Printing too Dark

What are the choices when you first click on Print Settings? If you send me an email, I will trade some screenshots with you. My email address can be found by clicking on my name and looking in the bio line of the resulting Profile.

Ernie

Aperture does print too dark when under 2.1 when it controls the profile, at least with older printers, like Epson 1800. The only way I can get good prints on that printer is to use "system managed" and then use Epson Standard or Epson Vivid. I have a similar problem printing in photoshop so I think it is that the profiles provided by Epson are not truly updated for OX 10.5, etc.

I have gone to Image Print RIP on Epson 4880 which does a fantastic job of printing. I export from Aperture or Photoshop to the desktop and then print. But, that doesn't make what is happening correct. It may be that we will have to make our own profiles to print since the Epson profiles are so old. Too bad.

I tested the printing dark on an Epson 1800 using semigloss paper and profiles. As it was definitely too dark, I used EZcolor to make a corrected profile. It now works fine. I think the problem for the most part is that the profiles supplied by the printer manufacturers are not updated. The process of making a profile with EZcolor was really very simple.

It might also have been that I am using Pro Photo instead of Adobe RGB as the profile.

After a lot of messing about with the entire printing problem, I have to say I concur with your conclusion. The changes in Leopard's printing and colorsync engines require updated profiles, which most printer manufacturers have not yet supplied. Creating my own using the Eye-One Photo put an end to my printing issues.

This is conjecture of course, but a lot of testing supports this conclusion.

I thought I should mention that this morning I clicked "check for updates" and apple updated my drivers for the specific models that have been used on my computer!! Try it if you are having a hard time, I wont have time to see if it has made things better today(mothers day).
On the other hand if you have already worked around the problem, this update may cause what you are used to doing come out with a different effect?

This printing thing is really getting to me.
Has anyone used aperture and then had photo prints from a photo lab ( not apple ).
I would be very interested about the out put, did they match aperture on screen

I have had aperture from day one.

I have NEVER had a decent print from it.

I have used.

an HP all in one job
HP 1280 (A3)
Canon IP3000
Canon IP4000r
Canon IP5200r
Epson R360

All complete crap from aperture. All requiring many many prints wasting terrific amounts of ink to get a setting close to reasonable.

In all cases simply exporting and printing from Preview gives much better results. Heck iPhoto gives better results.

I love Aperture but fact is it does not print well. Or at least it makes getting decent prints incredibly difficult Just read what it takes to get towards a decent print around the aperture forums here. Amazing really, Would be easier to process your own film!

Agreed. Never a good print either.

Actually I export @ 300dpi, open in CS3 then still have to push the brightness way up to get something that looks close to the monitor. Never fun printing I can say that.

My prints are all great from Aperture, from quality standpoint. On one printer, there can be a placement on the paper issue, but not the other, newer, one.

What are your settings when printing?

Ernie

I don't know what to tell you guys, but there is something wrong with your color workflow. Either your monitor calibration is off, or your printer profiles or off, or your driver settings are wrong. If you've never gotten a decent print from any version of Aperture, on any printer, from either 10.4 or 10.5, then you're doing something wrong. If you have to crank up the brightness in Photoshop to get your prints to match your screen, a link in your color workflow chain is off.

Just the other day an art director I work with all the time, who uses an Epson 2400, and doesn't use Aperture, and is a Tiger/CS2 holdout, asked me what I did to get the prints for the project we're working on look so good. We're using the same shots, and the same art. I printed them from Aperture 2.1 and she used my prints, rather than hers, for the comp presentation.

Aperture 2 & Leopard have had some print engine & colorsync changes. For me it required some new icc profiles and up-to-date drivers to get back on track. However, if you claim you've never, not with any version of Aperture, been able to get a single decent print on a half dozen or so different printers, you're doing something wrong.

Message was edited by: KBeat

The problem is a lot of 'us guys' are just mac people not professional print setters.

Coming from that perspective you can surely understand why its very frustrating to be able to print from anything, even Safari and have reproduced on paper what you see on screen, it works every time. Get into aperture though and you are in a world of crap.

I cannot afford to waste ink trying to find a setting that works. On the epson R360 I used an Entire set costing £27 to try and get one picture print.

