Thanks! Yes, most of my work, including this art book project, is printed cmyk by commercial printers. I do the conversion to cmyk myself before sending the file to print, but even that is only an approximation of what the final product will look like.

That said, I'm hoping to limit the surprise factor somewhat by getting the best calibration I can on the monitor I have. Aside from the ColorMunki's ability to generate paper profiles, are there other significant differences between it and the xrite i1, that you know of?

Thank you for responding to my post. At present, a new monitor is not in the budget, though your point is well taken and not something I had considered. Stuck with the iMac monitor for now.

Thanks again.

I am looking for feedback on the xrite i1 display pro color calibrator for Mac 10.6.8. I need to be able to accurately represent photos of color drawings, which will be printed in a book. So far the results have been dismal, and my research on calibration keeps pointing me to this device.

Any thoughts?

thank you!

Indesign makes a flipbook. You can make each page with only a photo on it. You need Flash also.

Thanks. That's an important step that makes a big difference.

Thanks. That's an important step that makes a big difference.

I think (not totally sure, but I think) that you can't "burn" a pixel that has no color in it. If those pixels are totally white (R255:G255:B255) then burn won't change them. That's been my understanding of it. If I've got that wrong, I would welcome the correct interpretation!

Yup, noticed that, and decided, in the spirit of the original message, to let it go and hope for the best :)

Baking ... anything... with a bad outcome.
1 - recipe and ingredients
2- equipment neatly lined up
3 - kitchen a complete disaster while putting it all together
4 - beautiful [pie/cake/loaf] cooling on windowsill
5 - [pie/cake/loaf] thief caught in the act of finishing off the last crumb (pets could be the thief....)

Dear friends,

I would like to respectfully suggest that unless someone misspells a photography-related technical term, where the misspelling might affect something like an expensive purchasing decision, that we give each other the benefit of the doubt and let these things go. Sometimes they are innocent typos, sometimes they may be the poster's attempt to inject a glimpse of his/her personality into the post.... whatever the reason, maybe we can agree to just let these things go. I really gain a lot from the photography information on this forum. The posts that pick on other people's spelling just make me fell bad.

Thanks.

you're welcome - have fun!

What matters most for enlarging something like handwriting is the resolution you set the scan to. The higher res the scan, the better the scanned image and the more you can get away with enlarging it. I find it also helps to choose "photo" instead of "text" when scanning anything handwritten. If you scan to a jpg you should immediately save it something else (psd or tif) to work with it, as it will degrade each time you save it if you work with it in jpg. Once you have enlarged, you can work with the sharpen tools in filters (if you are using PS) to make the letters crisper. Adjusting contrast may be helpful as well. But keep in mind this is a photo, so you are working with pixels, it will not enlarge perfectly smoothly like a vector font.

I use CS5, have been using Photoshop since version 7. I highly recommend the lynda.com tutorials. I really do learn something new every day, and it makes it more fun and a whole lot less frustrating to work with the program.

Thanks!

Wow - thanks for all the suggestions and for helping me to narrow down my list! Much appreciated.