|
|||||
|
Home >> Photography >> Digital Photography GretagMacbeth
Eye One Photo - Follow-up Review
Skip ahead to current in 2006 and things have changed somewhat since 2003. While my Sony CRT is still the same and still going strong, the 1270 printer has changed to the much nicer Epson R2400 and Epson 4800 K3 units, and I’ve since had the opportunity to use and review printer and monitor profiling packages from ColorVision and X-Rite/Monaco. The ColorVision PrintFIX PRO package excels at offering good bang for the buck while X-Rite/Monaco is a heavyweight in the high-end category. In fact X-Rite is going to get even bigger with the recent merger with GretagMacbeth to create a super color management company. For the time being both product lines will remain available separately. With the X-Rite product in hand, it made a lot of sense to try to get my hands on a current Eye-One Photo to see how the package and quality has held up since 2003 and compare two heavyweight contenders. A follow-up was also appropriate to get around the fact that my then Epson 1270 printer was not a particularly good unit for printing consistency and color stability even if it could produce some very nicely sharp prints. It just wasn’t appropriate to use something that old and that lacking in consistency when doing critical comparisons to the X-Rite profiles I was creating. For example, finishing off one color cartridge and inserting a new one in the 1270 could introduce a huge change in color when printing the same image on the same paper (I speak from experience). GretagMacbeth hardly needs an introduction, being the other giant in the world of color management. It’s ColorChecker card of multiple color patches is ubiquitous in so many test shots and charts used by many reviewers. GM is a primo brand with products of unimpeachable quality and one can only imagine what future products will emerge from the newly merged company with X-Rite. GretagMacbeth was kind enough to send me a current Eye One Photo package for this follow-up review. About Color Management I won’t get into a general overview of color management as I did in the original Eye One Photo article, but suffice to say that color management is critical in this digital age and you should not skimp on getting yourself a good color managed workflow. At minimum, this requires proper monitor calibration and profiling to provide confidence that what you are printing will actually have some resemblance to what you see on that profiled monitor. At a more advanced level, you would want to work with high quality custom profiles for your specific printer and choice of papers and to do that you would use a product like the GretagMacbeth Eye One Photo. For example, Epson has produced improved profiles for use with their current series of printers and even I would say that they are pretty good, but as Andrew Rodney points out in his book Color Management for Photographers, these profiles can still be too generic when absolute accuracy is desired. Epson will have taken a broad sampling of their printers with their papers and then averaged out the samples to create the canned profiles that either come with the printer’s installation CD, or can be downloaded from various Epson websites. It means that Epson profiles are good, but not perfect and again, packages like the Eye One Photo are required to produce specific profiles dedicated to your particular printer, using the ink cartridges currently installed, and the package of paper currently being used. It
means that if you are "meticulous"
about color management and accuracy, you would create new profiles
every time you changed ink cartridges, or opened up a new package
of paper. I recall some years in the past before X-Rite purchased
Creating new profiles every time an ink cartridge is changed no longer makes sense today when every serious printer offers individual ink cartridge changing. Gone are the days when one color ran out, the entire color cartridge had to be tossed out because all the colors were in one large cartridge.
The current Eye One Photo is a much beefier package than the one I reviewed a few years ago. I was quite surprised that the shipping box was so big, because the Eye-One wasn’t so big a package, or so I thought. Then I opened up the shipping box and hauled out a massive box for the Eye-One Photo that was only a little bit smaller than the shipping box. It’s about four times the size of the old version, so I was quite curious to see how the inner contents might have differed. I speculated that the contents would largely be the same, but just better packed than the original, smaller package that seemed to pack everything a bit too tightly.
