[argyllcms] Characterizing a scanner using Argyll
- From: "Asman, Andrew J" <Andrew.Asman@xxxxxxx>
- To: "argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 15:45:41 -0500
Off and on for the past year or so I have been attempting to characterize a
scanner using ICC profiles so that it can be used to acquire accurate Lab color
measurements. The scanner is mainly used to analyze pages that come from laser
printers although some inkjet printers have been used. The most common way that
I have read to characterize a scanner is by using a target like the Q60, but
because of the fact that I want to analyze printed output, as opposed to
photos, I found that using an Argyll-generated target (using targen and
printtarg) produces better results because the target matches the type of media
that I want to measure. Additionally, I usually modify the color values on the
patches to include significantly more pure colors because I am predominantly
measuring a printers ability to uniformly print pure colors (CMYK) on a page.
When measuring the error involved in a measurement I calculate the delta E
(1976) between the value that comes from the ICC profile and the value that
comes from the Gretag Spectrolino. The results vary based upon several factors,
the most important of which seems to be the gamut of the printer that was used
to create the profile. For example, if I create a profile using pages from a
printer and then use the ICC profile to measure pages that were printed on the
same printer, the average delta E value when compared to the Gretag Spectrolino
is consistently under 2. However, if I measure pages using a printer that has a
larger gamut than the one used to create the profile, then the out-of-gamut
colors tend to produce extremely large max delta E value ranging anywhere up to
100 depending on the printers used.
Is there any way to increase the accuracy of the profile when faced with
out-of-gamut colors?
When I create the profile from a ti3 file I generally use the following command:
colprof -v -qh -u -al <base_name>
There are several options that the colprof function provides that I am not
utilizing. Do you have any suggestions for options that I should use that might
help alleviate this problem? I have tried several combinations but my lack of
expertise on the subject matter seems to make it more of a guessing game than
anything else.
Any comments, suggestions, or criticisms would be greatly appreciated,
Andrew
Other related posts: