I have found the answer. When I was printing a print profile test chart. I use -t to print tif picture. And after that I run the printtarg again with -t. So the ti2 file was changed. The ti2 file is not with the tif file, but with the ps file. And I print the tif file to make my icc. At 2011-04-11 15:07:50,ltkun <ltkun@xxxxxxx> wrote: >thanks Graeme Gill. You are right. I use 300dpi to scan a picture. I think it >will be more accurate.but scanin has some difficult to aotu recoganize the >chart. This time I use -dipn to make the charts be properly recognised . but >when I am at the colprof step I also get the Profile check complete, peak err >= 84.302879, avg err = 23.234012, RMS = 26.345680. Also I have something wrong >that I can't realize. >At 2011-04-11 12:35:41,"Graeme Gill" <graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>ltkun wrote: >>> I have just run the commands from the scenarios,how to avoid this? >>> I have just run : >>> 1. targen -v -d4 -l260 -f2028 PrinterB >>> 2.printtarg -v -s -iSS -pA4R PrinterB >>> 3.scanin -v -c PrinterB1.tif PrinterB1.cht scanner.icm PrinterB >>> scanin -v -ca PrinterB2.tif PrinterB2.cht scanner.icm PrinterB >>> 4.copy PrinterB.ti3 PrinterBt.ti3 >>> 5.colprof -v -qm -b -cmt -dpp PrinterBt >>> all the commands are from examples. >> >>Hi, >> at the colprof step you get something like: >> >>Profile check complete, peak err = 91.558309, avg err = 25.405694, RMS = >>29.456946 >> >>which (as is mentioned in the documentation) indicates something >>has gone badly wrong. Typically this might indicate that the device >>values are all jumbled up, or that the CIE values are completely >>bogus. Perhaps the scanner recognition has failed. Did you check >>the scanin diagnostic output, to check that the charts were properly >>recognised ? - e.g: >> >>scanin -v -dipn -c PrinterB1.tif PrinterB1.cht scanner.icm PrinterB diag1.tif >>scanin -v -dipn -ca PrinterB2.tif PrinterB2.cht scanner.icm PrinterB diag2.tif >> >>cheers, >> Graeme Gill. >> > >