I think you misspoke, Bill. I would describe monitor calibration as
assuring that what you see on the screen is an accurate representation
of what the digital image is supposed to look like. It has nothing to
do with the printer since calibrating the monitor does not in any way
alter the data that is sent to the printer.
If you also calibrate the printer using particular inks and paper
combinations the prints will also look like what you see on the
calibrated monitor when the correct profile is used with the matching
paper and ink... at least insofar as paper and ink can reproduce the
gamut. Here the data actually sent to the printed page is altered but
it's due to the printer calibration and not the monitor calibration.
But if both have been calibrated they should look quite close.
Chuck Norcutt
Bill Pearce wrote:
>> How critical is monitor calibration? Are all of those
>> calibration tools/gizmos that are sold to calibrate
>> the monitor worth looking into?
>>
> The very most important thing there is, if you plan on making prints. In
> general, there's no relationship between the colors you see on a screen and
> what come out on a print, unless you happen to be very lucky. Calibration
> means that what you see on the screen is what goes out to the printer, be it
> your own inkjet or at a lab.
>
> That is a necessary oversimplication for discussion, of course, as there are
> many complexities to color management, but monitor calibration is the first,
> and in my opinion most important step.
>
> Bill Pearce
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|