Opening up the suitcase, shaped somewhat like the Eye-One Display colorimeter, revealed the custom shaped protective foam for all the assorted pieces of the various Eye-One Photo packages available. There’s even cutout spaces for items that are not part of the version of the Eye-One Photo kit I received for review, such as the projector profiling adapter. GretagMacbeth has definitely taken the Eye-One Photo upscale with such premium packaging. Most photographers probably don’t pack their cameras and lenses as nicely as GretagMacbeth does for the Eye One Photo. Most of the pieces were familiar to me from my first go around with the Eye-One Photo, but one piece is AWOL, the sunction cup holder used to calibrate CRT monitors with the spectrophotometer. I guess it’s a sign of the times that as CRTs need to be replaced, LCDs are what CRTs are being replaced with. I know that when my Sony CRT finally gives it up that I’ll be looking for a good LCD, because good CRTs are nearly impossible to find in most retail outlets. However, I’d have still liked to have had the CRT attachment accessory.
The new guide has a clamp at the top that holds the printed target in place. A central glider section goes over top the print target and the spectrophotometer fits on top of the glider section via a smaller, custom fitted glider for the rear of the spectrophotometer. Both gliders use rollers to move up and down, or side to side instead of plastic on plastic gliding that happens with the X-Rite method, which creates a bit of friction. As you scan rows of patches, you just nudge the central glider down after every row and scan back and forth. You don’t need to be at a specific side to scan a row, you can be at either end and work back and forth. Very efficient and if I thought the X-Rite method was smooth, the GM tracking is like taking a freshly sharpened set of skates onto a just Zambonied ice surface, or to be more common, like a hot knife through butter (hockey is on my mind because the NHL playoffs are in full swing as I write this J). More detailed photos using the new guide are farther down this review.
The Eye One Match software that comes with the Eye One Photo kit is the complimentary piece of the puzzle to make full use of the spectrophotometer, and adds more functionality to the kit in allowing you to profile scanners and digital cameras with the included scanner target and mini ColorChecker card. The older Eye One Photo I used back in 2003 was limited to profiling printers and monitors and wanting additional functionality required upgrade modules to be purchased. The current Eye One Photo kit I received offers more functions, but you can still customize to an extent by purchasing a basic kit and upgrading as desired. Using the Eye-One Photo Although the screens look largely the same as when I first reviewed the Eye One Photo, I’ve posted the screen shots to highlight some new features. The screen shots are not quite as sharp as can be because they have been resized downwards to fit my web template (screen shots are over 1000 pixels wide compared to my less than 700 pixels of content space). Plug in the spectrophotometer into a spare USB port then fire up the software. If you open up the Eye One Match software without the spectrophotometer plugged in, the software will prompt you to plug in the device. On the opening screen, you see the different calibration choices available for monitor, scanner, projector, cameras, and printers. Click on the appropriate choice so that you see a little green glow and then click on the right side arrow at the bottom right corner. On most screens there are help sections found at the top right side of the Eye One Match screens. These help screens provide good information and tips to help you along the way if you’re not familiar with the process of color management. They take the place of a detailed printed manual because there isn’t such a manual provided with the Eye One Photo package.
For RGB and CMYK profiling, you have some choices for the quality of target you wish to print out. With RGB, there’s really only one target of interest, the one that offers 918 color patches printed on two sheets of letter-sized paper. As I have mentioned in previous reviews, why spend good money on a high-quality profiling suite just to compromise your results; you should always use the highest quality targets available for creating custom profiles. Out of curiosity, I did create a profile for Epson Premium Luster using the smaller 288, single page target, but more on that later.
Print off your targets and allow an appropriate amount of time to dry. Some suites suggest less than an hour of time for the prints to dry, but I’ve usually waited at least 24-hours before using the target to create a profile for any package I’ve used. When the targets are ready, return to the same screen to measure them. You’ll be prompted to calibrate the spectrophotometer by placing it in its base station. Afterwards you continue on to measure the target.
As already hinted at, reading a chart is easy, quick, and very efficient thanks to the improved guide that GM has included with the Eye One Photo. I would have liked a longer USB cord so that the measurements can be done further away from the computer. In my office, I use an L-shaped desk with one side clear for working on profiles, but my CPU is located on the other side, requiring at least an eight-foot cord for adequate clearance. Thankfully, plugging the USB cord into a powered USB hub worked to give me the extra reach needed. Even better yet, make a battery powered spectrophotometer like X-Rite does. I can hardly wait to see what kind of new spectrophotometers are going to come from the newly merged X-Rite and GretagMacbeth company. Think of it, a Swiss-engineered spectro unit with American wireless, battery-powered operation using the GM guide. Reading a row just requires you to push and hold the left side thumb button on the spectrophotometer. The software detects the button push, flashes the screen white, beeps and then activates the spectrotphotometer’s built-in light source. You keep the button pressed and then glide the unit over a row of color patches. When you hit the end of the guide, you release the button and then the software beeps once to confirm a good reading, or multiple beeps to indicate a poor reading with a message on the screen advising you of what the potential problem might be. The message isn’t always accurate though with it mostly saying that you may have possibly measured the wrong row when in actuality you were probably too slow or too fast to read, or too quick to release the thumb button at the end of the row.
As you successfully read a row, the on-screen graphic of the print target fills in the same row to indicate which line you should read next. Obviously, you read line by line in order from row 1 to row 34 (for a 918-patch target). If you read a row out of order, the software sounds the error beeps to advise you of the misreading. It’s pretty foolproof for ensuring that you get a good reading because you can’t continue until you’ve read the row correctly.
This error notification is one way that the GM and X-Rite suites are a little bit better than the less expensive ColorVision suite. With the PrintFIX PRO, I could catch my errors by listening for the confirmation beep and if I heard something other than a single beep I knew that I flubbed a reading, but there’s no obvious or specific error beep or ding to indicate something’s not right. If you weren’t paying attention to the beeps and just kept on reading a row of patches out of order, you would have to wait for the end row ding-ding to be heard before realizing that an error had been made.
After reading all the rows, you can choose to save the data for future reference, or just move onto having the new profile created. When the profile is created, the on-screen graphic shows a coffee, pastry and newspaper as a hint that this might take a while, but in fact it only takes about 20 seconds or so before you’re prompted to name the new profile.
In another small touch that the GM and X-Rite suites have over the ColorVision suite, you’re not restricted in the number of characters to name your new profile. My current naming convention is to start with the color management brand name, followed by the printer model, paper, and then quality setting if I know I’m going to be producing more than one version of a profile. For example:
This naming convention groups all of a single brand’s profiles and gives me a quick reference for which printer it’s for and what paper, instead of having to decipher which profiles are for which printer and paper, as I have to do with some Ilford or Epson supplied profiles. If there are any issues with the charts read and profile creation, you'll receive this error message and a request to resample some specific patches:
Thanks to the new and improved guide, the GM method of creating printer profiles is the best process I’ve used to date. While I don’t consider the omission of being able to edit and tweak profiles created with the Eye One Match software to be of any concern, others might wish to have this feature that is included in the ColorVision and X-Rite suites. My take is that if I paid good money to purchase a high-end custom profiling suite, I expect excellent results without having to tweak the profiles. Having to tweak profiles takes away from the whole point of buying and using a custom profiling package, because then you’re back to the days of wasting time and paper having to do multiple prints to test your tweaks. Papers Profiled
The papers were:
I used the PDI test image seen at right, as well as some random images taken in recent times to compare the quality of the profiles. Profiles compared with included:
The ColorVision and X-Rite profiles were created using their respective high-quality charts that have 729 color patches.