Asking what setting I used?

I tried a lot of settings. I set the actula print to all colour corrections, sharpnesses etc to off.
From aperture I told it to manage colours. In this way crap crap crap print, totally nothing like what I saw on screen. Always my main complaint is all pictures seem to have a haze of grey over them. Really rubbish.

Anyhow banging up the gamma got you a bit closer to the picture but looking all washed out so you had to bang up the saturation in images to get a print.

With the Canon drivers there were profiles for different papers. In ALL instances the images is much darker and again with like a grey over tone.

The HP 1280 of which I was very excited to print A3, well what a waste of time. Although I accept the drivers for this printer are long in the tooth.

Long and short is I love aperture but getting prints from it in my experience has been impossible. A quick look round these forums show that I am far from alone. I am delighted that others have success, but simply telling us we are doing 'something' wrong is not helpful.

Telling me to calibrate my screen is not helpful.

Understand and accept that printing from any other, ANY OTHER app, printing precisely the same image, even the same file results in a perfect pictures every time. looking exactly as far as is possible like the image on screen. This is not a calibration issue.

In my experience its an aperture issue. If the issue is simply you have to spend £100 in ink to get a setting that works, well then sorry thats not good enough.

Oh and yes, I turned off colour control in the printers dialogue but also tried with it on, and with apertures on and with apetures. With respect I think I have tried every setting aperture and the print boxes have.

Gary,

I get that you're frustrated with the results, and if I can I'd like to help you get better prints from Aperture. It's quite possible, as many can attest. There are differences in how an application like Aperture handles color printing than say an application like Safari. These differences can lead to some frustration from users who aren't used to printing from applications that rely on good color workflow for accurate and consistent results.

We tell you to calibrate you screen, not to be unhelpful, but because it's the only way any of us know to ensure that what you see on screen comes pretty close to what you get in print (they'll never be identical). Without a good calibration of your display, there is really no chance they'll match. Now keep in mind, that doesn't mean that regular, non professional folks aren't getting prints they love from regular ink jets everyday. Quite the contrary. My wife prints from iPhoto on her MacBook to our iP6700d all the time without a calibrated display or the proper icc profiles for the printer, and she loves her prints. I cringe when I see them, but keep my mouth shut, as they are too saturated and dissimilar to images when I view them on my screen. She thinks they're perfect, as what she considers a good "screen to print" match varies very much from what I require. She also, like many "non pros," prefers the more saturated, higher contrast, brighter images that the printers often kick out using the standard, non managed setting. More accurate doesn't always equal more attractive.

Aperture, in order to get really good prints, requires a good color workflow. That means a properly calibrated display, a good icc profile (created for your specific printer, paper, ink, and print settings), and accurate print settings in the dialogue boxes. Also, to see exactly what you're going to get on the paper, and this holds true for Photoshop, you need to turn on soft proofing within the application. If any of these things are off, your prints will be off.

I'm not saying you can't get a print you love from Safari or Firefox or whatever else you print from, I'm sure you can. I am saying that a print from Safari will never be as accurate screen to print as a print from Aperture built from a solid color workflow chain.

KBeat,

I do inkjet print with a calibrated and profiled workflow for 5 years, mainly using PhotoShop. First PS 7, than CS and now CS3. It has always worked.

I use Aperture since release 1.5. I used to work as well, with the same profiles.

Since Aperture 2.0, I get prints that are, as others describe, darker than they should be and with a like a grey veil over them.

There is a bug, either in the program or in its documentation.

It is not the first serious bug in Aperture printing, BTW. They've always been eventually corrected. I am sure this one will be too.

Regards

Thanks you for your help.

The main point I am trying to get across is that I understand colour workflow is essential to any good print.

But what I get printed out of aperture looks nothing like the image on screen. In an of itself an issue of colour workflow if the same issue presents itself across the board no?

However Photoshop et all print perfectly. All I need to do is adjust the type of paper and quality I want from the print dialogue.

Its not like every other application is getting it wrong. Its aperture getting it wrong (Or at leas getting it right seems to require amazing feats.)

One other thing ICC profiles are all well and good where they are provided. What does one do when they are not? (none available for Epson or HP printers I have used)