Why your prints will never match your screen, and why that's a good thing

Keith looks at how soft proofing is not the cure-all some would have you believe. It can help, but it's no substitute for actually understanding how prints look and papers differ.
Printer test images are available at:
www.northlight-...
See also Keith's video about choosing the best papers for your printing
• Choosing the best pape...
There is much more in the 'Choosing the best paper' article at www.northlight-...

[@bootsmcconnell]

Keith, great advice, as always. One bit of parallel advice I use to give my students, going back into the days of silver b/w printing and color printing in the darkroom, was “take the print with you and look at it over the next couple of days in different places and under different lighting conditions, and if possible take it to where it might (ideally) be shown. Bring that experience of looking back to the darkroom (or the monitor + inkjet printer) to see what improvements you can make.” To this I would also sometimes add, see how the photograph looks framed, behind glass, before you consider the adventure over, and even consider how the size of the print might affect your choice paper as well the color and tonal characteristics of the print.

[@KeithCooper]

Yes - it's one reason I don't use my print viewing stand nearly as often as I thought I might. It's also my response when people ask about getting specialist lamp fittings and lamps for their print area - fine if you've a specific reason, less relevant for most people.

[@WhiteNightsTM]

Keith, thank you for all your hard work and valuable information throughout these years. Please consider adding “support my work” button or paypal link to all of your videos as there are people who will be gladly leaving some tangible “thank yous”.

[@KeithCooper]

Thanks - I do have a KoFi link on the web site. I'll see what works for YT

[@LePetitMondedeMichel]

Thanks you so much for this video you synthesize my thinking about printing. The most important thing in printing is the result. The road to get there is important but is not the main goal. Month ago I made the mistake of printing with the wrong icc profile and the result was better than the series made with the good one. The key to achieving great result in printing is experimenting and making mistakes.

[@KeithCooper]

Whilst the 'wrong' profile is never a route I'd suggest - if it works, it works ;-) It's the result that counts...

[@weekenddistractions]

Great stuff! I tack my prints on a bulletin board and after looking at them for a few days, it's amazing what you see that you didn't see earlier. Almost always have to make a new print. My biggest problem with the board is getting decent light on them. Windows and lights in the house reflect off them in non flattering ways. I'm about ready to get into the wall and put an AC plug up high. From that I can some mount some sort of multiple light setup to shine onto each print from above.

[@KeithCooper]

Yes, lighting is often underestimated

[@johndwilliams]

Still on the path to choosing a printer but have ordered a screen calibrator as a starting point. Practical advice as usual, Keith.

[@KeithCooper]

Thanks!

[@paulwilliams4295]

Thank you - I wish you'd published this video a couple of months ago, and before I bought my 200 Pro🙂 I've spent the last few weeks (and box of FS Platinum Baryta) trying to match soft proofing and the prints as a baseline, so I could mindlessly edit for prints in the future. After you've now reset my expectations, and I've experimented with printing patterns and smaller prints, I'm a little more confident that I can create prints that please me. Thanks for the regular videos, they're so useful.

[@KeithCooper]

Glad it was helpful! Questions are always welcome [here or via the Northlight Images site] since they are often what gives me ideas for these short videos. If an answer takes more than two paragraphs, it may well turn into a short video ;-)

[@daver4451]

Very useful as always. Thank you for giving you time to share your insights and knowledge.

[@KeithCooper]

Thanks

[@stevealbon6745]

Good video thanks Keith, recently bought ET-8550 very pleased with it, replaced a very old Canon pro 9500 .

[@KeithCooper]

Thanks - I may get a chance to do some more 8550 testing at some point (depends on printer availability)

[@hamshanksproductions7161]

Hi Keith. I’m fully set up for top quality prints. I think my screen is the same as yours and the best photography investment I’ve made. After purchasing screen I started to do colour photography. My prints couldn’t be better. However as you said, I only use soft proofing as a sort of indicator. I’ve watched other photographers go to great lengths to edit a photograph, put it into soft proofing only to use the most basic ps (hammer and chisel) tools to adjust? Who would know if your prints hadn’t quite matched your screen? Don’t get me wrong, you should aspire to produce the best you can. I love the prints I make on Matt papers. Amazing. One thing you may comment on is the use of a rip. Colorbyte software apparently takes over the engine of your printer and will take it past the limitations of the native software. But expensive.