Methodology For critical printer profile comparisons, I relied exclusively on my Sony E540 21-inch CRT as my reference. Yes, this is the same CRT from the original 2003 review and some may question its validity for the comparisons because of its age and because more and more serious photographers have moved on to LCDs for editing. However, my CRT has relatively low hours run and still has plenty of headroom for brightness (one of the first signs that a CRT is nearing its useful life as an editing tool). It may not be an Artisan, but it is still the most accurate monitor in my house and I rely on it for all of my important photo editing and with a profile created for it with the Monaco Optix XR and EZColor, images have never looked better. The tests prints were viewed in my home office with indirect sunlight during daytime hours, or via my daylight balanced desklamp in the evenings. Comparisons As I’ve stated in the past, when you spend a good sum of money buying a high quality color management suite, it only makes sense that you would always use the highest quality targets available in the suite to create your custom profiles. Why spend all that money just to compromise in using a low or mid quality target? However, I was curious to see if there were any significant differences between GretagMacbeth’s mid-level 288-patch target and their high-quality 918-patch target, so I did test prints using Epson Premium Luster paper. Differences? Yes there were, enough to very highly recommend always using the 918 patch targets if you live in the RGB world as I do. In comparing profiles created with the ColorVision PrintFIX Pro and X-Rite Pulse ColorElite System, as well with the canned Epson profiles, I found all to be quite good relative to each other. Hahnemuhle’s profile for Photo Rag 308 wasn’t too bad, certainly better than other vendor supplied profiles I’ve used in the past for those specific papers, but I felt it wasn’t quite up to the standards set by GretagMacbeth and X-Rite.
There was a bigger difference between GM’s own profile created with the 288 target and the 918 target than there were comparing to the ColorVision or X-Rite profiles. Similarly, there was a bigger difference when comparing Epson’s 1440 dpi profile with their 2880 dpi “special” profile – surprisingly, Epson’s 2880 dpi profile is less accurate than their 1440 dpi profile with the high-resolution profile being more yellow in tonality (or lacking in blue). While I do place the GM and X-Rite profiles ahead of the ones created with the PrintFIX Pro, as I wrote in the X-Rite review, in a very strict comparison of just the quality of the end profiles, I wouldn’t consider the difference to be reflective in the increase in cost that the GM and X-Rite suites have over the ColorVision package. However, as with high-end audio, small differences can be the make or break between good, great and outstanding. People paying the kind of money for the GM and X-Rite suites would expect superior looking profiles and they’ll get it for the extra cost paid. Also, when looking at the GM package as a whole and what it offers and can do along with the ease and convenience of creating profiles, the cost becomes commensurate, because the sum is greater than the individual parts. With that said and out of the way though, it became clear to me that the comparisons would really come down to GM and X-Rite for the most accurate profiles I could create in my system with my particular printers. Where the ColorVision and Epson profiles parted ways with the more expensive suites is in the relative saturation of colors, with the ColorVision and Epson profiles being more so than the GM or X-Rite profiles.
The profiles created with the GM and X-Rite suites were so close that I didn’t want to make a call at first, but as I scrutinized the PDI test prints and compared them to the monitor, I found a couple of things that I could report on. First, in favor of the GM suite, the shadow detail is ever so slightly better than the X-Rite suite (or any of the other profiles for that matter). But, where the GM suite faltered a bit was in the rendition of red, as seen in the Color Checker chart in the same PDI test image. The GM suite rendered the red as more of a deep, deep orange whereas the X-Rite profiles were more true to being pure red, but again, very slight difference that was only noticed when I specifically looked for it. For prints of other than test images, I found both matte and glossy to be excellent using the Eye One Photo profiles. In reviewing prints of other images, I noticed one curious difference when looking at the various prints of some wall graffiti, seen below. The red section in the lower left quadrant was overly saturated to the point of turning black in the ColorVision print whereas all the other prints were accurate with what I saw on the monitor.
