[argyllcms] Re: Newbie help?

On 2006 May 1, at 9:59 PM, Graeme Gill wrote:

> Ben Goren wrote:
>
>> First, I've  read much  of the  documentation and  searched the
>> list archives for relevant stuff. Yes, I know that the i1 isn't
>> directly supported by Argyll and that there aren't any plans to
>> add  such support  in  the future. Frankly,  if  it weren't  so
>> (relatively)  inexpensive  and I  not  so  poor, I  would  have
>> gotten  some other  instrument  that /is/  supported and  whose
>> manufacturer  is  more generous  with  documentation. But...I'm
>> poor.
>
> The trouble with the Eye1 is that either [. . .]

Exactly what I  figured. I don't have the skills to  hack the data
format and  I don't have  the money to buy  one to send  to you. I
don't think  I'll ever get  the former, but  I'll chip at  least a
couple pennies  into a fund for  the latter after my  bank account
recovers from the serious blow I dealt  it in buying the i1 in the
first place....

I'll also drop  a note to the salescritter at  Chromix who sold me
the i1. He  had some  good money-saving  suggestions, and  I think
I  might  be able  to  convince  him  that  getting specs  to  you
will  probably sell  a  respectable number  of  i1s that  wouldn't
otherwise get sold--and without  cutting into their upgrade sales,
either. Quite  the contrary,  if  anything--I'm  going for  Argyll
because of the quality and my  lack of money; but anybody with the
money isn't likely to want to mess around with a command-line tool
in this point-n-click era.

I rather suspect that the folks  at Greytag Macbeth will listen to
somebody at Chromix much more attentively than any of us.

>> otherwise unmodified.) Unfortunately,  the profile  wasn't even
>> in  the ballpark--it  looked like  somebody scribbled  with the
>> pencil in a curves adjustment in Photoshop.
>
> What did profile  (or profcheck) report as the fit  error ? This
> is usually the givaway as to whether the patches got mixed up.

To be honest...I couldn't tell  you. I wasn't paying attention.

But  it's now  a  moot point--thanks  to David,  I've  got it  all
working! (There's a minor  nitpick that has me  using ColorPort to
generate the printable version of the target rather than Argyll. I
much prefer Argyll's layout [much higher patch density], but I can
live  with that  for  the moment). I'll  post  a summary  write-up
sometime tomorrow.

>> I've also tried  to use ColorPort, and  quickly discovered that
>> the  output file  needs  to be  massaged rather  extensively. I
>> tried to  compile David Gangola's  cpxchg, but all I  found was
>> the  one  he posted  to  the  list...and  that needs  a  couple
>> #include  files that  I didn't  find. ColorPort ``feels''  like
>> the  superior tool  of  the two,  but I'd  almost  put up  with
>> hand-transcribing readouts from Eye-One Share at this point, if
>> that's what it took to get started on the right path.
>
> If someone would  send me a couple of colorport  files, then I'd
> be happy  to see if logo2cgats  can be modified to  accept those
> files as well. It doesn't sound hard.

I doubt you'll have any trouble with it. The worst part is scaling
the color values; ColorPort expects them to be 0 - 255 rather than
0 - 100.  Plus, David's cpxchg should be a good reference. He even
GPL'ed it, if you want to be lazy.

What kinds of files would you like? I'd be more than happy to send
you whatever I can.

...tomorrow. After some sleep....

Cheers,

b&

Other related posts: