[argyllcms] Re: AW: Re: Create RGB printer .ICM to use in Photoshop CS5
- From: Phil Cruse <pcruse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 10:27:15 +0100
Hi Stefan,
Problem I had with Win7was with Argyll RGB Canon printer profile also. Was
Canon driver interfering??
Info here with lots of other basic stuff:
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-GB/windows7/Change-color-management-settings
Soft proofing prob was on my Mac with CMYK profiles (printing through a RIP).
Profiles worked great on print, but made soft proofs dark, causing me to
over-lighten images! Profiling without cal works great.
I know all about "RGB" drivers :)
http://www.colourphil.co.uk/inkjet.html
Cheers
Phil
On 20 Oct 2011, at 09:59, Wim Hertog wrote:
> Phil,
>
> That W7 thing could be an issue. The strange thing is that it only happens
> with profiles made with Argyll. PM5 profiles are perfectly ok...I'll give it
> a try when I'm home this evening. Do you have more info on the soft proofing
> problem?
>
> With "RGB" printers I mean a printer where the printer driver wants RGB data,
> not CMYK. Almost every office to semi-pro printer that doesn't use a special
> RIP has an RGB driver.
>
> Many thanks,
> Wim
>
> 2011/10/20 Wim Hertog <nertog@xxxxxxxxx>
> Hi Vladimir,
>
> I'm a bit confused now. Alan just wrote that he only profiles his Epson 3880
> and after that his prints match his calibrated monitor. My experience is that
> the profile just characterizes the printer but does not change the way it
> prints, in other words, it can not match print to monitor. Am I wrong in this?
>
> The process you described is what I did and I have the same results. After
> the extra step of applying the correction curves (either in the profile or as
> a PS curve) the whole image changes but prints quite ok.
>
> In every other profiling package however, I can match my print to monitor
> using just 1 step: converting to the printer profile. This profile includes
> the correction curves and applies them without making the softproof in PS
> unuseable. In other words: 1 confusing step less when printing.
>
> Could you clarify this a bit for me?
>
> Thanks,
> Wim
>
>
>
>
> 2011/10/20 Vladimir Gajic <vgajic67@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Hi Wim,
>
> the Idea of calibrating the printer before building a profile is simply to
> keep your device in a constant printing condition. The process could also
> look like this:
>
> 1. You create a printer calibration witch results in a .cal-file. During the
> calibration process you also can create a Photoshop curve, witch can
> illustrate the whole procedure IMHO mutch better
>
> 2. You generate a RGB-target for your profile, applying the .cal you created
> in the previous step. You also can skip adding the .cal using printarg,
> simply open the file in PS and apply the generated PS-curve BEFORE printing
> the file.
>
> 3. Generate the profile
>
> 4. The printing process could look like this:
> - open your image and convert to the device profile. You will notice that the
> image looks correct. This is also your softproof.
> -now apply your curve. The image changes in a strange way, but will be
> printed correctly.
>
> The Idea behind: profile once, calibrate many.
>
> Your printer may change in time. Any cartrige replacement, even if you are
> using original inks, can produce colour shifts. The same applies to the
> substrates you are using. In that case it's enough to recalibrate your
> printer generating a new .cal and PS-curve.
>
> There are also different ways to work with an calibrated workflow (e.g.
> applying .cal using cctiff, or linking the .cal directly to the profile).
> Anyway, the described procedure was for me a good starting point for
> understanding the whole stuff.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Cheers
> Vladimir
>
>
> -- Gesendet von meinem Palm Pre
>
> Wim Hertog <nertog@xxxxxxxxx> schrieb am 20.10.2011 10:02:
>
> Hmm, so the profiling step alone should do the trick then? I thought
> profiling only characterized the printer and you needed the calibration step
> in order to actually change the printing behaviour. If the profiling step by
> itself is enough to create prints matching my (with argyll) calibrated
> monitor, I must be doing something wrong somewhere...
>
> After following the tutorial and profiling the printer the gamut shape and
> softproof look perfect. Very similar to what I get from PM5. The printout
> using this profile results in a horrible yellow-brown cast though. I follow
> my usual workflow while printing: windows CM is turned off in the canon
> driver and photoshop manages colours using the generated profile. I'm pretty
> sure it's not double profiling anywhere.
>
> I must be doing something wrong somewhere but I literally read the tutorial a
> 100 times and tried everything and always get the same result: a strong
> yellow brown cast together with totally blocked shadows.
>
> Anyone has any idea what's happening or....a link to another tutorial to
> double check?
>
> Wim
>
>
> 2011/10/20 Graeme Gill <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Wim Hertog wrote:
> > Now, the above workflow results in some strange outcomes: the colours of
> > the softproof in photoshop are completely off (the same happens when I
> > convert to above generated icc file). The image prints ok (ok doesn't
> > mean as good as I want though), nothing like the softproof shows.
> > However, when I don't add the .cal file to the icm (last step), the
> > softproof is perfect but the actual printed image is horribly wrong
> As suggested in the tutorial, get just profiling working first. There
> are too many variable otherwise, and the first thing you do in diagnosing
> a problem is break things down into individual steps anyway.
>
> Graeme Gill.
>
>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
