Why Johnny Can’t Print

My title is a play on Why Johnny Can’t Read, a 1955 book by Rudolf Flesch that argued that schoolchildren should be taught to read with phonics instead of look-say or whole language. (Here’s a review of the book. It’s priced at $3, but only if you go back in time to 1955.) Educators continued to teach whole-language reading (and maybe still do) even though there was no evidence that it worked, and lots of evidence that it didn’t. What this has to do with printing is that most photographers try to print with a method that doesn’t work either, yet they keep doing it.

Here’s the recipe that most photographers use for printing a picture:

1. Transfer the image from your camera to your computer.
2. Adjust the colors and the cropping on your screen, using iPhoto, Photoshop Elements, IrfanView, Picasa, or whatever.
3. Start up the printer and print the photo.
4. If the colors aren’t quite right, which they probably aren’t, go back to step 2 and repeat. When you’re happy or ready to give up, stop.

Why doesn’t this work? Why the need for all those test prints just to get things right? Well, suppose you tried to make corn muffins with a recipe like this:

Actually, my grandmother did bake this way, but she had been baking for decades before I even met her. I would fail if I tried this recipe, and then somebody would write a column on Why Marc Can’t Bake.

Everybody, even if they’ve never baked, knows what’s wrong with the recipe: The measures are missing! But nobody (other than serious amateurs and professionals) seems to see that that’s true of the printing recipe, too: The measures are missing.

OK, it’s not that obvious that the printing recipe is lacking the measures, so we have to peek beneath the surface. Most photographers do know that an image is digital, meaning that it’s a file of numbers. Each pixel (picture element) is represented by three numbers: The amount of red, the amount of green, and the amount of blue. A typical image has around 5 - 10 million pixels.

I actually already revealed the problem when I said “amount of” red, green, and blue. That’s just like saying “some” flour or “a couple of measures” of baking powder. In digital images, amount means percentage. For example, one pixel might be 61% red, 23% green, 74% blue. It seems that 61, 23, and 74 are precise, which they are, but the problem is, percent of what? And the answer is: Percent of the full amount.

For the image file itself, as it came from the typical camera, “full amount” actually has a meaning. It’s defined by a standard that’s known as sRGB. But, when those same numbers are sent to the display so you can see the image and start making adjustments, “full amount” means “full amount that your display can show”, and your display doesn’t follow the standard. It just displays whatever its electronics happen to do with the numbers. You’ll understand what I mean if you look at all the TVs in a big electronics store. The TV colors are all over the map, and so are the displays on all the computers they sell, including yours. Your “full amount” is no more standardized than your oven temperature if you twisted the dial without looking.

So, what you’re doing when you adjust the colors in your photo editing app is setting them to whatever looks good on your display. Where that actually leaves them is unknown.

Then you take this randomly-set image file and send it to your printer, which is more standardized than your display, but not enough to make really good prints. Inkjet printers are pretty stable, and don’t vary nearly as much as displays. They’re even set to sRGB, but actual colors vary with the paper (glossy or matte, paper color, etc.), and, believe it or not, the printer has no idea what paper is loaded into it.

(Advanced photographers sometimes use standards other than sRGB, but the point is that there is a standard, not what it is.)

In short, you take a standardized image (sRGB), adjust it to match an out-of-adjustment display, and send the result to a printer that’s set to some third set of colors. And that’s why Johnny can’t print.

Anyone who’s ever baked can say how my corn muffin recipe can be fixed: Specify the measures, and say how long to bake them and at what temperature. Same for the printing mess: Calibrate the display and, if you can’t get it to sRGB (normally, you can’t), construct a profile that specifies exactly how it’s off. Same for the printer: Get a profile that specifies how far it’s off from the standard for a particular paper.

Then, whenever you view an image on the display, adjust the numbers (remember the 61,23,74 example?) so the same color, but maybe with different numbers, shows on the display. When you print, adjust the numbers again so that the right color comes out on the printer.

Of course, you don’t make these adjustments—the software does. It’s called color management. Adjusting colors and printing with color management is analogous to baking with measurements. Not using color management gets you bad prints, just like sloppy baking gets you bad corn muffins (something between corn soup and corn bricks).

Are you willing to print with color management? If you are, here’s what you need to do:

• Buy and use a display calibrator, which is a hardware device that lays on your screen and reads the actual display colors so the calibration software can tell what they are, make the appropriate adjustments, and prepare a profile that specifies the deviations from the standard. Fortunately, prices have come way down for calibrators. Here’s one for $60: ColorVision Spyder2 Express Win/Mac. If you follow the link and read the comments on the Amazon site, you’ll see that there are some very dissatisfied customers. Using a calibrator is a little tricky, and they didn’t get it right. (Turn off all the lights, turn off all automatic screen savers and dimmers, don’t run any other apps, and tilt the display way back so the calibrator stays put.) You can’t save money by calibrating by eye using a software-only utility. Here’s why.
• Get a printer profile for your printer, ink, and paper. The easiest way to do this is to use the manufacturer’s ink and paper and download the profile from its website. I know that Epson is very good about this; other major manufacturers probably are, too. Generally, you’ll find profiles only for fairly-serious photo printers costing $200 or more, not for the cheapest printers and all-in-ones.
• Use a photo-editing app that does color management. On the Mac, many, if not most, do. Examples are iPhoto, Pixelmator, Lightroom, Aperture, Photoshop Elements, and, of course, Photoshop. On Windows, the norm is not to do color management, but you’re OK if you use any of the Adobe products. (My understanding is that popular free Windows apps like IrfanView and Picasa don’t do color management, but check on the latest developments for yourself.)
• When you print, make sure about 25 different poorly-documented options are set correctly, or else your attempt to use color management will backfire and you’ll get worse results. There’s essentially zero cooperation between computer makers, OS venders, photo-editing app publishers, and printer manufacturers to make this situation any better. To its credit, Epson does a good job of telling you exactly what to do in its user’s manuals, which, unfortunately, probably aren’t widely read by printer owners.

(Last August I wrote an article on how I print with color management.)

So, are you willing to do what needs to be done? If you’re not, I completely understand. Maybe you’re not alone, and that’s why photo printer sales are actually going down.

Sorry if I wasn’t able to help you print. But, at least now you know why Johnny can’t and you can’t either.