I wished I could have profiled my CRT with the GM spectrophotometer, so that I could see how the single brand color management system would fare, but as already mentioned, the required suction cup holder to calibrate and profile CRT monitors is no longer part of the package. I could only profile the LCD, as that is the only monitor adapter that came with the package. I don’t hold my Samsung LCD in high regard for critical photo editing, which is why I use it only for placing Photoshop palettes, but I did give it a shot with the Eye One Photo. Maybe it just needed the right profiling package to dust off the carbon and reveal a diamond…or at the least, a cubic zirconia. Calibrating and Profiling LCD Monitors with the Eye One Photo In a dual-monitor setup, when you start up the Eye One Match software for monitor calibration, as soon as it comes up, you should move the screen to the monitor you want to profile. However, after the spectrophotometer is calibrated in its base station, the Eye One Match software resets both monitors and appears to dump whatever monitor profile may have been applied before starting up Eye One Match. In actuality, the Eye One Match software simply adjusted my Sony from "Expert" level color adjustments to "Easy," which is a preset of 6500K. Resetting the Sony back to Expert via the OSD (onscreen display) got me back to the profiled state. In order for me to directly change the Sony's RGB output, I have to be in Expert mode via the OSD to properly calibrate it during a profiling session.
You can place the spectrophotometer anywhere on the screen as the software will detect where it’s located and ensure that it takes its measurements in the appropriate area. Most people will advise that you should place your measuring device in the center of the monitor, but this creates problems with accessing the OSD controls for your monitor to adjust brightness, contrast, and RGB output (if applicable). I found placing the spectrophotometer in the top left quadrant of my screen as a good compromise in reading location and still being able to read the Eye One Match screen, as well as accessing the LCD’s OSD.
LCD’s can be problematic if you’re not sure how to profile them. You can’t calibrate RGB output like you can with a CRT, because doing so is akin to a software adjustment instead of a hardware one. Most LCD’s offer contrast and brightness adjustments and some even offer a backlight adjustment and this is really the only true hardware adjustment you can make with an LCD. For the white point setting, you can’t use a CRT reference of 6500K either because that again is like a software-type of adjustment. You can only profile to an LCD’s Native white point, or rather, you "should" only profile to an LCD's native white point. With some LCDs you can’t adjust anything and you can only hope that whatever package you’re using to profile the monitor will do a good job with such limitations. I just happen to have such a brutal LCD in my Toshiba notebook and I used that as a bit of a torture test to see how well the various packages would fair. It would also be the easiest way to compare the various profiles because I didn’t have to worry about how switching profiles for comparison purposes would be incorrect due to brightness or contrast changes specific to each method of profiling.
Actually, I lied, my Toshiba notebook’s LCD can be adjusted, but these adjustments are via the video card driver’s software and this is obviously not ideal. Even if I wanted to access those software adjustment settings during a custom profiling session, it would be nearly impossible to do with some profiling brands and not worth the effort. After profiling to the native white point of the LCD with a gamma of 2.2, I was quite surprised at how good the Toshiba’s LCD is for matching up to my reference profiled CRT. The Monaco Optix XR profile had just a touch more red than the profile created with the Eye One Photo, while the ColorVision Spyder2PRO profile was a touch darker and lacking in the warmth of the two more expensive profiling packages. The Eye One Photo produced the more accurate profile for the Toshiba notebook and I’m a pretty happy camper knowing that I can edit on the Toshiba and not worry about a mismatch to my desktop CRT. The Samsung LCD
I noticed that the Eye One Match software offered a variety of different luminance settings for LCD profiling and while 140 cd/m2 was too bright, I tried lower settings such as 120 cd/m2 that helped, but then I found the colors to be affected, which I didn’t want. Out of a lark, because it did so well with the Toshiba, I tried setting the Eye One Match for notebook profiling the Samsung. This would set the luminance level way down to CRT-level luminance of 90 cd/m2, which would seem pretty brutally dim for a LCD. However, after finishing off the profile, I finally got my Samsung’s brightness to very closely match my Sony CRT and the colors were not affected (insert fireworks, champagne corks popping and horns going off). And if I told you that the LCD monitor view was a good match for a print produced with an Eye One Photo profile, would that surprise you? But, keep in mind, good is not the same as great, or excellent as it is with my CRT and it won't be displacing the big Sony as my number one. All in all though, I have to say my reluctance towards using LCDs for critical color editing is much diminished knowing how well they can be profiled with the Eye One Photo. However, I want to point out that what I did with my Samsung may not work with your setup, which is why having a profiling package with the flexibility of the Eye One Photo is killer for being able to nail the right kind of custom profile that works for your particular system, even if it seems somewhat wierd of different. While I didn't use the Eye One Photo for profiling my digital cameras, I'm posting a couple of screen shots for your benefit to get a feel for the process.
Profiling a digital camera is an interesting feature, but one that I think is best suited for the studio photographer using the same shooting conditions day in and day out. You just can't create enough custom profiles for every single shooting condition that you might find yourself in, hence the studio-orientation of camera profiling. And hence why you have certain white balance settings such as Sunny, Cloudy, Shade, Incandescent, etc. I generally shoot in Auto White Balance mode and then fine tune during RAW conversion, and when I can remember to, I use white balance cards in a test shot for later reference. Conclusion To cut to the chase, you cannot go wrong with the Eye One Photo. The spectrophotometer and Eye One Match software is singly or jointly capable of being an all-in-one suite that can calibrate and profile a range of devices from digital cameras, to scanners, to LCD monitors, to projectors, to printers and papers. The monitor calibration and profiling process is similar to most other packages and while I cannot comment on the current quality for CRT profiling, I found it to be quite capable in my first go around a few years ago. Others have commented on the GretagMacbeth spectrophotometer being the best device they have used for calibrating their monitors, so I have little doubt that had I been able to profile my CRT, it would have been excellent. And needless to say, I’ve never gotten a better looking profile for my LCDs than with the Eye One Photo. For profiling printers and papers, my primary interest for this follow-up, it’s the smoothest and easiest method I’ve used to date. The only way I can think of it getting better is if GretagMacbeth adopts the battery power of X-Rite spectrophotometers, for cordless operation (a longer USB cord would also be nice). There are a few different versions of the Eye One Photo, so you’ll want to check out all the kits and their specific features and buy the one that you need. As I understand it, even the most basic Eye One Photo can be upgraded to activate all the features and functionality of the Eye One Match software. You buy as you need those features rather than pay for features immediately that you may not need, e.g. most serious amateurs will likely only need RGB printer profiling, whereas the professional photographer may desire CMYK profiling capabilities for the off-set printing needs of their clients. The price of the Eye One Photo package under review here is approximately CAN $2000, same as the original Eye One Photo I reviewed a few years ago; however, the current package has more features enabled than the older version, such as scanner and camera profiling (a mini digital Color Checker is included for the digital camera profiling). The ruler guide is also much improved from the original and let us not forget the very nice custom case that houses and protects this expensive investment.
The Eye One Photo is more expensive than the ColorVision PrintFIX PRO and based strictly on quality differences between it and the lower cost suite, it would be hard to justify that additional cost. However, I believe the additional cost of the Eye One Photo is warranted and justified for those wanting the best and most flexible color management package available without stepping up into the extravagant world of suites costing almost five-figures. Back in 2003, if I were to provide a recommendation status I would have said highly recommended and in 2006, there’s no change to that status; the Eye One Photo is still highly recommended, but alas, just as in 2003, I still can’t afford it. Back in 2003 I just didn’t have the money, but in 2006 I'm destitute because I’ve already spent a small fortune on new cameras, lenses and printers J Link to GretagMacbeth or their specific Eye-One web site May 28, 2006 - Color Management Shoot Out - ColorVision, GretagMacbeth, and X-Rite/Monaco products compared with my rankings. |
|
Correspondence & About this website Copyright © 1998-2008 Edwin Leong |
|
  |
|
Back
in 2003, 
About
the Current Eye-One Photo
Another
piece of the kit 
The
key piece of any Eye One Photo package is the Swiss-made spectrophotometer.
It looks 
I
The
Toshiba Notebook LCD
I
lost count how many times I profiled my Samsung LCD with all three
monitor calibration packages in-house and while I found I could
get close to matching my CRT, I was never entirely satisfied with
any of the profiles produced. All three brands produced profiles
that 
The
quality of the