[argyllcms] Re: Create RGB printer .ICM to use in Photoshop CS5
- From: Marcus Andersson <lucaf3rr@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 10:18:34 +0200
Hi,
I have a question regarding calibration. Is it really meaningful to produce a
.cal for an RGB printer with 8 colors? I don't know that much about these
things but theoretically a CMY linearization on such printers would involve all
eight colors, right? I am asking as a novice, thanks.
Regards,
Marcus
On October 20, 2011, at 10:01, Wim Hertog wrote:
> 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:
