The stated speed benefits of the SpyderX however, are completely useless especially if you want a more accurate calibration. I've found the results from the Elite to be far more pleasing because I can control all aspects the major aspects of the calibration including the white point and color profile. The Elite version takes things further and gives even more control when it comes to calibrating your monitor. Previously I used and reviewed the SpyderX Pro which I thought was a brilliant, simple, and, intuitive device. Is it even remotely possible to produce "high-quality" prints from a cheap printer if it's calibrated correctly? SpyderX EliteĪs part of the SpyderX studio package, a display calibrator is also included. What I wanted to see was how much of an improvement the Datacolor package could offer for a cheap and entry-level printer. A good printer will more than likely produce relatively decent prints even without calibration. For this particular test, I thought it would be far too easy to use a high-end printer and calibrate that. As mentioned above calibrating is something I'm a big fan of and something I recommend so, I wanted to test and see how Datacolor's solutions work. The perspective you have of your images is entirely different when you see your work in a huge print vs looking at it on a relatively small screen.
I agree that printing images is something that all photographers should do. Recently, however, I'm starting to reconsider that position and I'm currently looking at potentially buying the Canon PIXMA PRO 10S. Many of my clients print the images I provide them but I don't personally print them for myself and for that reason I never really had any need for such calibrators. One of the main reasons I've never calibrated a printer before is because I don't personally print.
0 kommentar(er)
