Roma--  Just for kicks, try these settings when you recalibrate:

Brightness:  30
Contrast: 50
Preset Mode:  Standard

What's a normal result?

I use ColorEyes Display Pro and when I adjust the white balance using the Brightness and RGBs, I set the Brightness about 2% higher than the indicated level for my targeted luminance value.  This gives the software a bit of "headroom" for adjusting the RGB levels and makes a much better profile.  The support people from IntegratedColor/ColorEyes often suggest setting the brightness level 5-10% higher than indicated.

My question to you Eizo users is, why aren't you using Eizo's integrated hardware calibration system with ColorNavigator software and DDC?

Mike, My apologies...  I knew this story sounded familiar and I realized later that you also had a conversation going over at the POTN forum.  I think you received more "Color Management" advice there, but very few of the CM regulars there use Qimage for printing. Glad you got it sorted out.

I just read through this thread and I'm scratching my head...  I don't see any place where you mention the model of your NEC monitor.  It raises some questions for me-- Is this NEC monitor a wide gamut type that the Spyder2 Express simply can't handle? Why use a cheap obsolete calibration device like the Spyder2 Express, when NEC has the excellent Spectraview II system available? The Spyder2 Express was an adequate basic calibration tool back when the majority of us still used CRTs, but the new Spyder3 devices are designed to handle the newer LCDs, both wide and normal gamut.  Datacolor claims that the Spyder3 hardware is 83% more accurate than the Spyder2.

One more question... How did you calibrate "Sharpness" with a Spyder2 Express?

Allan, I had an afterthought...  Are you using L* or 2.2 as your gamma setting in ColorEyes?  I know the software tells you L* is recommended but I found that 2.2 gives me a smoother profile in the deep gray tones without the sudden spikes.  On the screen, opposite to what they say about L*, 2.2 opens up my shadow areas and gives me smoother gradients with imperceptible banding.

According to the validation report, your profile is excellent, with all measurements under 1.0, but you may want to compare 2.2 vs L* and see which works best for you.

Terry, please put your suspicions to rest. I certainly DON'T resize in Photoshop when I'm going to print with Qimage. Never have.  But I WILL resize in Photoshop when I'm printing from Photoshop.

No confusion and I do appreciate your time.  I understand that the 600ppi setting I enter is meaningless until/unless I print.  I set that because I still occasionally print from Photoshop and it's just one more step saved, and one more pre-print setting that's easy to forget.

Regarding the 4800x1200 interpolated...  That's an actual print quality setting in most HP photo printers. I didn't mean to imply that I used any software to interpolate to this resolution. Best = 600 dpi, Maximum = 4800x1200 dpi.  I always print with the "Best" setting.  I guess most of the residents of this forum are Epson or Canon users and not familiar with the prosumer level HP printers.

Regarding 16 bit files, of course I knew that Qimage handled any required interpolation automatically, but I thought you guys were telling me I HAD to send Qimage an 8 bit file.  Anyway, I learned something today.  

I just had a similar discussion in another thread, but this one clarified that I was doing right all along. I also use ACR for my raw files, but set 600 ppi, which is the native resolution of my HP printer.  I know that ppi is essentially meaningless until you actually print, but I sometimes still print through Photoshop and having this setting in place saves me a step.

I also learned now that Qimage takes my 16 bit Tiffs and interpolates them down to 8 bit, again saving me a step.

So, are you saying that I shouldn't set the presets from ACR to open the file in Photoshop as 16 bit, 600 ppi?

No, I'm not...  I'm making 600ppi images.  And, it's done automatically through the export presets in Adobe Camera Raw.


Again, 16 bit is in the ACR presets.  It's not another step for me.  I do a lot of editing and retouching in Photoshop CS4 and prefer to edit in a 16 bit environment for as long as possible before printing.


Please re-read my previous reply.  And you don't have to sell me on the benefits of Qimage.  I own it, I use it, I love it!


Now that's the answer I was after.  Thank you Fred!   

Doing some research on 16 bit printing, I think I answered one of my own questions.  My HP 8750 printer specifications say it can handle "TIFF 24-bit RGB Uncompressed Interleaved".  These are 8-bit files (8x3=24).  My understanding though, is that the driver automatically downsamples the 16bit files to 8bit, AT THE POINT OF PRINTING.

I also found this article by Mr. Chaney:
http://www.steves-digicams.com/knowledge-center/hype-or-hero-take-2-16-bit-printers.html

I think my course of action is to continue to work in a 16 bit environment right up to printing, and then convert from 16 to 8 bit before printing, regardless of whether I print from Qimage or Photoshop CS4.

Comments?

OK...  I've been printing for several years and have always:

Shot in Raw
Converted to 16 bit Tifs, Adobe RGB
Printed from 16 bit Tifs (300 ppi)
Gotten excellent prints at every size from 4x6 to 13 x 19.

The only change I recently made was setting the ppi to 600 to match the native resolution of my specific HP printer. Previously I used 300 ppi.

Mike's articles are written in a scatological style and I'm not sure of what he is recommending.  Should I convert from 16 bit to 8 bit files before printing?  Should I go back to using 300 ppi?  Does it make a difference? Yes or no answers will suffice.

The thing is... I don't have a "problem" per se.  I'm an advanced Photoshop user, I know my way around color management, I use a professional level photo printer and my prints are excellent.

Terry, you're making some assumptions which are incorrect.  When I print with Qimage, I don't resize at all, but I may crop slightly for composition purposes.  And I will continue to work with 16 bit Adobe RGB Tifs (from the original Canon CR2 Raw files converted with ACR 5.6).  My printer is the 9 ink, 13x19 predecessor to the HP B9180 and B8850.

I just want confirmation that even if I don't notice it, I'm probably better off using 600ppi.

I've been using ColorEyes Display Pro software for over a year and the validation report you posted is excellent.  I question the Luminance value of 80cd/m2 unless you are using the highest quality of LCD monitors with high bit internal color processing.  I use a modest Dell 2209WA, which is a budget level IPS paneled monitor and I calibrate to 110cd/m2.  If your monitor is not capable of reaching 80cd/m2 by using the OSD Brightness control alone, the CEDP software will go directly to your video card and compress the RGB color tones there.