[@KeithCooper]

Thanks Used to use that RIP with my SP9600 15 years ago. It was useful but expensive then - these days, it's a pricy luxury I've no use for any more. It has its vociferous fan club, but the entry dues are too steep for me ;-) I will have another look at the Mirage print software with the P5000, but that isn't a full RIP like ImagePrint.

[@dplj4428]

This answers some questions and advice that was missing. 13:18 looking? Are loupe still worth using?

[@KeithCooper]

yes worth it, if you know what matters. That takes practice though.

[@iigal]

Hi Keith, thanks for all the videos and the posts on DPR. You were a great resource when I was considering buying this printer (now I have it). I am really confused by your comments about soft proofing. You say that some of it is useful, that some is overrated, but then what parts of it do you use/trust beyond the gamut check? I was taught by some of the professional printers in town that the soft proof in PS with Simulate paper color, simulate black ink and black point compensation, all checked "should" be a close emulation of how the print would look like. So I use that view to pre-compensate with editing in PS to achieve a look that is close to what I originally had for my (calibrated) screen view. I can't say that that soft proof is always close to the print in my hand viewed with a calibrated lamp; this varies by paper (and therefore the icc profile I use). So, do you have better guidance as to what part of the soft proof view you trust or find useful? Thanks!

[@KeithCooper]

Your 'professional printers' are missing out a key element - their personal experience of what a print looks like and how it will [always] differ from any screen view. I use soft proofing as an occasional guide for strongly coloured images where I want to see details of colour transitions and the like - it's sometimes helpful. Soft proofing appeals to 'recipe followers' ... A>B>C>Print . Unfortunately the best printing needs a feel and understanding of what's going on - that [hopefully] is what your 'professional printers' have... You already have the key expertise when you've noted the the soft proof can be quite a bit out depending on paper. Learn to view the print as the final result and the screen image as an intermediate step, which may differ depending on the paper and image. This is why I pay so much attention to printing known test images for any paper - they give me a baseline more firm than looking at prints of images I've just edited

[@AnnieNoodle]

I have to say as a painter who wants to make quality prints at home, I'm usually not even looking at the monitor, since I want to capture the original look of the painting. My main battle is with textures, usually! Thank you so much for all of these helpful videos. I found your channel when my old printer died, and you've helped me decide what printer I should get to replace it (I'm going with the Canon pro 300). Thanks again!

[@KeithCooper]

Thanks - glad it's been of some help!

[@thomaseriksson6256]

Lots of good information, thank you. Have you an article on the important of file size, resolution, from a camera?

[@KeithCooper]

No, because it has so many caveats, any suggestions would be largely meaningless. If I gave a number for any particular size it would be wrong - the answer is 'it depends' You need enough detail for the print size - it's also about image content and subject.

[@thomaseriksson6256]

​@@KeithCooper Thank you for the quick answer. My problem is that I just got a 2nd hand 36Mpix D800E and I try to plan ahead for a 2nd hand 45 Mpix D850 in such way that I have planned to get two Zoom lenses 24-70mmF2.8 E VR and 70-200mmF2.8 VR. I just got a 28mmF1.4 E to the camera but I have lots of old Nikon and Zeiss prime lenses and also three Nikon TS lenses that I will use on a 45 Mix camera but in a few year time there will be a 55-67 Mix Z8 camera. And then my lenses may not be good enough and I will use a FTZ adapter on that camera if I can afford the Z8. I'm an amateur “arty” woodland and infrastructure photographer and I plan to print A2 using a Epson P900 printer.

[@KeithCooper]

I've printed from 11MP images at A2 - so any of those cameras are easily enough. I know you want numbers, but you won't get them from me ;-) :-) As to 'lenses not good enough' - I've heard this for nearly 20 years and it's still largely just hot air on camera forums ;-) I still use a Canon 24-70 2.8L and 70-200 2.8L IS I bought in 2003, but on a 50MP camera. I expect to use them still, when the 5DS is replaced by a 100MP camera ;-)

[@thomaseriksson6256]

@@KeithCooper II still have a D700 12 Mpix camera that replace my D300 12 Mpix DX camera a year ago when it broke down. I don't have a 19mm PC lens yet or a good 50mm lens. I got a Zeiss planar 50mmF1.4 but it has CA at a large aperture opening. And I don’t have a good AFS 400mm F2.-8 G VR tele lens but only an old AF300mmF2.8 IF-ED screw drive lens.

[@robinjones6999]

Very interesting as usual Keith. Im convinced that everyone has different eyes and sees thing differently, not to mention eye degeneration as you get older - I find the whole thing so confusing and frustrating! I guess, at the end of the day, you try to get a print that you like, whether its totally "true" or not.

[@KeithCooper]

Yes - that's what counts. By regularly printing test images, not affected by any personal image editing foibles, I'm hoping to reduce some effects of my own sight changing. That said, it is a concern for those of us with older eyes ;-)

[@perroh]

Amazing video as always, thanks for spreading your knowledge (excuse any mistake, my English is not my first language)

[@KeithCooper]

No worries! - Thanks for your comment!

[@goranritterfeldt2608]

As always many thanks for your channel. Just as a small reminder… i wrote earlier when you got the P5000 that I didn’t found how to get the nozzle check as an automatic scheduled process. For example when I am out from home for a week. I tried but not succeed… take care! Göran from Latvia

[@KeithCooper]

I was told that setting turning off the auto shutdown, and setting a cleaning time would do it. I can't actually test this at home though (I'm not leaving the printer unused and switched on for a length of time)

[@chico11mbit]

Good work, dear colleague.

[@KeithCooper]

Thanks

[@ddsdss256]

I just try to optimize what I see onscreen (my primary workflow being DxO PhotoLab 5 Elite, possibly also using Nik and/or Topaz Photo AI or other software, depending on the image). When I get the image looking the way I want it to (on my factory-calibrated Benq PD3200U 4K monitor set to sRGB and 50% brightness--I generally edit with most outside light blocked out and no artificial ambient light), and save it (either as a TIFF or JPG). When I want to print (on my Epson P900), I open the file with Epson Print Layout and generally use the OEM ICC profile for color, or Advanced B&W Photo for B&W (in which case I generally use the confusingly default "Darker" setting), and Black Enhance Overcoat and Black Point Compensation where applicable. I'm still not sure about Perceptual vs. Relative Colorimetric Rendering Intent, but generally use the latter (more testing needed). I rarely use Maximum Quality as High Quality produces phenomenal prints in most cases and takes a lot less time. Although, as you point out, it's impossible/pointless to 100% match a projected image to a print (and of course prints look radically different depending on paper and lighting), I'm generally satisfied that the print reflects my artistic vision based on what I see onscreen. The important thing is "does the print work?" Experimenting with various papers and settings is part of the process (as you say, experience is hugely important--I still feel like I'm on the steep part of the learning curve) but IMO it's better use of time to record and edit more images than to obsess over the mythical "perfect" print (sometimes easier said than done)...

[@KeithCooper]

Yes - finding your path through this takes some time ;-)

[@1stWorldProblemsSolved]

The display used makes a huge difference also, lighting matching to the calibrated device or vice versa is also helpful when comparing; high CRI bulbs are preferable as well. Using a well calibrated OLED C1 (sub 2% de BT.2020 and sub .5% rec.709 with calman), they are much cheaper compared to desktop calibrated displays for editing purposes and offer flexibility of use), I am able to use soft proofing in ps very effectively to get a image to look how I want on a specific paper types before print. I don't think all images/art styles belong on, "the customer's paper of choice", but they should be sold the correct paper to most accurately display the image/art they choose. There is surely an optimal paper for each image or art style, in most price ranges. The main differences for my workflow; the smoothness of gradients are superior once printed, not different overall in color or tone, but in the transitions between on a higher dpi thus making it look smoother, the ppi of the monitor being only 91.79 pixels per inch shows more steps (main disadvantage to using a large oled). This is with a professional printer full disclosure. (z6200PS).

[@KeithCooper]

Indeed, soft proofing CAN be of use if handled well - poorly used it is a source of frustration for many.

[@davidshaw2233]

Hi Keith, newbie here. love your videos and am slowly figuring out how to print. One question that keeps coming to mind is this: Cameras can capture images in either Srgb or AdobeRgb gamut. Monitors can display in either an Srgb, AbobeRgb, or Dcp gamut. But nothing I’ve heard ever mentions what gamut a printer uses. Does a printer use a gamut? If so, which? Does it matter? The reason I ask this is if I take a photo using AdobeRgb, process (edit) it in software using AdobeRgb, then print the photo, will the printer be able to use the AdobeRgb gamut or does it say print in Srgb. Are there limitations to a printers (for lack of a better term) gamut.

