[argyllcms] Re: Custom illumination
- From: Klaus Kompatscher <kkompatscher@xxxxxxxx>
- To: <argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 18:52:34 +0100
On 20.01.2010 15:00 Uhr, "Graeme Gill" <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Klaus Kompatscher wrote:
>> Ok this sounds all quite logic and I could simulate things you mentioned.
>> If printing by using relative Intend the print looks OK.
>> Initially I have been shocked because I did only a softproof by using Source
>> -> relative -> Printer -> absolut -> Monitor conversion and the Monitor
>> image has nothing to do with the print.
>> Perhaps this is the point you can't see to fit an option the way PM is doing
>> it?
>
> There's no point. If you are doing absolute matching, then you
> want what Argyll is doing with absolute intent, because
> it is giving you actual absolute color values. If you want
> relative matching, then Argyll's relative intent will do
> what you want. Profile Makers absolute intent is useless
> in this situation because it nulls out the the absolute values,
> and you get (almost) relative values instead.
>
> Or to put this another way, why is this not what you are expecting ?
> What are you attempting to do ?
>
> Why are you surprised by the softproof - you are using an absolute
> soft proof, so naturally it shows the actual color of the print
> under that illumination. If the monitor profile is properly
> using absolute intent (which may not be the case if it's a
> Profile Maker profile), then you should be able to do a side
> by side between the monitor and the print under the measured
> illuminant, and they should match. (This is often a tough
> proofing situation though, unless you remove any distracting
> white point cues from the display.)
>
> Graeme Gill.
>
Well right now the monitor image does not match the print at all, but
perhaps because I am using a PM monitor profile. I will try with Argyll
monitor profile and let you know.
Thanks
Klaus
Other related posts:
