color management perspective (and I listed everything I've done to make sure I am...if there are any holes in my process feel free to chime in) then I expect this printer to do its job and provide output appropriately matched to its own danged preview.

I've provided the links, I've provided my settings and processes, and I am simply boggled.  

This isn't a hobby, it's my job, and I would prefer not to go back to paying someone else to do my 13X19 and smaller prints for me...which is why I invested in this machine.

(NOTE:  Since the first post I have also exported this imageout as a JPEG and tried that as well...same result)

[itotmike]

Totally in agreement!  Your frestration is clear and I hope I'm not clogging up your thread with my "contributions".  Trouble for me is that I don't have confidence that my printer or display profiles ARE setup properly.  I have swapped colour mgmt seetings so often now that I'm probably cancelling out profiling at both ends.  Think Chinese translated to Albanian, to French, and output English!!!  Problem also that PhotoShop profiles label standard differently than HP.  "CYMK", for example, has no counterpart in the HP printer settings!  What to use?  ICM, Application Managed???

I continue searching for a solutuion & came across this site http://www.ocad.ca/about_ocad/technology_media/sb/printing_help/color.htm    .  Based on this info, and translating to my application, I am getting a bit closer.  At least the printer is now "paying attention" and actually printing something other than "whatever it feels like". 

Now that I've got colours close to matching (WYSIWYG), it is apparent that I do, in fact, have some issues with my LCD monitor brightness/contrast settings.  I am now working through that and hoping I don't need to go to the expense of buying a Spyder calibration tool.  I DON'T make a living at this and would prefer to spend my hard earned $ on glass/equipment to improve quality at the front end.  Photos from Costco will be here in about hour...

[HLansing]

Mike,

You're not printing from CYMK-profiled images...are you?  That's geared pretty specifically for pre-press work, and if you are using that colorspace I would be astounded if you get prints that look like your on-screen previews.

One thing you may want to try (if you have ICC profiles loaded in Photoshop for your printer/paper combination...this is critical for WYSIWYG) is soft-proofing in PS to see what it thinks your print will look like. Of course, you may aleady be soft-proofing in which case, ignore this.

And no, you're not cluttering up the thread at all.

[itotmike]

No I'm not using CYMK, just mentioned that as an example (poor example) of colour management naming mismatch.

I have been trying to use Adobe RGB, or sRGB, or ColorMatch RGB for workspace editing.  I also tried using HP provided profiles, specially HP OJ6300 Prem-Plus Photo (tricolor + black).

When I configure my printer, I have tried all 4 different available Color Managment settings which consist of ColorSmart/sRBG, Adobe RGB (1998), Application Managed Colors, or ICM.

My brain is now becoming frazzled & I'm losing track of the combos which appear to APPROACH acceptable results.  On the one hand, I'm too tired to continue but on the other, I know if I walk away from this for a little while I'll have lost track of my "progress" and will have to start all over.  I need a workflow for my workflow...

Jim

[itotmike]

Forgot to mention, no I'm not using Soft Proofing since I don't know about it.  I researched & tried it but all I got was stuff about color blind modes & image looked rotten.  Giving it a rest for now...

[HLansing]

PMd you the step-by-step on soft-proofing, Mike.