[@KeithCooper]

The printer/paper/ink gamut is defined by the printer profile. This is either a specific icc profile, or an implied one inside the printer driver Cameras do not capture in srgb or A98 - raw files have no profile. A profile is assigned when processing them either in camera [jpegs] or with processing software Monitors can display in whatever gamut they have - this can be calibrated to a known type if needed and within the range of colours they offer. I have covered this in different ways See this kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z4nFm3qsi6-Nh7c and this kzbin.info/www/bejne/l2KykJJ5e71-rqc Also, I'd suggest reading this - very useful The Colour management chapter from the CS3 book [still relevant] www.photoshopforphotographers.com/pscs3/download/PSCS3_colmanage.pdf Hope that lot helps!

[@davidshaw2233]

Thank you. That clears a lot up

[@rolex-js9nk]

question: do you come to lincolnshire and can you fix my prints? 😂 been struggling to get the prints somewhat close to the screen. but they come out super desaturated quite often. tried to set up my monitor so its more desaturated so I can get a more accurate representation. tried changing the ICC profiles , but the results aren't great. the best I could get was to save as a jpeg then print it off. going to buy some epsom glossy paper so it matches my printer see if that helps, (that was epsoms default fix because they couldn't help me ) after that I'm out of ideas.

[@KeithCooper]

I do bespoke on-site print training as part of my commercial work - see here www.northlight-images.co.uk/commercial-photography/training/photography-tuition/ Drop me an email via Northlight if you want to know any more? Have you calibrated the monitor - this is not something which can be done 'bye eye'

[@louisgoodison3447]

Hey Keith would really appreciate if you could reply to this. I’m starting up a photo business and need a printer that can print decent quality photos a3+ that has decent sized ink cartridges that will last for less than £400 or in that range any ideas ?

[@KeithCooper]

An unanswerable question I'm afraid What does 'Decent quality' mean? What sort of volume, what sort of market - i.e how quality/price sensitive is your market Any particular media types? What sort of images? The question is not really about the printer, it's about its place in the business, and what that business is. I've an entire collection of videos about all this in the 'Business of Photography' playlist As for less than £400 for a printer - unlikely, since that's firmly in 'consumer level' desktop printer territory.

[@zBernie12345]

I've said many times: "The proof is in the printing!"

[@KeithCooper]

Very true

[@johandenhertog6878]

Have the Epson SureColor SC-P700 and i give it up. On my Nikon D4 camera and on the BenQ monitor it look fantastic beautiful. Shoot only black and white portraits. Everytime it looks bad and use many different papers. Maybe i think to much how i would on my camera. Black and white is so complex to print that it impossible to match what you photograph. Maybe the best way to print is the look how the person would to see. And not the photographer. Printing is a another world for a photographer. It’s also a expensive way to go crazy about inkt and paper.

[@KeithCooper]

There's no good way of printing direct from a camera to my mind. I'd suggest that, if you want good B&W, you print from a computer and use appropriate software. Digital black and white takes care and expertise - there is no mystery about it IMHO

[@audiophilipp]

My last printed image, that colors match at my s23 ,my screen and my tv,they all match acrsoss the devices except on the photo printed,a lot of blue color saturation on the print,why is that ?

[@KeithCooper]

What's a s23?

[@audiophilipp]

@KeithCooper samsung s23 ultra,lphone,my monitor,my tv,everywhere the photo is shown withot that much of blue color,when i printed it,it had much more blue,printed with icc profile fot the paper and printer,also on soft proofing there wasnt that much blue

[@KeithCooper]

Classic difference between screens and prints - also depends on how it was printed and on what. Without a colour managed edit/print workflow with a good profile, such prints are always going to be hit and miss. If just using uncalibrated mobile devices and a TV then any match is always as much by luck than design ;-)

[@audiophilipp]

@KeithCooper why none of devices shows it ? Also the soft proof doesnt show it

[@KeithCooper]

You don't mention the printer/software etc? Can't say much without far more info - too many options... Remember too that soft proofing only relies on a one way translation in the profile, so it could just be a bad profile...

[@Chefbigpp]

Do margins actually always appear correctly on paper? (Specifically the Epson ET-8550)

[@KeithCooper]

Not always is the best I can say. It depends on the software, driver, computer system and particular paper size. Where margins are critical I'll do a test print on plain paper to check It's not something I tested for the 8550 when I had it here, so I can't be more certain than that, although I do recall some issues with custom sizes via the top slot (it's mentioned in the main [written] review)

[@Chefbigpp]

@@KeithCooper alright thank you, and a huge thanks for the in-depth written review!

[@freehand5040]

You cannot print light that's for sure.

[@KeithCooper]

Yet, a lot still assume you can ;-)